The New York Times Explains Why Neither Psychiatry Nor Background Checks Can Stop Mass Shooters
Their profile is shared by many people who never kill anyone.
Their profile is shared by many people who never kill anyone.
The only defender guaranteed to be present at any attack against you is you.
Last week President Obama asked us to compare terrorism to gun violence. Maybe we should.
Obama's talk of common-sense gun safety laws don't seem to apply to this tragedy.
Wants less shouting, more good policy.
Any attempt to stop would-be murderers from buying guns is bound to be overinclusive, underinclusive, or both.
How can we know simple gun safety laws would help when we know nothing about circumstances of how the killer got the gun?
In Delaware County, Pennsylvania.
The answer, like the frequency of youth gun carrying, may vary from state to state.
The most popular gun-control proposals would have little effect, while the most effective measures would be immensely unpopular.
During the Miss America contest, the contestant said no to banning "military-style assault weapons."
Do less than 1 percent of crime victims defend themselves with firearms?
State AG just got the authority to investigate such shootings last month.
At stake: Possessing a firearm during a "crime of violence" adds five extra years to a felony sentence.
National Journal reads too much into a correlation.
A thriving and unbeatable black market makes weapons available no matter what officials intend.
"I've been a human powder keg for a while....just waiting to go BOOM," said Flanagan.
The New York Times thinks so.
Very few people are victims of workplace homicide-and the ones who are are mostly men.
"Stronger mental health screenings for prospective gun owners" would strip many harmless people of their Second Amendment rights.
But people with an "interest in eluding law enforcement" might not.
"We're going to demonstrate to the world that black people have the same rights as white people."
Chuck Schumer and Amy Schumer employ the same old anti-gun rhetoric.
A novel fellowship program seems to be reducing crime.
In New York City, you can't even wield a fake gun on TV... unless you're making anti-gun propaganda.
According to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll
One criminologist's reaction: "This report should calm the fears that many people have that these numbers are out of control."
"Something has to be done" is generally an indicator of a bad, reactionary policy.
Under current law, the Louisiana theater shooter was properly cleared.
Wanting tougher immigration law to prevent possible crimes is like wanting tougher gun laws to prevent possible crimes.
And a federal court continues to violate handgun sellers' First Amendment rights in California
Man who opened fire in crowded theater fails with insanity-plea defense.
What Sanders' third-party home had to say about guns in 1972
Should "unlawful users" of "controlled substances" automatically lose their Second Amendment rights?
And why should all the millions caught up in the drug war be deprived of Second Amendment rights?
A bizarre scandal, even by political standards.
The logic may lean that way, but we can't be sure the Court values the Second Amendment's application that strongly.
A race to check off boxes on the Democratic side
People demand "gun control" while grieving over the racist massacre in Charleston, but gun rights have proven pivotal to black Americans' safety and freedom.
The dragnet would ensnare many harmless people without having a significant impact on gun violence.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10