To start, I'm not trying to open the gun control debate on this forum again. I have nothing to say that I haven't said before, and I dare say the conversation wouldn't be significantly different from the other times we've looked at it. My interest in the topic this time round is that it seems that US politicians are using the method I always used when we talked about gun control here by using Australia as a 'case study' to make suggestions on how the United States might move forward. The weird thing from my perspective is that it seems when somebody actually taps the experts on the shoulder for information, they say it's a bad comparison. The Washington Post article: Fact-checker - Ted Cruz The (Australian) ABC article that highlighted Cruz's claim: Ted Cruz claim is wrong The short version of the story is that Obama and Clinton have actually been bringing up the Australian gun reforms of 1996 (I've linked a funny and informative three-part Daily Show perspective on the comparison in the past, as have others), and Cruz is weighing in by claiming that rape and sexual assaults skyrocketed after the gun reforms 'because women couldn't defend themselves'. The short version of why this is a blatant lie is that carrying guns around in public for personal protection has never really been a thing in this country, and because the gradual rise in rape and sexual assaults seems to be a result of higher awareness and reporting, not necessarily a raise in incidents. The main reason I bring all this up is that I was a little shocked to find myself agreeing with this quote from the ABC article: I'm fairly sure I've essentially attributed good changes in Australian crime rates to the buyback program (as does the Daily Show) by pointing out that we've not had any huge massacres involving assault weapons since the ban (though we've obviously still had public incidents involving firearms). Whenever I've made these comparisons in the past, the primary argument against me has been that the two countries are not comparable, but I didn't give it much credit in the past. While I'm not second-guessing my stance on gun control, I'm definitely changing in my opinion that international comparisons are intrinsically valid. If nothing else, check out the WP article above, because it's an interesting analysis. What do we think? Do international comparisons on crime reform hold up? Do international comparisons on policy in general hold up?