Scientists Find Dinosaur Blood

Wait...what?  How could blood and soft tissue survive for 80 million years in a dinosaur bone?

Hey!....here's an idea....just MAYBE the bone isn't 80,000,000 years old?  Maybe it's only thousands of years old?

Confirmed Dinosaur Blood on Ancient Fossil Astonishes Evolutionists

RALEIGH, N.C. – Researchers have confirmed that biomaterial discovered on an ancient fossil is in fact preserved dinosaur blood, astonishing evolutionists who continue to believe the fossil is 80 million years old.

Over the past decade, scientists have unearthed a number of dinosaur fossils with preserved blood vessels and soft tissue. Many evolutionists initially treated such discoveries with skepticism and incredulity—while others rejected them outright—due to their seeming incompatibility with the evolutionary timeframe.

In a November 23 journal article published in “Journal of Proteome Research,” scientists from North Carolina State University confirmed that blood vessels found on the fossil of a hadrosaur (B. canadensis) are in fact dinosaur blood—not contaminants from some other source.

“Their findings add to the growing body of evidence that structures like blood vessels and cells can persist over millions of years,” the university announced in a press release last week.

In their journal article, the researchers confessed that they initially thought protein-filled blood vessels could not possibly survive in any dinosaur fossil for millions of years.

“The [discovery of tissue] from Tyrannosaurus rex was controversial when first reported,” they wrote. “The survival of proteins from the Cretaceous Period (66–145 million years ago) was not thought to be possible.”

“Although soft tissue vessels and cells have been observed in multiple fossil specimens … continued skepticism on the prevalence and endogeneity of ancient soft tissues and their composite molecules persists,” they added.

Here;  http://christiannews.net/2015/12/07/confirmed-dinosaur-blood-on-ancient-fossil-astonishes-evolutionists/

How funny.  Now that they are convinced that the bone has to be millions of years old...rather than change their thought process to investigate the idea that bones are thousands of years old, they simply say that they NOW believe that blood and proteins CAN SURVIVE for millions of years.

The Bible says that the WISE MEN and INTELLIGENT MEN of our day will be confused and confounded.  I sure wonder if this is one example of such?

America is Number One Gun Nation

As we have already said, the blood wasn't even dry and the dead hadn't even been counted in San Bernardino and the liberal left was blaming the murders on guns!

Silly liberals!!

Here is a GREAT VIDEO that explains how America is the #1 nation in the world for GUNS OWNED PER CAPITA....BUT...much to the liberals disgust we don't even rank in the top 100 nations for MURDERS PER CAPITA.

As the video says, that HAS to drive our liberal, "black guns are bad!", "how many bullets does anyone need?!", anti-gun crowd more than a little miffed.

Watch video here;  https://www.youtube.com/embed/pELwCqz2JfE?rel=0&autoplay=true

"But Dennis, this gun discussion has nothing to do with prophecy...so why are you talking about it?"

Ummm....because I like guns and I think every sane person who isn't a Muslim extremist or any other terrorist should own one, two or five.  It's our Constitutional responsibility. : )

Oh yeah...and make sure you also buy hundreds or thousands of rounds and store them in a cool, dry place....because what good is a gun if you don't have anything to put in it?

Hat tip to Bill J.

ISIS Film Shows Kids Killing

It's funny how the liberals have mocked any Americans who have dared to ask WHO we should let into this country and HOW should we adequately vet them?  They say, "These refugees from Syria and Iraq are just widows and orphans! How dangerous can they be?"

Of course last week a Muslim lady from Pakistan who very possibly was a "widow" before she came...just showed how dangerous a follower of Muhammad can be.  She killed 14 people in cold blood.

"Yes, but Dennis, certainly the kids coming from Syria or other Muslim countries would NEVER pose a problem!  How can we say no to letting little kids come to America?  They are little kids!, forgodsake!"

Watch this recently released ISIS VIDEO and ask yourself if you would want this little Muhammad coming to America?

If after watching the video you still say YES....then how would you recommend DE-RADICALIZING them?

Here;  http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/5198.htm

Wake up liberals!  Islam has a problem!  The problem is that they follow a book of lies called the Koran and they are summoning Satan on a daily basis when they all bow to the pedophile Muhammad and invoke his presence on a daily basis at thousands of mosques around the world!

"But Dennis, you sound so intolerant!  Even President Bush told us that Islam is a religion of peace...and now Obama keeps reminding us on a daily basis that it is!"

Are there peaceful Muslims?....YES!!!

Are there MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of radical Muslims too?.....YES!!!

Hey...when you get done watching the ISIS KIDS video, spend another few hours watching all the other videos coming from Muslim lands and ask yourself if these folks look like ANYTHING you want ruling the world?

Catholics Should NOT Try and Convert Jews

It was very clear when Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life.  No man comes to the Father except through me."  Jesus is the ONE AND ONLY WAY during this age of Grace that we find ourselves in.  Muslims can't get there blowing themselves up while chanting to Allah, Buddhists can't get there no matter how many times they think they will be reincarnated, Hindus can't get there dunking themselves in the Ganges River, Indians can't get there by doing a rain dance and Jews can't get there by going to a synagogue a few times per year or having a bar mitzvah.

So just as WE WERE ALL LOST...THEY ARE ALL LOST!  Just like WE NEEDED A SAVIOR....THEY ALSO NEED A SAVIOR.

So what are the Catholics saying today about spreading this Good News of Jesus to all corners of the world?

Catholics should not try to convert Jews and should work with them to fight anti-Semitism, the Vatican said on Thursday in a major new document that drew the Church further away from the strained relations of the past.

Christianity and Judaism are intertwined and God never annulled his covenant with the Jewish people, said the document from the Vatican's Commission for Religious Relations with Jews.

"The Church is therefore obliged to view evangelization to Jews, who believe in the one God, in a different manner from that to people of other religions and world views," it said.

It also said Catholics should be particularly sensitive to the significance to Jews of the Shoah, the Hebrew word for the Holocaust, and pledged "to do all that is possible with our Jewish friends to repel anti-Semitic tendencies."

"A Christian can never be an anti-Semite, especially because of the Jewish roots of Christianity," it said.

The document coincided with the 50th anniversary of a revolutionary Vatican statement that repudiated the concept of collective Jewish guilt for Jesus' death and launched a theological dialogue that traditionalists have rejected.

They feel there should be a so-called "Jewish mission" to convert Jews because they did not accept Jesus as the Messiah, and were therefore bound to be displeased by the new official stance on conversion, a senior Vatican official said.

"In concrete terms this means that the Catholic Church neither conducts nor supports any specific institutional mission work directed towards Jews," said the document, adding that there was a "principled rejection of an institutional Jewish mission."

A Vatican expert in Catholic-Jewish dialogue said it was the first time a repudiation of active conversion of Jews was so clearly stated in a Vatican document.

Until about 1960, prayers at Catholic Masses on Good Friday, the day commemorating the death of Jesus, labelled Jews "perfidious" and called for their conversion.

That prayer was eliminated from general use after the 1962-1965 Second Vatican Council introduced a new missal, or prayer book used at Masses.

But later a prayer for the Jews was allowed to remain in the old-style Latin Mass, sometimes called the Tridentine Rite, used by ultra-traditionalists such as the Society of Saint Pius X, whose members reject the reforms of the Second Vatican Council.

In 2008, former Pope Benedict further reformulated the prayer used by the traditionalists to remove language Jewish groups found offensive, such as "the blindness of that people".

Thursday's document said Catholics should "bear witness to their faith in Jesus Christ also to Jews" but that they should do so in "a humble and sensitive manner, acknowledging that Jews are bearers of God's word..."

Here;  http://www.jpost.com/Christian-News/Catholics-should-not-try-to-convert-Jews-Vatican-says-in-landmark-document-436915

Nice!  So the Catholics have now made it official that they won't tell Jews about Jesus!!

Silly Catholics....haven't they heard that countless Jews are accepting Christ like no other time before?

Five years ago I got into a debate with a staff member at St Thomas University in St Paul, MN.  He loudly told our group that he wished we could all be more pious like our Muslim brothers and sisters who pray five times per day, give to charity and read their Korans.  When I pushed against this obvious perversion....he got very flustered and publicly said in a loud tone in front of 50 Catholic witnesses, "I don't believe what Jesus said about being the ONLY WAY!  And furthermore if I ever told my students at St Thomas that Jesus was the ONLY WAY, I would be escorted off campus that very day!"

Awesome!  How many people are paying $50,000 per year to send their kids to that place?

To me this adds more evidence that the Catholics and the Pope are going to play a big part in the LAST DAYS CHURCH and the ONE WORLD RELIGION.

If today the Catholics won't tell the Jews about Jesus and we already know they won't tell Muslims about Jesus....when do they welcome the Hindus and Buddhists under the ONE RELIGION tent?

"On that day, many will say to me, "Lord, Lord...."

"Depart from me, I don't know you."

Massive Percentage of Muslims Desire Shariah Law

What are the facts surrounding Islam?  Can a devout Muslim really serve effectively as the President of the USA?  Should we, as a nation, allow hundreds of thousands of Muslims into our nation knowing full well that many or most of them have desires for a different government than the one we currently have?

The following article shows this chart from Pew Research....and I hope our leaders are understanding what it is saying.




Here;  http://canadafreepress.com/article/77349

Friends, that's a whole lot of Muslims that desire that Political Islam rule their nations!

Let's pretend that there was a religion called Luciferan.  There were millions of them all over the world and they bowed to a god names Lucifer. They also publicly announced that they believed that Jews descended from apes and pigs, they believed that anyone who didn't bow to lucifer should be killed, they hated Christians and were willing to blow themselves up trying to spread the kingdom of Lucifer all over the world.

Would we automatically let millions of Luciferans into America?

Think about it....

But while you are thinking about that also remember that Jesus told us to love and pray for our enemies...so PLEASE remember the words of our Master when and if we get the chance to interact with Muslims.  They are lost and on their way to hell if they don't accept Christ and YOU could be the one that wins them over with love.  Remember, THOUSANDS of Muslims every single day are tossing their Korans into the toilet and accepting Christ as their Lord and Savior!  There has NEVER been such a time for Muslims to come to Christ.

Jimmy Carter Banned Iranians....Just Like Trump is Suggesting

Donald Trump should probably read the Bible passage that says, "Pride comes before the fall."...but that being said, he has said some interesting things during his campaign.

Yesterday he suggested that all Muslims be stopped from coming into the USA until Congress can figure out what the heck is going on with all the hatred coming from these Muslims.

Of course the media is having a field day saying how it's unconstitutional to ban people from coming here based on religion.

But what if Islam is not just a religion....what if it's a political persuasion that is hell bent on throwing over the US way of life?  Could we ban them from coming then?

Turns out Jimmy Carter had some similar ideas long before The Donald did.

Trump is a monster, a madman and a vile racist. He's just like Hitler. Or Jimmy Carter.

During the Iranian hostage crisis, Carter issued a number of orders to put pressure on Iran. Among these, Iranians were banned from entering the United States unless they oppose the Shiite Islamist regime or had a medical emergency.

Here's Jimmy "Hitler" Carter saying it back in 1980.

Fourth, the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly.

Apparently barring people from a terrorist country is not against "our values" after all. It may even be "who we are". Either that or Carter was a racist monster just like Trump.

Meanwhile here's how the Iranian students in the US were treated.

Carter orders 50,000 Iranian students in US to report to immigration office with view to deporting those in violation of their visas. On 27 December 1979, US appeals court allows deportation of Iranian students found in violation.

In November 1979, the Attorney General had given all Iranian students one month to report to the local immigration office. Around 7,000 were found in violation of their visas. Around 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the US.

Meanwhile any Iranians entering the US were forced to undergo secondary screening.

Interestingly enough, Carter did this by invoking the Nationality Act of 1952. A law originally opposed by Democrats for its attempt to restrict Communist immigration to the United States.

“If this oasis of the world should be overrun, perverted, contaminated, or destroyed, then the last flickering light of humanity will be extinguished,” Senator McCarran said of the law. He was a Democrat.

Now unlike Muslims, Iranians were not necessarily supportive of Islamic terrorism. Many were and are opponents of it. Khomeini didn't represent Iran as a country, but his Islamist allies. So Trump's proposal is far more legitimate than Carter's action. Carter targeted people by nationality. Trump's proposal does so by ideology.

Classifying Iranians as a group is closer to racism than classifying people by a racist supremacist ideology that calls for the mass murder and enslavement of non-Muslims, as ISIS is doing today.

One of the neater subsets of the 1952 Act barred the entry of, "(11) Aliens who are polygamists or who practice polygamy or advocate the practice of polygamy."

I wonder which creed this might apply to.

Maybe the professional conservatives running around shrieking their heads off can calm down now long enough to have a rational conversation on the subject.

Here;  http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261062/carter-banned-iranians-coming-us-during-hostage-daniel-greenfield

The Liberal Theology of Gun Control

We did a post yesterday about guns and how crazy the liberals get every time someone gets shot with one.

Today we found this in the Wall Street Journal and it's so good I will try and post it all.

The highlighted passage that sticks out of the article is this;
GUNS ARE WHAT YOU TALK ABOUT TO AVOID HAVING TO TALK ABOUT ISLAMIC TERRORISM

How does a man who entered the White House vowing to restore science to its proper place tell us that gun control is the answer to terrorism?

After all, California already has strict gun control, as does France, which just had its second terrorist massacre this year. Not to mention that the one time when terrorists with assault rifles and body armor were foiled, it was because an off-duty traffic cop in Garland, Texas, was carrying a gun—and used it to shoot the two heavily armed Islamists before they could kill anyone.

Or that “common sense gun control” would have done nothing to stop Richard Reid (the unsuccessful shoe-bomber); the Tsarnaev brothers in Boston (pressure cookers) or the 9/11 hijackers (box-cutters). Maybe the president should be demanding common sense pressure-cooker control.

Yet while the critiques of the president’s antigun pitch are correct, they are also beside the point. Because liberal calls for gun control aren’t about keeping guns from bad guys. It’s what you talk about so you don’t have to talk about the reality of Islamist terror. And focusing on the weaponry is part of a liberal argument that dates to the Cold War, when calls for arms control were likewise used to avoid addressing the ugly reality of communism.

Understand this, and you understand why Senate Democrats reacted to San Bernardino by putting forth antigun legislation. Why the New York Times ran a gun control editorial on its front page, and the Daily News used its own cover to feature the National Rifle Association’s Wayne LaPierre underneath San Bernardino killer Syed Farook—labeling them both terrorists. And why President Obama used Sunday night’s address to whine about those resisting his call for gun measures that would not have stopped any of the shooters.

Put simply, today’s liberalism cannot deal with the reality of evil. So liberals inveigh against the instruments the evil use rather than the evil that motivates them.

Not that there aren’t measures society can embrace to keep the innocent from being shot and killed. The best example may be New York City from 2002-13, during Ray Kelly’s last stint as police commissioner, when the NYPD was bringing the murder rate to record lows through America’s most effective gun-control program: stop-and-frisk.

This was gun control for bad guys, under the theory that when you take guns away from bad people—or at least make them afraid to carry guns on the street—you reduce shootings. But it was savaged by liberals. Because they don’t want just the bad guys’ guns. They want yours.

So they demonize guns while fighting approaches that try to identify threats, whether from mentally ill individuals such as Adam Lanza, who went on a murderous rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, or terrorists such as Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik. Surely the key to distinguishing between the millions of law-abiding Muslims and those who mean us harm is intelligence.

Nevertheless, the urge to blame the weapon has deep liberal roots. It was particularly pronounced in the latter years of the Cold War when Ronald Reagan was president.

Even as Reagan was applying the pressure that would ultimately bring down the Berlin Wall in 1989—from arming the Afghan resistance to supporting Poland’s Solidarity movement to rebuilding America’s defenses—liberals derided him as a warmonger. Two things especially irked them: He’d called the U.S.S.R. the Evil Empire, and he was skeptical about arms control for the sake of arms control.

So when the Gipper walked away from the 1986 Reykjavik summit because Mikhail Gorbachev insisted his price for a nukes deal was the end of missile defense, Reagan was derided as a dunce. But his decision proved one of his finest moments: Scarcely a year later the Soviets caved and Mr. Gorbachev signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.

Bad regimes are like bad guys in this respect. They’ll take a deal they know has no teeth. But they will accept a genuine arms reduction only when the good guys put them in a position where they have little or no choice.

This helps explain why, for example, Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi turned over his entire nuclear program to George W. Bush—and why the Iranians happily agreed to a deal with President Obama that puts them on the path to a bomb.

Meanwhile, we’ve just endured what may be the first successful ISIS-inspired attack on the homeland. And like her former boss, Hillary Clinton is demanding the government “take action now” on guns.

Back and forth it goes. Instead of debating the antiterror policy of the past seven years—the wisdom of ending the National Security Agency’s metadata program, whether ISIS can be knocked out without any ground troops, how the lack of nerve on Syria fed this mess, or whether Islamist terror can be defeated so long as our leaders refuse to call it by its rightful name—we’re all arguing over gun control.

Then again, if you were Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton, isn’t this the debate you’d prefer?

Here;  http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-liberal-theology-of-gun-control-1449533861

Economic Collapse Has Already Started

According to author and money manager Peter Schiff...the economic collapse of America has already started.  Can you feel it yet?

The reason that Schiff is worth reading is because he was one of the few analysts who accurately saw the collapse coming of 2008-2009.

Back before 2008 Peter Schiff was harshly criticized and laughed at for his predictions about a coming economic collapse. Among other things Schiff warned that consumer spending had hit a wall, stocks were overpriced and lax credit lending practices would lead to a detonation of the banking system. Rather than heed the warnings, the biggest names in mainstream media tried to discredit him for not toeing the official narrative. Shortly thereafter, of course, Schiff was vindicated and much of the doom he had forecast came to pass.

Today, Schiff continues to argue that the economy is on a downhill trajectory and this time there’ll be no stopping it. All of the emergency measures implemented by the government following the Crash of 2008 were merely temporary stop-gaps. The light at the end of the tunnel being touted by officials as recovery, Schiff has famously said, is actually an oncoming train. And if the forecast he laid out in his latest interview is as accurate as those he shared in 2007, then the the train is about to derail.

We’re broke. We’re basically living off of debt. We’ve had a huge transformation of the American economy. Look at all the Americans now on food stamps, on disability, on unemployment.

The whole economy has imploded… the bottom hasn’t dropped out yet because we’re able to go deeper into debt. But the collapse is coming.

Fundamentally, America is worse off now than it was pre-crash. With the national debt rising unabated and money being printed out of thin air without reprieve, it is only a matter of time.

Schiff notes that while government statistics claim Americans are saving again and consumers seem to be spending, the average Joe Sixpack actually has a negative net worth. But most people don’t even realize what’s happening:

I read a statistic… The average American has less than a $5000 net worth… it’s pathetic… we’re basically broke… but in fact it’s much less… If you actually took the national debt and broke it down per capita, the average American has a negative net worth because the government has borrowed in his name more than the average American is able to save.

…

What’s happening is pretty much what we would anticipate. I don’t see from the data any real economic recovery, certainly not in the United States.

We’re spending more money, but it’s not because we’re generating more wealth. We’re generating more debt. We’re using that borrowed money to consume and so temporarily it feels that we’re wealthier because we get to spend all that money… but we have to come to terms with paying the bill.

The bills are going to come due. Right now interest rates are being kept at zero which makes it possible to service the debt even though it’s impossible to repay it… at least we can service it. But once interest rates go up then we can’t even service it let alone repay it.

And then the party is going to come to an end.
The problem, of course, is that no one with any real influence over public perception, like our elected officials or the media, will do anything about it. They’ll continue the party until it comes to an abrupt and irreversible end, and anyone who goes against the official narrative will be branded a lunatic gloom and doomer or extremist.

But vilifying those who are blaring the warning sirens will do nothing to change the end result:

We’re going to have a crisis… There are always going to be people who say ‘well, you’re a stopped clocked… you keep predicting doom and eventually it happens’… but you have to back and listen to why… Why are they saying it?

If you look back at things that I’ve said and the things that Ron Paul has said… This is why it’s happening… it’s not like we’re just saying negative things to be negative and then when something negative happens we can claim credit for it happening.

If you look back at the events it bears out that we’re right… unfortunately our opinions are in the minority… and you have governments that have a vested interest in ignoring these opinions because they don’t want to change because they’re at the root cause of the problem. But they don’t want to acknowledge their role in creating the problem. They don’t want to acknowledge that the problem is more government and that we need less government because that’s not how they stay in power. They promise something for nothing… they promise that government is the solution for your problems, not the cause of your problems.

They’re never going to acknowledge people like Ron Paul for what they’re saying… but they’ll try to discredit you by saying ‘well, you’ve been saying this for years and nothing bad has happened.’

But look around. A lot of bad stuff has happened. We just haven’t had the final and complete collapse. But what good is it when that happens? Now it’s too late to do anything about it.
The reality is that the American economy is on its last leg. Black Friday sales were pitiful, some of the world’s leading companies are warning of recession, and U.S. national debt will soon surpass $20 Trillion.

Just as was the case before the Crash of 2008, all of the signs are there. And just like before, the stock market continues to hover near all-time highs.

If you’ve been paying attention you know what happens next.

Here;  http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-12-07/peter-schiff-warns-whole-economy-has-imploded-collapse-coming

Bummer!!  Not the American dream!!!  It can't collapse!!  Who will buy all the NFL tickets and $50,000 pickup trucks and $200,000 travel trailers parked along the interstate of every city??

"But Dennis, God would never do that to America....He loves us too much.  Remember that one verse, 'For God so loved the world?"

Ummmmm.....yeah....you better keep reading because the Bible is full of stories of nations being judged and thrown down for their wicked ways.

So readers, I hope you are not surprised if we witness America dealt a staggering blow.  Lord knows we deserve it....BUT....I am choosing to cling to the words of Jesus when he tells us that the condition on earth before Jesus comes in the rapture will be 'as it was in the days of Noah.'  Jesus said that in that day people were eating, drinking, marrying and giving in marriage and had no clue what was coming until it was too late, and the flood waters came and took them all away.

So that pattern repeats itself, life was just running along as normal and then Jesus came to snatch his bride and the folks left behind were left to endure the Great Tribulation.

If America implodes and starts defaulting on debt and bankrupting Food Stamps and Social Security....it could get really ugly in a hurry and would hardly be called a "normal" time when people were just carrying on as if they hadn't a care in the world.

So I believe we have a pretty good chance that America will just be carrying on...ignoring God and feeding our entertainment needs like we always do when BOOM!!!!  With the voice of the archangel and the trumpet call of God, first the dead believers will be caught up into the clouds and next the believers who are still alive will have their bodies changed in the twinkling of any eye and then THEY will be caught up into the clouds to meet Jesus!  Amen!!  Come Lord Jesus!!

IT'S THE GUNS STUPID!!!

Of course the blood wasn't even dry and the dead hadn't been counted in San Bernardino and the liberal left was screaming for MORE GUN CONTROL!!!

"No!  It has nothing to do with radical religion (they can't say Islam) and everything to do with these nasty black guns that are running around killing everyone!"

Ummmm....inanimate objects aren't capable of murdering anyone.

The NYT was quick to roll out what "Conservative-led Australia" did 20 years ago to stop it's mass shootings.

In the continuing debate over how to stop mass killings in the United States, Australia has become a familiar touchstone.

President Obama has cited the country’s gun laws as a model for the United States, calling Australia a nation “like ours.” On the campaign trail, Hillary Clinton has said the Australian approach is “worth considering.” The National Rifle Association has dismissed the policies, contending that they “robbed Australians of their right to self-defense and empowered criminals” without reducing violent crime.

The oft-cited statistic in Australia is a simple one: There have been no mass killings — defined by experts there as a gunman killing five or more people besides himself — since the nation significantly tightened its gun control laws almost 20 years ago.

Mass shootings in Australia were rare anyway. But after a gunman massacred 35 people in the Tasmanian town of Port Arthur in 1996, a public outcry spurred a national consensus to severely restrict firearms. The tightened laws, which were standardized across Australia, are more stringent than those of any state in the United States, including California.

The impact of the gun laws is difficult to assess partly because of the low rates of intentional firearms deaths in Australia. Gun-related homicide rates are even lower, because suicides make up about 80 percent of all gun deaths. Looking at gun-related suicides and homicides separately shows similar trends — higher rates of both before 1996 than after, declines in the decade before 1996 but sharper declines in the decade after, and a leveling off in recent years.

Mr. Leigh and Ms. Neill tried to measure the effect of the 1996 measures across Australian states and territories to see whether different levels of gun confiscation led to different results. They found that the places where the most guns were removed from public circulation also experienced the largest drops in intentional gun deaths.

The impact of the buyback appeared more pronounced on suicides.

“Firearm suicides fell more in states that had more guns bought back than in states with fewer guns bought back,” Ms. Neill said in an email. “Firearm homicides also fell more in states with more guns bought back, but the effect was smaller than for firearm suicides.”

Here;  http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/world/australia/australia-gun-ban-shooting.html?action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&module=MostPopularFB&version=Full&region=Marginalia&src=me&pgtype=article&_r=0

How stupid can people be?  So Australia spends government money to BUY BACK guns and the 'gun violence decreased'....but the article goes on to say that MOST OF IT was a reduction in suicides!!

Friends, if you want to kill yourself, does it matter if you hang yourself, shoot yourself or throw yourself off a bridge??  NOPE!!!  Either way, YOU ARE DEAD!!!

But to the "black guns are scary" crowd...they INSIST on including "Suicide by gun" in all their "guns are bad" statistics.

Make no mistake about it, the liberals who have NEVER SHOT A GUN and have no idea what a PUMP SHOTGUN even is...want to take away your guns.  They figure that if they don't need them in the New York apartment then YOU DON'T NEED THEM living on a ranch in South Dakota.

Please remember WHY we American citizens have the right to bear arms....it's to protect us from our own government one day deciding to incarcerate an entire group of us.  It's also to give any future-would-be invaders of America a chance to think twice before invading USA since there would be a gun pointed at the invaders from almost every nook and cranny in the country.

The latest mass shooting was committed by Muslims who were 'living the American dream".  They had NO LOGICAL REASON to kill themselves in a shoot out with police after first killing a bunch of his co-workers....unless you are a religious Muslim....and then the reason can become totally logical.  THEY WANT TO PLEASE ALLAH!!

Of course Obama came on the TV last night to reassure us all that we shouldn't be concerned about future "terrorist" attacks....of course he meant "future MUSLIM terrorist attacks" but he couldn't bring himself to say the word Muslim....so he left us guessing what kind of terrorists he was referring to.

And going even further, he felt in was in his power to remind us that these religious Muslims who just killed and maimed dozens in California were not real Muslims.  WHAT???????  How the heck does Obama have any idea what "real Muslims" are all about?

In reality, ISIS and it's cohorts are probably much closer to Muhammad in their actions and beliefs than the other Muslims who drink, fornicate and act like Westerners.