Brady Website question


PDA






natedog
March 10, 2004, 01:05 AM
http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/ads/immunity/sen_police.pdf

I've come to realize that most "facts" on the Brady website are just unscientific and biased, and offer no real hard evidence. Just to entertain me, can someone tell the story behind these figures? Specifically, the "77% of Americans support the ban" and the "2/3 of gun owners support the ban", in addition to "assault weapons crime plunging" and "all law enforcement organizations support the ban".

If you enjoyed reading about "Brady Website question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Zundfolge
March 10, 2004, 01:17 AM
77% of Americans support the ban" ... "2/3 of gun owners support the ban"
I suspect these figures come from either push polling (by asking questions like "Do you want to keep assault weapons out of the hands of gang members and small children?") or the poll was taken on the floor of the DNC national convention or one of the many Starbucks just off the UC Berkeley campus.

"assault weapons crime plunging"
"Assault weapon" crime was almost non-existant before the ban ... it is still pretty much non-existant.

Its like a community having 1 AW crime one year and zero AW crimes the next year ... why that's a 100% decrease in AW crime :rolleyes:

"all law enforcement organizations support the ban"
Most police unions (like the FOP) do support the ban ... as do the heads of many police departments (as their position is usualy political).

Fred Thompson
March 10, 2004, 02:43 AM
Funny, as I was browsing their site, I didn't see anyplace to send mail to

them... wonder why....:evil:

longtom4570
March 10, 2004, 01:18 PM
I agree if you ask your questions the right way and at the right places you to can get the results you want. I believe that they also get a lot of their stats from thin air,to play on peoples fears

Jrob24
March 10, 2004, 01:56 PM
I think with the "assault weapon" crimes declining is obtained by tracking the # of crimes committed with pre-ban rifles but ignoring the use of post-ban versions. Typical deception by gun-grabbers

DF357
March 10, 2004, 02:09 PM
the answer. I saw the actual numbers somewhere but it goes something like this. They say "Police killed with 'AW's' has dropped 65% since the ban."

The numbers this is based on are something like this: 3.6% of all police who died in 1993 were killed with an 'AW". Since the ban, 1.7% of all police who died were killed with 'AW's'.

The numbers were insignificant before but they use them anyway.

I saw the actual numbers somewhere but I can't remember where.

idd
March 10, 2004, 02:15 PM
Yep, and then their comrades at the VPC issue a contradictory report claiming that one in five officers killed in the line of duty were filled by an AW. In their report it appears that they are using their own non-standard version of "assault weapon" (they never defien the term anywhere, so it's hard to know exactly), conflating pre-bans with post-bans with anything that looks mean and ugly.

Standing Wolf
March 10, 2004, 05:03 PM
In plain English, the anti-Second Amendment bigots are lying—still.

CarlS
March 10, 2004, 05:12 PM
I saw the actual numbers somewhere but I can't remember where.

I saw the actual numbers on the NRA-ILA webpage in the briefs.

GSB
March 10, 2004, 05:20 PM
report it appears that they are using their own non-standard version of "assault weapon" (they never defien the term anywhere, so it's hard to know exactly)

IIRC, they included any firearm capable of accepting a magazine of > 10 rounds, which included handguns -- including those of just about every LEO in the country.

Sisco
March 10, 2004, 05:59 PM
"77% of Americans support the ban"
I'm an American and no one asked me. If the poll talleys are real you can bet they carefully select the area of the country that is polled.

Justin
March 10, 2004, 06:36 PM
IIRC, they included any firearm capable of accepting a magazine of > 10 rounds, which included handguns -- including those of just about every LEO in the country. Which includes officers who were shot with their own sidearm.

In other words, if a perp takes a cop's gun and shoots him with it, that cop has been shot with an "assault weapon."

:rolleyes:

dischord
March 10, 2004, 11:41 PM
Just to entertain me, can someone tell the story behind these figures? http://www.consumerfed.org/022304_assault_weapons_survey_2004_release.html

http://www.consumerfed.org/ASSAULTWEAPONSURVEY2004.pdf

Interesting Tidbit: The VPC founders were CFA staff, and the two groups maintain close ties. They seem to share Naomi Seligman, the contact on the press release in the first link.

Justin
March 11, 2004, 02:54 AM
Do a bit of digging and it really is quite surprising at just how incestuous the whole anti-gun movement is.

Most of these organizations are simply spinoffs of one another.

But the part that's really interesting is where the funding comes from. Follow the trail far enough, and you'll find that The Joyce Foundation donates gobs of money to pretty much any anti-gun org.

RobW
March 11, 2004, 01:55 PM
I can create a poll with EVERY results you want to have.

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics (Winston Churchill).

dischord
March 11, 2004, 02:13 PM
RobW, I thought that was Mark Twain. :)

mondocomputerman
March 11, 2004, 03:00 PM
Where can I get one of these?

Q: What is the difference between semi-automatic hunting rifles and semi-automatic assault weapons?

A: Sporting rifles and assault weapons are two distinct classes of firearms. While semi-automatic hunting rifles are designed to be fired from the shoulder and depend upon the accuracy of a precisely aimed projectile, semi-automatic assault weapons are designed to maximize lethal effects through a rapid rate of fire. Assault weapons are designed to be spray-fired from the hip, and because of their design, a shooter can maintain control of the weapon even while firing many rounds in rapid succession.

Wish my semi-auto "assult rifle" was accurate and controllable from the hip.

Cacique500
March 11, 2004, 03:35 PM
There's a nice quote on the www.nrablacklist.com - "Outrage #1 - ...The NRA wants Congress to legalize military-style semi automatic weapons -- lethal killing machines that can put 12 slugs in a cop's body in 2 seconds"

12 shots in 2 seconds? Wow...that's some pretty good aim and one helluva light trigger pull...

Where do these people get this crap? :scrutiny:

MeekandMild
March 11, 2004, 06:23 PM
A friend of mine explained how you get such poll numbers. You call people and ask a few informal questions before you mail them the real poll. Then you only put stamps on the letters to the ones you know will answer correctly.

The stuff on this site reminds me of an old joke, 'How do you tell if a politician is lying? His mouth moves.' It wold be funny if these folks weren't so dead set on raping us.

:rolleyes:

71Commander
March 11, 2004, 07:23 PM
the poll was taken on the floor of the DNC national convention.





No. The %ages are to low.

slydel0kt
March 11, 2004, 11:19 PM
"Figures don't lie; but liars do figure".

Dan

Rebeldon
March 11, 2004, 11:45 PM
My questions would be:

Which assult weapons were actually taken off the streets by the AWB? Where did they come from, and where did they go?

Which assult weapons will be back on the streets when the AWB goes away, that aren't now already on the streets?

If you enjoyed reading about "Brady Website question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!