In this country there is considerable controversy about whether gun ownership should be more restrictive. Interestingly, in every country where gun laws have been strengthened there has been a decrease in gun related deaths. Personally, I cannot imagine why someone would want to own an assault rifle unless they lived in Iraq or a similar violent country.
Gun advocates argue that the evidence, although obvious, is not real.
Researchers in Lancet examined gun related deaths and determined 3 laws which seemed to have the most beneficial effects and extrapolated how these laws, if enacted nationally, would affect these deaths. Interestingly, although this was published in March, even after Orlando there seems to be continuing ignorance.
Researchers examined 25 gun laws in force in the states, finding the three laws most associated with lower rates of firearm-related mortality: universal background checks for firearm purchases, background checks for ammunition purchases, and identification requirements for firearms (i.e., microstamping or ballistic fingerprinting).
The authors then calculated the effect on firearm mortality if the three laws were mandated nationally. With background checks for firearm purchases, the death rate would decline from 10.35 per 100,000 population to 4.46; with ammunition background checks, to 1.99; and with firearm identification, to 1.81.
I do not find this surprising. I just hope that this country can enact some sensible legislation without party bickering and more deaths.
The Lancet, Volume 387, Issue 10030, 30 April–6 May 2016, Pages 1847-1855
No comments:
Post a Comment