Sarah Brady, the wife of former Reagan White House Press Secretary James
Brady, who was struck in the head by a bullet during an assassination attempt
on the president in 1981, appears in a new video in which she pays tribute
to the victims of the tragedy in Tucson and urges Americans to make a push
for stricter gun control laws.
After the shooting of James Brady, the Bradys became outspoken gun control
proponents, providing the backing to an eponymous Handgun Violence Prevention
Act, which set requirements for background checks before purchasing a gun....
...
In an interview with Jim and Sarah Brady on CNN Wednesday, Sarah Brady explained
that the lack of action on gun control was matter of lawmakers' courage.
（http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/13/sarah-brady-james-brady-arizona_n_808541.
html）


美國的槍枝管制，是個非常寬頻的問題。實施槍枝管制所產生的實際效應，也必然
需要較長時間才能顯示出來。解決美國的槍枝泛濫問題，本質上是改變歷史傳統，
確立一種非暴力的文明價值觀和一項長治久安的國策。

槍枝管制和禁槍問題的寬頻性質，決定了它本身必然是一個長期的歷史過程 ──
從觀念意識到行為模式到國家律法。而阻礙這個國家文明進程的根本力量來自兩個
方面：一個是個人自由神聖不可侵犯的觀念，再一個是認為槍枝泛濫的既成現實無
法改變。雖然這兩種根本力量都站不住腳，但它們卻又非常強大而頑固，所以我們
還是有必要對其在理性上予以簡明的澄清 ── 首先個人自由神聖不可侵犯從來都
是有條件的，法律本身就是對自由的約束；另外改變積習和現狀，永遠都是艱難的、
痛苦和曠日持久的，如果美國還有前途、還有生命力，那麼非理性和暴力，終究會
被文明和理性所取代。

According to Gallup, the percentage of Americans who want gun laws to be
stricter fell from 78 percent in 1990 to 62 percent in 1995. By 2007, it
was down to 51 percent. And last year it was just 44 percent in Gallup polling.

According to a new CBS News poll released yesterday, 47 percent now support
stricter gun laws (see graphic at left). That is a small spike from a March
2010 CBS News poll when 40 percent said the same thing, but below levels
of 2002 when 56 percent supported tighter gun control, and in 1994 when stricter
gun control had 59 percent support. That all means there is a much smaller
upside for a lawmaker who might make a case for stricter gun control laws.
（http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20028226-503544.html）

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2011/01/11/pie_chart_GunControl_v1.jpg

International/Comparative Statistics
The U.S. has the highest rate of firearm deaths among 25 high-income nations.
Another study concluded that among 36 high-income and upper-middle-income
countries, the U.S. has the highest overall gun mortality rate.
The overall firearm-related death rate among U.S. children under the age
of 15 is nearly 12 times higher than that among children in 25 other industrialized
nations combined.
The firearm-related suicide rate for children between the ages of 5 and
14 years old in the United States is nearly 11 times higher than that in
25 other developed countries.
Americans own far more civilian firearms ━ particularly handguns ━ than
people in other industrialized nations and U.S. gun laws are among the most
lax in the world.
（http://www.lcav.org/statistics-polling/gun_violence_statistics.asp）

In 1998 (the most recent year for which this data has been compiled), handguns
murdered:
373 people in Germany
151 people in Canada
57 people in Australia
19 people in Japan
54 people in England and Wales, and
11,789 people in the United States (suicides not included)
（http://twocrabs.blogs.com/2crabs/2007/04/gun_violence_st.html）


有一種很流行的觀點，認為槍枝本身並不是問題，而是行兇的人有問題，這似乎合
理地把槍枝和罪犯隔離、分解成了兩個毫無關係的命題。但事實上對於槍殺血案而
言，如果孤立來看，槍枝和罪犯各自本身都不是問題 ── 槍殺血案的實質，是有
問題的人擁有有問題的槍，所以兩者是無法分而論之。或者說，有問題的人擁有槍
枝，這本身就是個問題，這不僅僅是有問題的人本身的問題。更嚴謹一點來講，從
槍殺血案存在事實的角度看，有問題的人如果沒有槍枝，他並不構成生命危害，因
此在廣義上也不能稱之為“有問題的人”。在槍枝管制的語境下，槍枝和犯罪，不
是兩個毫無關連的概念，事實上沒有槍枝就沒有犯罪，因為沒有槍枝，很多犯罪只
能停留在臆想的狀態。

Us homicides by weapon:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg

美國的槍殺血案都是突發事件，但從來都不是偶然事件，而是持續性必然發生的，
無論過去、現在或未來都是如此。槍殺血案的偶然性，僅僅在於它發生的具體時間、
地點和可能會發生在誰的身上。

依靠暴力是無法獲得自由和人身安全的，暴力只能感召暴力，這是業力因果使然。
下面我們來看一看有關資料。

Guns in the Home:
A gun kept in the home is 22 times more likely to be used in an unintentional
shooting, a criminal assault or homicide, or an attempted or completed suicide
than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense. (Kellermann, AL et al.,
"Injuries and Deaths Due to Firearms in the Home." The Journal of Truama,
Infection, and Critical Care, Vol. 45, No. 2, August 1998.)
By a margin of 5 to 1, Americans feel less safe rather than safer
as a more people in their community begin to carry guns. (Hemenway, David;
Azrael, Deborah; Miller, Matthew. "U.S National Attitudes Concerning Gun
Carrying." Injury Prevention.2001; 7:282-285.)
（http://www.wagv.org/gun-violence.php）

Dangers of Gun Use for Self-Defense:
Using a gun in self-defense is no more likely to reduce the chance of being
injured during a crime than various other forms of protective action.
Of the 13,636 Americans who were murdered in 2009, only 215 were killed
by firearms (165 by handguns) in homicides by private citizens that law
enforcement determined were justifiable.
A study reviewing surveys of gun use in the U.S. determined that most self-reported
self-defense gun uses may well be illegal and against the interests of society.
（http://www.lcav.org/statistics-polling/gun_violence_statistics.asp#f49）


Self-protection:
。。。。。。
The findings of the McDowall's study for the American Journal of Public
Health contrast with the findings of a 1993 study by Gary Kleck, who finds
that as many as 2.45 million crimes are thwarted each year in the United
States, and in most cases, the potential victim never fires a shot in these
cases where firearms are used constructively for self-protection. The results
of the Kleck studies have been cited many times in scholarly and popular
media.
McDowall cites methodological issues with the Kleck studies, claiming that
Kleck used a very small sample size and did not confine self-defense to
attempted victimizations where physical attacks had already commenced. The
former criticism, however, is inaccurate ─ Kleck's survey with Marc Gertz
in fact used the largest sample size of any survey that ever asked respondents
about defensive gun use ─ 4,977 cases, far more than is typical in national
surveys.A study of gun use in the 1990s, by David Hemenway at the Harvard
Injury Control Research Center, found that criminal use of guns is far more
common than self-defense use of guns. By the Kleck study, however, most
successful preventions of victimizations are accomplished without a shot
being fired, which are not counted as a self-defense firearm usage by either
the Hemenway or McDowall studies. Hemenway, however, also argues that the
Kleck figure is inconsistent with other known statistics for crime, citing
that Kleck's figures apparently show that guns are many times more often
used for self-defense in burglaries, than there are incidents of bulgaries
of properties containing gun owners with awake occupants. Hemenway concludes
that under reasonable assumptions of random errors in sampling, because
of the rarity of the event, the 2.5 million figure should be considered
only as the top end of a 0-2.5 million confidence interval, suggesting a
highly unreliable result that is likely a great overestimate, with the true
figure 10 times, or more, less.
（http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States）




自利、自私與禁槍、擁槍及其它
http://bbs.creaders.net/life/bbsviewer.php?trd_id=546260

熱愛生命還是熱愛自由？ -- 再談禁槍
http://bbs.creaders.net/life/bbsviewer.php?trd_id=545978

自由+人權+平等 = 讓子彈飛？
http://bbs.creaders.net/life/bbsviewer.php?trd_id=545699