You have to prove your patients had cancer before you cured them. People claimed laetrile cured cancer So show me any evidence that suggests that 99% of the would-be massacres didn't happen strictly because of this law, or you're selling laetrile
Metaphor/simile...pedantics. (It is a metaphor.) Now, get back to my point. You gonna wash off my cancer cure, one validated by The Lancet, just because it does not cure EVERYONE, only MOST?
The cancer "cure" your pushing is laetrile unless you can prove that people had cancer before you cured them. So to discard your clumsy simile, not a metaphor, in order to claim your country's moronic laws thwarted any would-be men's occurs you must first prove that there would have been massacres. Otherwise I could say the release of the macarena is why you don't have any massacres in Australia. And it would have exactly as much credibility as your claim.
Gawd....now I have to educate the Man about simile/metaphor. Simile is signalled when 'as' or 'like' is involved. As for your other stuff, I have no idea what you are on. I have one simple question for you.....'Are you gonna wash away my cancer cure, confirmed by The Lancet, just because it only cures MOST, and not EVERYONE?'
In order for you to show that gun control worked, you must show that there would have been massacres that were thwarted. Until you do that your argument is dead in the water.
How about this analogy...not a metaphor. I gave Australia a cure for massacres, and they dried up to almost nothing. I gave the USA a placebo, and the massacre rates kept going up. What say ye?
So you can't show me the massacres that would have been, but that were thwarted by the law? Don't feel bad I didn't expect you to.
No I can't. Can't prove a negative. Can demonstrate that the cure had the effect of reducing massacres here, and the placebo did nothing in the USA. But, hey, keep sending thoughts and prayers....might work one day.
The us not one single rifle that can shoot anyone. There has to be someone on the trigger to make it work. It is the shooter that is the one that is responsible.
There is quite a significant amount of researchshowing a correlate between gun laws and reduction in firearm morbidity
It's not a ''meme'', it's common sense to those who grasp logic. Like forks dont make you fat and pencils dont write misspellings.
No because you probably expected NOT to see a statistical analysis and the analysis shows strong correlation between gun legislation and reduction in firearm mortality
Do something to whom? How does sweeping legislation that covers all citizens cause someone from Aus to think twice about doing that again?
You need to get your money back for your psychic lessons. I asked you how many would be massacres were thwarted by your gun legislation. Further I doubt your statistics have anything to do with illegal gun owners since you're talking about controlling it with law that's the only thing you could control. In fact we might even see an increase if we forbade people from legally owning guns
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia I count eight mass shootings with a total of 27 mass massacres since 1996.