After the shooting in Roseburg, Oregon, we are back on the gun debate that normally follows one of these terrible events. President Obama tells us how more people die from mass shootings here than anywhere else in the world. Others on the left parrot this and the media accepts it as valid. The problem, of course, is that it is not true.
First of all, there are many countries in South America, Africa and Asia where deaths in mass shootings are more common than in the USA. Since there is no way to refute this reality, those on the left pushing gun control decided to just drop these countries out of the mix. Instead of all countries, they talk about "advanced countries". That means that countries like Brazil, Argentina and Mexico fall off the list because they are not "advanced". But think about that. The same people pushing for gun control are also pushing to bring a big chunk of the population of Mexico here. If these people have a high level of mass shootings in Mexico, why wouldn't they bring that custom here? And why should we only look at "advanced" countries. Why not consider all countries with strict gun laws? Isn't that the issue? Mexico has very strong gun laws, but it has plenty of mass shootings. Doesn't that mean that the gun laws aren't working in Mexico?
Second, there are even many "advanced" countries with higher death rates from mass shootings than the USA. Finland, Switzerland and Norway are "advanced" by anyone's definition, but they all have higher death rates from mass shootings than the USA during the last fifteen years. Those who push for gun control in response to mass shootings tell us to ignore the three countries because the statistics are colored by abnormally small sample sizes. Get it? Advanced countries don't count unless they have big populations. The thirty million people in these three countries are just a small sample. Think about that one now. There is only one advanced country in the world other than the USA that has more than one third as many people as the USA, namely Russia (although some would dispute the use of "advanced" to describe that nation. So if you boil down what the left is really saying, there are more mass shootings here than in Russia. But how do they know? For years, the Russians were under attack by Chechen terror groups. They carried out attacks like the one in the Moscow theater that killed a great many people. Aren't they mass shootings? Not according to the people pushing gun control. Terrorist attacks don't count in other countries.
The real truth is that those who push gun control want to move ahead despite the real statistics. Ignoring these statistics might be good for a political argument, but it makes no sense if one is trying to come up with a plan of action to counter this problem.
First of all, there are many countries in South America, Africa and Asia where deaths in mass shootings are more common than in the USA. Since there is no way to refute this reality, those on the left pushing gun control decided to just drop these countries out of the mix. Instead of all countries, they talk about "advanced countries". That means that countries like Brazil, Argentina and Mexico fall off the list because they are not "advanced". But think about that. The same people pushing for gun control are also pushing to bring a big chunk of the population of Mexico here. If these people have a high level of mass shootings in Mexico, why wouldn't they bring that custom here? And why should we only look at "advanced" countries. Why not consider all countries with strict gun laws? Isn't that the issue? Mexico has very strong gun laws, but it has plenty of mass shootings. Doesn't that mean that the gun laws aren't working in Mexico?
Second, there are even many "advanced" countries with higher death rates from mass shootings than the USA. Finland, Switzerland and Norway are "advanced" by anyone's definition, but they all have higher death rates from mass shootings than the USA during the last fifteen years. Those who push for gun control in response to mass shootings tell us to ignore the three countries because the statistics are colored by abnormally small sample sizes. Get it? Advanced countries don't count unless they have big populations. The thirty million people in these three countries are just a small sample. Think about that one now. There is only one advanced country in the world other than the USA that has more than one third as many people as the USA, namely Russia (although some would dispute the use of "advanced" to describe that nation. So if you boil down what the left is really saying, there are more mass shootings here than in Russia. But how do they know? For years, the Russians were under attack by Chechen terror groups. They carried out attacks like the one in the Moscow theater that killed a great many people. Aren't they mass shootings? Not according to the people pushing gun control. Terrorist attacks don't count in other countries.
The real truth is that those who push gun control want to move ahead despite the real statistics. Ignoring these statistics might be good for a political argument, but it makes no sense if one is trying to come up with a plan of action to counter this problem.
No comments:
Post a Comment