Anyone citing "Gun related deaths" is just trying to manipulate statistics. Not all gun related deaths are bad and many are actually extremely positive.It shows a strong correlation that the buy back lowered gun deaths but the error bars are also large.
"Gun related murders" would be a more informative statistic although even it would be skewed by rival felons killing each other.
“I’m somewhat disappointed that more African Americans don’t think for themselves and just go with whatever they’re supposed to say and think."
- Dr. Benjamin Carson
And for all you "gun grabbers", here is the case in point. You cannot, and will not defeat these facts. I am an active member on the Phinfever forum, and a guy over there by the name of Rich, made it very clear that gun grabbers cannot defeat these facts, here is what he said:
http://phinfever.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=8096Criminals are going to get guns, whether you ban them or not. If they are choosing to murder, what are they going to care about breaking a gun law? That is not the solution. That would not have prevented Columbine or Aurora.
Case and point, South Africa. The process to legally obtain a gun in South Africa is far stricter than in the U.S. Sometimes you have to wait up to two years to obtain a gun. And yet the rate of murder with firearms is 340% higher and the highest in the world.
Colombia is another country with strict gun laws. All guns are manufactured by the government and only small arms are allowed. Entire cities, such as Bogota, have even banned guns.
The murder rate with guns is the second highest in the world.
Same in Thailand in regards to small arms and the registration process is strenuous.
Three examples of countries with stricter gun laws and a much higher murder rate through the use of guns.
The fact of the matter is that while the United States has the highest gun ownership rate in the world, the rate of homicides with guns is lower than Uruguay, Panama, Paraguay, Mexico, Guyana, Guatemala, South Africa, Venezuela, Belize, Argentina, Costa Rica, Jamaica, Brazil, Barbados, Nicaragua, Honduras, Colombia, Salvador, Bahamas, Dominican Republic, Phillipines, Zimbabwe, Israel, Ecuador... I could go on and on.
And take a wild guess who is generally obtaining guns in these mostly third world countries and committing these crimes.
Despite stricter gun laws, criminals are getting the guns and victims are defenseless to do anything about it except take a bullet to the head.
Oh, and it's widely known that armed robbers are cowards. Look up surveillance tapes of armed robberies gone bad when their victim quickly turns on them and is packing themselves. 9/10 the criminals are the ones "****ting their pants" in fear. They go into confrontations with the mindset and belief that THEY are the only ones packing, and in complete control of the victim. Why do you think women are so much more frequently targeted as victims than men?
Like most libertarians, Penn Jillette is generally speaking a constitutional originalist. Yet he doesn't make the case on the 2nd amendment on any kind of historical grounds, showing what was intended at the time the 2nd amendment was written. He merely offers the text, without context, and expects that will be enough.
I on the other hand have offered a contextual reading of the 2nd amendment that supports my position. It is by no means the only way to read the 2nd amendment historically, as there was no single point of view on it in 1791 just as there's no one way to interpret a law passed yesterday. But at least I make the attempt, even if I'm not an originalist and think the Constitution should be interpreted by a modern standard.
But when and/or if it does happen I'm sure there will be a section of the population who will still be against it. And despite all their bluster and threats of violence they'll hand over the guns. They're not ready to shoot federal marshals.
I was once a normal kid
Till the Devil came down and flipped my lid
He gave me a switchblade and he gave me a muse
Then he vomited acid all over my shoes