[[Phill]]

[ QUOTE ]
phil,

Do you not see why size matters? With a larger population the US has a greater chance of this happening over an extended period of time. You made a time line comparison of US vs Britain as it pertains to shootings. Britain will always win that scenario even if they have the same law legislation throughout both countries.

[/ QUOTE ]

Urgh, you are saying size makes it more likely for shootings like this to happen.

Im saying size is irrelivent for banning guns across the nation.

Yes, obviously shootings will happen more often in a country of 300 million people, of which at least half can walk into a shop and after filling out a simple form legally purchase a gun.

How many shootings has the US had since 13th March 1996 (fwiw, 16 kids and one adult died that day and that was a small primary school in scotland). How many since guns were outlawed in 1997 here?

Then take a population figure, so roughly 60 million UK and 300 million US and you get a general figure of how many massacres would be expected. Obviously really innactrate, but its a good ball park figure.

Then take this figure, and multiply it by how many children die in school shootings. That is how many children banning hand guns has saved in the UK.

If the figure is 1 or higher, its obviously been a positive move. PLUS that isnt even taking into account random accidents and general murder using guns (though that figure will be almost as high seeing how effective knives and big sticks are anyway)