[ Paralipomena ]

Draxblog has an entry from June 12, 2005 on firearms in Croatia which I honestly do not understand.
If it is true that

not only [increased] the number of gun-related crimes despite tougher anti-gun legislation, but legally owned guns are used only in 5 % of all gun-related felonies[,]

I simply don't get the logic leading to the conlusion that

if the idea is to decrease number of Croatians being shot to death, imposing new bans on firearms is definitely not the right way.

Maybe it is my complete misunderstanding of politics of prevention. Yet, it seems to me that in the above-quoted case only an even stronger ban on privately owned firearms can help, and may it simply be for the - cynical - reason that substitutive weapons as knifes usually do not as much harm to as much people as firearms do. It cannot mean, as I understand it, that legal gun owners are the better and more peaceful gunmen, if "only" 5 % of felonies are related to legally owned guns.

Although I could not claim to be a fan of Michael Moore the somehow foully sophisticated argument reminds me of some presented in his Bowling for Columbine. Of course, it is humiliating to be perceived as a "gun nation" by the media (what makes Drax to change his blog title into "Not a Gun Nation"). But to actually amend the situation means to be adamant towards every sort of ownership and use of guns.