cameraniac Loc: Huntingburg, Indiana

Found this link on one of the evil, black-rifle forums that I frequent. (68forums.com)

http://www.facebook.com/AmidstTheNoise

Yoos2 Loc: BC Canada

Very interesting, and, if truthfully presented, very influential in determining the the reasons for these violent crimes. The geographic locations of these crimes is also helpful. I would be interested to lay these statistics on top of a similar chart showing the locations of the major gangs and gang related incidents.
Though I am Canadian I have have a great interest in how these things are being handled or mis-handled in the US of A.
John

BuddyLars Loc: Rockton, Illinois

Thanks for the link.
Interesting facts

Danilo Loc: Las Vegas

Very interesting link. Thanks for posting.
I personally think it's wise of the government to target the erroneously named assault-rifles for banning because they would be far more useful in defending oneself from a tyrannical government. People, mostly from the left, are laughing at anyone who suggests a rifle might be good for this sort of defense, but it's true.
If I were defending myself I would rather be using a rifle, and keeping my adversary far away, if possible, than to use a handgun at typical handgun distances. If your battle is down to handguns, it's almost over.

cameraniac Loc: Huntingburg, Indiana

I couldn't agree with you more, Danilo. The left also likes to discount the fact that the second ammendment gives citizens the right to be able to defend themselves from from a tyrannical Government. To them, it pertains to the right to hunt and participate in sport shooting, only.

travlnman46 Loc: Yakima WA

Hi Danilo: Like a buddy of mine pointed out to me, if the government decided to take you out, all they would need to use is one of their drones... It's true any distance weapon is better than a short range weapon, for keeping an adversary as far from you as possible. Just hope they don't have the same advantage or worse yet are even better armed.