The horrific actions of one evil individual has re-ignited many individuals who support bans on all guns (or at least severe restrictions).
For now, I wanted to post just a few comments on the subject
On the rights/moral
Do people have the moral right to defend themselves? A fist, pepper spray, stick, board with a nail, billy club, knife, sword, bow and arrow, gun…at what point do people believe it becomes illegal to defend yourself? What if you’re a 105 pound woman, and a 230 man is attacking? Is the only legal option gun ban advocates would propose is to hope and pray you can dial 911? Then hope and pray the police get there in time to help? A more likely outcome is the police will arrive in time to complete an accurate tape outline of your corpse.
I would argue the method/tool itself has no moral implication whatsoever as long as the person doesn’t hurt any innocent person in the process of defending themselves. I.e. accidentally hitting with a bat someone other than your attacker is a crime, just like doing the same with a automatic weapon. If you hurt innocent persons during your previously legitimate self defense, you now become a criminal as well.
But what about reality and results – – Do countries with restrictive gun laws have less violent crime?
Only if you cherry pick the data 
Australia’s 2002 gun ban provides an unfortunate case study as well
Even Australia’s Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:
- In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
- Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9 percent.
- Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
Why didn’t anyone in the theater try to fight back?
Is it because law abiding persons were unarmed due to the fact Auroroa Colorado has very strict laws against conceal carry? Or because most in society have become pacified sheeple dependent upon state protection services instead of learning how to protect themselves? Maybe a mix of both…
Think about these FACTS for a second
- The massacre in Aurora took only two minutes to carry out.
- The average response time of police is, at minimum, six minutes (and getting worse).
- A typical concealed carry holder can draw, aim and shoot back in less than five seconds.
Do the math.
On the subject of media bias, why didn’t we hear about the Aurora shooting shortly before this tragedy that was quickly ended by a citizen carrying a gun?
Gun ban advocates never call for the complete abolition of guns – – only preventing regular citizens from owning guns.
Once we start talking about disarming the government officials as well, then we can have a serious discussion.
I thought your renspose was great. I often find myself wondering about what one of these people would do if their family were in the situation they seem to think can’t happen to them.On New Years Eve someone tried to break into my neighbors house. They were unsuccessful but had they succeeded they would have had 10 minutes to do whatever they were willing to do since that is how long it took the cops to arrive.This issue alone makes me even more convinced that I cannot leave the protection of my family to the police. As good a job as they do, it simply isn’t enough when you have an angry motivated criminal who doesn’t care about the law.I enjoy this blog very much. It has become a daily read for me. Thanks!
Your so-called “Statistics” on crime in Australia are complete rubbish. This report from the official Australian Institute of Criminology shows that sexual assault, for example, has been *declining* at 3% a year:
http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/0/B/6/%7B0B619F44-B18B-47B4-9B59-F87BA643CBAA%7Dfacts11.pdf
Australia’s violent crime rates are extremely low by international standards. Our gun crime rate is particularly low. Try using some actual facts next time.