monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Well what was the point of all the fuss about the difference between rifle wounds and handgun wounds?

"Civilized" Europeans...

America is missing out on a tourism boom
By Alanna Petroff January 16, 2018: 12:39 PM ET

The United States is missing out on a major tourism boom.

The number of trips made by global travelers surged 7% last year, according to new projections from the UN World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). Meanwhile, trips to the U.S. fell by about 4%.

The decline, which follows a 2% drop in 2016, allowed Spain to overtake the U.S. as the second-most visited country in the world. Spain welcomed an estimated 82 million visitors last year, up 9% from 2016. The number of trips to the U.S. was roughly 73 million.

France remains the world's favorite tourist destination, with traveler numbers surging about 8% to roughly 89 million.

Industry experts said that two key factors were behind the decline in U.S. tourism: The strong dollar and controversial policies on immigration and travel introduced by President Trump's administration.

"The deterioration in demand from key markets such as the U.K. and Mexico can be attributable to the less desirable image of the U.S. under Trump following controversial decisions such as the travel ban," said tourism analysts at Euromonitor.

oralloy wrote:

The proper answer is that people who hunt with rifles are indeed good hunters, despite the devastating wounds that rifles cause.

nope

hunters who can't do better than a messy wound are not coming to hunting camp

Um, ehBeth specifically referred to hunting animals for their meat. Do people who hunt with an AR15 commonly devour the varmints they shoot? (I'm going by the chart you've provided.)

The devastation caused by the AR15 is maximal at ranges under fifty yards because of the high velocity of the projectile. That's what Dr. Sher found so disturbing compared to the handgun injuries she was more familiar with.

How's that going to work, Finn? Can you provide a realistic scenario as to how this might happen? I know you poor people suffered mightily under the Obama dictatorship — but you still had enough patience to let the electoral process take place.

The argument is not that a collection of random citizens should be able to go head-to-head with the Third Cavalry Regiment. That’s absurd. Nor is the argument that citizens should possess weapons “in common use” in the military. Rather, for the Second Amendment to remain a meaningful check on state power, citizens must be able to possess the kinds and categories of weapons that can at least deter state overreach, that would make true authoritarianism too costly to attempt.

As for your logic: Opioids are in the news today because pharmaceutical companies distributed them in an irresponsible manner, actually advertising them, flooding the market with samples, and hastening the addictions of those prone to abusing drugs. Opioids, however, are available by prescription only. Maybe we should change the laws so that firearms are only available by prescription as well.

This is frustrating. I've already posted a source that shows that handguns are used more often in mass shootings than are rifles. In fact, handguns are used more often by a ratio of 5 to 1.

The FBI analyzed 160 cases of active shooters over the period from 2000-2013, and not one was stopped by a concealed carry permit holder who was not active duty military, a security guard, or a police officer. 21 were stopped by unarmed civilians.