On 31 Dec 2005, at 3:24 pm, Gary Nunn wrote:
I apologize in advance, because I know this topic can get a bit
heated on
this list. The reason I'm posting this, is because this is the
first media
article that I've seen, from a major media outlet, that makes an
attempt to
be fair and accurate.
If the difference in violent crime or murder rates or whatever was
really obviously significantly different between gun-control/non-gun-
control areas then one side or the other of the debate would be
trumpeting that fact loudly. So whatever difference guns make it
isn't enough for either side to have proved it after years of argument.
Given that we have strict controls over the sale of alcohol, tobacco,
fireworks and other possibly harmful materials it seems entirely
sensible and in line with other regulation to control firearms sales
especially since there is no compelling evidence that they
significantly improve (or harm) personal safety *in general* but are
obviously dangerous items individually.
Most comparisons of gun ownership/crime rates are apples/oranges
comparisons. Anomalies like Switzerland crop up.
I'd be interested in a comparison of the USA with places that are
similar such as Canada or Australia. That might be more enlightening
than comparisons with Europe or South America.
--
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/
If you listen to a UNIX shell, can you hear the C?
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
