-----------------------------------------------------------

POLITICS OR RESEARCH? . . . THE TAXPAYERS PAY

The "peer review" process is supposed to prevent the publication of research that is flawed in method or conclusions.  Editorial bias has caused a breakdown of that review process, allowing publication of much shoddy work simply because it supported the "politically correct" view.  Unusual showmanship accompanies the announcements of gun prohibition advocates.  Why?

Our group is also concerned that the 1990 Harvard Medical Practice Study -- a sample from New York state -- suggests that Americans are five times as likely to die from a doctor as from a gun.  An estimated 150,000 Americans die every year from medical negligence -- over five times as many deaths from doctors as from guns! A "public health emergency" about which the American Medical Association is suspiciously silent.  Politics, lies or incompetence?

THE NUMBERS

However, when Kellerman and Reay calculated their comparison, they did NOT include those cases, they only counted the times a homeowner KILLED the criminal.  Because only 0.1% (1 in a 1,000) of defensive gun usage involves the death of the criminal, KELLERMAN AND REAY UNDERSTATED THE PROTECTIVE BENEFITS OF FIREARMS BY A FACTOR OF 1,000! They turned the truth on its head!  Why?  Kellerman emotionally confessed his anti-gun prejudice at the 1993 HELP Conference.

Honest analysis, even by Kellerman and Reay's own standards, shows the "43 times" comparison to be superficially appealing, but actually a deceitful contrivance -- unfortunately, a lie that is parroted by the well-funded gun-prohibition lobby and by gullible and biased journalists.

THE "POLICE CHIEF'S" FALLACY

When a victim is successful in repelling a crime, the victim is unlikely to report the crime, leaving police to deal only with the unsuccessful attempts to defend oneself.  Since police are exposed to a skewed sample of failure, they can honestly, though incorrectly, conclude that it is dangerous to attempt to defend oneself with a gun, the so-called "Police Chief's Fallacy" named after the former San Jose, CA Police Chief Joseph McNamara, a vocal gun prohibitionist.

LICENSING, REGISTRATION, & BANS

Most shocking amongst the dozen flaws:

• the apparent homicide drop began during 1974, 2 years BEFORE the gun law -- so how could the law be responsible for the temporary drop?
• if the gun freeze were responsible for the homicide drop, we would expect the drop to continue -- the law hasn't changed, but the overall Washington, DC homicide rate has skyrocketed to 8 TIMES THE NATIONAL AVERAGE since 1988.
• justifiable and excusable homicides, including those by police officers, were treated the same as murders and were not excluded from the study.
• the study used raw numbers rather than population- corrected rates, so did not correct for the 20% population decrease in Washington, DC during the study period or for the 25% increase in the control population -- the imagined drop in total homicides was not due to the gun law, as Loftin claimed, but was due to other factors, such as the population drop!

If "guns cause murder," why doesn't Virginia, the alleged "easy purchase" source of DC's guns, have DC's murder rate?  The black teenage male homicide rate in DC is 227 per 100,000, yet less than 7 for rural, middle-aged white men, the US group for whom gun ownership is highest -- there is an inverse relationship between homicide and gun density.  Homicide rates have been falling for decades for every group EXCEPT inner-city teenage males, the group for whom gun ownership is ALREADY illegal throughout the entire US.

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO RESEARCH THAT SHOWS LICENSING, REGISTRATION, WAITING PERIODS, OR GUN BANS DECREASE CRIME IN THE LEAST -- obviously criminals that murder, rape and deal drugs won't comply with any gun law.  It is only good citizens that will be disarmed, defenseless, dialing 911, and dependent upon the dubious resources and questionable will of a capricious, rapacious, incompetent, and uncaring government.

THE "ASSAULT WEAPONS" DECEPTION

Of over two dozen published studies on "assault weapons," only one FLAWED "study" done by two newspaper reporters, the Cox newspaper study, suggested that, EVEN IN THE HIGHEST CRIME AREAS, semiautomatic guns were used in more than 0 to 3% of crimes.  The Cox "study" is invalid because it was based on gun traces.  The FBI, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF), and the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress have all explained why gun traces cannot be used for statistical purpose -- simply, because guns are CHOSEN for tracing, such traces do not represent a true SAMPLING of the kinds of guns used in crime.  THE COX "STUDY" EXAGGERATED THE USE OF "ASSAULT WEAPONS" IN CRIME FROM 3 TO OVER 100 TIMES, depending on the definition of "assault weapon" and the locale studied.

Almost all of these newly fearsome, expensive target rifles banned are functionally like guns designed 100 years ago! The Los Angeles riots and other disasters show us that these so-called "assault weapons" are often the most appropriate weapons for self-protection by good citizens against mob and gang violence.

THE "RELATIVES & FRIENDS" FALLACY

Almost all the "relatives" killed each year are the very same men, well-known to the police, that have been brutalizing their wives, girlfriends, and children for years -- those men are killed in self-defense.  Would it be more "politically correct" if those women or children were killed by their abusers?

Law professor Don Kates has written, "Far from being ordinary, otherwise law-abiding citizens, those who commit murders, as every study of homicide shows, are real criminals with long histories of violence against the people around them...Indicative of this are FBI statistics showing that 74.7% of persons arrested for murder had been arrested previously for a violent felony or burglary..."

CONCLUSIONS

The studies proving the ineffectiveness and the dangers of gun prohibition are met with "if it saves only one life..."   The most loving person, however, must admit that A GOOD PERSON'S LIFE LOST BECAUSE A GUN WAS ABSENT IS AT LEAST AS VALUABLE AS A LIFE LOST BECAUSE A GUN WAS PRESENT.  Since 50 to 75 lives are saved by a gun for every life lost to a gun, we must see deceitful images that pluck at our heartstrings for the lies they are -- not a basis for public policy -- even when a doctor, a policeman, or a medical journal is telling the lie!

HOW CAN YOU HELP?

WRITE YOUR FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATORS.  Insist that public policy be formulated using honest data and that their be no taxpayer funding of biased or incompetent research by the CDC or any other tax-funded group.  Insist that taxpayer-funded studies, like the assault weapon studies by the California Attorney General's Office, be made public, not suppressed because the results were "politically incorrect."

WRITE newspapers, TV, and medical journals and tell them that you will not tolerate dishonest or imbalanced reporting on gun control and other issues.  Expose the fallacies and show them the honest data.

GET INVOLVED AND VOTE for legislators that are truthful and that support your freedoms to defend yourself, your family, and your community.

DONATE to our group and others that support your rights to protect yourself from criminals, crazies, and tyrants.

FOR FURTHER READING...

POINT BLANK by Gary Kleck Ph.D. is a comprehensive evaluation of the research on gun control and violence available from the publisher, Aldine de Gruyter, at: (914) 747-0110.

THE SAMURAI, THE MOUNTIE, AND THE COWBOY: SHOULD AMERICA ADOPT THE GUN CONTROLS OF OTHER DEMOCRACIES? By David Kopel JD is a comprehensive cross-cultural comparison of gun control and violence in other countries available from the publisher, Prometheus Press, at: (716) 691-0133.