Biden’s extreme proposal of banning semi-automatic firearms would do little to reduce mass shootings in the United States, according to a new study released this month by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, named after notorious anti-Second Amendment activist billionaire Michael Bloomberg, who is also running for president as a Democrat.
The study “did not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings after controlling for the effects of bans on large-capacity magazines.”
Statistician Leah Libresco reported in The Washington Post in 2017 that she used to wish that “the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.”
“Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way,” Libresco wrote. “We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence.”
– Ryan Saavedra in Joe Biden Essentially Calls For Banning Nearly All Firearms
A good debate moderator would ask Bloomberg about this study.
If only the DNC would allow a good moderator for their debates.
LOL, ironically, a “moderator” is what folks in the United Kingdom call sound suppressors, rather than calling them “silencers” as the U.S. government’s BATFE does. I saw something this week where someone in England said the only weapon ordinary people in England are allowed to keep at home is a shotgun, but they’re allowed to keep a moderator (suppressor) on it so they won’t lose they’re hearing if they need to fire it indoors for self defense. They have to keep their shotgun locked up and unloaded, but they can keep the moderator (suppressor) on it.
Here in USA, it’s the opposite; your home defense gun can be loaded, but it can’t have a suppressor on it (unless you live in a free state and jump through lots of hoops and deal with lots of red tape and fees).
Technically yes and no. If your are on a none trust , the suppresor has to be nonaccesable to all other persons in the house hold. So yes you can have it on your shotgun but it would have to be locked up in some in which your the only person who can use it. No other person can have knowledge on how to access the suppresor otherwise its technically NFA violation.
Non-trust aka a Form 4 with just your name in it not a “None trust”
They can use a moderator, but they don’t really have awhat we consider a right to self defense. It has to be last option and proportionate. Ask Tony Martin. If thugs surround your house and enter through all possible egresses while firing shotguns, you might be allowed to use your shotgun after you’ve called the police.
You will not find a good moderator or an honest one in the democratic primaries.
“A good debate moderator would ask Bloomberg about this study”
I’m happy with the “moderators” they’re already using. Since the dems are so anxious to eat each other there’s hardly a way to make any of them look good. A lot of the fighting during the fiasco “debate” in NV didn’t come directly from the moderator questions, it came from others jumping in on each other, pointing out (what are to normal people) obvious hypocrisy and lies. There’s no way for the mods to control that on live TV. This bunch of dems would be better off having mutiple “takes” on their questions with mulligans and dubbed in applause, sort of like “Andy Griffith” or “Green Acres”.
“… good debate moderator…”
LOL
That’s what they call an ‘oxy-moron’. Just like the demotater candidates they are morons on oxy.
You mean a Master Debate Moderator
I recall during the 2015-2016 republican nomination process, the media kept calling Ted Cruz a master debater.
The Clinton/Communist Fake News Network would never consent to Sen. Cruz as a moderator of anything on their air.
@ Mark_PAV
Yeah, that’s a real knee slapper huh!
Instead of making guns ‘less deadly’, how about we focus on making people less prone to carry out these atrocities?
At some point this stuff was only heard of in gang activity (mafia), not schools or random venues. Hell, even that was rare.
We had the firepower then but not the high profile atrocities we see today. The guns didn’t really change, society did. The question is what changed in the hearts of the people to even consider such heinous acts?
Great question. Having given it much thought, I’m not sure we’ll ever see a definitive answer. One paper I read suggested that most of the shooters have been on SSRI’s and/or other mind meds.
Personally, I believe evil exists. And it rears it’s ugly head now and again.
It’s not something we can hold in our hands. It just is.
Not sure it’s something we can put a lid on.
They all have serious family / relationship issues and an inability to properly cope with it. The fact that many take antidepressant meds probably just means that they’re looking for a way to cope with their problems, and that’s the direction they’ve been pointed in by the “experts”. The best prescription is a loving, moral upbringing.
Most of these animals seem to be leftists or at least democrat supporters (same same). I think that’s a pretty good common thread. Also most of these terrible events happen in gun free zones. When the prevalent party of mass shootings supports gun free zones and then asks for more power and wants your guns… Self fulfilling much?
Yes, and that will be the next “opioid” crisis. When someone eventually realizes what was done to all these children’s minds by the almighty pharmas in the name of profit for themselves and the stockholders. And, look at the current legal proceedings.Purdue Pharma just took a scatological dump on the investors and ran for the hills with all the cash.
Or just ban totalitarian Marxist’s instead.
“The question is what changed in the hearts of the people to even consider such heinous acts?”
It’s the culture. The people responded to the message that their lives were hopeless, and that they would never get ahead.
Then they saw that a good way to get lots of attention was to do something so heinous that the news media would cover it in minute detail, ensuring that the would be ‘famous’.
Then they act…
The mass killings started in the 80s and have only increased in frequency, but back then the media did not have the capability or audacity to profit from them.
The honest truth is the babyboomers had not gotten into power, to be able to influence society, yet. They did not want to be poor like previous generations and gladly traded Liberty for false government security. The soldifcation of party faction over Constitution was the purpose of nam and to distract from forced integration of a foreign culture on Whites. Nam was the coupe de grace on the Constitutional Republic. The weak said yes, to a corrupt government like the DoI says people tolerate evil if they can profit from it instead of fighting it, and the nation has suffered every since. Think of how violence with guns has decreased 50 percent since 1993, and that was done by forcing all Citizens under a police state because low income minority communities resemble the third world chithole they place before the hyphen and America.
It was actually brilliant warfare, to have your opposition pay for their own destruction, except my kids are going to get the brunt of what older genrations did out of material convenience.
what changed….meds
its that simple look at most of the shootings in schools and the kid was on meds
and was on meds because in most cases mom had to work and could not keep a lid on the kid like they did in the past until they leveled out normally with age
the meds were used as a cheat to save time instead of having supervision just med up the kid to numbness and being docile…take the meds away and RAGE!
If you think I am wrong…go look at poor black and Latino areas where there are enough guns and FULL auto ones to invade canada! and they have no money for meds…so no school shootings!
It isn’t just the lack of meds, sometimes these meds work and then actually do the opposite of what they were prescribed to do.
These meds need to have a competent doctor following up, talking to parents and teachers to see if there is a change, not a doctor that was “assigned” to just rubber stamp any additional prescriptions.
When one is a buffoon they will believe most anything, even that one has a serious chance of being elected president.
Corn pop was a tuff dude,unfortunatly uncle Joe the buffoon wasn’t.
The People are roused by the Message Of Biden.
Accept the MOB or be trampled by the MOB.
Because the MOB is what The People want.
That picture of Biden look like Jeff Dunham’s dummy Walter. I wonder who’s running the mouth. It often seems like it is on autopilot with no one at the controls.
From the above article:
Biden: ban “assault weapons” & “get those clips that have multiple bullets in them not for sale, not be able to sell silencers, all those things.”
He can barely speak. It’s amazing that the media pundit experts thought he would make it through the nomination process. I actually hope he does. The debate between slow Joe and Trump would be comedy gold.
This !
Root cause mitigation is the only meaningful way to reduce (gun) violence, and you will always, always, have psychotic outliers like the Columbine cunts.
This is one of the reasons they’re shifting away from the crime/violence prevention tact to one of suicide prevention. NH’s new Dem heavy legislature is pushing it hard as justification for waiting periods.
I haven’t gotten any responses from the reps to my question of what if I already own a gun. Why wait some arbitrary number of days to pick up a new gun when I already own one? Not to mention the infinite number of other ways to ends ones own life.
Besides my body my choice, right Dems?
Help me out here. The Washington Post’s interview of the woman in the article was back in 2017. Why is this being recycled for today in 2020 as fresh news?
It’s as fresh and or as relivetive as Biden the Buffoon is.
…and yet “Creepy Uncle Joe” is no longer fresh, nor relevant, especially after the recent Debates. Not quite sure what your point is…
It was an obviously sarcastic comment.
It’s not being recycled. It’s referenced in the quoted article above.
The author identifies it as being from 2017, so not really sure what the problem is here.
I know. I read the article twice and checked the link as well to verify 2017. I guess my point is that an article from 2017 is being brought to the forefront today, whereas 2020 news would generally be more expected.
Her comment was how she viewed it in 2017. However after she did this new study that was just released this month. She found that the results did not match what her previous thoughts on the subject were. And she was fustrated in a completely new way. Just my take on it hope it helps.
So they want to restrict suppressors now? That is recent. Will they want to restrict Short Barrel Rifles or Short Barrel Shotguns next? Those have not been in the news so I guess they haven’t heard about them. And they ignore machine guns, even thought there are about 175,000 that are legal to own and transfer.
The Biden pic totally looks like Jeff Dunham’s Walter, perfect match.
I wonder if that’s where Jeff got the idea for His dummy?
I was going to ask if Biden was where Jeff got his idea for Walter!
No, Biden was a dummy long before Jeff was born!
The economy is great, wars are winding down, people are working, times are good.
What else is there to run on as a democrar?
To recall an old term GUN CONTROL REQUIRES TWO HANDS AND A NATIONWIDE SYSTEM AGAINST THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST LEFTISTS..AND LOOKING AT THE PHOTO OF BIDEN USED IN THIS ARTICLE, I SEE WHERE JEFF DUNHAM GOT THE IDEA FOR THE FACE OF HIS OLD MAN DUMMY…
Comments are closed.