Have we become comfortably numb

MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum

Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Gordo.

I was thinking about this a bit after it happened. I was also dealing with the possibility of getting someone in my family help for a mental illness. Well good luck with that. This individual called the suicide hotline 4 times in a week for supposed conversation. Was hospitalized for suicidal thoughts a week prior. And called the police on their husband two days prior. As she was in the ER for stomach pains I asked what I could do. Talked to a social worker and they basically said 'well since they hasn't done anything ...and weren't in immediate danger that they would be out in a day. '. So my option was to either get a day reprieve or torch the relationship.

I mention this to show the total dysfunction in our mental health care. And quite frankly families have nowhere to turn, can't get help and depending on the individual , tragic results can occur. Someone that does this needs mental health care. This combined with the availability of weapons makes for a deadly mix. It is a shame we are turning our backs on the mentally ill. Families don't have a chance to help because of hipa etc...
 
Do you really believe that those who would want to commit heinous crimes against others would be stopped by banning gun ownership or as in Mexico where it is illegal for citizens to own firearms the drug cartels have no problem sourcing guns for the wild west shootouts they have on the streets . The same would be true here as the old saying goes if guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns .


Yes, I do. I would be willing to give it a try, you know, to save the children and all that.

Mexico is a third world country, and, as Mark has stated, have no ability to enforce laws.

Your old saying should really go:
If guns are outlawed, then only outlaws and police officers would have guns.
 
Timm,

You are absolutely correct my friend. Thank you for posting.

That is one vital, critical component that needs to be addressed in resolving this problem. We all know this.

Will the dysfunctional, ideologue members of Congress (including the Dems) that absolutely fear the NRA, recognize this shortfall and respond accordingly?

I think we all know the answer to that question.

By the way, in response to this current incident, the Don supports arming teachers. I suspect other pols and the public also believe this is the right solution.

So, if the unlikely happens and the Don (or others of his ilk) get elected, all schools will need to add a requirement that all teachers receive appropriate firearms training as part of their curriculum. :banghead:
 
So, if the unlikely happens and the Don (or others of his ilk) get elected, all schools will need to add a requirement that all teachers receive appropriate firearms training as part of their curriculum. :banghead:

There are a lot of teachers I would not want to have guns.

As it is they are already stressed and liable for all kinds of crazy things.

Last year a local teacher who was passed over for tenure shot his principal and vice principal killing the principal and seriously wounding the vice principal.

Yes, let's arm them!

The flip side is that you can be sure that some kids would catch teachers off guard taking their guns and then doing who knows what. I seriously doubt that having that many guns in our schools would improve this situation and would more likely get more guns pulled out and shots fired when a gun was not needed.
 
Last edited:
Thank you RCHeliGuy and Joey_V (I wish I'd bought your Summits btw:) , for an intelligent banter on this subject from folks here in the USA. I must admit that I still say gun control does nothing, will not, could not ever. Should we go over the top socialist and kill all mentally ill people? Who will set the line of who is most dangerous to society and who is not? This is a path humanity is going on and we are up against trials and tribulations in our future, history has shown us what can be done...let's look forward and make some smart choices!!
 
Yes, of course.

And many citizens need access to firearms too. But it needs to be regulated - stringent checks, firearms suited to the purpose, and mandated storage requirements. Not just open slather free-for-all.

I can talk about the Australian model because I am familiar with it. But the model has some credibility because it has worked extraordinarily well. The laws were introduced after our last mass shooting in 1996, and we haven't had another mass shooting since.

That's not to say we won't have another mass shooting - we no doubt will - but we're going on 20 years without one now. It would seem unlikely that the US could go 20 days without a mass shooting!

Even if you could reduce the incidence by half, that's a lot of lives saved and a lot of victims' family trauma spared.

This is flawed. Criminals are going to get guns by any means necessary. The only people you hurt by these policies are law abiding citizens.
 
The future is going to be very different than today.

The middle class is gone and is never coming back. This is not because of jobs moving over seas but because of automation. Even if we brought all manufacturing back to the US it would only employ a small percentage of the work force it used to.

We have a huge divide that is only going to increase over time. Our brightest people are being filtered at the collegiate level and are pairing off with each other in college. This is distilling the power, money and intelligence in the country. As a result wealth and power is accumulating in families.

There is a huge unfilled demand for the most intelligent talented people so they will continue to be offered more money and benefits.

Corporations continue to have record profits because they require far less overhead ( employees ) to get work done. In addition the employees who are not part of the elite are worked harder and paid less.

Meanwhile virtual reality is about to happen. Eventually large portions of our population are going to disappear into this artificial universe because they will have a better virtual life than a real life. It will be a cheap opiate for the masses.

Currently the top 7% could float the entire country at a decent middle class wage. This will become the top 6%, top 5% etc..

Automation is projected to cause 25-40% unemployment in the next 20 years.

As a result we will most likely go to a more socialistic order which will tax the rich far more and allow for a living wage to everyone whether they work or not.

Meanwhile we are in the middle of a man made mass extinction and our oceans are breaking down.

The next two decades will see an enormous amount of change and either we will solve a huge number of problems, or the human race will perish and the Earth will start over.

BTW the US desperately needs immigrants to keep growing or our economy will collapse. However Asians will become the largest immigrant population over time which may actually be a good thing for us.
 
Last edited:
Thank you RCHeliGuy and Joey_V (I wish I'd bought your Summits btw:) , for an intelligent banter on this subject from folks here in the USA. I must admit that I still say gun control does nothing, will not, could not ever. Should we go over the top socialist and kill all mentally ill people? Who will set the line of who is most dangerous to society and who is not? This is a path humanity is going on and we are up against trials and tribulations in our future, history has shown us what can be done...let's look forward and make some smart choices!!

Despite high profile coverage of violent crimes committed by those with psychiatric disorders, violence in people with some psychiatric disorders is more often the exception than the rule.

It is a myth that people with some psychiatric disorders are highly prone to violence.
 
What we do have are more desperate and frightened people whose expectations are way out of line with reality.

We have a generation who expect to be cherished and praised at work and who think that they are very special and who suddenly find out they are not considered very special in the real world.

We have people who have no link with their local communities and who care more about how many likes they get in Facebook when they post a selfie than about their neighbors.

We have people enraged by the media.

We have people conditioned to blame everyone and everything except themselves when something goes wrong.


The result = isolated(lonely), disappointed, disenfranchised , upset, frightened people who blame others for their lives not being perfect. Now add guns...
 
Well said Larry and like you I have been a responsible gun owner for close to fifty years. I own dozens of guns and shoot them in various competitive venues. I've hunted since I was a kid and look forward to the day when I can do so with my grandchildren.

FWIW, I'm not worried about you. You come from a different generation that understood responsibility for your actions.

When I went to elementary school, children brought jack knifes with them to school and played with them at recess. Kids rode bicycles to school and played somewhere outside with their friends before being called home for dinner. We got hurt, learned responsibility for our actions and learned respect from other kids who got hurt worse.

By the time my daughter went to HS, she was not allowed to bring a purse to school and could be suspended for a dress code infraction. Bringing a knife to school would get your expelled. People are called unfit parents for letting their children ride a bicycle a mile or so to school.

The current generation has very little respect for others, has learned very little about accountability for their actions and is mostly unfit to bear arms.

You may teach responsibility to your grandchildren, but unfortunately that is not at all typical anymore and the current generation has no business being around guns. They aren't adequately prepared.

BTW. I served and was at one point proficient with an assault rifle and hand gun.
 
It's funny when I thought about this some more I realized how bad things have gotten and how this affected me and my kids.

When my kids were in junior high I wanted to get them archery sets. I was a trained archery instructor, maintained an archery range and instructed children at Summer Camp years ago and I could personally shoot accurately out to 90 yards with a competition recurve.

My ex-wife had a fit about this because of how dangerous it was. So even though they were going to be supervised by someone trained to use this equipment and who had instructed children before she would have nothing to do with it.

Because of her paranoia, my children missed out on something I could share with them that could have taught them a few things besides how to hit a target.

So I'm not blaming the gun, I'm blaming how the current generation has been raised. They are not fit to be gun owners.

BTW the typical age of these shooters is 15-22... There are a few outliers 11 and 27, but there is a group of kids coming of age who are not equipped for gun ownership.
 
Mark, good comment, as I have said many times, there are way too many parents out there that should not have been. The family unit that I grew up with is becoming less and less I fear.

This latest tradgety was committed by a young man from a broken home was it not as I believe many of the previous tradgetys were.

Improvement to ways and means to gun ownership, I'm fine with that but ignoring the real problem behind all of this is just as irresponsible IMO
 
Improvement to ways and means to gun ownership, I'm fine with that but ignoring the real problem behind all of this is just as irresponsible IMO

What if a large percentage of the children coming of age have no business owning a gun?

What if allowing them easy access to guns creates even more fallout in the years ahead that puts all of us in danger.

Even if the guns aren't to blame and society as a whole created this generation, it could make sense to take guns off the shelves for the general welfare of everyone.

I'm just saying that even accounting for this being a complicated problem, the best answer could be taking them away. I'm not saying it will happen in my lifetime, but unless society changes in a big way we could eventually have multiple generations with no business owning a gun and no matter the root cause we may have to do some damage control while we figure the rest out.
 
Thank you RCHeliGuy and Joey_V (I wish I'd bought your Summits btw:) , for an intelligent banter on this subject from folks here in the USA. I must admit that I still say gun control does nothing, will not, could not ever. Should we go over the top socialist and kill all mentally ill people? Who will set the line of who is most dangerous to society and who is not? This is a path humanity is going on and we are up against trials and tribulations in our future, history has shown us what can be done...let's look forward and make some smart choices!!

No prob... debate is healthy. Sometimes I wish I bought my own Summits back.. haha...

Re the topic at hand, I'm not going to be swayed and neither is anyone else, so I'm not going to go any further. I've been on enough forums to know that it'll just take up a majority of my time to get involved.

I witnessed increased crime after a Chicago gun ban and I'm not convinced with other data otherwise. So like I said, the floor's all yours.

I offer no solution other than stating it's not gun control alone, it's a complicated issue and requires a multidisciplinary approach (mental healthcare, guns, upbringing, TV, etc). Those who state that gun control is the issue are not offering any solution that is any more valid than mine... but that's MY opinion.

So for amey who repeatedly asks me for my solution - I have none. And yours isn't any better in my opinion.

Either way, I'm out. We will just have to agree to disagree. And I'm 100% perfectly fine with that.

:music:
 
Last edited:
I must admit that I still say gun control does nothing, will not, could not ever.

Do you want to offer a suggestion, then, as to why the USA has a terrible problem with mass gun murders and no other civilised country in the world has the same problem?
 
This is flawed. Criminals are going to get guns by any means necessary. The only people you hurt by these policies are law abiding citizens.

Again - do you want to offer a suggestion as to why the USA has ridiculously high mass gun murders and no other civilised country in the world does? If it's not guns, what is it?
 
Criminals are going to get guns by any means necessary. The only people you hurt by these policies are law abiding citizens.

Unfortunately for the law abiding citizens, every criminally obtained gun also starts its life as a legally obtained one. Surely an person with reasonably functioning intelligence can see that? Reduce the legal guns in a society and you commensurately reduce the chances and likelihood of criminals obtaining them.
 
Adam,

Seems pretty obvious / intuitive to me. Well stated. I totally agree.

What's concerning is there are those who suggest the opposite. We need more guns.

This is something that I will never understand.

In the end, this country has a a culture that is obsessed with guns. Almost like a drug addiction.

Not to mention a very well funded organization who will stop at nothing to defeat anything (regardless of how reasonable it is) that prohibits feeding the addict.

The perfect self destructive storm that continues ad infinitum.

Gordon

PS: Adam, I believe approximately four out of ten guns are procured illegally. These would be principally the guns purchased at gun shows that don't require the typical background checks, etc. This is a great example of a loophole that 75% of Americans (including NRA members) agree needs to be addressed and it was one action suggested after Sandy Hook that never came to fruition. DUH!!!
 
Last edited:
The Harvard study attempts to answer the question of whether or not banning firearms would reduce murders and suicides. Researchers looked at crime data from several European countries and found that countries with HIGHER gun ownership often had LOWER murder rates.

Russia, for example, enforces very strict gun control on its people, but its murder rate remains quite high. In fact, the murder rate in Russia is four times higher than in the “gun-ridden” United States, cites the study. ”Homicide results suggest that where guns are scarce other weapons are substituted in killings.” In other words, the elimination of guns does not eliminate murder, and in the case of gun-controlled Russia, murder rates are quite high.

The study revealed several European countries with significant gun ownership, like Norway, Finland, Germany and France – had remarkably low murder rates. Contrast that with Luxembourg, “where handguns are totally banned and ownership of any kind of gun is minimal, had a murder rate nine times higher than Germany in 2002.

The study found no evidence to suggest that the availability of guns contributes to higher murder rates anywhere in the world. ”Of course, it may be speculated that murder rates around the world would be higher if guns were more available. But there is simply no evidence to support this.”

And, as the study points out, where guns are banned, murderers still find weapons with which to do their dirty work. The difference is that the victims potential means of self-defense. With guns available, one would assume their deterrent effect if not outright effectiveness in the self-defense realm would predictably knock the murder rate down. Criminals and murderers are less likely to attack if the possibility the potential victim is armed exists. Common sense 101.


The study found no evidence to suggest that the availability of guns contributes to higher murder rates anywhere in the world. ”Of course, it may be speculated that murder rates around the world would be higher if guns were more available. But there is simply no evidence to support this.”

And finally:


Further, the report cited, “the determinants of murder and suicide are basic social, economic, and cultural factors, not the prevalence of some form of deadly mechanism.” Meaning, it’s not guns that kill people.

People kill people.

Well how about that? The study is published in Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy. You can read it here. Pass it around to your anti-gun friends. Point out this isn’t some right-wing think tank that pumped out the study. Then appeal to their common sense. Of course that may be difficult to do with someone who actually believes that the simple act of banning a weapon will magically lower the murder rate because without that weapon, people just wouldn’t murder each other … or something.


http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
 
Last edited:
Myth: Gun control in Australia is curbing crime

GUNS IN OTHER COUNTRIES - Australian Homicides before and after Port Arthur Masacre and Gun Ban BuybackFact: Homicides were falling before the Australian firearm ban, matching a global downward trend in most industrialized countries. However, non-firearm homicides are relatively stable in Australia.

Fact: Crime has been rising since enacting a sweeping ban on private gun ownership. In the first two years after Australian gun-owners were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms, government statistics showed a dramatic increase in criminal activity. 33 In 2001-2002, homicides were up another 20%. 34

From the inception of firearm confiscation to March 27, 2000, the numbers are:
•Firearm-related murders were up 19%
•Armed robberies were up 69%
•Home invasions were up 21%

The sad part is that in the 15 years before the national gun confiscation:
•Firearm-related homicides dropped nearly 66%
•Firearm-related deaths fell 50%

Fact: Gun crimes have been rising throughout Australia since guns were banned. In Sydney alone, robbery rates with guns rose 160% in 2001, more than in the previous year. 35

Fact: A ten year Australian study has concluded that firearm confiscation had no effect on crime rates. 36 A separate report also concluded that Australia’s 1996 gun control laws “found [no] evidence for an impact of the laws on the pre-existing decline in firearm homicides” 37 and yet another report from Australia for a similar time period indicates the same lack of decline in firearm homicides. 38

Fact: Despite having much stricter gun control than New Zealand (including a near ban on handguns) firearm homicides in both countries track one another over 25 years, indicating that gun control is not a control variable. 39

Myth: Japan has strict gun control and a less violent society

Fact: In Japan, the total murder rate is almost 1 per 100,000. In the U.S., there are about 3.2 murders per 100,000 people each year by weapons other than firearms. 40 This means that even if firearms in the U.S. could be eliminated, the U.S. would still have three times the murder rate of the Japanese.

Myth: Gun bans elsewhere work

Fact: Though illegal, side-street gun makers thrive in the Philippines, primarily hand crafting exact replicas of submachine guns, which are often the simplest type of gun to manufacture. Estimates are that almost half of all guns in the Philippines are illegal. 41

Fact: Chinese police destroyed 113 illegal gun factories and shops in a three-month crackdown in 2006. Police seized 2,445 tons of explosives, 4.81 million detonators and 117,000 guns. 42

Myth: The United States has the highest violence rate because of lax gun control

GUNS IN OTHER COUNTRIES - Homicide Rates for Top Ten Countries Plus United StatesFact: The top 100 countries for homicide do not include the U.S. 43 The top ten countries all have near or total firearm bans.

Myth: The U.S. has the highest rate of firearm deaths among 25 high-income countries

Fact: 60% of American “gun deaths” are suicides 44 and the U.S. has a suicide rate 11% higher 45 than international averages. This accounts for most of the difference.

Fact: The U.S. has a violent crime rate lower than 12 of seventeen industrialized countries 46 due in large part to the 2.5 million annual defense gun uses. 47

Myth: The United States is the source of 90% of drug syndicate guns in Mexico

Fact: This is an often misquoted data point from the BATFE, who said 90% of the firearms that have been interdicted in transport to Mexico or recovered in Mexico came from the United States. Thus the 90% number includes only the firearms American and Mexican police stop in transport. 48

Fact: The original 90% number was derived from the number of firearms successfully traced, not the total number of firearms criminally used. For 2007-2008, Mexican officials recovered approximately 29,000 firearms from crime scenes and asked for BATFE traces of 11,000. Of those, the BATFE could trace roughly 6,000 of which 5,114 were confirmed to have come from the United States. Thus, 83% of the crime guns recovered in Mexico have not been or cannot be traced to America and the real number is most likely 17%. 49

Fact: Mexican drug syndicates can buy guns anywhere. For the relatively under-powered civilian rifles coming from the United States, drug runners would pay between 300% and 400% above the market price. Thus they can and are buying guns around the world. 50

Fact: Mexican drug cartels – with $40 billion in annual revenues – have military armament that includes hand grenades, grenade launchers, armor-piercing munitions, antitank rockets and assault rifles smuggled in from Central American countries. 51 These are infantry weapons bought from around the world and not civilian rifles from the United States.

Myth: Mexico seizes 2,000 guns a day from the United States

Fact: The Mexican attorney general’s office reports seizing a total of 29,000 weapons in all of 2007 and 2008, or about 14,500 weapons a year. And that is all types of weapons, regardless of country of origin. 52 Had they actually seized approximately 2,000 weapons per day, the total number of seized guns would be closer to 1,460,000.

Myth: Thousands of guns go into Mexico from the U.S. every day

Fact: In Senate Committee testimony, the BAFTE said the number was likely at worst to be in the “hundreds”. 53 As evidenced above, for 2007 and 2008, the average for all firearms seizures was closer to 40 per day (29,000 guns/730 days), and only a fraction of these came from the USA by any means.





Notes:
1.Violence, Guns and Drugs: A Cross-Country Analysis, Jeffery A. Miron, Department of Economics, Boston University, University of Chicago Press Journal of Law & Economics, October 2001 ↩
2.Scotland tops list of world’s most violent countries, The Times, September 19, 2005 ↩
3.Minutes of Evidence, Colin Greenwood, Select Committee on Northern Ireland Affairs, January 29, 2003 ↩
4.Firearm ownership, Small Arms Survey 2007; Crime, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime – compiled by The Guardian, Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country ↩
5.In Switzerland, handguns are obtainable once a person obtains a simple police permit which is valid for six months. Federal law over weapons, weapon accessories and ammunition (weapon law, WG), Federal Assembly of the Swiss Confederation, May 2007 ↩
6.Carol Kalish, International Crime Rates, Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report (Washington: Department of Justice, May 1988). 1984 data for Switzerland, and the 1983 data for England and Wales. ↩
7.Army rifles remain racked at home, Swiss Defense Ministry statement, May 15, 2004 ↩
8.Chocolates for guns? Brazil targets gun violence, Rubem César Fernandes, executive secretary of Viva Rio, a nongovernmental agency that studies urban crime, Christian Science Monitor, August 10, 1999 ↩
9.Homicide trends in the United States, U.S. data: Bureau of Justice Statistics, September, 2004. Brazil data: Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2005. ↩
10.Targeting Guns, Gary Kleck, Aldine Transaction, 1997, at 360 ↩
11.Juristat: Crime Statistics in Canada, 2004 and FBI Uniform Crime Statistics online ↩
12.Canadian Firearms Legislation and Effects on Homicide 1974 to 2008, Caillin Langmann, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, September 30, 2011 ↩
13.Criminal Victimization in Seventeen Industrialized Countries, Dutch Ministry of Justice, 2001 ↩
14.A Comparison of Violent and Firearm Crime Rates in the Canadian Prairie Provinces and Four U.S. Border States, 1961-2003, Parliamentary Research Branch of the Library of Parliament, March 7, 2005 ↩
15.National Report by Finland, United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs ↩
16.Pekka-Eric Auvinen shooting in Tuusula, Finland on November 8, 2007 ↩
17.Weapons sell for just £50 as suspects and victims grow ever younger, The Times, August 24, 2007 ↩
18.The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S., Daily Mail, July 3, 2009, citing a joint report of the European Commission and United Nations ↩
19.YouGov survey of 2,156 residents in Sept 2007 ↩
20.British Home Office, reported by BBC news, July 12, 2002 ↩
21.Targeting Guns, Gary Kleck, Aldine Transaction, 1997, at 359 ↩
22.Minutes of Evidence, Colin Greenwood, Select Committee on Northern Ireland Affairs, January 29, 2003 ↩
23.Fear in Britain, Gallant, Hills, Kopel, Independence Institute, July 18, 2000 ↩
24.Crime Figures a Sham, Say Police, Daily Telegraph, April 1, 1996 ↩
25.Reported in The Guardian, September 3, 2000 ↩
26.42 killed by handguns last year, The Times, January 10, 2001, reporting on statistics supplied by the British Home Office ↩
27.Illegal Firearms in the UK, Centre for Defense Studies at King’s College in London, July 2001 ↩
28.Illegal Firearms in the UK, Centre for Defense Studies at King’s College in London, July 2001 ↩
29.Crime and Society in England 1750-1900, Clive Emsley, 1987, at 36 ↩
30.Where Kids and Guns Do Mix, Stephen P. Halbrook, Wall Street Journal, June 1999 ↩
31.Where Kids and Guns Do Mix, Stephen P. Halbrook, Wall Street Journal, June 1999 ↩
32.Associated News Media, April 30, 2001 ↩
33.Crime and Justice – Crimes Recorded by Police, Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2000 ↩
34.Report #46: Homicide in Australia, 2001-2002, Australian Institute of Criminology, April 2003 ↩
35.Costa targets armed robbers, The Sydney Morning Herald, April 4, 2002 ↩
36.Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?, Dr. Jeanine Baker and Dr. Samara McPhedran, British Journal of Criminology, November 2006. ↩
37.Austrian firearms: data require cautious approach, S. McPhedran, S. McPhedran, and J. Baker, The British Journal of Psychiatry, 2007, 191:562 ↩
38.Australian firearms legislation and unintentional firearm deaths a theoretical explanation for the absence of decline following the 1996 gun laws Public Health, Samara McPhedran, Jeanine Baker, Public Health, Volume 122, Issue 3 ↩
39.Firearm Homicide in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand: What Can We Learn From Long- Term International Comparisons?, Samara McPhedran, Jeanine Baker, and Pooja Singh, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, March 16, 2010 ↩
40.Japan data: 1996 Demographic Yearbook, United Nations, 1998; US data: FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1996. ↩
41.Filipino gunsmiths are making a killing, Taipei Times, May 7, 2005 ↩
42.China Radio International Online, September 7, 2006 ↩
43.SOURCE: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2010 ↩
44.Center for Disease Control WISQARS Fatal Injury Data is the National Vital Statistics System for 2010 ↩
45.World Health Organization, mortality database as of November 2006 ↩
46.Criminal Victimization in Seventeen Industrialized Countries, Dutch Ministry of Justice, 2001 ↩
47.Targeting Guns, Gary Kleck, Aldine Transaction, 1997 ↩
48.Mexico’s Massive Illegal weapons coming from China and the U.S., American Chronicle, March 14, 2009 ↩
49.The Myth of 90 Percent, Fox News, April 2, 2009, BATFE data distilled by William La Jeunesse and Maxim Lott ↩
50.Southwest Border Region–Drug Transportation and Homeland Security Issues, National Drug Intelligence Center, October 2007 ↩
51.Drug cartels’ new weaponry means war, Los Angeles Times, March 15, 2009 ↩
52.The Myth of 90 Percent, William La Jeunesse and Maxim Lott, Fox News, April 2, 2009 ↩
53.Senate Committee Judiciary, William Hoover, Assistant Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms, March 17, 2009 ↩











I am with Joey , as I stated earlier those who have their viewpoints on matters such as this will most likely never change it . So the above post will be my last contribution on this topic.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top