60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence

By , in Current Events Exposing MSM Lies Guns on .

On Sunday, CBS’s 60 Minutes aired a report on the surge of murders and violence in Chicago.  When describing the increase in violence as a “surge”, 60 Minutes is certainly not exaggerating; this year’s homicide total in Chicago is up by 56% from last year, and up almost 75% from 2013.

However, CBS is certainly exaggerating when it compares Chicago to a “war zone” – in Afghanistan, for example, US forces have averaged 300+ murders per 100,000 since the 2001 invasion.  With a 2016 homicide rate of ~29 per 100,000, Chicago’s homicide rate hasn’t reached the 1992 peak of ~32 per 100,000.  Can anyone recall CBS comparing Chicago to a “war zone” in the 1990s?

60 Minutes centered its coverage on a drop in stops and arrests by police, with a focus on blaming the police for creating a crime-filled environment, with scarce mention of the perpetrators behind the increase in violent crime.  They also mentioned low police morale, new policies on racial profiling and police reporting, gang members posting video of confrontations with police, and “fear of becoming the next viral video” in their piece.  What was conveniently left out of the entire report?

Any mention whatsoever of Black Lives Matter, or any of the other nationwide protests against police that are primarily driven by race.  Of course, these protests almost always occur when the “victim” is black, regardless of whether or not the perpetrator in question was wrongfully shot or not.

Its not as though 60 Minutes didn’t have ample opportunity to mention BLM in their report.  Featured in the piece was an interview with former Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy.  60 Minutes made sure to discuss how McCarthy was dismissed following the release of the Laquan McDonald shooting video and the subsequent protests.  However, the same day that CBS aired its report, McCarthy blamed nationwide protests for creating a “political atmosphere of anti-police sentiment.”

“So what’s happening, and this is ironic, is that a movement with the goal of saving black lives at this point is getting black lives taken, because 80 percent of our murder victims here in Chicago are male blacks,” McCarthy said. “Less than half of 1 percent of all the shootings in this city involve police officers shooting civilians.”

McCarthy directly cited BLM as responsible for creating an atmosphere of fear in police departments the same day this report was released, yet none of this was in the report on 60 Minutes.  Since McCarthy has been singing the same tune since he was dismissed, it is reasonable to believe that CBS deliberately edited any mention of nationwide protests or BLM from the portions of their interview with McCarthy that they chose to air.

The closest CBS came to mentioning BLM was their commentary regarding Officer Veronica Murillo.  Remember that bit about becoming the “next viral video”?  Below is the 60 Minutes commentary on Murillo:

Officer Veronica Murillo says it was the fear of becoming the next viral video that kept her from pulling her gun as she struggled with this suspect. He knocked her down and bashed her head into the pavement. She suffered neurological damage that has endangered her career.

Absent from this was any mention of nationwide news coverage or protests, which was what drove Murillo to fear use of deadly force.  Months ago, ZeroHedge filled in their readers to the actual reaction to the incident:

Many people have attributed the rise in Chicago violence to the co-called “Ferguson Effect” in which criminals lash out against what they view as a “de-legitamized” police force while the police retreat from actually enforcing the law out of fear of inciting the next major riot.  In fact, below is the perfect example of a female police officer in Chicago that was recently hospitalized after being “severely beaten” by a violent criminal.  In subsequent interviews, the female cop said she was afraid to use lethal force primarily because of the national backlash she may have faced as a result.  The encounter happened on Chicago’s violent West Side when cops responded to a car accident.  The attacker, apparently under the influence of drugs, launched a brutal attack against responding officers that resulted in three cops being hospitalized.  Per ABC:

“She thought she was going to die. She knew that she should shoot this guy, but she chose not to, because she didn’t want her family or the department to have to go through the scrutiny the next day on national news,” Supt. Johnson said.

“It is terrible. It is total disregard for law enforcement. They put their lives forward every day for us and to see somebody do this, to pummel the police officer is terrible. It is a terrible thing,” business owner Louie Rainone said.

60 Minutes included commentary from Flora White, mother of a Chicago murder victim.  She blamed the police for pulling back patrols, stating that they weren’t doing their job.  They also interviewed pastor Michael Pfleger, who participated in a protest wearing a Colin Kaepernick jersey.  Of course, Kaepernick is an NFL quarterback who supports BLM, which inspired his national anthem protest.  It is also worth noting that Kaepernick waited until a backup quarterback took his job to begin his national anthem protest.  It should come as no surprise that Pfleger implied that police were failing to do their job, though he not seem to understand why:

Michael Pfleger: I’ve never seen there to be a combination of anger, distrust, and a feeling like communities have been abandoned.

Shame on us that our children are afraid to go out of their house of being shot and killed. When is the tipping point, do we all say, enough?

Even current Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson, also featured in the 60 Minutes report, has begun following in predecessor McCarthy’s footsteps, and now ascribes part of the blame of officers’ unwillingness to engage on the streets to anti-police sentiment.

At a press conference on Sunday, Superintendent Eddie Johnson said “anti-police sentiment” and a negligent criminal justice system were in part to blame. “In many instances, the individuals who chose to pull the trigger are repeat gun offenders emboldened by the national climate against law enforcement and willing to test the limits of our criminal justice system,” Johnson said…

Obviously there was no mention of Johnson’s blame of anti-police sentiment deriving from nationwide protests.  Yet another chance to mention BLM and national protests that 60 Minutes chose to omit.  More convenient editing?

The majority of the 60 Minutes report focuses on police and how they have changed doing their job, without any mention of the primary reason why: a national anti-police atmosphere which has hamstrung police and led them to fear doing their job to the best of their ability.  Nowhere is this more pertinent than Chicago, a large city with a massive gang and criminal element centered in a few bad neighborhoods.

If there is ever to be any meaningful police reform, race should not be the focus.  Reforming our for-profit criminal justice system is a great place to start instead.  The majority of police activity is profit-based, not crime-based – just think about the number of cops writing speeding tickets who could instead be solving crimes.  Making profound changes to an overmilitarized police force is necessary, as countless people of all races are illegally surveilled, wrongfully arrested, have their personal property seized, sometimes in unnecessary SWAT raids, and all of this police conduct is totally tolerated by the MSM.  Real reform in the war on drugs, which is driving a large amount of this activity, needs to be done for any other reforms to be effective.  Holding police accountable for their mistakes is but one piece of a much larger puzzle to solve regarding police reform

At least 60 Minutes finally got something correct this time around in their reporting.  They did not blame gun laws as the problem for Chicago’s violence.  That is quite a turnabout, given the program’s history in blaming gun laws for all gun violence in the USA.  I’d say its a positive development, but I won’t hold my breath expecting CBS to all of a sudden turn away from its MSM narratives and the “news” they peddle to the masses.

  • Pingback: 60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence -()

  • Pingback: 60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence | ValuBit News()

  • Pingback: 60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence - BuzzFAQs()

  • Pingback: 60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence | StrikeEngine()

  • Pingback: 60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence | NewZSentinel()

  • Pingback: 60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence | It's Not The Tea Party()

  • Pingback: 60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence | Domainers Database()

  • Pingback: 60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence - Investing Matters()

  • Pingback: 60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence | US-China News()

  • Pingback: https://i0.wp.com/fmshooter.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/60-minutes-michael-pfleger-kaepernick.jpg?resize=676380()

  • Pingback: 60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence - My Angels Cloud()

  • Pingback: 60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence | |()

  • Pingback: 60 Minutes Conveniently Leaves One Crucial Fact Out Of Its Report On Chicago Violence - Alternative Report()

  • Pingback: Daily Reading #5E | thinkpatriot()

  • Peter Harris

    “At least 60 Minutes finally got something correct this time around in their reporting. They did not blame gun laws as the problem for Chicago’s violence.”

    Hey DUANE-pipe, they don’t have to.

    Do you ever blame entropy, within the 2nd law of thermodynamics, when your engine runs out of petrol?
    Or do you ever blame your intoxication on the alcohol content of your bourbon when you drink too much??
    Of course not, and like guns killing people, it’s a given.

    I know, you’re going to come back and say, with more infantile Alt-Right dribble, that; “cars kill people too.”

    Have you ever heard of Australia?
    We have gun laws here in Australia.
    It’s one simple law. . . We banned fucking guns!

    And as a consequence, our country is now one of the safest in the industrialised world.
    Think about that, when you’re eating your grits in the morning.

    • Duane Norman
      • Peter Harris

        True to form, the feckless and gormless on the Alt-right, can only manage brief sentences, so a 3 word reply from you is not surprising.

        As for your inane link;

        “So, while Australians kill themselves with firearms less often, it seems they don’t actually take their own lives any less often than before the ban.”

        Is that the best you can do, petticoat?

        Comparing apples with golf balls? (Australia and United States).
        Here is a statistic that the article conveniently failed to mention.
        Since the ban on guns, we have not had a mass shootings since!

        And in that time, the United States has had 6782 mass shootings.

        Get that statistic up ya, bro!

        • Duane Norman

          Nah, I’ve just learned that discussing guns with Australians is extremely difficult at best. Most have never shot a gun and know nothing about guns, which is akin to the gun control types in the USA. All of you just have no real frame of reference.

          Your mass shooting statistic proves it.


          As for your “gun ban” working?


          • Peter Harris

            “I’ve just learned that discussing guns with Australians is extremely difficult at best. Most have never shot a gun and know nothing about guns,”

            A rather pathetic defence, don’t you think Duane??

            In actual fact, on my 1st trip to the United States, I went to Montana, where I met a bunch of local lads in Billings.

            One day, we stopped by the local bowling alley, picked up a bunch of discarded tenpins, and went shooting, using the tenpins as targets.

            The local blokes from Billings brought everything along, from a Smith & Wesson Magnum used in the Dirty Harry films, up to Winchester elephant guns.

            So, don’t give me that crap about about being uneducated when it comes to guns.

            “All of you just have no real frame of reference.”

            In any event, you don’t need to a have personal contact with guns, to know they are bad to have in the environment. You just have to simply watch the evening news here in Australia, and watch all the mass shootings in America (Our frame of reference), to know that we are actually more educated than the gun loving knuckleheads in the states.

            As for your frame of reference, we all know that’s completely screwed up.
            Just take this link you sent me is an example.


            I’ll set you straight on the story, which proclaims that the ban on guns was a a failure.

            The government late last year was debating as to whether they would add a firearm called the Adler shot gun, to the list of banned guns, because the Adler, could be changed from repeat lever action 5 shot, then modified to be a 7 shot repeat action.

            But somehow in the twisted propaganda, from the websites that you promulgate, they somehow draw the conclusion that the debate on the Adler, equates to “ban on guns is a failure.”

            How fucking dumb are you and your gun toting nutters, that you cannot even create a cogent argument.

            All you’ve got, is your guns, and your propaganda websites.

          • Jacob

            G’Day Mate! How do explain the fact that your gun ban didn’t have any noticeable effect as compared to the US homicide rates
            crikey, look at that chart.

          • Peter Harris

            Hey dropkick, if you look at the chart, it shows there has been a drop in murder rates. . . Ha ha ha…

            Are you really that dumb, that you would submit this chart, in defence of more guns???

            And one another little detail, the chart seems to mysteriously stop around 2001/02.

            Because obviously, if the chart had extended out to 2016, the murder rate in Australia, would be well below that of the United States.

          • Guesst

            Peter, nobody really cares what you have to say about the USA. Australia is a second-rate country compared to the us. If it weren’t, you wouldn’t be here arguing with people instead of enjoying the ‘great’ country you persist in testifying about. The only thing we want to hear about from you, is AU’s feral hog problem. Please weigh in. ::snort::

          • Peter Harris

            “If it weren’t, you wouldn’t be here arguing with people instead of enjoying the ‘great’ country you persist in testifying about”

            I keep mentioning gun toting nutters, and they keep popping up.
            And I mention non sequiturs, and ad hominem, and that’s all they keep posting.

            And how much time have you spent in Australia??

            Australia will always be greater than America, for numerous reasons.

          • Guesst

            Blahblahblah. You didn’t address the feral hog problem.

          • Peter Harris

            You didn’t address any intelligent argument.

          • Duane Norman

            So you’re coming to the USA to buy and/or confiscate our guns, right? How much are you offering for 3rd-Generation Glock 17 LEO trade-in with 5 15-round magazines?

          • Peter Harris

            Really Duane, you want to continue this debate?
            On a Saturday night (your time)?
            Have you got nothing better to do?

            I’m starting to feel sorry for you , it seems you got nothing else in life, except your website and your guns.

            A simple answer to your question.

            Over the decades, the United States have spent literally tens of trillions of dollars fighting and starting immoral wars, and in some cases, illegal wars.

            So if they could find the money for that, they can find the money for a gun buyback scheme as well.

            But it’s not all carrot, there is some stick involved as well.

            If after some time, if people have not handed in their weapons, they will face a lengthy stay in prison.

            You have a pleasant Saturday evening

          • Jacob

            “If after some time, if people have not handed in their weapons, they will face a lengthy stay in prison.” – how are you going to round up people who won’t give up their right to defend themselves. Will you use men with Guns to forcibly imprison people against their will. I thought you where anti-gun. Not very peaceful after all, are you?

          • Peter Harris

            I should have stated firstly, that before you implement a buyback scheme, you would have to 1st repeal the 2nd amendment.

            And to your question, well, if recalcitrants like you, refuse to hand in your weapon, then naturally you would call in the police.
            If that didn’t work, the National Guard.

            And if all you miscreants band together, and put up some sort of organised resistance, then the government should call in the army.

          • Jacob

            “if all you miscreants band together, and put up some sort of organised resistance, then the government should call in the army.” – will you send your forces to crush us peons like bugs. Comrad Stalin would be proud

          • Peter Harris


            I rather unfortunate pejorative term, to use on yourself, and your fellow gun nutters, don’t you think Jacob?

            Oh, and I’m assuming you picked out Stalin, because you perceive him as left-wing/Communist?
            Don’t you know your history?
            Genghis Khan, Napoleon and Caligula just to name a few.

            They would be “proud” too.

          • Jacob

            Don’t forget Hitler, another fan of gun control.

          • Peter Harris

            Oh, that old chestnut.
            I’ve heard it all before.

            Hitler took everyone’s guns, so he could control the population?
            Again, not true.

          • Jacob

            He just took the guns from the population he did want to control.

          • Peter Harris

            Jacob, look at it in context, and factually!
            Virtually none of the population in Germany, back in the 1930s, owned a gun.
            And that measure, of gun confiscation, was within a broad suite of measures.
            Let’s put it this way, let’s assume that there were as many guns back in 1930s Germany, as there is today in the USA.
            The massive German army, would have just crushed dissenters who had guns.

            You pro gun nutters, constantly use 1930s Germany as an example, and you completely distort the history of that time, just for your own wacky ideology.

          • Jacob

            But they did confiscate the guns. Tyrannical governments always do, it’s the first sign of tyranny.

          • Peter Harris

            Complete Bullshit!
            Give me at least 10 examples of Tyrannical governments, from history, that have confiscated guns.

          • Duane Norman

            Just to be clear Peter, you’re gonna come to America and buy back the guns from your fake Montana friends, and threaten them with prison if they don’t sell to you at the price you want?

            I suppose an Australia-style buyback makes sense when the gun owners you “know” aren’t even real.

          • Peter Harris

            You really are Nuff-nuff, aren’t you Duane.

            I bet you couldn’t wait to wake up Sunday morning, and sprout more disingenuous bullshit.

            No, I won’t be going to America again.
            Because the government will be doing implementing of the buyback, not me.

            Lardy Dardy da da.

            And as I said, if you don’t believe me that I’ve been to Montana, then that is fine, because I really don’t give a rats arse.

            If you have more disjointed, and infantile comments, then I’ll get you later.
            It’s bedtime here.

            And by the way, you still have not addressed my point.
            My original point.
            Since the gun buyback scheme 20 years ago, we have not had one mass shooting.

            While the United States in that time, you’ve had thousands and thousands.

            Remember Sandy hook??

            I guess a few little kiddies having their lives snuffed out, is okay with you, which you probably just regard as collateral damage, for you to maintain your precious 2nd amendment.



          • Duane Norman

            The USA just elected pro-2A Trump. But he’s going to be implementing Peter Harris’s gun buyback program?

            What if instead, Trump rescinds American military protection of Australia? Over 200 million Indonesians and over a billion Chinese just to your north, waiting to come and exploit all your natural resources. Perhaps you’ll wish you had a second amendment then?

          • Peter Harris

            Hello Duane/Jacob.

            That’s how I’ll refer to you in the future, because I’m sure you are the same person, going by the time stamps, and the fact that you never appear together.

            “What if instead.”

            Yes, what if instead we change the subject and the argument, yet again, just so as you can possibly win a debating point.

            Remember the original argument was we were discussing the successful Australian gun laws, when compared to the abysmal situation in United States, and your gun laws.

            Now you wanna talk about Donald Trump’s foreign policy, and how that may affect the Asia-Pacific region?

            Again, you are making argument, which I have some knowledge, and, as you Americans say, you know Jack-shit.

            I live in Jakarta, and I’m very aware of the strong relationship between Australia and Indonesia.

            The Australian and Indonesian military have close ties, and conduct military exercises together, and Australian forces are training and teaching Indonesian personnel.

            So to your fear mongering bullshit question, I don’t lose any sleep, worrying that Indonesia may invade Australia one-day

            And regarding China, didn’t you learn anything at school??

            Unlike the Portuguese, Spanish, French and more recently the British empire and the United States, China has never sought to invade distant nations.

            Yes, China has annexed neighbouring nations down through the millennia, but have never had any colonial intentions, beyond its own borders.

            The Chinese people, by default are very defensive,

            You know why the Chinese built the Great Wall?
            Because they want to keep the great Mongol herds out.

            So enough of your bullshit, non sequiturs, and shifting the argument away, in order to desperately win at least one debating point.

            So back to the discussion, and answer 2 of my questions, you keep avoiding.

            Simple question Duane/Jacob.
            Did the kiddies at Sandy Hook need to die?
            And if so, why?

          • Jacob

            North Korea
            This is a waste of time. It would be easier to name examples of Tyrannical governments who don’t restrict guns once in power(hint:There aren’t any).

          • Peter Harris

            Ha ha ha ha.

            I really feel sorry for you poor dumb bastards.

            Jacob, it was you, that raised the question about guns, and Tyrannical governments, not me!

            And now that you have painted yourself into a corner, by failing to answer a simple question, a question you raised, it is now “…a waste of time.”

            That’s hilarious, and pathetic.

            Look Jacob, stop embarrassing yourself with non sequiturs, that you end up shooting yourself in the foot with (appropriate expression, huh?), And get back to the central argument.

            As I’ve just said to your twin, Duane, answer these 2 simple questions.

            Did the kiddies at Sandy Hook need to die?
            And if so, why?

          • Jacob

            1)Ok, I guess we need to do this:
            Communist Russia
            Communist China
            Ottoman Turkey
            Communist Cambodia
            2) Did we need to make our women open to rape gangs from imported migrants? and if so why?…. wait…. That never happened, because because we don’t have a Tyrannical Government that leaves the citizens defenseless.

            As far as the Gun violence in the US, it’s situated in heavily progressive cities with strict(unconstitutional) gun rules. I know you’re Australian, and don’t fully understand all the issues surrounding Gun violence in the US, this video should help explain

          • Peter Harris

            Oh, so you have changed tack again.

            You still cannot come up with 10?
            For a start, the Ottoman Empire doesn’t count.

            Because the Ottomans were not taking guns from their own people, they took them away from the Armenians, so they could crush the Armenians, in what is considered the biggest genocide of recent history.

            Your history is so bad Jacob you make yourself look silly.

            Oh, and I didn’t watch the video to its conclusion, because Bill Whittle is one of the biggest white scumbags, and pathological liars, in the world today.

            This is the real truth

            And I see you’re still avoiding my question, by diverting with some BS argument about refugees raping your women.

            So you complain about that, but you are ok with all the kiddies being murdered at Sandy Hook?

            When are you going to address my question, regarding Sandy Hook?

            Or, are you going to come back with more BS, and more irrelevant arguments?

            So far, my count is that you have avoided the question 7 times.
            Are you going to try for 8??

          • Jacob

            I did come up with 10
            Communist Russia
            Communist China
            Ottoman Turkey
            Communist Cambodia
            North Korea

            Ottoman Empire most definitely counts. Armenians where under the rule of the ottomans at the time of disarmament and slaughter, but I’ll give you one more. The mass disarmament by the Redcoats of the British citizens in the American colonies, a.k.a as the American Revolution. I’ll tell you what our founding fathers told king George, you want our guns, you can come and take it from my cold dead hands.

          • Peter Harris

            You did not come up with one.

            “Armenians where under the rule of the ottomans at the time of disarmament and slaughter”

            You have even refuted your own argument with that point.

            Yes, the Armenians were not considered citizens of Turkey, therefore they had no constitutional rights, so therefore the Ottomans were able to do what they did (even though the Ottoman pretext was false, and deceptive).

            And likewise, with all your other lame examples.

            You’re comparing apples with golf balls.

            All those other examples, the people who were dispossessed, were not considered citizens of the country.

            It would be like saying for example, in the past the United States setting out to disarm black slaves. Now that would be considered acceptable and constitutional, because Negro slaves were not considered citizens of the United States, and therefore had no constitutional rights, including the 2nd amendment.

            You have avoided the question on Sandy Hook now 13 times.

          • Jacob

            “white scumbag” Way to show your true colors. Would it ever be acceptable to say that about any other race. Hateful people like you have always justified their cause by reducing people to some second class race. Some scummy race that needs to disarmed and ultimately cleansed.

          • Peter Harris

            Yes, that’s right.

            There is now evidence emerging that white people are regressing, because of the detrimental environment they have created for themselves.

            One specific point is the introduction of junk food, and poor diets, and how that has an Epigenetic effect on intelligence, even after one generation.

            Throw in stress, an adversarial and competitive culture.
            Add apathy, ignorance and general laziness through being seduced by mass media.

            This has created intellectually poor, unmotivated dumbed-down humans, who rely on their limbic system, and not their prefrontal cortex, in which to the view and analyse the world, and the end result is “poor white trash.”

            You have avoided the question on Sandy Hook now 12 times

          • Peter Harris

            “As far as the Gun violence in the US, it’s situated in heavily progressive cities with strict(unconstitutional) gun rules.”

            Again, total BS.

            I found this out today, by mistake, because I was looking for something else.

            Of all gun related mass murders, only 13% occur in what is termed, “gun free zone.”
            In other words, 87% of mass murders with guns, occur in areas that are pro Second Amendment.

            Another inconvenient truth for your bullshit ideology..

          • Jacob

            Most Murders in the US happen in the Gun free zone known as Chicago or Detroit or New Orleans
            Cities where it’s next to impossible to get a carry license.
            Why isn’t there a correlation between tight gun laws and murder rates. The US cities with the strictest gun laws have the most murders. Why are you so hell bent on the US, what about Switzerland, they have a laws on the books that requires every male to own a gun, and they have lower crime rates that Australia.

          • Peter Harris

            The evidence does not support your point.

            Of course, you would never rely on evidence that refutes your gun toting madness, would you.

            And as for Switzerland, you’re missing one crucial point, and that is the law is not mandatory.

            And one other point, is that the Swiss are far more civil, cultured and their society is considerably more advanced, when compared to the savagery of the United States.

            You have avoided the question on Sandy Hook now 11 times.

          • Duane Norman

            Can’t speak for Jacob, but I can’t answer any further questions until you tell me how much a 3rd-Generation Glock 17 LEO trade-in with 5 15-round magazines is going to fetch in your gun buyback scheme.

          • Peter Harris

            Ha ha ha ha, you guys are hilarious.

            Duane, I don’t give a flying fuck, as to what your 3rd generation cock extension is worth.
            It’s totally irrelevant to the broader discussion.

            So you are not going to address the issue of Sandy Hook, huh?
            Until I answer your pathetic question?

            How childish, and immature.

            But hey, you use any diversionary tactic to avoid the question.

            You have avoided the question on Sandy Hook now 14 times.

          • Duane Norman

            Nope, it is relevant. I don’t even own one, I just know a place that sells the package on the cheap. If Peter Harris is implementing his gun buyback program, this could be one hell of an arbitrage opportunity!

          • Peter Harris

            Sorry for the late reply Duane, but I’ve been moving house, and you know what it’s like… Maybe not.

            Only an American would see economic opportunity in a buyback scheme.

            Gordon Gecko was certainly correct, when he described the American culture as “greed is good.”

            So, how many times have you avoided the Sandy Hook question?

            15 times now?

          • Peter Harris

            File this, yet again, under the heading of “Only in America.”


          • Peter Harris

            “I thought you where anti-gun. Not very peaceful after all, are you?”

            More emotional, and twisted logic from you gun nutters.

            I don’t have an ideological mindset specifically against guns, however, what I do have, is a pleasant experience of living in a country that doesn’t have the gun violence, that’s comparable to the type of gun violence you guys have in the United States.

            And if guns are used for a short time (To round up the recalcitrants such as yourself) to reduce gun violence, then that would be appropriate.

          • Jacob

            Maybe that’s because Australians own more guns than ever, with more than 37,000 licenses issued in five years

          • Peter Harris

            Oh, I see, so you are using Britain’s worst tabloid rag, to make your argument??

            Go away, and find official ABS figures, and then get back to me with an argument.

          • Jacob

            So sorry young down-underson. I black belt in Rhetorical Jiu Jitsu. Use own sorry arguement aggainst yourself. You stood no chance. https://31.media.tumblr.com/edc1cd372980f17abb8b7e61da4391ab/tumblr_inline_nghkqrX0r71rptnjq.jpg

          • Peter Harris

            Stick to the topic, Dumb-Ass.
            Again, no Pre-Frontal cortex

          • Jacob
          • Peter Harris

            Oh, that chart, the one from the gun nutter propaganda website, that makes Australia look like the most violent country in the world, which of course it’s not.

            Oh look, there’s a clue!

            The chart was based on 1999 figures. . . Again hilarious.

            What other Bullshit charts do you have??

          • Jacob


          • Peter Harris

            Again Jacob, you’re making my argument for me.

            It goes back to 1996, okay then, but its 2017 now!

            You guys are so dumb, to use an appropriate analogy, it’s like shooting fish in a barrel.

          • Duane Norman

            Ok Peter, you are just what the USA needs. You have all the answers and you’re never wrong.

            All you need to do now is come to our country, ban all guns, and figure out how to confiscate them like you did in Australia. Maybe you’ll start with your friends in Montana?

          • Peter Harris

            Its called a buy-back.
            Don’t choke on your grits there boy.


            “The chances of being murdered by a gun in Australia plunged to 0.15 per 100,000 people in 2014 from 0.54 per 100,000 people in 1996, a decline of 72 percent, a Reuters analysis of Australian Bureau of Statistics figures showed.”





          • Duane Norman

            So you’re going to buy them back from your friends in Montana, right?

          • Peter Harris

            My God Duane, you are a fast reader.

            Everybody has their price.

          • Duane Norman

            Your whole Montana story sounded like fiction, and your comments demonstrate it. Those guys aren’t turning their guns in, period, especially not for a government price. Have you ever even been to the USA? Need a passport stamp to believe that.


            Less than 30% gave up their guns in Australia… which collected less than a million guns. But it’s gonna work in the USA, which has 300+ million?

          • Peter Harris

            Quite frankly Duane, I don’t really care what you say in regards to what I’ve done in my life.

            Unlike you, you poor white trash, whose probably never travelled more than 2 states.

            Let’s assume, I was lying about my trip to the United States (I have actually been to the United States twice, and lived there), but let’s say I never have seen a gun my life, let alone touch one.

            I can still refute your argument.
            When you made the dumb comment about Australians not having any direct contact with guns, therefore, they don’t have the understanding, or ability to make an argument for banning guns.

            But hey, look at who I’m talking to.

            You wouldn’t understand anything I say.

          • Jacob

            you Aussies must enjoy the company of wallabies more then you enjoy your women, because after the gun ban, it’s been a free–for–all on your Sheilas

          • Peter Harris

            Again Jacob, you are just embarrassing yourself.

            Good thing this is an anonymous forum. huh?

            You gun nutters are so stupid, you keep posting graphs and statistics, which prove me right, and discredit your argument for more guns.

            And as to your comment about Wallabies and Sheilas, so typical of your type, who have no prefrontal cortex, on which to draw on for a logical argument, but instead, just resort to non sequiturs and ad hominem.

            Yes, we love our Wallabies.
            All football played in Australia, whether it’s rugby league/union, or AFL, is played with no padding or helmets, unlike the cream puffs in the United States who play gridiron, with attire akin to a mixture of a Motocross rider, Astronaut.


          • Jacob
          • Peter Harris

            Yes, your right, you’re not making any sense, or arguments.

          • Peter Harris

            You will recall I said this yesterday;
            “Since the ban on guns, we have not had a mass shootings since!
            And in that time, the United States has had 6782 mass shootings.”
            Well, it’s now 6783.


    • Jeanne DeSilver

      Australia hasn’t been overrun yet with Muslims and dindoos. You’re in their sights though. Time moves too fast for those who wait.

  • Steven

    The problem is obvious! There are too many criminals, perverts and savages in society.
    They all got to go! Either on their feet or feet first!

  • Ya, you have gun laws there, and you also have terrorist attacks. At least here we can fire back when a zealot jihadist bursts through the door of a cafe. Lets Make Australia Great Again and arm those ‘down under’.

    All these attacks could have been mitigated with an armed populace.

    ISIS Knife attack


    Sydney Cafe shooting


    Ingleburn siege leaves two dead and two injured


    Back Packer murders


    Curtis Cheng Slayings


    • Peter Harris

      Earth to Ed Szall, we don’t have terrorist attacks, because in large part, we are not meddling in Islamic states, and the Middle East, like the USA has been doing in the last 70 years.

      Have you ever heard of blowback??

      How dumb are you???

      “Lets Make Australia Great Again”

      Australia has ALWAYS been great, because we don’t have a gun culture, like you halfwits in the United States.

      And regarding the word “again,” in make America Great Again, it never will be “great again,” because the empire of the United States is all but over, due in part to troglodytes such as yourself, and your fellow gun murdering enthusiasts.

      • Duane Norman


        Australia IS following America’s lead in the Middle East, and meddling in the affairs of Islamic states. And, as Ed Szall points out, they ARE coming for you too, with or without a gun culture!

        • Peter Harris

          Firstly, Ed Szall cannot speak for himself?

          And secondly, do I have to keep coming back, and correcting your twisted and bizarre logic and reasoning??

          That story relates to Australia fighting ISIS in the Middle East, which is a reaction to decades of American foreign policy meddling in the Middle East.

          More specifically, ISIS was born out of the Mujahedin in Afghanistan, which by the way, the CIA created

          • Jeanne DeSilver

            0bama should have done a bit more meddling instead of naming ISIS a “JV team” in his effort to let them grow, as they did.