Obama Continues the Lie About Gun Violence in Other Countries

When President Obama announced his executive actions on guns from the East Room of the White House, he once again, repeated this lie:

"This type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries. It doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency."

That claim has already been debunked by PolitiFact.com, stating that it is "Mostly False".  The fact is that Norway, Sweden, and Finland all have "Mass Shooting" rates that are higher than the U.S.; relative to the size of their respective populations.

In terms of homicides, our neighbor to the south, Mexico, has a rate 4 times higher than the we do.  In fact, Central and South American countries, in general, all have excessive gun violence and homicide rates despite having lower per-capita gun ownership.  The United States ranks 18th.  This despite the fact that the we rank number one in gun ownership with a per-person rate of 112.6 guns per 100 persons.

This is a perfect example of the type of claims that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and other Democrats use to try and push gun control measures in this country.

What we never hear from any of these people is that gun-related homicides in the U.S.  have fallen by 49% since peaking in 1993.  Non-fatal gun violence has fallen by nearly 75% over the same period.  Some of that can be attributed to the fact that gun ownership has tripled in this country since the 1990's from an estimated 270 million to 310 million.  Simply, a person with criminal intent is less likely to commit a crime if they think that a potential victim may be armed.

References:

Barack Obama's emotional evolution on gun control: http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/05/politics/obama-gun-control-evolution-executive-order/

Is Barack Obama correct that mass killings don't happen in other countries?: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/22/barack-obama/barack-obama-correct-mass-killings-dont-happen-oth/

List of countries by firearm-related death rate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

Number of guns per capita by country: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/

Gun Violence Statistics 1993-2011: http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-violence/pages/welcome.aspx

Hillary and the Left's Charade Over Australian Gun Control

Following the Umpqua Community College shooting, President Obama pointed out that
gun control in Australia has "almost" eliminated mass shootings.  Those on the political left have taken the President's cue to push for similar actions in the U.S.  Of course, Hillary Clinton has jumped on the bandwagon by saying that Australia's gun control is "worth looking at".  Others have dropped Obama's "almost" comment, and now the mantra is that Australia's gun control has "eliminated all" mass shootings.

But, the belief that Australian gun control has greatly changed things in that country is a charade.

In 1996, Australia passed into law, a number of gun control measures that are now considered the "gold standard" by the political left.  Besides mandating that gun owners be registered, semi-automatic weapons were outlawed threatening prison sentences for their possession.  Because the Australian constitution mandates that private property can't be seized without compensation, a buyback program was initiated to confiscate approximate 650,000 of those weapons.  In a country that had 3.2 million at the time, that was approximately 20%; leaving, theoretically, 2.6 million weapons legally owned in the country.

That sweeping gun control action in 1996 was prompted by a mass shooting referred to as the Port Arthur Massacre, when a man armed with two semi-automatic rifles killed 35 people and injured 21.  But, understand, this was a one time event. Australia was never a place known for mass killings.  In the 20 years prior to Port Arthur, there were only 5 mass killings; all with guns, with the primary weapon being a shotgun.  In the nearly 20 years following Arthur, there have been 8 mass killings; 3 with guns.  Of the other 5, one was a stabbing rampage; another a family killed by a father wielding a hammer; and the final 3 were by arson.  Therefore, mass killings didn't stop.  In fact, they increased, and the methods actually became more brutal; proving that without guns, people will find other means.

Also, understand that research has shown that the number of gun related homicides began dropping since 1968; and the rate of decline didn't change one iota since those 1996 gun controls were initiated. Instead, murders actually increased after 1996, from 300 per year, peaking at 350 in 2002.

In addition, with a conservative estimate of 260,000 weapons.  Some were never surrendered in 1996; some were stolen from registered owners; others were illegally imported; and, some were actually backyard manufactured (homemade).  The number of illegal weapons is equal to nearly 10% of the 2.75 million that are legally held by just 750,000 people in a country of 23 million.

The bottom line is that the belief that Australia curbed homicides and mass murders is simply not true.  In 2008, the non NRA-loving, right-wing publication, Time magazine, made that clear with its article titled: Australia's Gun Laws: Little Effect.  Also, to replicate what was done in Australia in th U.S. would be an insurmountable task.  Even if we could confiscate 20% of the 300 million guns in this country, that would still leave 240 million in the hands of Americans.  Also, even if it were possible to keep the number of illegal guns to just 10% of the number of legal guns, it would still mean that 24 million  would be out there.  Today, gun trafficking at the border is primarily one-sided, with guns flowing into Mexico from the U.S.  But ban semi-automatics, and that situation is sure to be reversed with the percentage of illegal guns going well beyond that of Australia.  We can't keep drugs and illegal immigrants from crossing the border.  What makes anyone think we could stop illegal guns?

Of course, Hillary, Obama, and the Democrats think they have a winner by trying to make us think Australia has the answer to gun violence, and the uninformed will believe them.  So, from now until the election, I'm certain we will hear nothing but false praise for what Australia has supposedly achieved through their strict gun control laws.

References:

Watch President Obama's Statement on the Shooting in Oregon: https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/10/01/watch-president-obamas-statement-shooting-oregon

Hillary: Australia-style gun control 'worth looking at' | TheHill: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/257172-hillary-australia-style-gun-control-worth-looking-at

Australian Mass Murders: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_mass_murders

Australian Institute of Criminology: Homicide Statistics: http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.html

Fact check: Where do Australians get illegal guns?: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-26/source-of-illicit-guns-in-australia/6483762

Time:  Australia's Gun Laws: Little Effect: http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1736501,00.html

The Pretense That a Gun Show Loophole Is Fueling Firearm Violence

Currently, there is no federal law prohibiting the transference of a firearm by sale, or inheritance, or by gift between two private parties.  As such, no background check is required. Federal law only prohibits the transfer if the person receiving the firearm is intending to commit a crime or is knowingly unable to pass a background check as in the case of a known felon seeking a weapon.

Thus, one spouse can buy a licensed gun for their home without the other spouse needing a background check to use it.  Or, you can give a gun to someone for their protection if they are under the threat of bodily harm, without that person having go through the up to 3-day background check process before having possession of a newly purchased gun.  Or, a hunter may borrow another hunter's firearm to try it out without going through the process of a background check.

And, yes, a gun collector can take his antique collection of firearms to a gun show and sell all or single items to another private party without the need of a background check for each item sold.  This fact, of course, is what Democrats and other gun control advocates call the "gun show loophole".   Thus, to the average person, the implication is that criminals and potential mass shooters are buying weapons at gun shows in order to mow down people at schools or movie theaters, or for their use in the commission of a crime.

However, the above assumption that criminals and crazed mass killers are buying weapons at gun shows is false, and is a political pretense for having universal background checks for the very same situations that I noted in the second paragraph.

The reality is that criminals don't obtain their weapons at gun shows. 99.9% of guns purchased at those events are sold by federally licensed gun dealers, who by federal law, are required to obtain background checks on every sale or lose their license.  In fact, a 2004 Department of Justice survey of 18,000 inmates at federal and state prisons found that only 16.8% or 3024 had a weapon on them at the time of arrest.  Of those 3024, only eight-tenths of a percent said it was purchased at a gun show.  That's just 24 inmates who bought their weapons at a gun show. Also, 40% said they had bought guns illegally on the streets.  Only, 9.9% said they had purchased their guns from a licensed pawn shop or gun retailer. 

Gun shows are also not the source for weapons used by mass shooters.  In a news article appearing in the New York Times titled "How They Got Their Guns", the writer analyzed the last 14 most horrific mass shootings and found that in every case, the weapons used were legally obtained at gun stores and not gun shows.

So, the bottom line is that gun shows are a minuscule part of this country's gun violence problem, though Democrats still want to use the gun show loophole to their political advantage. They tell their base to blame Republicans for not closing this so-called loophole.  A loophole that allows private citizens to exchange guns among themselves; not just at gun shows, but anywhere; the vast majority of which won't be used in the commission of any crime.

References:

Senate Democrats as they demand new gun-control laws: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/8/armed-guards-protect-senate-democrats-they-demand-/

Gun show loophole: https://www.google.com/search?q=gun+show+loophole&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Justice Department Study: Page 13: Firearm Use By Offenders: Table 14: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fv9311.pdf

How They Got Their Guns: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/03/us/how-mass-shooters-got-their-guns.html?_r=0

Obama's Record on Mass Shootings

As the following FBI data shows, mass shooting incidents have been on the rise since 2000.

In addition, these incidents have more than doubled under his Presidency (2009-2103) when compared to years prior.  From 2000-2008, this country averaged about 8.4 mass shootings per year.  Under Obama's watch, we have 18.6 incidents annually.

On the heels of the Charleston shooting, Obama calls for gun control. Despite this country having more guns than ever, the actual number of murders has fallen from approximately  23,000 to 24,000 in the 1990's to just over 14,000 by 2013.

Obviously, there are some cross-currents in our society. During Obama's presidency we have  seen the highest incidence of mass shootings and the lowest number of murders since 1969. 

The continued decline in the number of murders is something that Obama inherited. Some say that tougher drug laws were the reason. Others believe that increased stop-and-frisk and traffic stops is resulting in more and more illegal firearms being taken off the streets.  Others believe that increased gun ownership makes the criminal element think twice about using a gun in robberies or other crimes.  But, one thing is known, incarcerations have doubled since the 1990's while the murder rate is down 42%.

So, this brings us to President Obama and the three-fold increase in mass killings. I am not going to speculate why, like a light switch, this has happened.  But, it has.  And, all I can say is this kind of problematic killing by primarily young people has some psychological and sociological foundation and has less to do with gun control; given that murders, in general, are down.  I will say this.  Constantly, Obama and other Democrats such as Hillary Clinton downplay the good about America only to focus on its faults regarding race, the police, gay rights etc.  Someone on the edge mentally, can easily amplify this talk and decide to take action on their own; resulting in a mass shooting.  But, this is just my opinion.

References:

Chart Source: New York Magazine: http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/09/why-you-shouldnt-fear-the-mass-shooting-rise.html

United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2013: http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

The Many Causes of America’s Decline in Crime: http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/the-many-causes-of-americas-decline-in-crime/385364/