Re: The Armed Citizen - Missouri

"David Moffitt" <weaselkiller@ prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Scout" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "Some Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > "Scout" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > "David Lentz" <dlentz10@/*NOSPAM*/rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Some Guy wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > <snip>
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Yea, that certainly has worked in DC. After all the
registration
> > > > system
> > > > > > > there is no workable that NO ONE can legally register a
handgun
> in
> > > the
> > > > > > > district, and since it's mandatory for all handguns to be
> > > > registered.....
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yet, the criminals have and use more handguns for crime than
> ever
> > > > before.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Seems like your "workable system" doesn't apply to criminals,
> and
> > > > never
> > > > > > > could.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It just proves patchwork controls don't work. An effective
> solution
> > > > would
> > > > > > have to be country-wide to avoid state-state transfers.
> > > > >
> > > > > The above author makes an interesting assertion, that while state
> > > > > gun control does not work, national gun control would  It is an
> > > > > interesting, albeit amusing opinion.  Yet no evidence was
> > > > > provided which to support it and no evidence can be provided.
> > > >
> > > > Well, we do have some contradictory evidence. Prohibition and the
WoD.
> > > Both
> > > > of which work on a national level and isn't a "patchwork" of
controls.
> > > Seems
> > > > that the first didn't work, and the second isn't working. One can
only
> > > > wonder why he feels a 3rd attempt will be any more successful that
the
> > > > miserable failures that went before it.
> > >
> > > Name one industriallized country that has effective gun controls and
> also
> > > has a higher gun homicide rate than the US. Or a higher gun suicide
> rate.
> >
> > Hmmm....so you're telling me that industrialization is a major factor in
> > violent crime?
> >
> > Second, why are you concerned with just gun rates? Are you telling me
it's
> > acceptable to murder people as long as they aren't shot? Seems like your
> > conditions are rather selective and will result in a biased result
because
> > of that.
> >
> > Oh, and I will note that your use of the term "effective" means you can
> > disavow any rates that show they have a higher rate simply by asserting
> that
> > their gun control is clearly ineffective no matter how restrictive it
> might
> > be.
> >
> > Rather a self serving set of criteria you set up there.
>
>
> "They are designed to kill as many people as possibble." Assault weapons?
> No, hands and feet. (Ex-)New York Gov. Mario Cuomo has joined the fight
> against semi-automatic guns, but state crime figures show that his energy
is
> being misdirected. In 1992, the latest year for which detailed figures are
> available, semi-automatic, large-capacity rifles killed 20 people in New
> York state, That's 0.8 percent of the state's 2,394 murders. But hands and
> feet beating and stomping accounted for 117 murders. That's nearly six
times
> the number caused by assault weapons. -- Reason Magazine, May 1994

Interesting. That brings up another question, of course. In how many of
those cases did a "semi-automatic, large-capacity rifle" make a difference
in whether someone was killed or not? IOW, were those supposed "advantages"
necessary to the action? The "DC Snipers" used a "semi-automatic, large
capacity rifle," but everything they did could have been done with a single
shot rifle or pistol.