Hmmm. I had not seen that before. It sort of raises some questions -
thanks for those links.

I still believe strongly in the individual's right to defend oneself.
There are many incidents that show that crime was stopped by and lives were
saved by individuals with firearms. Also - due to the lack of people
carrying firearms and lack of familiarity with them, lives have been lost.
A particularly good example is the (approx) 1993-1994 Colin Ferguson (sp?)
attack on innocent people on the Long Island railroad. Due to the ignorance
of handguns, people remained cowed while he was reloading. Also, if anyone
had been armed then, the loss of life most likely would have been much less.

Additionally, the press in the US is so liberal and anti-gun that they
usually neglect to report (or downplay) when bystanders with firearms subdue
criminals and almost always use big scary sounding terms when a crime
involves a firearm.


"Carl Nisarel" wrote in message
s.com...
Hwæt! Richard Hertz, men ne cunnon secgan to soðe:

It is not a load of crap. See John Lott's papers and
book(s) studying the subject.

Better yet, see:

http://tinyurl.com/zcrr
http://tinyurl.com/xlnr
http://tinyurl.com/zcs2
http://tinyurl.com/bkp2
http://tinyurl.com/zcsh
http://tinyurl.com/zcsk

Lott's MGLC research is no longer considered valid by the
academic research community and Lott is considered a fraud.