Assaulted: Civil Rights Under Fire - Documentary

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cesiumsponge said:
"benEzra" posted more data on an unrelated thread. I thought I'd include it here. The FBI also keeps Uniform Crime Reports and makes a lot of data available on their website if you have time to poke around. Here is a breakdown of deaths by state and firearm type for 2010. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl20.xls

Since the "assault rifle" topic keeps coming up in popular culture as the best place to start with gun bans, we have his pesky data:

Total murders............................................12,996.....100.00%
Handguns.......................................................6,009......46.24%
Firearms (type unknown)..............................2,035......15.66%
Other weapons (non-firearm, non-edged)...1,772......13.63%
Edged weapons..............................................1,704......13.11%
Hands, feet, etc..................................................745.......5.73%
Shotguns.............................................................373.......2.87%
Rifles...................................................................358.......2.75%

Simply, ALL rifles combined (including assault weapons, hunting rifles, collectible rifles, competition rifles, and perhaps even blackpowder rifles) resulted in the smallest statistical category of all means used to commit murder. You are over 200% more likely to be murdered with hands and feet or close to 500% more likely to be murdered by hand-held, non-edged weapons like clubs or hammers. "Other" might also include poisoning, immolation, etc. It isn't clear.

That really puts the "assault weapons" issue into perspective when compared to all other possible means. It's always pitched to reduce gun crime but shows it would make absolutely no statistically significant difference. The data doesn't split rifles into subtypes, but I suspect "assault weapons" make up a small number of that 2.75% of rifles used in murders. These are all direct government figures that aren't taken out of context or cooked in a way to suggest a biased agenda, so no one can claim its been spun by a,pro-gun organization like the NRA or anti-gun organization like the Brady Campaign or Ceasefire.
Click to expand...
Fantastic, these are the stats we will be working into the doc. No way can anyone argue with facts. You have been of tremendous help, I look forward to working with you all over the next few months as we put this together.
Anita
 
Cesiumsponge said:
It's going to be mighty hard fitting all this into one documentary. Hopefully the crew can get a tightly focused message out and maybe put out future installments.

Here is an interview of Kris Koenig on GOA radio. He is going to present both sides and do this from a scientific, logical, rational point of view without making anyone look foolish or taking soundbytes out of context:
https://www.yousendit.com/dl?phi_ac..._download%26batch_id%3DTEhXNWNnQ3Q1aWIwZXNUQw
Click to expand...
Thanks, Cesium! He's up for another radio interview this Sunday, Talking Guns with Kate - we will keep ya posted!
 
Carl N. Brown said:
Sen. Thomas Dodd ("father" of the GCA) was father of Sen Chris Dodd (not the other way 'round).

I remember how exasperating Thomas J. Dodd's arguments were to me.

When I was growing up in the 1950s and 1960s criminals in my neighborhood got guns illegally by unregulatable channels like fences, smugglers, bootleggers and dope dealers--people who dealt in contraband. AS confirmed by Wright and Rossi in their analysis of the NIJ felon survey in the mid 1980s. Criminals are least likely to affected by gun control; it is those of us who are law abiding who are most affected by gun laws.
Click to expand...
Yep. Criminals never have a problem with gun laws.
 
denton said:
My professional work involves a lot of practical statistics. Here is an article that I wrote a while back (2002??) that might help:

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/brady_effectiveness.pdf

If you need help with statistical analysis, I can spare an hour or two.

Family Anecdote:

I'm an avid shooter, but one of my adult daughters has been pretty gun averse. She would just barely tolerate my son-in-law's hunting firearms in the house.

One day they left for church, and one of the children left the rear patio door open. When they came home, their computer, camera, checkbook, and spare keys were all missing. Next morning while my son-in-law locked their accounts, I changed the locks and installed industrial strength deadbolts.

A couple of nights later, she heard something in the back yard, and looked out her bedroom window to see that the thieves had returned, and were trying the old keys in the new locks. She went flying down the stairs to their teenage daughter's room, while my son-in-law headed for the younger children's rooms.

Halfway down the stairs, she realized that if they did get in, she had absolutely no physical defense.

Next morning, she demanded and got my wife's spare 38 Special, along with a microwave oven size safe to keep little hands away from the firearm. It was really kind of sweet to see her get in touch with her inner momma bear. Today, she would put two rounds in an intruder's center of mass without an instant of hesitation.

Good luck with your project. I'll look forward to seeing it.
Click to expand...
Oh, boy, Denton, I'm sure we would love to have all the assistance you want to give! Very much appreciated, all of your input here, from everyone. I have been learning more than I ever expected just from you guys. Thanks again!
:)
anita
 
doc2rn said:
One might want to look at how the gun confiscation durring Hurricane Katrina went. There are some pretty ugly scenes and stories to be told about that incident.
Click to expand...
Yes, we have been posting on the Louisiana gun forums, with requests of anyone who had their guns confiscated. So far, no luck. If you know of anyone who went through this, and think they might want to chat on camera about it, please let us know.
Anita
 
What a coincidence,

I am subscribed to "sootch00" on youtube and he just posted a link to your trailer on youtube, right as I saw this one THR.

I will be anxiously awaiting the completion of your documentary. Good luck!

Also, I wanted to join the crowd in favor of using "human rights" which are PROTECTED by the constitution, not granted by the constitution. I know "civil rights" is more of a commonly-used term, and fine for the title, and I know you are well aware of the difference, but the more you can emphasize that point, the better.

Again, best of luck!
 
You might want to try reaching out to Steve Halbrook (http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/) on the topic of Katrina since he appears to be a second amendment attorney that has filed against the city of New Orleans and played a role in Chicago and DC legislation. I don't know anything about the fellow but about 3/5ths down on his site, under "Lawsuit against New Orleans gun confiscations from Hurricane Katrina Victims" are some links to legal actions in regards to the Katrina debacle. I don't know about the legal world so those documents might or might not be useful. Someone else might be able to chime in.

I think it's worth including the infamous footage of New Orleans Police Superintendent Eddie Compass's quote on national TV that "No one will be able to be armed," Compass said. "Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns." before carrying out broadband warrantless confiscation with National Guardsmen and law enforcement. You might even be able to reach out to Patricia Konie, who was the posterchild of the confiscation efforts when they tackled her.






The video I was trying to recall earlier was not the 1968 Gun Control Act. It was the Hughes Amendment (House Amendment 777, Rep William J. Hughes D-NJ) snuck in on April 10 of 1986 to the Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA, H.R. 4332). Hughes sneaks in the amendment and successfully prevents it from being read on the floor multiple times. A verbal vote results in a majority Nay vs Yea. Voting on electronic device ended 297 Nays and 124 Yeas with 15 no votes. A majority of Democrats in a Democratically-controlled House voted Nay. It was passed anyhow. The chairman called the voice votes in his favor ultimately. It kind of reminds me of the blatant re-re-revoting of the Yea/Nay at the DNC on the issue of Jeruselum being the capital of Israel and putting God back into some texts somewhere, and the chairman calling the vote in his favor despite the clear opposition.

Here is the footage of the floor vote with links to the full length footage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6Mx2UcSEvQ
AJAX22 summarizes the happenings here on Calguns: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=364163








Also mnrivat posted about the "REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE NINETY-SEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SEXXSION FEBRUARY 1982"

Here is a PDF scanned link to the article since the printed material is hard to come by. http://constitution.org/mil/rkba82.pdf
An html reproduction for ease of reading/searching: http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm

That is a very important report given to Congress. It is also a very dry document since it's a report but it covers the history of the BATF, the documentation and history proving it as an individual right, a history on armed citizens and standing armies, gun control legislation, "beta" versions of the Second Amendment that didn't make it into the Constitution, the 14th Amendment and the KKK era of disarming African Americans, and even covers anti-gun views by the National Coalition To Ban Handguns, who of course has a tactfully titled paper, "YOU DO NOT HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO OWN A HANDGUN". Suffice to say, it makes an incredibly weak case which is destroyed by all the evidence to the contrary.

Some bits:

"The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and wording of the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as well as its interpretation by every major commentator and court in the first half century after its ratification, indicates that what is protected is an individual right of a private citizen to own and carry firearms in a peaceful manner"
Click to expand...

There is also a history of the BATF and it's transition into:
"The Subcommittee received evidence that BATF has primarily devoted its firearms enforcement efforts to the apprehension, upon technical malum prohibitum charges, of individuals who lack all criminal intent and knowledge. Agents anxious to generate an impressive arrest and gun confiscation quota have repeatedly enticed gun collectors into making a small number of sales--often as few as four--from their personal collections. Although each of the sales was completely legal under state and federal law, the agents then charged the collector with having "engaged in the business" of dealing in guns without the required license. Since existing law permits a felony conviction upon these charges even where the individual has no criminal knowledge or intent numerous collectors have been ruined by a felony record carrying a potential sentence of five years in federal prison. Even in cases where the collectors secured acquittal, or grand juries failed to indict, or prosecutors refused to file criminal charges, agents of the Bureau have generally confiscated the entire collection of the potential defendant upon the ground that he intended to use it in that violation of the law. In several cases, the agents have refused to return the collection even after acquittal by jury."
Click to expand...





One interesting aspect worth exploring, in my opinion, is how little the general public knows about these "assault weapons" or "semi-automatic"and "high-cap magazines" and other technical terms. We don't see DUI stories reported with cars bearing "high performance engines" and "variable valve timing" or "oversteer biased". Given firearm terminology and technology are all technobabble alien to laymen, it is impossible to hold credible polls or surveys on the topic because, as you've shown, not even the drafters of anti-gun legislation can define what they're trying to ban. Many of these guns like the AR15 or the 1911 are "semi-automatic" designs that have been around 50-100 years in their original incarnation.

I'm often reminded of this poor police officer in the 90's that did this short video on the differences between a civilian semi-auto rifle and a full-auto. 8:32 has a great clip of Edward Conroy of the ATF testifying before the US Senate subcommittee on trying to define an "assault weapon" and stating the only difference between "assault rifles" and a "sporting rifle" is looks. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yATeti5GmI8
 
Last edited:
holdencm9 said:
What a coincidence,

I am subscribed to "sootch00" on youtube and he just posted a link to your trailer on youtube, right as I saw this one THR.

I will be anxiously awaiting the completion of your documentary. Good luck!

Also, I wanted to join the crowd in favor of using "human rights" which are PROTECTED by the constitution, not granted by the constitution. I know "civil rights" is more of a commonly-used term, and fine for the title, and I know you are well aware of the difference, but the more you can emphasize that point, the better.

Again, best of luck!
Click to expand...
This is a great point, Holden...
 
Cesiumsponge said:
You might want to try reaching out to Steve Halbrook (http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/) on the topic of Katrina since he appears to be a second amendment attorney that has filed against the city of New Orleans and played a role in Chicago and DC legislation. I don't know anything about the fellow but about 3/5ths down on his site, under "Lawsuit against New Orleans gun confiscations from Hurricane Katrina Victims" are some links to legal actions in regards to the Katrina debacle. I don't know about the legal world so those documents might or might not be useful. Someone else might be able to chime in.

I think it's worth including the infamous footage of New Orleans Police Superintendent Eddie Compass's quote on national TV that "No one will be able to be armed," Compass said. "Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns." before carrying out broadband warrantless confiscation with National Guardsmen and law enforcement. You might even be able to reach out to Patricia Konie, who was the posterchild of the confiscation efforts when they tackled her.






The video I was trying to recall earlier was not the 1968 Gun Control Act. It was the Hughes Amendment (House Amendment 777, Rep William J. Hughes D-NJ) snuck in on April 10 of 1986 to the Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA, H.R. 4332). Hughes sneaks in the amendment and successfully prevents it from being read on the floor multiple times. A verbal vote results in a majority Nay vs Yea. Voting on electronic device ended 297 Nays and 124 Yeas with 15 no votes. A majority of Democrats in a Democratically-controlled House voted Nay. It was passed anyhow. The chairman called the voice votes in his favor ultimately. It kind of reminds me of the blatant re-re-revoting of the Yea/Nay at the DNC on the issue of Jeruselum being the capital of Israel and putting God back into some texts somewhere, and the chairman calling the vote in his favor despite the clear opposition.

Here is the footage of the floor vote with links to the full length footage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6Mx2UcSEvQ
AJAX22 summarizes the happenings here on Calguns: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=364163








Also mnrivat posted about the "REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE NINETY-SEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SEXXSION FEBRUARY 1982"

Here is a PDF scanned link to the article since the printed material is hard to come by. http://constitution.org/mil/rkba82.pdf
An html reproduction for ease of reading/searching: http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm

That is a very important report given to Congress. It is also a very dry document since it's a report but it covers the history of the BATF, the documentation and history proving it as an individual right, a history on armed citizens and standing armies, gun control legislation, "beta" versions of the Second Amendment that didn't make it into the Constitution, the 14th Amendment and the KKK era of disarming African Americans, and even covers anti-gun views by the National Coalition To Ban Handguns, who of course has a tactfully titled paper, "YOU DO NOT HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO OWN A HANDGUN". Suffice to say, it makes an incredibly weak case which is destroyed by all the evidence to the contrary.

Some bits:



There is also a history of the BATF and it's transition into:






One interesting aspect worth exploring, in my opinion, is how little the general public knows about these "assault weapons" or "semi-automatic"and "high-cap magazines" and other technical terms. We don't see DUI stories reported with cars bearing "high performance engines" and "variable valve timing" or "oversteer biased". Given firearm terminology and technology are all technobabble alien to laymen, it is impossible to hold credible polls or surveys on the topic because, as you've shown, not even the drafters of anti-gun legislation can define what they're trying to ban. Many of these guns like the AR15 or the 1911 are "semi-automatic" designs that have been around 50-100 years in their original incarnation.

I'm often reminded of this poor police officer in the 90's that did this short video on the differences between a civilian semi-auto rifle and a full-auto. 8:32 has a great clip of Edward Conroy of the ATF testifying before the US Senate subcommittee on trying to define an "assault weapon" and stating the only difference between "assault rifles" and a "sporting rifle" is looks. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yATeti5GmI8
Click to expand...
Thank you again, Cesiumsponge - this info is copied into my research files, now. And Halbrook is on our interview list now. You are awesome!
anita
 
Adding to the disparity in perception of a firearm being solely based on emotional reaction of re physical appearance or baseless representation, a member here (user name GEM, Dr. Glenn E. Meyer, PhD) wrote a paper on the topic named " Will It Hurt Me In Court? Weapons Issues and the Fears of the Legally Armed Citizen" under the environment of a courtroom.

http://www.thejuryexpert.com/2009/0...s-and-the-fears-of-the-legally-armed-citizen/

There was also the great copkiller "teflon boolits!" scare which was completely baseless, as well as the "black talon" scare. If someone has links to dispelled those, please add them. I can't find anything at he moment but ill modify te post if I come across them.
 
Last edited:
Minor thought I have included in a letter to the editor of our local newspaper (which was published):

The possession of a firearm is not a causal factor in the commission of a gun related crime, it is incidental and supplemental to it. It is impossible to control a criminal act by attempting to control the possession of inanimate objects, otherwise all objects would be the subject of controls related to criminal misuse (autos, baseball bats, knives, hatchets, hammers, etc.).

It is the height of hypocrisy to single out firearms, which by nature are completely harmless without human interaction, as an object to be controlled in order to control actions (virtually impossible).

If one were to be successful in removing a firearm from a murderous individual one is still left with a murderous individual who can easily turn to any of the inanimate objects mentioned above (and many more) and effectively commit the crime.

Dan
 
DP, welcome to THR. This is a great place to learn about various pro-2A theory without the flaming/trolling commonly found on the Internet. I look forward to seeing your documentary. You may want to check survivalistboards.com for people willing to talk about their Katrina experience. They're a pretty decent group of people (like THR, their mods do not tolerate trolling/flaming), but OPSEC and tinfoil hats might keep them from biting on an interview.

On a side note, this project's only 24% funded on kickstarter. KS is a great tool for project jumpstarts, do don't be afraid of donating there if you are unaware of the site as it is generally a well-known site for raising project capital.
 
More juicy government statistics from the BATFE. www.atf.gov/statistics

"The January 2011 data release will cover calendar year 2009 activity."
Annual Firearms Manufacturers And Export Report
http://atf.gov/statistics/download/afmer/2011-interim-firearms-manufacturing-export-report.pdf

Manufactured firearms in the report for that year:
Rifles: 2,293,297
Shotguns: 862,293
Pistols: 182,730

Recall all rifle homicides in the data I posted earlier from the 2010 FBI uniform crime report constitute 2.75% of all homicide methods recorded. Rifles are manufactured at a volume that exceeds handguns by 1250% but they're responsible for the smallest statistical category recorded by the FBI under homicide types. That is a stark contrast in extremes. The most produced firearm subtype (and assault rifles being a sub subtype that anti-gun types are up in arms about) is also the firearm subtype least used in homicides. Straight from the recordkeeping of two federal agencies of the US government. No bias. No emotional fearmongering.

There is also a lot more data on firearm traces done by law enforcement and tracked back by the ATF available on the site, if its pertinent.
 
Last edited:
bergmen said:
Minor thought I have included in a letter to the editor of our local newspaper (which was published):

The possession of a firearm is not a causal factor in the commission of a gun related crime, it is incidental and supplemental to it. It is impossible to control a criminal act by attempting to control the possession of inanimate objects, otherwise all objects would be the subject of controls related to criminal misuse (autos, baseball bats, knives, hatchets, hammers, etc.).

It is the height of hypocrisy to single out firearms, which by nature are completely harmless without human interaction, as an object to be controlled in order to control actions (virtually impossible).

If one were to be successful in removing a firearm from a murderous individual one is still left with a murderous individual who can easily turn to any of the inanimate objects mentioned above (and many more) and effectively commit the crime.

Dan
Click to expand...
We Totally Agree. I assume the targeting of firearms has to do with the speed of death. Its the easiest way to cause harm, and from a distance too.

Just a guess on my part.
anita
 
Cesiumsponge said:
More juicy government statistics from the BATFE. www.atf.gov/statistics

"The January 2011 data release will cover calendar year 2009 activity."
Annual Firearms Manufacturers And Export Report
http://atf.gov/statistics/download/afmer/2011-interim-firearms-manufacturing-export-report.pdf

Manufactured firearms in the report for that year:
Rifles: 2,293,297
Shotguns: 862,293
Pistols: 182,730

Recall all rifle homicides in the data I posted earlier from the 2010 FBI uniform crime report constitute 2.75% of all homicide methods recorded. Rifles are manufactured at a volume that exceeds handguns by 1250% but they're responsible for the smallest statistical category recorded by the FBI under homicide types. That is a stark contrast in extremes. The most produced firearm subtype (and assault rifles being a sub subtype that anti-gun types are up in arms about) is also the firearm subtype least used in homicides. Straight from the recordkeeping of two federal agencies of the US government. No bias. No emotional fearmongering.

There is also a lot more data on firearm traces done by law enforcement and tracked back by the ATF available on the site, if its pertinent.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the Tax revenue generated by the NFA and the massive numbers of people with NFA items...granted it's mixed in with government, hence why at first glance CA has the largest amount of destructive devices (flashbangs count apparently).

That said, the JFPO apparently was wrong about the firearm law or translated a Weimer Republic Era law and passed it off as the Nazi's Halbrook would be the point person on this. But I can tell you I heard this from gun people, not Antis, who want to be accurate.
 
Ashcons said:
DP, welcome to THR. This is a great place to learn about various pro-2A theory without the flaming/trolling commonly found on the Internet. I look forward to seeing your documentary. You may want to check survivalistboards.com for people willing to talk about their Katrina experience. They're a pretty decent group of people (like THR, their mods do not tolerate trolling/flaming), but OPSEC and tinfoil hats might keep them from biting on an interview.

On a side note, this project's only 24% funded on kickstarter. KS is a great tool for project jumpstarts, do don't be afraid of donating there if you are unaware of the site as it is generally a well-known site for raising project capital.
Click to expand...
Ashcons, thank you so very much for the support and also, the Katrina link...we need that!
:)
Anita
 
Cesiumsponge said:
More juicy government statistics from the BATFE. www.atf.gov/statistics

"The January 2011 data release will cover calendar year 2009 activity."
Annual Firearms Manufacturers And Export Report
http://atf.gov/statistics/download/afmer/2011-interim-firearms-manufacturing-export-report.pdf

Manufactured firearms in the report for that year:
Rifles: 2,293,297
Shotguns: 862,293
Pistols: 182,730

Recall all rifle homicides in the data I posted earlier from the 2010 FBI uniform crime report constitute 2.75% of all homicide methods recorded. Rifles are manufactured at a volume that exceeds handguns by 1250% but they're responsible for the smallest statistical category recorded by the FBI under homicide types. That is a stark contrast in extremes. The most produced firearm subtype (and assault rifles being a sub subtype that anti-gun types are up in arms about) is also the firearm subtype least used in homicides. Straight from the recordkeeping of two federal agencies of the US government. No bias. No emotional fearmongering.

There is also a lot more data on firearm traces done by law enforcement and tracked back by the ATF available on the site, if its pertinent.
Click to expand...
Cesium this is great, I thank you for this!
:)
anita
 
gfanikf said:
Don't forget the Tax revenue generated by the NFA and the massive numbers of people with NFA items...granted it's mixed in with government, hence why at first glance CA has the largest amount of destructive devices (flashbangs count apparently).

That said, the JFPO apparently was wrong about the firearm law or translated a Weimer Republic Era law and passed it off as the Nazi's Halbrook would be the point person on this. But I can tell you I heard this from gun people, not Antis, who want to be accurate.
Click to expand...
Yes, gfanikf, accuracy is vital to this production.
and I think we will be hunting down Halbrook for an interview...
:)
 
DeadPatriot said:
Yes, gfanikf, accuracy is vital to this production.
and I think we will be hunting down Halbrook for an interview...
:)
Click to expand...
Thanks. I mean I've very pro-2A, but it's hard to deal with the way we can sometimes accept or repeat things with no citations. Then again I'm a lawyer (actually served as counsel for a restoration film project funded by Kickstarter) so I'm a stickler for the details, both because I'm trained to use them to back my case or find holes in the others. If you want someone to act as a critical script reader I would be happy to help out.
 
The original intent of the NFA tax stamp in 1934 was a de-facto ban because only the wealthiest at the time would pay $200 in 1934 dollars for a $2 suppressor or a $20 rifle. Only in recent times has the dollar devalued to the point where a $200 fee for a $1000 suppressor seem more reasonable. That ATF page has NFA data and its really picked up over the last decade.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Q
  • Locked
Assaulted: Civil Rights Under Fire
Replies
9
Views
1K
Quiet
Q
danez71
  • Locked
Finally! 2A movie/documentary “Assaulted: Civil Rights Under Fire,”
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
danez71
danez71
D
  • Locked
Pro-2A documentary in the works - donations needed - Assaulted
Replies
11
Views
1K
Cesiumsponge
C
D
  • Locked
Assaulted: Civil Rights Under Fire Update
Replies
2
Views
792
Ryanxia
Ryanxia
C
  • Locked
"Fire and Ice" Documentary
Replies
19
Views
1K
Trebor
T
Back
Top