Posted on 02/18/2020 11:29:54 AM PST by rktman
A study released by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health declares there is no evidence assault weapon bans lead to a lower incidence of fatal mass shootings.
The push for an assault weapons ban is central to the Democrats gun control agenda nationally and is front and center for Democrats at the state level in places like Arizona and Virginia.
According to the Johns Hopkins study, researchersdid not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings.
Researchers did claim licensing requirements like those in Connecticut help reduce the number of mass shootings, but their study omitted the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School in which 26 were killed at the school and another victim was killed in a private home.
In other words, a study which claims licensing reduces instances of mass shootings omitted one of the most often cited mass shootings in U.S. history, even though that shooting occurred in a licensing state.
Moreover, John Hopkins criteria for licensing laws allowed them to bypass Illinois which, in turn, allowed them to sidestep the never ending gun crime of Chicago.
But the study was clear there is no evidence tying assault weapons to a lower incidence of mass shootings.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
do not lower the incidences of mass shootings...
how about a study that shows the defensive use of firearms...
and do not shush me.
So they lied...but did say part of the truth.
“sidestep the never ending gun crime of Chicago.”
These are not “mass murders”.
Yup. Mortifies me the pediatric wing is named for this louse, and the adjoining cardiac for a damned Moslem sheikh.
Come and take it.
Columbine happened during the last nationwide assault weapons ban.
Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union had severe assault weapons restrictions and yet mass shootings were commonplace. I guess they left those most notable and important cases out of their study.
Probably because it is extremely difficult to sneak an assault rifle into a gun free zone.
I’m not surprised
Not able all. No sneaking required, but anyway, many mass shootings where an”aslt wpn” was used, the weapon was sneaked in via backpack etc.
Shocking! Who could have believed such a thing? Snicker...
so there really wasn’t an ‘Imminent Need” like NY claimed to rush through their ban-
And they aren’t ‘Assault Weapons’- they are rifles- single shot- no selective fire to make them full auto
Citizens of NY need to sue NY for violating their second amendment rights for no reason at all
While it looked like an assault weapon, the semi-auto rifle young Adam Lanza used at Sandy Hook, was actually “Connecticut compliant.”
.....” Calling Virginia Governor Ralph Northam....
Calling Ralph Northam.....please pick up the
phone.....there is an urgent message for you....”
“Assault weapons” bans, magazine bans, in fact bans of any type, including virtually every single “gun control” and/or licensing law have absolutely nothing to do with improving public safety. They demonstrably do not work. So why do people keep advocating for them? It isn’t about safety, it is about control. It is about incremental disarmament.
FINAL PARAPRAPH
“The study was supported by The Joyce Foundation and Dr. Websters professorship funded by the Bloomberg American Health Initiative.”
Why am I not surprised?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.