Guns, Laws, and Crime; with Logic and Facts

Man, so much hurt, pain, loss, and illogical, irrational, uncontrollable emotions being spewed everywhere, from all sides. I get it. I’ve personally experienced the loss of friends to guns. I get it. So, I am going to analyze the data and come to a definitive stance for where I stand with Gun Rights and Gun Control.

Because there is so much information, I have organized it in “sections” for better reference to my conclusions.

There are some beliefs that we all have, that shape how we interpret this issue. Which explains why some people refuse to change their mind even when confronted with facts. It’s their beliefs that still compel them to think a certain way.

Section 1: Beliefs that Shape Me:
(Also see: My view of politics and religion)

I believe in the human right to absolute self-defense with the use of deadly force if needed to preserve ones own life. Therefore, I believe that the 2nd Amendment is a human right, a right that a lot of other cultures and nations agree with.

I believe that I can not solely trust the police. History supports this. Some can be trusted, not all, and not in every situation. Afterall, they are also enforcers and direct arms of the state and government; not to mention they took 75 minutes to breach the room at the Uvalde Elementary school. Their average response time is 12 MINUTES! Toooooooo long in an active shooter situation.

I believe that I can not solely trust the state or federal government to protect me and my family. History supports this as well; and the 100+ MILLION people that have been directly murdered throughout history by their or another government that legally authorized it’s actions, would agree with me too. I know Native Americans would and more senior African Americans who lived through Jim Crow and Democrat Civil Rights Act filibusters with also.

I KNOW that morals and ethics are not defined by The State. Thousands of years of slavery by various nations and governments over human history establish their Amoral stance. Also, Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, and all those disgusting trash GOVERNMENT OFFICALS who literally USED THE STATE to LEGALLY murder innocent life, proves The State does not determine right/wrong; therefore, neither can Laws in America (slavery was legal, segregation was/is legal, Japanese interment camps were legal, racial persecution was/is legal, Jim Crow was legal, abortion is legal, on and on). There is no perfect government or society, and there never will be, because there is no perfect person or perfect people who exist to create it; and that’s a universal reality.

Now that you get an idea as to what beliefs shape how I interpret facts, we need to now define words and ideas so that they get properly conveyed.

Section 2: Defining Terms to Maximize Understanding

We need to understand what a “mass killing” is. What a “homicide by the use of a firearm” is, and “death caused by a firearm in self defense.” This will give me a more clear understanding of the actual and real numbers. Yes, it matters. If I say 20 million people were killed by gun, that sounds bad, but when I say that out of that 20, only 2 million were a murder and the rest were due to self defense. You gain a better understanding of the reality of those numbers.

Mass Murder/Killing – The FBI defines mass murder as murdering four or more people during an event with no “cooling-off period” between the murders by one person[1]. Different from a “Kill Spree” and “Serial Killers” that takes place in multiples of locations. Also different from a group of people committing the violent event or events.

The “common” international Mass Killings are terrorist attacks, such as a suicide bombing. A single person in one event mass kills a lot of innocent people. ISIS got America beat as fast as the numbers of deaths over the years, but the media won’t talk about that or compare the two; despite being the same by definition. That’s a discussion for another day.

The most violent international Mass Killings have been carried about by governments under their own justifications of being legal, but this is called Democide [2]. Though Hitler and Stalin were a single person, leader of the government in which was used to mass murder millions, again, we are narrowing to down to the direct result of one person’s direct actions. Media won’t want to touch this either, they love their Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pots, and Maos of history… fucking trash commies… anyways, back to the topic at hand:

Section 3: History Of Mass Killings

How far back do we want to go? Mass Killings have been a part of human history. Every time another nation would conquer the other, they would mass kill the inhabitance (Genocide). Events like this are even recorded in the bible, Roman historians, Egyptian historians and so on. Even when there is a revolution in that nation, and they go on a mass kill spree of the opposition, this is nothing new in history (Democide). [3] Even the very first human who murdered, where did he even get that idea from? How did he know that would happen? So, that’s way too broad, but it does bring up an interesting point that I will need later – human nature.

I’m only going to consider the time from when the modern GUN was invented and on with a single person committing the mass killing.

The first recorded use of a firearm was in 1364 and “handguns” were known across Europe by 1380s. But the “Hand Canon” created in China was in use long before that. Guns reached their “classic” form in the 1480s but the invention of the flintlock in 1815 changed everything. In 1854, Volcanic Repeating Arms produced a rifle with a self-contained cartridge. In 1860, Benjamin Tyler Henry created the Henry rifle, the first reliable repeating rifle. In 1861, Richard Jordan Gatling invented the Gatling gun, the first successful machine gun, capable of firing 200 gunpowder cartridges in a minute. [4, 5] So, leading up to 1900, what did the people and governments feel about non-army personnel having these?

Well, let’s focus on America. The Britts thought it was a good idea to impose gun control on the colonies [6]. That was a bad idea. Then, less than 100 years later the US Government imposed gun control on the Native Americans. That didn’t end well for the Native Americans. The Battle of Wounded Knee, where over 300 Native Americans were killed by the US Government is a prime example [8]. Also, when slaves revoted and were able to get their hands on guns, a lot of Slave Owners and slave catchers (predecessors to the Police) get killed [9]. During the Civil War and after, Slave catchers and now, police, were getting killed by civilians, and now freed slaves with guns [10]. The Democrats openly opposed the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments [11, 12]!

In the 1900s, America had some few resisting pockets of Native Americans (1898 Chippewa v. Mississippi), and freed slaves, but still oppressed, African Americans owning guns also rebelled. As early as 1934, Joel A. Rogers identified 33 slave revolts, including Nat Turner’s in 1834. Democrats had to take action to repel what the Grand Old Party, Republican Party had set in motion only about 40 years prior with Abraham Lincoln. They quietly founded and openly supported the KKK and pushed for Gun Control laws. This is a hard fact that leftist history revisionists hate to admit. You can just read the disappointment when the USA Today had to admit this:

“Historians agree that although factions of the Democratic Party did majorly contribute to the Civil War’s start and the KKK’s founding…”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/30/fact-check-democratic-party-did-not-found-kkk-start-civil-war/3253803001/

Democrats did not elect an African American to Congress until 1935! When Democrats retook power in the South, guess what laws they instituted? JIM CROW… Then, when the Civil Rights Act was being debated in 1964… the DEMOCRATS filibustered [13]! Anyways, I can go on and on about how racist Democrats are, but that’s another matter. My point is, as a lot of freedom focused African Americans point out, Gun Control at it’s root was born out of racism [7], with the goal to oppress those who are not armed. Don’t believe me? Let’s just quote The first General Assembly of Virginia of 1619:

“[t]hat no man do sell or give any Indians any piece, shot, or powder, or any other arms offensive or defensive, upon pain of being held a traitor to the colony and of being hanged as soon as the fact is proved, without all redemption.”

Laws Enacted By The First General Assembly of Virginia, in COLONIAL ORIGINS OF THE
AMERICAN CONSTITUTION 287 (Donald S. Lutz ed., 1998) (quoting 1 JOURNALS OF THE HOUSE OF
BURGESSES OF VIRGINIA, 9–14 (H.R. McIlwaine & John P. Kennedy eds., 1905)).

What is interesting is that the old cases of mass killings (according to the definition above) were done by Mobsters and Prohibition gangsters. People who didn’t obey the laws to start with. The first seemingly more modern Mass Killing was in 1949, by Howard Unruh who walked down this street and killed 13 people. Then, in 1966 we had the UT Sniper. He shot and killed 14 people, including an unborn child (which Democrats would have just encouraged an abortion anyway), and injured 31 other people. Then The Easter Sunday Massacre occurred on Easter Sunday, March 30, 1975 in Ohio, when James Urban Ruppert fatally shot eleven of his own family members in his mother’s house. Then there were 5 major mass killings in the 1980s. A few major in the 1990s, but this does not account for the massive crime wave of mass homicides all over the use, especially in LA and NY. The major mass killing was Columbine in 1999. This sort of set the trend for future generations. There were about 4 major mass killings in the 2000s. Then, in the 2010s, there were about 13 major mass killings. And for the 2020s, we are at 3 major mass killings.

Here is a chart of Mass Killings since 2000 in more detail and includes the less known events:

Year	Events	Dead
2021	10	63
2020	6	16
2019	18	110
2018	19	101
2017	22	162
2016	14	111
2015	12	89
2014	6	28
2013	7	40
2012	12	86
2011	6	38
2010	5	27
2009	7	59
2008	6	47
2007	5	60
2006	4	25
2005	3	18
2004	3	20
2003	3	9
2002	3	23
2001	2	5
2000	3	17

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States#Summary

Notice how the numbers keep escalating in 2010 and on.

How are they escalating? Are there laws in place? Well, let’s dive right into the LAWS and Regulations of Guns:

Section 4: History of Gun Control and Government Regulation of Guns

In 1791 the wild rebellious Americans straight up said in the Bill of Rights “…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” after Brittan attempted to impose gun control measures against the colonies. Those government officials, the British, were shot.

Wasn’t until 160 years later in 1934, after WW1, the Great Depression, and [the government] making gangsters rich with Prohibition, did the government feel like they needed to limit what kinds of weapons ‘We The People‘ can own. But… they knew from the beginning it wasn’t law abiding citizens that were doing the shootings at this point… it was gangsters doing shooting, and minorities owning guns…

We can say that “gun control laws” has been tested now for over 80 years… how do you think they are working?

It all kicked off in 1929, when gangers, dressed up as police officers, or may have very well been police officers (they’ve never been caught or identified, but the PD was suspected) executed seven Irish members and associates of Chicago’s North Side Gang [14]. These gangs were empowered by The Prohibition (government ban of alcohol) lol (irony) (lAwS wOrK) and fighting each other for the profits. This event, along with all the other PROHIBITION enabled crime, lead the government to think that more laws would help; thus 1934 NFA was passed and kicked off the whole Gun Control addiction of the Federal Government… 143 years after the 2nd Amendment was written and ratified. Why did the government not feel the need for gun control during the 143 years? Everyone owned “weapons of war” during this time. Citizens owned Canons… But, never the less, gangsters were killing and minorities were owning more and more guns, so, NFA of 1934 was passed.

The National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934 [15] was part of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “New Deal for Crime“ and it was meant to curtail “gangland crimes of that era such as the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre.” LOL 88 years ago, same logic and excuse, to reduce gun violence… how’s that law working out now? Anyways.

Then came the The Federal Firearms Act (FFA) of 1938, and then the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case United States v. Miller, ruling that through the National Firearms Act of 1934, Congress could regulate firearms.

And THEN the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968. [16] The GCA repealed and replaced the FFA, updated Title II of the NFA to fix constitutional issues, added language about “destructive devices” (such as bombs, mines and grenades) and expanded the definition of “machine gun.”

In 1986 the Firearm Owners Protection Act was passed by Congress that also codified some gun control measures, including expanding the GCA to prohibit civilian ownership or transfer of machine guns made after May 19, 1986, and redefining “silencer” to include parts intended to make silencers.

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 [17] which amends the GCA, requires that background checks be completed before a gun is purchased from a licensed dealer, manufacturer or importer. It established the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which is maintained by the FBI [18].

The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, that actually targeted Africans Americans, pushed by Democrats and signed into law by Bill Clinton [19], is the subsection titled Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act. This is known as the assault weapons ban. It also banned “certain high-capacity ammunition magazines of more than ten rounds,” according to a U.S. Department of Justice Fact Sheet. After its 10 years of being on the law books and enforced, the 10 year assault weapon ban was not renewed. Several studies in 2004 ^[20], 2014 ^[21], 2005 ^[22], and 2017 ^[23] found that the assault weapon ban “There is no compelling evidence that [the ban] saved lives.“

Holy shit, that is A L O T of Gun Control laws and regulations… You can look up all the in same government regulations here: https://www.ecfr.gov/ and https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/rules-and-regulations-library

A study from the Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy counts 300 “relevant federal and state laws regarding the manufacture, design, sale, purchase, or possession of guns.” The word “relevant” is important, because there are OTHER laws that also impact gun sales, ownership, possession, use, modifications, and so on. But, for the sake of argument, let’s stick with 300.

300. THREE HUNDRED. THREE WITH TWO ZEROS.

That’s how many laws potentially fail every time there is a mass killing. Because, what else are these laws suppose to prevent and regulate?

Guess what they thought in 1938, 1968, 1993 when Gun Control laws didn’t work? wE nEeD MoRe LaWz. Here we are, 2022 with potentially 300 or MORE Gun Control Laws… and… nope, still don’t work. So, guess what their plan is now? wE nEeD MoRe LaWz.

How many criminals who committed mass killings were stopped by ANY of these laws? NONE. ZERO.

For the people in the back, or have their head up their ass: CRIMINALS DO NOT OBEY GUN CONTROL LAWS. 100% OF CRIMINALIS COMMIT CRIMES. CRIMES ARE VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW. Fucking rocket science… So, with that REALITY, how many gun control laws will a gun control defiant criminal obey? Ill let you do the math.

100% OF GUN CONTROL CRIMINALS OBEY 0% OF GUN CONTROL LAWS, ALWAYS.

That’s like saying a thief doesn’t steal… and water, isn’t wet…

GUN FREE ZONES

One of the largest policy failures according to statistics and SOUND LOGIC is the fact that 89-94% of MASS SHOOTINGS take place IN A GUN FREE ZONE [25, 26]. A stat like that and you would think something DOES NOT WORK. Yet, their plan is: wE nEeD MoRe LaWz.

Some argue that the state above is flawed because it doesn’t include the mass shootings in private homes, and the home is not a legally designated gun free zone. Really? You allow angry violent criminals into your home with guns without your permission or in direct violation of you preventing them from entering? Pretty sure gun free zones take away the authorization for random people to enter the establishment with guns… same thing. A home is an assumed gun free zone for strangers that don’t have the authorization to bring their gun into that house… Which, again, proves all sorts of policy failure points; the applied concept of gun free zones, for businesses or residences, doesn’t work lol.

Since Gun Free Zones are epic policy failures which HAVE LEAD to LOSS OF LIFE, what about Background Checks?

BACKGROUND CHECKS

Well, first of all, THERE IS ALREADY A UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECK mandated by law. So anyone who mindlessly parrots “wE nEeD...” it already exits your fucking mental slave. Anyways:

In order to sell a gun, all U.S. licensed gun dealers must run a potential purchaser through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, a provision based in a federal law that was passed in 1993.

Those ineligible to purchase guns include people with criminal records, addicts of any controlled substance, certain people with a history of mental illness, those illegally in the U.S., those dishonorably discharged from the U.S. Armed Forces and subjects of domestic violence-related protective orders.

Soooooo how are gang members in Chicago able to have so many guns? Do they all pass background checks? LOL How are people (such as Dylan Roof) KNOWN BY THE FBI able to “legally” obtain a firearm and PASS these background checks? The Department of Justice announced a settlement with the victims’ families from the Dylan Roof shooting, who had sued the federal government in 2016 because Roof was allowed [by the FBI] to purchase a gun despite his prior criminal history. Whoops, look like the background check law, even when applied, failed here too.

Clearly, three things can happen with this Background Check Law.

1) it fails to stop anyone.

2) the shooters ignore it and buys one without doing a background check.

3) It does stop them, but they buy one off the street from gangs in Chicago…

All there of these REALITIES show how USELESS the Background Check law can be.

Every single time there is a mass shooter, this law fails too. To be a mass shooter requires you to be mentally ill… ALL MASS SHOOTERS ARE MENTALLY ILL.

GUN BANS

This is a favorite “go-to” for the irrational, illogical, emotionally unstable anti-gun government dependas out there. They think that if all guns were just banned, there would no longer be gun violence… like, poof, gone.

Well, like the “war on drugs” and Prohibition has taught us is that bans, don’t work lol. Cocaine, Heroin, meth, all that stuff is banned… Just like the days of the Prohibition era where there was still alcohol being made. History teaches and has taught that outright banning things, does not work that well at all.

Plus, guns are made all over the world. Glock, Taurus, Arsenal, HS, Proarms, Heckler & Koch, SIG Sauer, IWI, Beretta, and MP to name a few aren’t even American companies… If they were, gun companies would just move their operations to another part of the world and continue making guns. These guns will just make their way across the open border and back into the hands of criminals and mass killers… just like drugs. Remember, America loves to buy guns, but American doesn’t make all the guns.

Then some may make the argument that it would greatly reduce sales and profits and would put them out of business; ya? how’s that working out for the Cartels and their drugs? Another logical failure.

The Assault Rifle Ban of 1994

But, let’s talk about the time when the US did, in fact, ban those mean scarry looking “assault” rifles. The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 contained the scarry rifle ban. For an entire decade, these mean looking weapons of war were banned in America. In 2004, when it came time to renew the ban, a research report commissioned by the National Institute of Justice found that if the ban was renewed, the effects on gun violence would likely be small and perhaps too small for reliable measurement, because rifles in general, including rifles referred to as “assault rifles” or “assault weapons,” are rarely used in gun crimes. That study, by the Jerry Lee Center of Criminology, University of Pennsylvania, found no significant evidence that either the assault weapons ban or the ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds had reduced gun murders. In 2003, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services, an independent, non-federal task force, examined an assortment of firearms laws, including the AWB, and found “insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence.” A review of firearms research from 2001 by the National Research Council “did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes.” In relation to a 2001 study the National Research Council in 2005, stated “evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes.” The Columbine High School massacre, in which two shooters murdered 13 people, occurred while the ban was in place. One of the shooters used a semi-automatic pistol and high-capacity magazines that were prospectively banned by the law.

Therefore, with the use of logic and scientific data we can easily conclude that a gun ban, will not work. And to push any sort of ban is illogical, irrational, and contrary to the research and common sense.

RED FLAG LAWS

Now this is where things get scary. A lot of mental health is theoretical and subjective. One psych doc may push one kind of treatment and have a certain kind of theories while another, equally licensed, may push a different kind of treatment and theories; and they may contradict each other.

Hitler had “legally licensed” Psychiatrists in Germany describe and paint the Jews like they all had a mental illness in the 1930s [27].

American “legally licensed” Psychiatrists made all kinds of immoral judgements about African Americans in the late 1800 to early 1900s. Benjamin Rush, often referred to as the “father of American psychiatry” and a signer of the Declaration of Independence, described “Negroes as suffering from an affliction called Negritude.” In 1851, prominent American physician Samuel Cartwright defined “drapetomania” as a treatable mental illness that caused black slaves to flee captivity. He stated that the disorder was a consequence of slave masters who “made themselves too familiar with the slaves, treating them as equals.” At the turn of the 20th century, leading academic psychiatrists claimed that “negroes” were “psychologically unfit” for freedom. And as late as 1914, drapetomania was listed in the Practical Medical Dictionary. [28] These are your “experts” of the day. Hell, the DSM even classified homosexuality as a mental illness not that long ago. See, this area is mostly subjective and at the mercy of whoever is in control of the cultural narrative.

With all that in mind, it [the law] is easily turned into a weapon. An anti-gun Judge will of course agree with an anti-gun psychologist in the need to take away someone’s civil rights, their guns, out of “fear of harm and the communities best interests” All the while, a criminal, would just buy a gun from a drug dealer down the street, or Cartel across the border, and conduct the shooting anyway.

These sort of laws increase civil rights violations, human rights violations, genocide, and democide, historically. The idea is cute, but when in practice, it can be and usually is destructive to a free society.

MANDITORY TRAINING AND LIABILITY INSURANCE

Now, here, I think there is some common ground and possible agreement.

It would be wrong to compare this, gun rights, to that of driving a car. There is no better example of the phrase, “apples and oranges.” One is a civil right protected by the US Constitution and a human right, the other is a luxury, unnecessity, ‘thing’. Defending yourself from any sort of attacker, criminal citizen or government, with whatever force is necessary to preserve your life, human rights, and the lives of your family, IS an absolute necessity; driving a BMW is not. Walk, run, ride a bike, you still get to where you need to go. To compare the two, is willful pathetic ignorance.

Here comes this dumb counter argument: “Then you don’t need a gun if you can still defend yourself with a knife.” Again, illthoughout. When the government (or cartel, or criminal) comes to my house with WEAPONS OF WAR to violate my human rights, and all I have are kitchen knifes… what kind of self defense is that going to be? That isn’t a defense, that’s a massacre (just like throughout History). Walking, running, bike riding, you can still get to work just fine. Defense with a knife verses government “weapons of war” is a far different monster. Nice try though.

But, the USE of a firearm can be dangerous to the public around you, just like yelling “fire” in a movie theater. Thus, basic education and training of a firearm should be required, but paid for by the government as to not disproportionately effect lower-income citizens who are due that same human right. It should be “free” for all citizens, because it is a CIVIL RIGHT, but the government can not prevent you from exercising your civil rights if you can’t afford it, thus, publicly funded mandatory training program.

The same can be thought of for liability insurance. A publicly funded mandatory liability insurance program. This can be used for legal defenses [like LawShield] (we are all presumed innocent unless found guilty, a right to an attorney, a right to due process, and a right to an appeal) and rehabilitate communities and victims that have experienced gun violence.

Rich people, politicians, and celebrities get big fancy security guards with nice expensive weapons of war. Hell, politicians security details are paid for by your tax dollars anyway! Why can’t YOUR taxes go directly toward supporting and securing YOUR civil rights too?! Instead of 40 BILLION dollars to the Ukraine, how about 40 Billion to set up and invest in these sort of programs? Fucking rocket science…

But, the obvious question, are CRIMINALS going to go out and do the mandatory training and get the mandatory insurance?… LOL yeah, okay, don’t be that dumb and naïve. As logic proves, CRIMINALS commit CRIMES, just like water, is wet…

All these are, are just PAPER WORDS, detailed and complicated words on paper that make up what we call a “law” that doesn’t do shit, because, well, it’s just words on paper. Also… criminals by definition won’t obey them lol. So, what works?

WHAT WORKS?

Well, we all know for a fact armed guards, check points, physical movement control systems, and security works for protecting MONEY, trash Celebrities, trash Politicians, government buildings, and on and on I can go; this is WHY certain people and places are safer… and it’s not because of words on a paper (a law).

There have only been 57 US Politicians assassinated since 1842… some not even in the US or even killed by a US citizen.

There have been only 55 famous Hollywood Celebrities murdered…

WHEN in the US, these politicians and celebrities get top notch protection.

There is a map on the FBI site that shows all the bank robberies… still less than HOME robberies, CAR robberies, and just shootings everywhere else. Why? Because BANKS have better security and protection than you do in your home and car…

So, let’s just focus on WHAT ALREADY WORKS:

• Federally mandated security measures in all public schools:
  • Single point entry
    • Security guard present
    • Metal detectors and wand
    • Identify confirmation and sign in all guests
  • All doors to the outside remain locked
  • Class room doors with deadbolts and kickproof doors.
  • Security officer on duty during all school hours.
  • Free training to Teachers and Staff who choose to conceal carry
  • Perform regular security drills, like fire drills.
    
• Federally mandated and funded Training for firearm public use (not in-home use, due to privacy).
  
• Federally mandated and funded Liability Insurance for firearm public use(not in-home use, due to privacy).
  
• The legal requirement for law enforcement to take action to subdue the attacker or hold them liable for lack of action, in some fashion.

The school measures would work because it works for BANKS and government buildings already.

The training and insurance will be a hot topic for a lot of people, but, to protect EVERYONE, including the rights of the gun owner, it is needed because its heading in that direction already.

Due to court rulings, the Police are NOT obligated to “protect and serve.” I repeat, there is NO, ZERO, ZILTCH obligation for police to protect you [29, 30]. THAT needs to change. They need to be REQURED by law and face punitive legal action if they DON’T protect and serve.

If you have any better ideas that I have not addressed, I’m all ears! But, please, education your damn self before trying to argue for some public policy that will effect you AND ME.

Oh, and know your sources. Everytown, Gifford’s Law Center, and all those groups are just bias gun haters that will say anything and distort everything to win. Some of the most dishonest propagandist I’ve read. Is exactly the same as if I got my gun data and information from the NRA… equally unreliable and biased.

Also, stay tuned, as time goes on I’m sure more events and information will take place and I will just update this article.

Additional Sources and Research

1. Follman, Mark (December 3, 2015). “How Many Mass Shootings Are There, Really?”. The New York Times. Retrieved December 6, 2015.
2. Harff, Barbara (1996). “Death by Government by R. J. Rummel”. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History. MIT Press. 27 (1): 117–119. doi:10.2307/206491. JSTOR 206491.
3. https://owlcation.com/humanities/The-Top-10-Worst-Genocides-in-History
4. https://www.history.com/topics/inventions/firearms
5. https://www.pbs.org/opb/historydetectives/technique/gun-timeline/
6. Research Director, Independence Institute, and Adjunct Professor of Advanced Constitutional Law, Denver University, Sturm College of Law. This is article is adapted from How the British Gun Control Program Precipitated the American Revolution, 6 Charleston L. Rev. 283 (2012), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1967702.
7. https://www.sedgwickcounty.org/media/29093/the-racist-origins-of-us-gun-control.pdf
8. https://www.britannica.com/event/Wounded-Knee-Massacre
9. Frederic D. Schwarz Archived December 3, 2008, at the Wayback Machine “1831: Nat Turner’s Rebellion,” American Heritage, August/September 2006.
10. Breen, Patrick H. (2015). The Land Shall Be Deluged in Blood: A New History of the Nat Turner Revolt. Oxford University Press. pp. 98, 231. ISBN 978-0199828005.
11. Colbert, “Liberating the Thirteenth Amendment” (1995), pp. 10–11.
12. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/house-passes-the-13th-amendment
13. https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/filibusters-cloture/civil-rights-filibuster-ended.htm
14. O’Brien, John (February 14, 2014). “The St. Valentine’s Day Massacre”. Chicago Tribune. Archived from the original on July 2, 2014. Retrieved June 28, 2017.
15. https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/national-firearms-act
16. https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/gun-control-act
17. https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/1025
18. https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/nics
19. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/3-ways-1994-crime-bill-continues-hurt-communities-color/
20. Koper, Christopher S.; Woods, Daniel J.; Roth, Jeffrey A. (June 2004). “An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994–2003 – Report to the National Institute of Justice, United States Department of Justice” (PDF). Philadelphia: Jerry Lee Center for Criminology, University of Pennsylvania.
21. Gius, Mark (2014). “An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates”. Applied Economics Letters. 21 (4): 265–267. doi:10.1080/13504851.2013.854294. S2CID 154746184.
22. Read “Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review” at NAP.edu. 2004. doi:10.17226/10881. ISBN 978-0-309-09124-4.
23. Lee, LK; Fleegler, EW; Farrell, C; Avakame, E; Srinivasan, S; Hemenway, D; Monuteaux, MC (January 1, 2017). “Firearm Laws and Firearm Homicides: A Systematic Review”. JAMA Internal Medicine. 177 (1): 106–119. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7051. PMID 27842178. S2CID 205119294. Limited data from 4 studies on the effects of the federal assault weapons ban (in effect from 1994 to 2004) do not provide evidence that the ban was associated with a significant decrease in firearm homicides.
24. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/criminal
25. https://crimeresearch.org/2018/06/more-misleading-information-from-bloombergs-everytown-for-gun-safety-on-guns-analysis-of-recent-mass-shootings/
26. https://crimeresearch.org/2019/07/breaking-down-mass-public-shooting-data-from-1998-though-june-2019-info-on-weapons-used-gun-free-zones-racial-age-and-gender-demographics/
27. https://www.ushmm.org/learn/holocaust/path-to-nazi-genocide/chapter-3/from-citizens-to-outcasts-1933-1938
28. https://ct.counseling.org/2020/05/the-historical-roots-of-racial-disparities-in-the-mental-health-system/
29. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html
30. https://prospect.org/justice/police-have-no-duty-to-protect-the-public/