Obama Wrong that U.S. Is 'Only Developed Country' Where Mass Shootings Happen

June 19, 2014 - 6:33 AM

Anti-gun liberals say a lot of stupid things about guns; President Obama is no exception.  Last week, he said something so patently false that it deserved to be ignored entirely, but given the shootings in Las Vegas and Oregon; it's bound to come up again: gun control.

In the wake of those two tragic shootings, the president made this unbelievable claim:

My biggest frustration has been that this society has not been willing to take some basic steps to keep guns out of the hands of people who can do just unbelievable damage.  We are the only developed country on earth where this happens. And that it happens now once a week. And it's a one day story."

Uh, by "this society," Mr. President - you mean American society, right?

Regardless, that claim is flat-out wrong - and was wonderfully debunked by economist John Lott:

Does Obama not consider Norway a developed country? After all, Anders Breivik shot 69 people to death and wounded 110 others.  That attack holds the record for a single-person shooting spree.

Is Germany a developed country?  While the president focused on school shootings, he never acknowledged that two of the three worst K-12 school shootings have occurred in Germany since 2000, not in the United States.  These were:

-- Erfurt, Germany on April 26, 2002: a former student killed 18 at a secondary school.

-- Winnenden, Germany, March 11, 2009: a 17-year-old former student killed 15 people, including nine students and three teachers.

A partial list of mass shootings in Europe from 2000 to early 2010 is available here.

Over at Townhall, Katie Pavlich wrote about Everytown [sic] for Gun Safety's former executive director Mark Glaze, who told the Wall Street Journal that the gun control wing of America and their agenda wouldn't have stopped past mass shootings and it won't prevent future ones:

Mr. Glaze said the [gun control] movement hasn't solved one of its signature problems: Many mass shootings wouldn't have been stopped by tighter regulations proposed by gun-control advocates, even if they might have prevented other gun crimes.

...

The most attention on gun control comes after mass shootings - just look at the post-Newtown push and the brief attention paid to the issue after the Memorial Day weekend shootings in Isla Vista, Calif. Yet virtually none of the solutions gun-control groups are pushing would have prevented any of the massacres that capture public attention.

"Because people perceive a mismatch in the policy solutions that we have to offer and the way some of these mass shootings happened, you know, it is a messaging problem for us, I think. ... Is it a messaging problem when a mass shooting happens and nothing that we have to offer would have stopped that mass shooting? Sure it's a challenge in this issue."

There's a saying that when you have the facts on your side, argue the facts; when you have the law on your side; argue the law; and when you have neither, pound the table.  And, the gun control crowd sure has been pounding the table, with no discernible effect on American policy or the public.