May 6th, 2008
I don’t see many “assault weapons” in there.
The first sentence in a Time story noting that the 1996 Australian gun control laws have made no difference in gun-related crimes in the country:
On the afternoon of April 28, 1996, Martin Bryant snapped.
It’s a case of “he just snapped”:
A striking figure with his long blond hair and milky skin, he had just eaten lunch at a café within the historic site of Port Arthur, a former prison in Australia’s island state of Tasmania. Described later by his sentencing judge as a “pathetic social misfit,” the 28-year-old then reached into his sports bag and, in the manner that others might pull out a sweater, withdrew two military-style semi-automatic rifles, which he used over the next eight horrifying minutes to kill 35 people — men, women and children — in what remains Australia’s worst mass murder.
Just a normal guy who, for no reason whatsoever, just went nuts suddenly. Coincidentally, he just happened to be carrying two rifles in his bag.
Yeah. Right.
It’s the “he just snapped” theory that gun control types like to use when arguing against legal ownership of guns, military-style or otherwise. It helps plant the idea that anyone can suddenly turn into a murderous monster at any time, and therefore dangerous weapons need to be kept from everyone all the time. Because everyone can suddenly become a killer with no warning.
Where are all the stories about concealed carry permit holders “just snapping” and shooting people willy-nilly? If it can happen to anyone, surely it would happen to at least some of the people who regularly carry guns. But we haven’t seen that, have we?
The Australia killer’s gun was acquired illegally, by the way. Good thing they passed a law making it illegal.
I pointed out previously that when people claim an AWB has helped prevent “Columine-style massacres,” they’re either ignorant or liars. Columbine happened in the middle of America’s ten-year AWB, so the baseline massacre they’re using doesn’t even fit their own storyline.
