Mike Haas wrote:

> Point is, both Australia and the UK have shown a demonstrable
> increase in crime, violent and otherwise, after passing
> wildly successful, far-reaching gun confiscation programs.  The
> web page make that more than clear, and that is why that web page
> ( http://NRAWinningTeam.com/auresult.html )
> is receiving hundreds of visitors daily from all over the world.*


 MWE: I read all the articles that were required to come to the conclusions
that I clearly stated. Neither Australia OR the United Kingdom had enough
"GUN CRIMES" before they passed their confiscation laws to make much
difference. They did NOT have a statistically evident or demonstrable
significant history of gun misuse by their criminal elements.

 In order to present "PROOF" that removing the guns from the hands of
"Those" citizens was a major factor in the rise in violent crime, you have
to demonstrate, on a case by case basis, that there would have been a
different outcome "IF" the gun laws had not been in place. In the case of
the UK and Australia, where guns were hardly ever used for self defense by
the citizens, that would be real damn difficult. The guns that were
confiscated, for the most part, were "Recreational" weapons. Neither the
U.K. or Australia had a high proliferation of handguns; the traditional self
defense weapon of choice in the U.S.

 I am NOT knocking you for presenting the information. I AM openly
criticizing you for misrepresenting the significance of the data. You simple
do NOT have the necessary proof to reach the conclusions you presented for
our consideration. At best you have speculation - And, that's also on shaky
ground.

 If it won't stand up to hard cross examination in a court of law, it's not
worth mentioning.
-----

   (Mike Eglestone)
----------------------
Rhode Island Law: Any marriage where either of the parties is an idiot or a
lunatic is null and void. 

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It
is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves."

-William Pitt (The Younger), Speech - House of Commons - 18 Nov. 1783