World News Sunday continued ABC's gun control crusade, devoting its “A Closer Look” segment to how after the 1996 school shooting in Dunblane, Scotland, Great Britain virtually banned handguns, suggesting it's worth emulating. But though reporter David Wright conceded, in the middle of his story, that “gun crime has risen here” since handguns were outlawed, thus seemingly undermining the premise that making guns illegal lessens crime committed with guns, he hung his story on how “Britain has never again had a school shooting.” But if gun crime is rising, that sounds more like good luck than a result of the ban.
Wright featured two Britons exasperated by the refusal of the U.S. to follow Britain's lead. Gun control activist Ann Pearston contended: “What ordinary people have got to do in the United States, if they really care about what happened at Virginia Tech, is to make the banning of firearms in the United States an election issue.” Mick North, the father of a child killed in the Dunblane incident, fretted: “Nothing happened after Columbine. Nothing happened after Nickel Mines in the Amish community. After a few weeks, nothing will happen after Virginia Tech. Even the death of 32 people may not be enough to build up the necessary momentum.”
For early examples of ABC's crusading post-Virginia Tech, check the April 20 NewsBusters item, “Disappointment at ABC News: 'Politicians and Gun Control: Why Aren’t They Outraged?'” And from April 17, “Nets Blame Virginia's 'Lax' Gun Laws, Gibson and Couric Press Bush on Gun Control.”
Anchor Dan Harris set up the April 22 World News Sunday story:
“With Virginia Tech on everyone's mind, we're going to take A Closer Look tonight at the aftermath of another school massacre, one that changed the lives and changed the law across Great Britain. Eleven years ago, in a small town in Scotland, a man killed 15 elementary students, a crime that Britain vowed would never happen again and since that day has not. ABC's David Wright reports on the lessons of Dunblane.”
David Wright began, from Scotland: “March 13th, 1996, three years before Columbine, this tiny town faced the news every community dreads -- a rampage at an elementary school. Most of the victims, like Sophie North, were just 5 years old.”
Mick North, victim's father: “She would be 16-1/2 now, a young woman causing me no end of problems, no doubt, but problems that I would have loved to have had.”
Wright: “Same age as some of those kids at Virginia Tech.”
North: “Probably just about, yes.”
Wright: “Because of Dunblane, 16 kids will never go to college. The gunman, a former scoutmaster named Thomas Hamilton, killed their teacher, too, before taking his own life. In three minutes time, he fired 105 bullets. Had he arrived at the school during morning assembly as he had planned, the death toll would have been even higher. All of Britain was shocked by Dunblane, even more so because the guns used in the rampage were legally purchased. And as a direct result of what happened here, this country decided to ban virtually all handguns.”
Tony Blair in 1997: “They have done enormous carnage often to wholly innocent civilians, including children. The sooner Britain gets a lead in this, the better. It's the right and civilized things to do.”
Wright: “It helped bring Tony Blair to power. His party made banning handguns a campaign issue.”
Ann Pearston, gun control activist: “We just said after Dunblane that never again was someone going to walk into a school and massacre children.”
Wright: “They never have, not in Britain. Gun crime has risen here during the past decade. But Britain has never again had a school shooting.”
Pearston: “What ordinary people have got to do in the United States, if they really care about what happened at Virginia Tech, is to make the banning of firearms in the United States an election issue.”
North: “Sadly, I won't hold my breath.”
Wright: “Sophie North's father is well aware that the handgun debate is a sacred cow in the U.S., in part because of the Second Amendment.”
North: “Nothing happened after Columbine. Nothing happened after Nickel Mines in the Amish community. After a few weeks, nothing will happen after Virginia Tech. Even the death of 32 people may not be enough to build up the necessary momentum.”
Wright concluded: “Over here, they're watching in horror and sympathy. David Wright, ABC News, Dunblane.”
—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center
Comments Policy
Pearston: “What ordinary pe
April 23, 2007 - 03:58 ET by old croPearston: “What ordinary people have got to do in the United States, if they really care about what happened at Virginia Tech, is to make the banning of firearms in the United States an election issue.”
What ordinary people in the United States have done is say "From my cold dead hands." Maybe the Brits should ban radical Islam due to the the death of 52 innocents on trains July 7th, 2005.
"A government resting on the minority is an aristocracy, not a Republic, and could not be safe with a numerical and physical force against it, without a standing army, an enslaved press and a disarmed populace."
— James Madison, The Federalist Papers (No. 46)
Um, Mr. Pearston, guns WERE
April 23, 2007 - 04:49 ET by motherbeltNote to Ms. Pearston: guns WERE banned on the Virginia Tech campus. The killer ignored the ban and brought a gun on campus anyway. What a shocker, huh?
Of course, if he couldn't buy a gun legally, he would have said "oh, well" and chucked his plan, right?
Long before I ever understood
April 23, 2007 - 04:33 ET byLong before I ever understood the need for guns and the political game that goes on over them, I argued against guns.
I came to learn the need for people to have guns; and I also learned what the US Constitution says about the right to own guns. However....
I think it is also very important to be conscious of what is going on around us, and having a big dog is great too!
:o)
And...Don't far more people d
April 23, 2007 - 04:51 ET byAnd...
Don't far more people die from Alcohol related deaths? Let's ban that!
Oh, and...
Millions die from abortions.... Let's ban that!
You can have my glass of fine
April 23, 2007 - 05:47 ET by ltcolusmcretYou can have my glass of fine French wine when you pry it from my cold, dead lips.
And...Don't far more people d
April 23, 2007 - 04:51 ET bydouble post deleted
There is absolutely NO proo
April 23, 2007 - 05:02 ET by motherbeltEdited post:
Gun crime has risen here during the past decade. But Britain has never again had a school shooting.” -Reporter David Wright (added)
There is absolutely NO proof that the gun ban is the reason there have been no recent school shootings in Britain. And I think that is a ridiculous argument to make, in light of the fact that gun crime in general has risen.
Am I mistaken, or by saying t
April 23, 2007 - 09:36 ET by Hero SquadAm I mistaken, or by saying that did Wright throw down a challenge to the next loon in Britain who wants to go out in a blaze of terror?
*****
"Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine no possessions?'" - Elvis Costello
This is such a crock. What
April 23, 2007 - 05:08 ET by Jack BauerThis is such a crock. What can't the MSM ever be HONEST and tell the full story.
Listening to this you might assume that prior to Dunblane, the UK had similar gun laws to the US. That it was very easy for the average citizen to walk into a gun store and purchase a Glock...
CRAP.
That would be 70 years before Dunblane. By 1996 is was already virtually IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to obtain a handgun legally in the UK except as part of a gun club.
The Dunblane shooter was a member of a target pistol club and used his weapon for target shooting. He had to get the permission of the CHIEF CONSTABLE of his county police force to legally own a gun.
That is: the top cop in his region has to PERSONALLY sign his license to own a gun for the purpose of target shooting, nothing to do with protection.
He was NOT authorized to carry a handgun in public. Virtually NO ONE was in 1996, including 90% of the police, was allowed to own a gun for personal protection except in very restricted ares. Such as politicians under threat of terrorism.
The truth is, the only people in the UK who carry weapons regularly are the CRIMINALS.
Must be great to have a Histo
April 23, 2007 - 05:48 ET by old croMust be great to have a History major ;) All I learned in my history class was about Martin Luther and the Reformation!
"Never thrust your sickle into another's corn."
- Publius Syrus
thanks old cro but I major
April 23, 2007 - 06:15 ET by Jack Bauerthanks old cro but I majored in politics at college.
Now my brother, he's the History honors degree guy!!!
I've just got a good memory for this shit!
For some weird reason stuff just sticks in what passes for my brain.
That reformation though. What a riot!
I have a Political Science De
April 23, 2007 - 06:34 ET by seth_kegleyI have a Political Science Degree with a History minor... My wife will not watch TV with me if there is a good program on the History Channel... I'm like a kid at Christmas lol... I think this whole gun control debate from the Left's perspective is them wanting the citizenry to have to rely on the government for EVERYTHING... including the feeling of safety... which we all know will never happen because the government always screws up something and shows its inability to run effectively... at least those of us smart enough saw through all the idiotic charges of racism in the Hurricane Katrina disaster to what really happened which was the abject failure of government to provide for a portion of the population that had become utterly dependent on the government for almost EVERY need... instead of empowering people to protect and prosper themselves Liberals want to make them slaves to bureaucracy...
Check out my blog at: http://preacherskid.blogdrive.com/
Jaaack-You broke the first tw
April 23, 2007 - 08:38 ET by ghotifunJaaack-
You broke the first two cardinal rules of liberal debate.
You used historic facts.
You used logic.
Must we keep reminding you...
The logic you cite unfortunat
April 23, 2007 - 10:38 ET by artwhiteThe logic you cite unfortunately doesn't hold water. However many guns we citizens own we will never be a match for a modern army. The awesome weaponry of the US army would destroy any citizen's armed resistance with barely a flex of it's little toe, look what we did to Saddam's huge and relatively well equipped force...And this has been the case for nearly a hundred years now so the argument that we have the right to bear arms in order to protect ourselves from our own government doesn't hold water anymore, here or in Great Britain.
That leaves us wih the argument that we have the right to bear arms as a means of self defense, but unfortunately this argument is undercut by the reality that we almost never successfully defend ourselves or our property with our firearms as most of these attacks are by stealth and catch us before we have a chance to access our own weaponry. The further terrible reality is that the guns we own far more often hurt our own through suicides or accidents while the vast majority of gun related homicides are criminal on criminal not criminal on citizen.
Therefore logic tells us that gun ownership decreases our safety at home and that our best answer to safety from violent crime is to reduce the propensity to such crime.
The logic you cite unfortunat
April 23, 2007 - 10:38 ET by artwhiteThe logic you cite unfortunately doesn't hold water. However many guns we citizens own we will never be a match for a modern army. The awesome weaponry of the US army would destroy any citizen's armed resistance with barely a flex of it's little toe, look what we did to Saddam's huge and relatively well equipped force...And this has been the case for nearly a hundred years now so the argument that we have the right to bear arms in order to protect ourselves from our own government doesn't hold water anymore, here or in Great Britain.
That leaves us wih the argument that we have the right to bear arms as a means of self defense, but unfortunately this argument is undercut by the reality that we almost never successfully defend ourselves or our property with our firearms as most of these attacks are by stealth and catch us before we have a chance to access our own weaponry. The further terrible reality is that the guns we own far more often hurt our own through suicides or accidents while the vast majority of gun related homicides are criminal on criminal not criminal on citizen.
Therefore logic tells us that gun ownership decreases our safety at home and that our best answer to safety from violent crime is to reduce the propensity to such crime.
"The awesome weaponry
April 23, 2007 - 10:51 ET by MightyMouth"The awesome weaponry of the US army would destroy any citizen's armed resistance"
Art, if it got to that point, the army would be fighting along side the citizen's considering that the army is comprised entirely of .... citizens!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
As a look at almost any coup
April 23, 2007 - 12:46 ET by artwhiteAs a look at almost any coup or revolution in histroy will tell you when it comes to down to the crunch the army, as they are trained to do, will follow orders and kill fellow citizens. In the cases where the army sides with a populist revolt they simply install a military junta who ignore the wishes of the citizens and we're back at square one only with a new head on the snake.
BTW I don't understand your quotation. Do those who provide freedom not enjoy it?
So... basically you believe
April 23, 2007 - 12:53 ET by Challenger GrimSo... basically you believe that if the government goes all toltarian on the populace, there's nothing we should do. We should all just roll over and let them march over our bodies and freedoms?
What I did today.
"BTW I don't understan
April 23, 2007 - 14:32 ET by MightyMouth"BTW I don't understand your quotation. Do those who provide freedom not enjoy it?"
No,they don't really enjoy it, not till they get home and someone else is out providing the freedom. I don't understand your confusion, pretty simple concept for most. BTW you are the first poster in over a year NOT to understand my sig line. Congratulations!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Got it. Thanks.
April 23, 2007 - 23:24 ET by artwhiteGot it. Thanks.
You are welcome, please for
April 24, 2007 - 09:33 ET by MightyMouthYou are welcome, please forgive the snippy reply.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Ok Art, what's your idea th
April 23, 2007 - 12:09 ET by Challenger GrimOk Art, what's your idea then?
Seriously, the government goes absolutely freakin fascist tomorrow. What would you do to oppose it? What's your alternative for the citizens to fight a government that will no longer listen to their voices?
I'm in favor of ANY option (no matter how slim) over NO option.
What I did today.
I think that the only proven
April 23, 2007 - 12:51 ET by artwhiteI think that the only proven method for citizen's to truly change the nature of violent government is through passive resistance and the refusal to work.
Exactly when and where was
April 23, 2007 - 12:55 ET by Challenger GrimExactly when and where was that proven to work?
What I did today.
In India in 1947, Ukraine in
April 23, 2007 - 14:26 ET by artwhiteIn India in 1947, Ukraine in 2004, Poland in the early '80's, for black Americans in the 60's, the general strike in France in '68 and Spain in '88 for another couple of examples.
??? That's your definition
April 23, 2007 - 14:33 ET by Challenger Grim??? That's your definition of violent government? Fundamentally democratic ones that aren't even really that violent? How about example with a REALLY violent government? Vietnam, China, Cuba, U.S.S.R., Nazi Germany, Iraq, Iran, Feudal Japan... How many more should I list?
The fact of the matter is, peaceful demonstration ONLY works against democratic governments. Or do you honestly believe Ghandi could have toppled Hitler?
What I did today.
Fair enough, good point.... a
April 23, 2007 - 23:23 ET by artwhiteFair enough, good point.... although I don't think Poland was democratic at that time and democratic is a stretch as a definition for India in '47 or Ukraine in '04 and Spain in '88 was a very young democracy only recently freed (peacefully) from facism....also the changes we're seeing in China may well have been hugely influenced by the peaceful sacrifice at Tianmen as well as other internal pressures, while the Soviet system fell apart due to a combination of internal (essentially passive non-cooperation) and external pressures... but I guess I agree with you that violent resistance sometimes the ony answer.
Ghandi
April 23, 2007 - 23:27 ET by Cool ArrowGhandi would be no more than a blip on the historical screen if he were standing up to a Saddam Hussein or Hitler rather than a Democratic government.
Gumby
April 23, 2007 - 23:33 ET by botgOh, Gandi
Thought it said Gumby
sorry
Pokey
April 23, 2007 - 23:36 ET by Cool ArrowIsn't Pokey doing pony shows in Tijuana?
Ghandi would be no more than
April 23, 2007 - 23:54 ET by botgGhandi would be no more than a blip on the historical screen if he were standing up to a Saddam Hussein or Hitler
I doubt he would have made it up to blip
As I recall, India in '47 w
April 24, 2007 - 09:31 ET by Challenger GrimAs I recall, India in '47 was still being ruled by a democratic Britian.
Time will tell with China, but somehow I bet there is far more change being effected by economic pressures outside than any sort of peaceful protest within.
But at least we agree that peaceful action is the exception rather than the rule.
What I did today.
If someone besides the crim
April 23, 2007 - 05:15 ET by motherbeltIf someone besides the criminal had had a gun at VT, the carnage might have been a lot less. Check out this story of another attempted campus shooting spree, also in Virginia . The interesting thing is, the news report didn't mention the use of guns to subdue the shooter; it just said the students "rushed" him.
Death toll limited by guns
motherbelt-A GREAT link!I sta
April 23, 2007 - 07:57 ET by ghotifunmotherbelt-
A GREAT link!
I stated it last week that I can't believe no one, except a 76 year-old professor did anything directly to to the shooter to prevent further losss of life. Shocking!
I don't recall EVER reading about this in the news. Thanks again for the link.
To Ms. Pearston: STFU!
April 23, 2007 - 05:49 ET by ltcolusmcretTo Ms. Pearston:
STFU!
Ann, well good looking as wel
April 23, 2007 - 06:07 ET by USA4freedomAnn, well good looking as well as smart! Ok, Ann, lets say someone wants to come in to your house and get a little frisky with you (did I mention you are goood looking). Here are your choices: A, call the Bobbies, (who have to pick up the telly) dispatch a car, put down their cup of tea, drive to your house (find the house in the dark), knock on the door and announce (Cue up trumpet): Madam, the police are here to save you!! Madam?? Madam??
Look, well old man, it looks like the (good looking) Ann was killed with a cricket bat. Bastards! We must ban that evil game at once!
Oh sorry I got so involved in the story that I forgot about choice B: THERE IS NO CHOICE, B! Ann maybe you are not so smart (but you certainly goooood looking) and dead…
PS, dear England, when we want your opion, we will ask for it. Hey we don’t ask you about the whole king and queen thing..
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagn- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
USA, you had me a little co
April 23, 2007 - 06:13 ET by motherbeltUSA, you had me a little confused there for a moment with your "pick up the telly." In England, the "telly" is the TV, noth the telephone. LOL
sorry not too up on my Englis
April 23, 2007 - 06:25 ET by USA4freedomsorry not too up on my English (like GW) its a second lang. to me...lol
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagn- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
The sad part is would make ju
April 23, 2007 - 06:27 ET by USA4freedomThe sad part is would make just as much sense to pick up the TV, maybe they will not steal it…
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagn- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
You all left me hangin. Wh
April 23, 2007 - 09:31 ET by MightyMouthYou all left me hangin. What do the brits call a phone? (and don't tell me its "phone").
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
London slang for phone
April 23, 2007 - 10:03 ET by RJ"Blower"
Thanks RJ, I guess that mea
April 23, 2007 - 10:07 ET by MightyMouthThanks RJ, I guess that means the one receiving the call is the
"Blowee" ? I think I would much rather receive calls, but that's just me! :-)
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Captain to engine room
April 23, 2007 - 10:26 ET by RJI also found this:
"blower n. This is a slang word for the telephone (i.e. "just a second, I'm on the blower"). Yes, I know it sounds a bit rude. A contributor tells me it stems from the days of party telephone lines, where one would blow into the mouthpiece in order to gently remind whoever was using the line that you wanted to too. My contributor tells me her mother told her, so that's good enough confirmation for me."
But I wasn't satisfied with that explanation, because I remember old movies with that tube device the captain used to communicate with the engine room. I think I remember the captain blowing into it to get the attention of the engine room guys. I was able to find this:
"Up in the bridge, the captain knows he has a cargo to be delivered to Boston, New England. The weather forecast is fair and he has plenty of time to make the crossing. He gets on the blower down to the engine room."
I believe that "blower
April 23, 2007 - 10:35 ET by MightyMouthI believe that "blower" on ship had some type of built in whistle instead of a ringer. The operator would blow the whistle to gain the attention of those on the other end. And as I recall, Star Trek (the original), used an electronic version of the whistle as well.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
You're talking about the bosun's whistle
April 23, 2007 - 10:54 ET by RJYou're talking about the bosun's whistle, which is used preceeding an announcement or orders. It's a long-standing practice on shipboard.
No,no. Yeah I know about th
April 23, 2007 - 10:59 ET by MightyMouthNo,no. Yeah I know about that one. But I swear I have seen some old b&w movies where they blow into a whistle and then talk down a tube, maybe in a submarine? But you will have to admit the Star Trek electronic whistle from one station to another.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
bosun's whistles
April 23, 2007 - 11:16 ET by RJI think we're talking about the same thing, MM. The bosun's whistle came before the tubes and they probably blew that into the old tubes.
Since Star Trek is a "ship" they use shipboard practices like the electronic version of the whistle.
P.S. I still have my dad's whistle. He was a Chief Bosun's Mate.
Ok I see the logic I think. T
April 23, 2007 - 06:13 ET by USA4freedomOk I see the logic I think. There are no one shooting up the schools, but gun crime (with no one other then the criminals having guns) is up. Got it. That is like saying no one is stealing canary yellow Volkswagens but every other Volkswagen has gone to the chop shop.
Dam, don’t you just hate it when the facts don’t jive with your point of view.
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagn- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
Just one more tidbit before I
April 23, 2007 - 06:25 ET by USA4freedomJust one more tidbit before I have to go to work. Does anyone realize there is no money to be made at shooting up schools? ITS WHAT A CRAZY PERSON DOES…BECAUSE THEY KNOW THERE ARE NO GUNS THERE TO STOP THEM. In England they would rather go in your house and kill you because you will have some valuables in your residence. Guess what, if I know you don’t have a gun and I do, do you think that would embolden me?
So when are you guys going to stop the bus bombings? I know we will get rid of the busses. See how stupid it sounds?
Now don’t get me wrong, the English are one of the few that support us, but don’t get involved in our politics. Its in our Bill of Rights, you remember that was the paper we wrote when we ask you to leave.
Why in the world is the world so…. Worried about what ever goes on here.
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagn- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
Gun Control
April 23, 2007 - 06:36 ET by pocomocoGun Control is nothing more than a ‘red herring’ used to sidetrack the public from understanding that, Yes! Mabel, there are bad people in the world who, for a myriad of anti-social reasons, want to do other people harm.
As such, no amount of gun control would have stopped a person like Cho from completing his ‘divine’ task. Because if guns were not available to him, it would have been a bomb where its construction is easily available on the Internet.
The truly sad part of all of this is the MSMs active participation in the Gun Control hoax. It’s advocacy journalism at its worst.
Today, rather than the 5 W’s used in reporting stories of yesteryear, the MSM now engages in ‘feelings’ journalism, which, in a short time, will prove to be its demise.
Just ask Wall Street.
I just wish the liberal MSM a
April 23, 2007 - 07:04 ET by Dave RI just wish the liberal MSM and their Democrat Party masters would stop lying to us about the real reason they support firearm confiscation, which has nothing whatsoever to do with criminals having guns.
David Wright is either a liar or a complete idiot.
This republic will not survive the continued neglect of its people.- Neal Boortz.
Great James Madison quote!!
April 23, 2007 - 08:01 ET by c5thenIf the schools would simply teach the history instead of trying to indoctrinate the students into a certain way of thinking, more people would realize that the founders of this country abolutely intended the people to be armed as a deterant to a tyranical government as well as protection from foreign powers.
Anyone who claims that the 2nd amendment applies only to "the militia" either does not have a 5th grade grasp of grammar, or is lying. And that includes politicians and Supreme Court Justices.
On high schools,gunracks and p-up trucks
April 23, 2007 - 08:09 ET by whodatWhen I was in high school circa 77-80, it was common for boys to have shotguns and rifles locked in their trucks in the parking lot. This being the case I often wonder how many would have raced from the building to get their guns ....I don't think we'd be looking at 33 dead. When we cannot trust the majority we are doomed.
5 years ago - similar occurance - different result
April 23, 2007 - 08:51 ET by c5thenhttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55326
Two students run to their cars to retrieve their weapons and the rampage is stopped.
Media "forgets" to report that two armed students were instrumental in stopping the gunman.
And take a wild guess wheth
April 23, 2007 - 09:20 ET by sarcasmoAnd take a wild guess whether he was under treatment for depression??
JMR
Good point sarc, it's high
April 23, 2007 - 09:26 ET by MightyMouthGood point sarc, it's high time anti-depressent drugs (and depression treatment) were banned!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Well, I've known people who
April 23, 2007 - 09:42 ET by sarcasmoWell, I've known people who claim they were greatly helped by those same drugs. My point isn't about any ban on anything (when is it ever?) but rather a little voice that says maybe if the government thinks these drugs merit a prescription, then they'd also merit letting the gun shops in on that little secret. Privacy is a fine thing, but antidepressants correlate so-well with shootings that people like me were able to correctly predict -- before it was even known there was a single shooter -- that antidepressants would be involved. Imagine the hysterical conniption the news media would be having right now if ANY illegal drug (pick your favorite...) were substituted for the mystery-antidepressant involved in this & just about every other school-shooting case over the past few decades. But it's NOT an illegal drug they're ignoring instead of having a fit about at the moment. Instead, the mystery-drug is an FDA approved prescription drug, and nobody but me is saying the emporor wears no clothes. Why? Follow the ad-money.
JMR
anti-depresants seem to work
April 23, 2007 - 11:10 ET by c5thenIt's just that they change the thought process of a certain % of individuals from depressed and thinking of killing themselves, to angry and pissed off at society and thinking of killing everyone else.
The medical profession and the pharmaceutical companies have not come to the realization that different is not necessarily better.
Mrs MM tells me that nearly
April 23, 2007 - 12:30 ET by MightyMouthMrs MM tells me that nearly all the women she knows (not just 40+) need something that they affectionetly call a "Happy Pill". And believe me without those pills there would be a lot more domestic and violent crime (towards men, by women) than there is now!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
c5,Thanks for that link, my p
April 23, 2007 - 12:38 ET by bigtimerc5,
Thanks for that link, my pal and I were talking about that exact incident the day after this happened when all the media/politicians/blogs were going on and on about The 2nd Amendment and more laws....I remember it well, problem was solved rather swiftly now wasn't it?
Some lessons are never learned from history.
Ann Pearston, gun control act
April 23, 2007 - 08:10 ET by ghotifunAnn Pearston, gun control activist: “We just said after Dunblane that never again was someone going to walk into a school and massacre children.”
Gosh, Ann, what you should have said is:
"...never was someone going to walk into our socialist welfare offices handing out the dole to our unemployed and morally lost youth and massacre children.”
So, Ann, when the radical Islamofascitsts take to the streets in England hell-bent on wiping out YOUR way of life and they're loaded for bear (and they're oh so close to doing that now), I guess you'll just roll over and let 'em take your country.
But at least the children will be safe...
According to an article in
April 23, 2007 - 08:21 ET by WolfremAccording to an article in The Scotsman this morning, murders by knife are on the rise.
I found this line sounding quite familiar: (12th paragraph down)
"These figures show that Scotland is not the safer place that the
Lib/Lab coalition pretended it was. Far too few police on the beat and
the continued scandal of automatic early release have both served to
make Scotland a more dangerous place, not a safer one."
"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." - George Santayana
good post Wolf! These are
April 23, 2007 - 08:52 ET by USA4freedomgood post Wolf!
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagn- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
Doing the exact same thing
April 23, 2007 - 09:10 ET by WolfremDoing the exact same thing over and over, yet expecting different results each time, is insanity.
Therefore, the real reason liberal leaders want to abolish guns altogether, which is the ultimate goal BTW, is to prevent the unwashed masses from uprising and revolting.
"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." - George Santayana
Wright featured two Britons e
April 23, 2007 - 09:21 ET by BeowulfWright featured two Britons exasperated by the refusal of the U.S. to follow Britain's lead. Gun control activist Ann Pearston contended: “What ordinary people have got to do in the United States, if they really care about what happened at Virginia Tech, is to make the banning of firearms in the United States an election issue.” - Americans have made firearms an election issue - Just ask the Goracle (the ploitician formerly known as Al "The Bore" Gore).
Mick North, the father of a child killed in the Dunblane incident, fretted: “Nothing happened after Columbine. Nothing happened after Nickel Mines in the Amish community. After a few weeks, nothing will happen after Virginia Tech. - By golly Mick, you're right. Nothing happened after two school shootings. Thanks for making the point that these were perpetrated by WHACKOS. Which also means that there are relatively few WHACKOS shooting up our schools.
Ann Pearston, gun control activist: “We just said after Dunblane that never again was someone going to walk into a school and massacre children.”
Wright: “They never have, not in Britain. Gun crime has risen here during the past decade. But Britain has never again had a school shooting.” - And thank you Ann and David, for making another point - Apparently, since gun crime has risen since the ban, availability of firearms never had anything to do with the school shooting.
And as a final point, "firearms related" deaths in the US account for just over 1% of total deaths - and this includes accidental shootings, suicides, and self-defense. I would love to see the statistic on actual deaths caused by the illegal use of firearms...
The Closed Mind Builds Strong Barriers
beowulf hits the target
April 23, 2007 - 12:40 ET by tumbler_2007Good post, beow;
But especially that great tag, "The Goracle !" Hoo-haw ! That's easily the BEST one yet, and hangs around Al Gore's chubby neck just perfectly ! I'll adopt that name for him immediately and never refer to him by any other ! Bravo !
I recall maybe ten or more ye
April 23, 2007 - 11:27 ET by ahusserI recall maybe ten or more years back, in England a man attacked a congregation in church with a samurai sword and killed at least one. Maybe five years ago a German boy attacked and killed several of his classmates at school with a handgun. Also I have two British movies (very entertaining by the way): Lock, Stock and Two Smoking barrels and Snatch. No criminal in the movie seems to have a hard time finding firearms. Could be a revealing look at the real truth about Britain.
I found this in answer to my
April 23, 2007 - 12:04 ET by ahusserI found this in answer to my faulty recollection:
" RTE News-Sunday, 28 November 1999 21:00
Police in Surrey in southern England are questioning a 26-year-old local man who ran amok with a samurai sword during Mass at a local Catholic church. The naked man, armed with the sword and a knife, struck out at worshippers at St Andrew's Church in Thornton Heath. Eleven people were injured; tonight four of them are in a critical condition in hospital. The man's family say that he is suffering from severe depression."
"A mind is a terrible thing." - A comic I forgot the name of.
Again using the wonderful int
April 23, 2007 - 12:25 ET by ahusserAgain using the wonderful internet to back up my faulty recollection. There was a deadly school shooting in Germany about 5 years ago. But the strange fact was that there have been many school shootings in Germany and according to the internet news story I was reading:
"Germany has some of the most strict firearms laws in the world. But a school shooting this week raises the question of whether the Internet presents a loophole for illegally acquiring weapons."
Apparently the amount of gun control doesn't matter as we all know.
"A mind is a terrible thing." - A comic I forgot the name of.
Does anyone have a link to a
April 23, 2007 - 11:41 ET by contraryDoes anyone have a link to a trusted source showing the Uk's violent crime rate over the last decade? Also, I was wondering the incidents of death here in the US attributed to guns versus cars. I would think more kids are killed by cars than guns but would like a source.
British crime rates
April 23, 2007 - 12:55 ET by dmntd1here are your British crime rates. Page 72 is the start of Firearm crimes in 2004/05 and shows that:
And, backing up a bit, page 37 has a table that shows that a weapon was used in 25% of all violent crime, up from 23 in 1995.
And, finally, stranger-on-stranger crime has gone from 32%(2004/05) to 46%(1995).
According to this book, the information is based on ACTUAL crime, as opposed to REPORTED crime.
oh yeah, as I re-read some parts of these.... top of page 72 states that 'Firearms (including air weapons) were used in 22,789 recorded crimes in England and Wales in 2004/05, a fall of five per cent or 1,305 crimes compared to 2003/04. Over half (52 per cent) of these offences involved air weapons. This is the first fall in firearm crimes since 1997. Increases in some of the........' What this does not show, however, based upon the graph immediately below it, is that NON-air-weapon crime went UP!!!!!!! But, for that, you have to go down to the next paragraph... And then, you get to the THIRD paragraph which says that guns were used in .4 per cent (one in 250 crimes), but that's of ALL crime, not violent crime, where we've already seen that they're used in a quarter of all violent crime...
Sheesh, the gun-control nuts are even writing the official gov't research!
Thank you for the link
April 23, 2007 - 17:32 ET by contraryThank you for the link
For your information.. The &q
April 23, 2007 - 23:08 ET by M J BFor your information.. The "air weapon" mentioned is an effing BEE BEE GUN! Get a life.
The gun crime rate in the UK is a quarter of what it is in the USA.
http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm
A better measure would be the
April 23, 2007 - 13:09 ET by NL207A better measure would be the changes in burglary and home invasion rates since the outlaw of firearms in the UK. I understand these rates skyrocketed after the ban
Similarly, Germany's number one crime problem is home breakin, burglary and robbery in the victim's home. The criminals operte with impunity knowing the victims are defenseless.
Then compare to Switzerland, where every able-bodied man is a member of the militia and has a fully automatic assault rifle in his home. The Swiss burglary/home invasion rate is both the lowest in Europe and near zero. It is even lower than the Untied States.
Use some common sense. If you were a burglar, which sort of place are you going to enter? Are you going to enter the home defended by a loaded assault rifle or are you going to wait until its occupants have left and enter unopposed?
Changed my mind -- my guns are ready to be picked up!
April 23, 2007 - 12:54 ET by w0tmAll of the emotional anecdotal evidence of the anti-gun left has caused me to change my mind. Amazing but they've done it. Yes, confiscate all firearms but we must do it in steps. Surely no one who believes in a gun-free world would disagree with this reasonable plan. First, confiscate all firearms in the possession of felons and those mentally insane and all unregistered firearms whoever the owner. The first step would confiscate all firearms except those registered and owned by mentally stable, law abiding citizens. OK so far. Shouldn't take long. Not long at all.
I believe I am in the second group and now have my guns ready to hand over as soon as the first group is completely disarmed and absolute proof is shown. Since laws already on the books allow the government to confiscate firearms held by the first group, they can begin to confiscate millions and millions of firearms today! Not tomorrow -- today!
It is sooo easy. Just put up big signs "drop illegal firearms here" atop dumpsters all over the country and the dumpsters will be filled up in days. Problem solved! Why has no one thought of such a simple solution? They've come close with their plan to first confiscate registered firearms owned by law-abiding citizens then those of criminals second. Just switch the two. How so very simple! Please get back to me when all of the illegal firearms are picked up so I can have mine ready to turn in.
These are the same people who made suicide illegal to reduce the number of suicides.
Hand in your guns
April 23, 2007 - 23:23 ET by Cool ArrowI agree with you. Now that we law abiding citizens are satisfied law enforcement can effectively insure our safety there is no need to own guns.
It occurs to me that if Alec Baldwin did the unthinkable we would be hearing the MSM first disavow any association with his views and then point to the phone message and ask why law enforcement didn't act.