Would Norway have happened in Texas?

There has been a great of talk about the actions of the nutter in Norway who was able to wander aimlessly around an island and systematically kill. For those that don’t know Norway has very strict gun control laws. Once again though we have seen what happens in a dis-armed population when criminals ignore laws. That is kind of what criminals do though so as per usual in such situations it si the innocent who suffer ebcause the politicians dis-armed the population, ironically to allegedly protect them.

But could Norway have happened in Texas? Probably not.

Making Sense, by Michael Reagan

How long would the Norway gunman have lasted in Texas or any state where concealed-carry laws are on the books? I ran a survey while on a cruise: in Texas, 3 minutes; in Montana, 7 to 8 minutes; in Arizona, 2 minutes; and in Nevada, 3 to 5 minutes.

Had Norway not surrendered to the anti-self-defense nuts, and allowed Norwegians to protect themselves by legally carrying guns, the massacre might well have been prevented. There?s a lot of truth in the old adage that if guns are outlawed only outlaws will carry guns.

That was certainly true in Norway where Anders Breivik, a lone gunman, launched his assault on youth campers of Utoya Island. According to press reports he fully expected Norway?s special forces to swoop down and stop him at any minute. It didn?t happen. Faced with unarmed victims he was given plenty of time to kill 68 innocent people who could not defend themselves. Had just one of them been armed, Breivik could have been stopped dead and lives would have been spared.

Moreover, if anyone had paid attention to Breivik?s rants they would not have been surprised when he acted on them, especially since Breivik had preceded his attack by setting off a car bomb in the heart of Oslo.

Tragically, Norway?s anti-gun hysteria resulted in laws restricting gun ownership by law-abiding citizens, leaving them exposed to gun violence at the hands of criminals such as Breivik, who simply ignore anti-gun ownership laws. Despite the Second Amendment, which protects American citizens? rights to access to guns for self-protection, the Constitutional right of citizens to bear arms is under constant assault.

Sure mass murders have happened in the US but always in ?areas where the victims have been dis-armed by rules and regulations that the killer conveniently ignores.

In an interview with the University of Chicago, Lott said that states with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest drops in violent crimes. Thirty-one states now have such laws ? called ?shall-issue? laws. These laws allow adults the right to carry concealed handguns if they do not have a criminal record or a history of significant mental illness.

He noted that criminals are deterred by higher penalties. Just as higher arrest and conviction rates deter crime, so does the risk that someone committing a crime will confront someone able to defend him or herself. He shows that there is a strong negative relationship between the number of law-abiding citizens who have gun permits and the crime rate, noting that as more people obtain permits there is a greater decline in violent crime rates. He adds that for each additional year that a concealed handgun law is in effect the murder rate declines by 3 percent, rape by 2 percent, and robberies by over 2 percent.

Why does?concealed?carry deter crime?

Concealed handgun laws reduce violent crime for two reasons. First, they reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves. That?s just common sense.

This is commonsense. Go hunting in the Kaingaroa Forest. There are plenty of people there with guns. Many are people that in any given city just the mere sight of them would bring a shudder from the general citizenry and that is just in their everyday attire. Gang members, rough types, all sorts…yet in Kaingaroa a nice bunch of blokes you’ve never met…you see everyone is armed…and everyone knows how to use them and so civility breaks out. People you wouldn’t normally have a chat with or cross the street to avoid are suddenly very human and chatty. There is no animosity and no threats, just civility. It is because everyone is equal and no one is in a more powerful position either through fear or through intimidation.

Would Norway have happened in Texas? No way. Would it have happened in Switzerland? Nope. THese sorts of terrible crimes only ever happen where politicians have dis-armed the population.

Every human has the right to self-defence, so why do our politicians always try to remove the tools that aid in self defence. Dis-arming the population always leads to trouble.