Following this event, I threw together a short column of my thoughts on the subject, entitled “I’ll Second That Amendment”
Following the tragic and senseless killing of 26 people - 20 of them elementary school children - in Connecticut, the anti-gun nuts are coming out of the proverbial woodwork.
Left wingnut Jerrold Nadler (D-New York) has even urged the equally leftist President to “exploit the shooting to get more gun control.”. He obviously has little concern over anything concerning the shooting, other than the political mileage he and his party can gain from it.
But this is not a new phenomenon, and it happens each time some nutcase decides it’s time for some attention and payback.
But, the blinders that Democrats wear always prevents the truth from coming out.
I decided that I would do a little research and find out about the trend in random “mass shootings” and exactly where they fall in the total scheme of things. This research is not scientific, or official, but an analogy based on the information available from news account and other information gleaned on line.
So, here goes:
Since 1982, there have been approximately 23, so-called “mass shootings”, worldwide.
The morbid by products of these events include 452 people killed, and about 149 wounded. That figures out to about 1.2 people killed per month spread over 30 years. Remember this is for the entire world, not just the USA. In that same time, approximately .4 people were wounded.
Chicago, Illinois, alone, is on track for 524 murders for 2012. The difference is, these shootings and murders in Chi-town are spread out over weeks and months, and don’t fit the description of “mass shootings”. But, dead is dead.
Ironically, out of the world total of 452 mass murder victims, only 128 people were killed in the USA.
The remaining 324 victims were killed overseas - where there is no 2nd Amendment allowing them to own firearms.
The bellowing of the leftist to ban firearms is even further hypocritical when you check te fact that of the U.S. total of 128 victims, 103 occurred in the so-called “Blue States” (Colorado, Connecticut, Washington, Wisconsin, etc)...liberal territory. Only 25 occurred in the “Red”, or conservative states. And, if you take out the Fort Hood, Texas massacre, which was done by a Muslim for political reasons, the conservative states account for only 12 deaths out of the 128.
The specifics are sketchy, but on a worldwide scale, 65-percent of the shooters committed suicide after their murder spree, a pretty good indication that they were mentally deficient in some way or another.
The median age of the shooters is 20.33 years, most from single parent, or troubled homes.
In summary, on the world wide stage mass shootings, countries other than the United States account for 72% of the deaths (66% of the wounded) from firearms in mass shootings.
The conclusion can be that the 2nd Amendment actually prevents more deaths than countries who totally ban firearms. It has already been proven time and time again that when firearms are banned in countries, the crime rate skyrockets.
So the use of the Connecticut incident as a tool to repeal the 2nd Amendment is a non-starter.
But a good infusion of morals and family values would help immensely .
. . . 324 victims were killed overseas - where there is no 2nd Amendment allowing them to own firearms. Often governments are the mass murderers.. with counts in the tens of millions. It's called democide..
appropriately and yes given our ruling class Dem New Normal
I absolutely see the day when it happens here if we do not stop them. Some of them discussed plans for it when they were mere Marxist-Alinsky campus radical, spoiled brats.
The link is to wiki graffiti.. if past experience is any clue Lefties seeing this on FR will rush to change democide to repocide. Things have been changed, even disappeared, once they appeared on FR.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/articlev.htm
The United States Constitution is unusually difficult to amend. As spelled out in Article V, the Constitution can be amended in one of two ways. First, amendment can take place by a vote of two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and the Senate followed by a ratification of three-fourths of the various state legislatures (ratification by thirty-eight states would be required to ratify an amendment today). This first method of amendment is the only one used to date. Second, the Constitution might be amended by a Convention called for this purpose by two-thirds of the state legislatures, if the Convention’s proposed amendments are later ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures.