Archive for the ‘Law’ Category

RAM into law the new Feinstein Gun Ban, and ban magazines that hold more than 10 rounds

January 22, 2013

I’m worried Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell may be about to cut a deal with Harry Reid . . .

. . . that’s why I need you to TAKE ACTION at once.

You see, Reid may still be just a few votes short of the 51 he needs to break Senate rules and use the “nuclear option” to destroy the Senate filibuster.

But if McConnell cuts a deal with Reid to deliver the votes he needs, he’ll have cleared a path for the passage of Barack Obama’s Gun Ban Plan.

Please CLICK HERE to send Mitch McConnell an email demanding he not cut a deal with Harry Reid to gut the Senate filibuster.

For Freedom,

Dudley Brown
Executive Vice President

www.NationalGunRights.org/

 

Will the U.S. Follow Germany’s Example? The country that invented Nazism sets up national gun registry.

January 22, 2013

Something very instructive just happened in Germany.

 

Germany just implemented “a vast registry that details every legal gun owner in the country, along with information about all of their firearms.”

 

They did this, based on records that, in some cases, “were kept on index cards across what used to be 551 separate local registries.”

 

Thus, with everyone’s name already on an index card (read: 4473 forms) in what was effectively a “universal background check,” it was a small step to a national gun registry.

 

Not surprisingly, “gun rights groups” in Germany raised no real opposition. “We are used to it,” said one.

 

Now, in the words of The Washington Post:

 

If they are preparing a raid on a house, they can scout the address in the database to be better prepared for what weapons might lie within. Before the database, they could only guess at overall numbers, and finding the weapons registered to a certain address had been laborious.

 

Do we need any better indication of why “universal background checks” are the most insidious aspect of Barack Obama’s gun control?

 

We know that gun confiscation is the ultimate endgame for many of the gun grabbers on the Left. Consider just a few, recent well-known cases:

 

* “Confiscation could be an option,” declared New York Governor Andrew Cuomo in a radio interview (December 27, 2012).

 

* “We cannot have big guns out here,” said Iowa Rep. Dan Muhlbauer. “Even if you have them, I think we need to start taking them.” (Interview with the Iowa Daily Times Herald, December 19, 2012.)

 

* “No one is allowed to be armed. We’re going to take all the guns,” said P. Edwin Compass III, the superintendent of the New Orleans police, right before several law-enforcement agencies began confiscating the firearms of lawful gun owners in the wake of Hurricane Katrina (2005).

 

The task of confiscating guns is much easier when the government has a registration list. And that is the number one reason gun owners should oppose background checks, because they give federal bureaucrats the framework for a national registration system.

 

If Obama gets his way, we will be much further down road to giving the Andrew Cuomos of the world the registration lists they need.

 

Some liberal gun-grabbers are trying to paint it as “non-controversial.” But this hideous provision requiring every American to get the permission of the government before exercising their Second Amendment rights must be stopped.

 

ACTION: Click here to contact your Senators and Representative. Insist that they oppose the national background check, which would set the framework for a national gun registry and confiscation.

 

 

 

Epic fail obama pundit get handed her head on national show

January 19, 2013
Gun Owners of America

Gun Owners of America (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Gun Owners of America on MSNBC tells it like it is.

Plus she can’t seem to figure out who she is trying to debate.

In any case the point of the add was that the elites are hypocrites when it comes to their own protection or their families. Whether you agree with more police in schools, armed teachers and principles or not.

http://on.fb.me/ZV4MMi

Not to mention that already they, as in Governor Cuomo and others are already talking about confiscation. In other words, even more ex post facto law. For years I have raged about the insult to our freedoms imposed by the Lautenberg Domestic Violence Act’s ex post facto provision. Well, I don’t have any problem with disarming people in the heat of the moment or even for as long as it takes to complete consoling and jail time. But damn it! If you are going to take someones rights away forever then convict them of a felony, period. But no, based upon political correctness and misandry (sexism) they trashed out the Bill of Rights, and that has set the groundwork for even more.

Obama Goes Nuts and Offers Anti-gunners Wish List

January 18, 2013
Most of his crazy proposals are so extreme,
only few of his initiatives pose serious threat
Surrounded by child-props, Barack Obama yesterday proposed a semi-automatic ban so extreme that it could potentially outlaw up to 50% of all long guns in circulation and up to 80% of all handguns.
Originally, Obama’s allies had announced they would reintroduce the 1994 ban on commonly-owned, defensive firearms.  That was until they found out that they would look like fools, since that semi-auto ban was largely the law of Connecticut on the day the Newtown shooting occurred — and didn’t cover Adam Lanza’s AR-15.  After that, gun grabbers just kept adding more and more guns until they would register (or ban) a huge percentage of the defensive guns in existence.
So where are we now?
Obama’s crazy gun ban is now being denounced by many Democrats. And, although you don’t “pop the cork” until Congress adjourns, it will probably take the magazine ban down the toilet with it.
This means that gun owners’ focus must now shift to the part of Obama’s agenda which poses the most danger because it is most likely to move:  the requirement that the government approve every gun transfer in America — the so-called universal background check.
All of you know why this is a problem.  But how do you explain it so simply that even a congressman can understand?  Let’s take a crack at that:
ONE:  THE FBI‘S “SECRET LIST” WHICH IS BEING USED TO BAR AMERICANS FROM OWNING GUNS IS INSIDIOUS
The FBI’s database currently contains the names of more than 150,000 veterans.  They served their country honorably.  They did nothing wrong.  But, because they sought counseling for a traumatic experience while risking their lives for America, they have had their constitutional rights summarily revoked, with no due process whatsoever.
You want to know something else?  The “secret list” could soon include tens of millions of Americans — including soldiers, police, and fire fighters — with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, and even post-partem depression.  This would be achieved under the 23 anti-gun “executive actions” that Obama announced yesterday.
TWO:  THE FBI REFUSES TO INSURE US THAT IT ISN’T TURNING ITS “SECRET LIST” INTO A NATIONAL GUN REGISTRY
Our legislative counsel drafted the Smith amendment in 1998 to prohibit the FBI from using the Brady Check system to tax gun buyers or put their names into a gun registry.  But the FBI refuses to tell us — or even to tell U.S. Senators — how (or whether) it is complying with the Smith amendment.  Why in the world should we give the FBI more authority and more names if it abuses the authority it already has?
This is the inherent problem with any background check, where gun buyers’ names are given to a government bureaucrat.  Is there any way to make sure that once a name is entered into a computer, that it doesn’t stay there permanently?
This concern is especially valid, considering how federal agents are already skirting the laws against gun owner registration.  Several dealers around the country have informed GOA that the ATF is increasingly going into gun shops and just xeroxing all of the 4473’s, giving them the names of every gun owner who purchased a gun through that shop — and setting up the basis for a national registration system.
This is illegal under the 1986 McClure-Volkmer law, but that has apparently not stopped it from being done.  If every gun in America has to go through a dealer, this will create a mechanism to compile a list of every gun owner in America.  And, as we have seen with New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who has just been legislatively handed such a list, when that happens, the talk immediately turns to “confiscation.”
THREE:  AS A RESULT, REQUIRING GOVERNMENT APPROVAL OF EVERY GUN OWNER IN AMERICA WOULD DO NOTHING BUT CREATE A PLATFORM FOR NATIONAL GUN REGISTRATION AND CONFISCATION.
As alluded to above, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo now has a comprehensive gun registry.  This is the most dangerous thing that New York legislators could have done — as Cuomo has made it clear he’s considering gun confiscation of lawfully-owned firearms.
“I don’t think legitimate sportsmen are going to say, ‘I need an assault weapon to go hunting,’” Cuomo said.  “Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.”
How nice.  He’ll let gun owners “permit” their guns for now — so that, presumably, they can be confiscated later, just as certain defensive weapons were confiscated in New York City during the Mayor David Dinkins administration in 1991.
FOUR:  THE FBI REFUSES TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW GUARANTEEING THE RIGHTS OF LEGITIMATE PURCHASERS
The Brady Law requires that the FBI correct erroneous denials of firearms purchases.  And it requires that it reply, initially, within five days.  According to attorneys familiar with the problem, the FBI NEVER, EVER, EVER complies with the law.  In fact, it increasingly tells aggrieved legitimate purchasers to “sue us” — at a potential cost of tens of thousands of dollars.
FIVE:  EVEN UNDER CURRENT LAW, THE BRADY SYSTEM HAS BROKEN DOWN REPEATEDLY
 
Since its inception, the FBI’s computer systems have often gone offline for hours at a time — sometimes for days.  And when it fails on weekends, it results in the virtual blackout of gun sales at gun shows across the country.
According to gun laws expert Alan Korwin, “With the NICS computer out of commission, the only place you could legally buy a firearm — in the whole country — was from a private individual, since all dealers were locked out of business by the FBI’s computer problem.”
Of course, now the President wants to eliminate that last bastion of freedom!
Recently, the FBI’s system went down on Black Friday, angering many gun dealers and gun buyers around the country.  “It means we can’t sell no damn guns,” said Rick Lozier, a manager at Van Raymond Outfitters in Maine.  “If we can’t call it in, we can’t sell a gun.  It’s cost us some money.”
The bottom line:  Our goal is to insure that Obama’s politicized dog-and-pony show doesn’t produce one word of new gun law.  Not a single word.
And the biggest danger right now is universal background checks — which would create a platform for national registration and confiscation.
We would note that, in addition, Obama is attempting to illegally enact gun control through unlawful and unconstitutional “executive actions.”  Click here to read about these.
ACTION:  Click here to contact your senators and congressman.  Urge them to oppose the universal background check because it is a platform for national firearms registration and confiscation.

‘Obama has dramatically overshot’

January 17, 2013

President Obama outlined several major legislative initiatives that he claims will reduce gun-related violence, but representatives at Gun Owners of America say the proposals will assault Americans’ right to keep and bear arms and do nothing to prevent senseless killings.

The Obama legislative agenda includes several controversial items, starting with universal background checks to make sure guns are not purchased by felons or “someone legally prohibited from buying” a firearm.

Mike Hammond has served in the offices of three U.S. senators and is now general counsel at Gun Owners of America. He said this provision should be opposed on two grounds. His first concern centers around the people Obama thinks should be prohibited from buying guns.

“In about 150,000 cases, we’re talking about veterans who came back from Baghdad or Kabul, perhaps sought counseling for a traumatic experience and, as a result, the Veteran’s Administration appointed a fiduciary to supervise their financial affairs and then sent their names to this secret list in West Virginia that prohibits people from owning guns,” Hammond said. “These people didn’t do anything wrong. They served their country honorably, and there’s no reason they should lose their constitutional rights because they sought someone to counsel them.”

While Hammond fears law-abiding Americans could easily be blocked from exercising their Second Amendment rights, he also claims involving the government in each firearm transaction sets the stage for more heavy-handed actions from Uncle Sam.

“It’s increasingly clear to us that the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms are using these secret lists to begin to compile the beginnings of a national gun registry,” Hammond said. “I personally drafted the Smith Amendment, which would prohibit them from using the Brady Check in order to create a national gun registry. But when senators have recently asked the FBI, ‘How are you complying with the Smith Amendment and how long are you keeping the names?’ they’re told to go take a long walk off a short pier. There is a danger that the Obama administration wants to create this gun registry using this universal check. There is no way in heaven’s name that we are going to consider anything like that.”

Hammond said a national gun registry is a slippery slope to government confiscation of weapons once the government knows where they are. He uses recent events in New York state as an example, since Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed new gun-control legislation and then alluded to confiscating firearms that are now deemed illegal.

In pushing for the background check, Obama contended that 40 percent of gun sales have no background checks. Hammond said that statistic is pure fiction.

“They asked the FBI about that and basically the FBI said that the gun-control advocates, for lack of a better term, just pulled that statistic out of their ear,” he said. “I mean they just made that statistic up.”

The biggest congressional fight will likely center around Obama’s call for a ban on assault weapons and his demand that magazines carry a limit of 10 bullets. The president said weapons used in a theater of war should not be brought into a movie theater.

“That is a lie. When I was in the military, I had a weapon that was designed for the theater of war. It was called an M-16 rifle,” Hammond said. “It was a fully automatic rifle. Unless you get a special license from the FBI, you can’t own one of those guns in America. That is an absolute lie.”

“What the AR-15 is is a gun that is designed cosmetically to look like a full automatic but operates nothing like it,” he said.

Hammond also rejects the proposed limit on bullets in a magazine, saying shooters like the ones in Connecticut and Colorado could just as easily have brought multiple guns and multiple magazines and achieved the same horrific response.

Looking at the big picture of the debate, Hammond believes that Obama reached too far in this agenda.

“Obama, in this case, has dramatically overshot. I think he has overshot in a way that is going to destroy his entire gun-control package,” argued Hammond, who said Obama initially leaned toward restoring the ban on semi-automatic weapons that was in effect between 1994-2004. He said that ban didn’t address some of the more recent cosmetic features on guns, like the one used in the Sandy Hook massacre, so the scope of this legislation got much bigger.

“So he began adding more guns and more guns and more guns,” Hammond said. “The people who know what guns are out there tell us that the resulting legislation now will ban probably about 50 percent of the long guns currently in circulation and about 80 percent of the handguns in current circulation. Let me state that again. Barack Obama and his proposals would ban most guns currently in circulation.”

Hammond also rejected the president’s 23 executive actions, particularly the ones that encourage doctors to ask patients about guns and share that information with the government.

THE FULL STORY ON OBAMA’S MASSIVE GUN GRAB:

Poll: Seeds of tyranny present in America

Obama plan: ‘Assault-weapon’ ban, universal background checks

47 states revolt against Obama gun control

Rush Limbaugh: Obama ‘wants people to snap’

‘Obama has dramatically overshot’

Oops! Gun-map hate mail goes to wrong paper

Constitution ‘no impediment’ to Obama

Chicago murders top Afghanistan death toll

Virginia’s solution to guns in school

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/obama-has-dramatically-overshot/#YwDHMA50UIfWr23h.99

Oathkeeper 151: Tells it like it is. No Nuremberg defense allowed!

January 17, 2013

In this video, Oathkeeper151, a New Jersey Police Officer who has been a member of Oath Keepers since 2009, makes it clear that he will not obey orders that violate the Bill of Rights. In particular, he says he will not be used as a tool of oppression against the American people who resist and refuse to comply with infringement on their right to bear arms, such as legislation or executive orders that decree they must register, get finger printed and photographed, like a criminal.

He asks his fellow officers what they are going to do if that happens. Will they keep their oaths? Here is his own description of his video:

In this video I ask my fellow Police Officers what they would do, if they were given an unlawful order. I also touch on the Assault Weapons Ban introduced by Senator Feinstein, and how this bill has the potential of putting us Police Officers in a very bad/even fatal predicament.

I spoke to him on the phone and he made it clear that he is not afraid to take this public stand because this is what needs to happen.  He says the peace officers across America need to stand up and let the people know that they are on the side of the Bill of Rights, and that they will protect the rights of the people. In one of the comments on his video, another officer had this to say:

I’ll lay my badge down, stop doing what I love if someone tries to make me do something immoral or unconstitutional. Good video, take care

Oathkeeper151 agrees. He told me that if there were door to door raids for guns against Americans who refused to comply with registration or bans, he would either defend the people with his badge on, stepping between them and the oath breakers doing the raids, or he would lay his badge down on the table and then go join the people in resisting. He loves his work as a police officer, but his oath, and his responsibility to protect the people of his community, is more important than his job. His oath comes first. The rights of the people come first…. and he is not alone.

 

Molon Labe,

Stewart Rhodes

Founder of Oath Keepers

 

Gutting our Second Amendment rights: epic fail obama

January 17, 2013

Modified from an email.

Earlier today, President Obama and his anti-gun pals unveiled their plans to GUT our Second Amendment rights.

The list of new schemes goes on seemingly forever, but the most outrageous are exactly what I’ve been fearing . . .

The gun-grabbers are going for broke, including:

*** RAMMING into law the new Feinstein Gun Ban, and banning magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

Far more draconian than the earlier ban, the new Feinstein Gun Ban and the Magazine Ban demonizes guns for looking “scary” and targets rifles, shotguns and even handguns.

These new bans are NOT likely to include grandfather clauses, and they might even go for out-right confiscation.

*** FORCING through Congress a new national gun registration scheme under the guise of “background checks.”

There’s simply no way to enforce a ban on private transfers without government bureaucrats knowing exactly who owns what weapons.

*** A new “mental health” denial system using “ObamaCare’s” nationalized healthcare system to begin snooping on gun owners.

One Surgeon General estimated 46.4% of Americans will have mental health issues at some point in their lives!

So make no mistake, this is designed EXPLICITLY to allow the federal government to strip ANY law-abiding citizen they want — including military veterans — of their Second Amendment rights on a whim.

In fact, the so-called “mental health” and the “background check” national gun registration system may be where this fight is headed . . .

More than even an outright ban on certain types of firearms, nothing gets anti-gun activists like Sarah Brady more excited than the ability to demonize certain gun features and register and trace guns and gun owners.

That’s because she and her antigun pals — like New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg — understand these are the first steps toward outright gun confiscation in America.

They’re putting up smoke and mirrors to throw American citizens off track.

But registration, bans and ultimately confiscation are really what President Obama’s “mental health” initiative and his so-called “background check” national gun registration schemes are all about.

So if you want to protect your gun rights, you and I are going to have to be ready for anything.

Please TAKE ACTION NOW and call your Congressman and Senators at 202-224-3121 and demand they oppose Obama’s gun control agenda at every opportunity.

For Freedom,

Dudley Brown
Executive Vice President

Begging for Bucks

Biden Proposals Include Framework for Gun Registry and Confiscation… Go figure!

January 15, 2013
Up to 50-80% of all guns in circulation could be covered
Press reports now make it clear what Vice President Joe Biden’s gun control package will look like. Biden wants to impose:
* A Feinstein-like semi-auto ban which, according to experts who have done the counting, could ban up to 50% of all long guns currently in circulation and up to 80% of all handguns. Incidentally, if you wanted to keep the AR-15 you currently have, you would have to have a 6-month FBI background check, be fingerprinted, and get a machine gun-type license.
* The framework for national gun registration and confiscation by requiring every gun transaction to have a Brady Check.
* Supposed “toughening” of anti-gun trafficking measures, but without doing anything about the man responsible for allowing more gun trafficking than any other American — Attorney General Eric Holder (with his Fast and Furious program).
Let us backtrack and explain a couple of things: Increasingly ATF is going into gun dealers and xeroxing all of the 4473’s. This is illegal under McClure-Volkmer, but, in case you hadn’t noticed, Obama is increasingly ignoring the law when it inconveniences him.
Thus, if every gun transaction in America must have a Brady Check, every gun in America could presumably be fed into a national registration system by ATF by simply copying the 4473’s.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo -– a man who gives you a pretty good idea of where gun control is going -– said, on the front page of the New York Times, that “confiscation” of firearms is an option. Obviously, having a registration list makes such a task much easier.
But what about so-called large-capacity magazines? Well, Republicans like Georgia’s Phil Gingrey have talked about the possibility of banning them. However, there are many problems with this.
First of all, millions of gun owners own these magazines for defensive purposes. To take away a homeowner’s right to choose these devices will simply make honest citizens less safe — especially, when they are facing multiple attackers.
Moreover, police have sometimes had to fire 20-30 rounds to finally stop just one drug-crazed individual from shooting. This just underscores why, quite often, good guys will need more than just six-shooters.
Second, there are tens of millions of high-capacity magazines in circulation. What are you going to do about them?
Third, changing magazines (or switching guns) is not a big deal for people like Adam Lanza.
Fourth — and perhaps most important –- this is a game the anti-gun zealots have played before: They threaten to kill the Second Amendment, and then negotiate their way back to “merely” eviscerating it.
Fifth this, in addition to the lifetime ban for less than felony’s that includes ex post facto law is an assault on the American people!
Or put another way, they threaten to shoot us in the head to get us to agree to cutting off our fingers.
The only way that America’s gun owners are going to have peace over the next decade is to stop ALL gun control -– as we did after Columbine –- and then defeat compromising legislators running for reelection in 2014.
ACTION: Click here to contact your Senators and Congressmen. Demand that they oppose ALL gun control — including magazine limitations and universal background (registration) checks — being proposed by the Biden commission.

There was something in the air that night, the stars were bright Fernando…

January 14, 2013

Can you hear the drums Fernando?
I remember long ago another starry night like this
In the firelight Fernando
You were humming to yourself and softly strumming your guitar
I could hear the distant drums
And sounds of bugle calls were coming from afar

They were closer now Fernando
Every hour every minute seemed to last eternally
I was so afraid Fernando
We were young and full of life and none of us prepared to die
And I’m not ashamed to say
The roar of guns and cannons almost made me cry

There was something in the air that night
The stars were bright, Fernando
They were shining there for you and me
For liberty, Fernando
Though we never thought that we could lose
There’s no regret
If I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando

Now we’re old and grey Fernando
And since many years I haven’t seen a rifle in your hand
Can you hear the drums Fernando?
Do you still recall the fateful night we crossed the Rio Grande?
I can see it in your eyes
How proud you were to fight for freedom in this land

There was something in the air that night
The stars were bright, Fernando
They were shining there for you and me
For liberty, Fernando
Though we never thought that we could lose
There’s no regret
If I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando

There was something in the air that night
The stars were bright, Fernando
They were shining there for you and me
For liberty, Fernando
Though we never thought that we could lose
There’s no regret
If I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando
Yes, if I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando…

SOURCE

Something to think about, to say the least.

The next time some moronic anti-gun Progressive Liberal tries to hand you that line of BS about how much safer we would ALL be if our guns were taken away, show them this page, these numbers and then challenge them to prove otherwise!

January 13, 2013

Hat tip, and stolen from TEXAS FRED

The anti-gun people are always telling us how much safer we would be if no one had guns, they want us to believe that murder rates would go DOWN if ALL Americans were disarmed.

The next time some moronic anti-gun Progressive Liberal tries to hand you that line of BS, show them this page, these numbers and then challenge them to prove otherwise!

See the statistics at the bottom of the page. Kind of contradicts what the hand wringing politicians, from BOTH sides of the aisle, and anti-gun Progressive Liberals would have us believe doesn’t it?

From the World Health Organization:

Murders per 100,000 citizens

Honduras 91.6

El Salvador 69.2

Cote d’lvoire 56.9

Jamaica 52.2

Venezuela 45.1

Belize 41.4

US Virgin Islands 39.2

Guatemala 38.5

Saint Kits and Nevis 38.2

Zambia 38.0

Uganda 36.3

Malawi 36.0

Lesotho 35.2

Trinidad and Tobago 35.2

Colombia 33.4

South Africa 31.8

Congo 30.8

Central African Republic 29.3

Bahamas 27.4

Puerto Rico 26.2

Saint Lucia 25.2

Dominican Republic 25.0

Tanzania 24.5

Sudan 24.2

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 22.9

Ethiopia 22.5

Guinea 22.5

Dominica 22.1

Burundi 21.7

Democratic Republic of the Congo 21.7

Panama 21.6

Brazil 21.0

Equatorial Guinea 20.7

Guinea-Bissau 20.2

Kenya 20.1

Kyrgyzstan 20.1

Cameroon 19.7

Montserrat 19.7

Greenland 19.2

Angola 19.0

Guyana 18.6

Burkina Faso 18.0

Eritrea 17.8

Namibia 17.2

Rwanda 17.1

Mexico 16.9

Chad 15.8

Ghana 15.7

Ecuador 15.2

North Korea 15.2

Benin 15.1

Sierra Leone 14.9

Mauritania 14.7

Botswana 14.5

Zimbabwe 14.3

Gabon 13.8

Nicaragua 13.6

French Guiana 13.3

Papua New Guinea 13.0

Swaziland 12.9

Bermuda 12.3

Comoros 12.2

Nigeria 12.2

Cape Verde 11.6

Grenada 11.5

Paraguay 11.5

Barbados 11.3

Togo 10.9

Gambia 10.8

Peru 10.8

Myanmar 10.2

Russia 10.2

Liberia 10.1

Costa Rica 10.0

Nauru 9.8

Bolivia 8.9

Mozambique 8.8

Kazakhstan 8.8

Senegal 8.7

Turks and Caicos Islands 8.7

Mongolia 8.7

British Virgin Islands 8.6

Cayman Islands 8.4

Seychelles 8.3

Madagascar 8.1

Indonesia 8.1

Mali 8.0

Pakistan 7.8

Moldova 7.5

Kiribati 7.3

Guadeloupe 7.0

Haiti 6.9

Timor-Leste 6.9

Anguilla 6.8

Antigua and Barbuda 6.8

Lithuania 6.6

Uruguay 5.9

Philippines 5.4

Ukraine 5.2

Estonia 5.2

Cuba 5.0

Belarus 4.9

Thailand 4.8

Suriname 4.6

Laos 4.6

Georgia 4.3

Martinique 4.2

And then we have this:

The United States 4.2

ALL the countries listed above the United States have 100% gun bans.

How’s THAT gun ban thing working out for them?

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if being stripped of the ability to defend yourself makes you “safe”. ~Chicago Ray~

After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn’t do it. ~William S. Burroughs~

I received this from a friend via email but most of the stats appear to be confirmed via this PDF:

http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/world_report/en/summary_en.pdf