Under the Weather…. you get to play on your own.


And today’s assignment is another “study” on gun control published in The Lancet.

Paris (AFP) – Gun deaths in the United States can be slashed by over 90 percent through universal application of laws requiring background checks of buyers and easy tracing of every bullet fired, researchers said Thursday.

Conducting a background check on every single gun buyer could more than halve the national gun death rate from 10.35 to 4.46 per 100,000 people, said a paper in The Lancet medical journal.

Background checks for all ammunition purchases would cut the rate to 1.99 per 100,000 people, and “firearm identification” to 1.18 per 100,000.

Firearm identification requirements oblige manufacturers to store images of the unique markings that every gun makes on the bullets it fires, for cartridges at crime scenes to be easily traced to the gun that fired them, and hence its owner.”Federal implementation of all three laws could reduce national overall gun deaths to 0.16 per 100,000,” said a press statement by The Lancet — a drop of over 90 percent cut.

Source: In US gun control, not all laws are equal: study – Yahoo News

Here is the rub: Two more publications also mention the same report but with different focus:

Closing the so-called “gun show loophole” and placing a ban on assault weapons have been major talking points people in favor of stronger gun control laws, but a study published Thursday in the British medical journal The Lancet suggests that these moves would actually result in more gun deaths, not less

Source: Study: Some Gun Control Laws Result in More Deaths – US News


Implementing three state gun control laws at the federal level could reduce the rate of American gun deaths by more than 90%, a new study has found.But leading gun violence researchers have called that result “implausible”, and said the study’s design is so flawed that some of its findings are not believable.

Source: Gun control study’s dramatic results ‘implausible’, say leading researchers | US news | The Guardian

When you have somebody from the Bloomberg-paid John Hopkins’s School of Medical Gun Control and Other Ugly Stuff calls the study Full Of Shit (In scientific terms), you know there is something wrong with it.

My take: Somebody was hitting the hash pipe way too hard and ran with the Unicorns in Barcelona.


Owner/Operator of this Blog. Pamphleteer De Lux. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.

Recommended Posts


  1. Why…dear god why…..cannot a single proponent of ‘universal background checks’ EVER define the enforcement mechanism of such a law? In other words, with UBCs, how will the State know if I transferred a firearm to another citizen without a background check?

    A not so clever strategy to mask their real intention…registration.

    • They do that because they know that if they come right out and say “registration”. the mask will be off. It’s as bad as them always crying “It’s for the children”.

  2. Braden Lynch : March 11, 2016 at 1:57 pm

    Ah, The Lancet. The paragon of unbiased and apolitical “medical” research. Ahem, end sarcasm.

    I recall that in the run up to the Iraq War they gave out some absurdly high estimate of massive civilian casualties from the invasion, that of course, did not come to pass. I think to achieve their numbers the coalition troops would have had to carpet bomb all the cities and then a kilometer by kilometer kill sweep to finish off any survivors. I’m exaggerating, but they are a leftist rag that is disguised as a medical journal.

  3. Conducting a background check on every single gun buyer could more than halve the national gun death rate from 10.35 to 4.46 per 100,000 people, said a paper in The Lancet medical journal.

    You can stop reading right there. The paper’s Full of Sh*t. America’s overall homicide rate is 3.8 per 100,000, and that includes ALL homicides, gun or no gun.

    The “national gun death rate” CANNOT be higher than the overall homicide rate.

    The only explanation is that they’re including suicides, too (which wouldn’t surprise me). But the question then becomes, “How would any gun law stop someone from killing him- or herself, by gun or by any other means?”

    Explain to me how a “universal background check” on firearms stops someone from jumping off a building or swallowing a whole bottle-full of Tylenol (or partaking of any other means of facilitating their own demise), and we’ll talk.

    Until then, stop. Just, stop.

Feel free to express your opinions. Trolling, overly cussing and Internet Commandos will not be tolerated .

%d bloggers like this: