Re: Gun control doesn't work--so what?

"Trevor Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Cole Firearms Inc." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Trevor Wilson wrote:
> > >
> > > "Morton Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > "Cole Firearms Inc." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Trevor Wilson wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Shane Yeager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *snipped for brevity*
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Trevor Wilson wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >**I never said that guns cause violence. Not once. Guns
merely
> > > > facilitate
> > > > > > > >easy and cheap destruction of human life for those with a
> violent
> > > > > > > >disposition. Look at the assault rates in the UK, the US and
> > > > Australia:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_ass_cap
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >The rates of assault for all three nations is broadly
similar.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Now look at the homicide rates, from bullets in each country:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_wit_fir_cap
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >American assaults seem to more often lead to homicide.
> Americans
> > > are
> > > > far
> > > > > > > >more adept at killing each other, yet seen to have
> approximately
> > > > similar
> > > > > > > >violent tendencies to other nations. The only glaring
> differnce, is
> > > > the
> > > > > > easy
> > > > > > > >availability of cheap firearms in the US.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --->From the nationmaster site, US firearm murders were 8259,
> and
> > > > > > > overall murders were 12689 (about 65% firearm related murders
> > > (FRM.))
> > > > > > >  The UK stats are 62 FRM from a total of 850 (7%.)  Overall
> murder
> > > > rates
> > > > > > > were .05 per 1000 for the US, and .01 per 1000 for the UK.
> Assuming
> > > > > > > that guns availability were the only difference in the rates,
> what
> > > do
> > > > > > > you suppose the difference in non-gun rates comes from?  Non
gun
> > > rate
> > > > > > > for the US= .05*(1-.65), or roughly .0175 per 1000, vs the
UK's
> > > > > > > .01*(1-.07), or .0093 per 1000.  As murder without guns is
> almost
> > > > twice
> > > > > > > as common (per capita) in the US as the UK, there must be more
> > > > involved
> > > > > > > than just saying that the guns are responsible for the
> difference.
> > > > > > >  Comments?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > **Not just guns. The training and handling of those guns, is
also
> at
> > > > issue.
> > > > > > Americans seem to be very proficient at killing their countrymen
> with
> > > > > > bullets. Given the rate of assault is similar in the US and the
> UK, it
> > > > is
> > > > > > reasonable to assume that UK residents may well be able to kill
> > > > (provided
> > > > > > they are similarly skilled to their US cousins) their countrymen
> at a
> > > > > > similar rate to Americans.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Guns, as opposed to fists, knives, et al, do not require the
> personal
> > > > > > interaction between victim and assailant. As such, guns may be
> doubly
> > > > > > efficient at killing. This, BTW, is a fact known to military
> trainers
> > > > all
> > > > > > over the planet. Much time is spent on recruits, desensitising
> their
> > > > inbuilt
> > > > > > resistance to killing another human. Guns perform this task
> admirably.
> > > > >
> > > > > That is the purpose of the Gun. If Soldiers have a resistance to
> > > > > Killing, they need to be desensitized to that problem.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > Perhaps Trevor can CITE a case where a gun has committed murder?
Human
> > > > beings commit murder. What is in their hands at the time, if
anything,
> is
> > > > incidental.
> > >
> > > **Trust me, Mort, you do not want to play that game. As the adage
goes:
> > > "People in glass houses......"
> > >
> > > You are the biggest glass house on the USENET.
> >
> > Then you should have no problem providing a cite.
>
> **Sure. Choose any of Mort's posts.

Your inability to support your claim is noted.