[marktwain]

Gun control is not about decreasing crime or suicides. It is all about control of people that the statists dislike.

[edcoil]

So either Harvard is full of crap or, the book “More guns less Crime” is.

I am betting on the former, not the latter.

[from occupied ga]

It is all about control of people that the statists dislike.

And that would be anyone who owns a gun.

[Robert357]

OK, people need to rally and put pressure on the JAMA and its publications that they shall not and never be organs of propaganda.

“...The timing of the article’s publication is also suspect, just as Congress is considering gun control legislation. JAMA editors scandalously rushed into publication an article in 1999, right before President Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial involving sexual misconduct, showing that college students didn’t consider oral sex to be “real sex.” JAMA editor George Lundberg was fired for having, in the words of AMA chief Dr. E. Ratcliffe Anderson, Jr., “threatened the historic tradition and integrity of the Journal of the American Medical Association by inappropriately and inexcusably interjecting JAMA into a major political debate that has nothing to do with science or medicine..”

It is time to unload on the JAMA and find out who its advertisers are and unload on them that they should not help sponsor “junk science and propaganda.”

This is a grass roots effort that really needs to start!

[indthkr]

2nd Amendment bump for later........

[11th Commandment]

When liberals are confronted with the facts, they have to acknowledge that banning assault riffles and high capacity magazines will do nothing to the murder rate. What the will say is that with lower power weapons, a mass shooter may not be able to get off as many shots resulting in fewer deaths. Although that doesn't have a significant impact on the Murder rate, it would save a few lives. And this alone in the liberal mind is enough to ban assault riffle and high capacity magazines.

However, this thinking has no basis in economic reality. The lesson in crime prevention that the US as learned over the last 20 years is that crime has little to do with poverty control but removing criminals from the street. Understanding this, the US put time and resources into local police and removed the criminal element. This was the successful experiment in NYC under Rudy G and implemented all over the country. Today the US has 300,000 more uniform officers than it did 20 years ago.

By imposing criminal law of gun ownership we will have divert police resources from "walking the beat" to enforcing guns laws on law abiding citizens. We know the former is an effective crime fighting tool while the latter is not. Furthermore diverting resources to enforce guns laws will invariably increase crime as we have less cops putting the real criminals behind bars. So the question to ask, is possibly saving 4-5 lives in a mass shooting every few years worth the cost of an appreciably increased murder rate year after year.

Liberals are capable of answering this question. Ironically, the resource argument is the same reasoning many liberals use to justify marijuana decriminalization.