anyone know a good website with actual facts and myths about gun control. my fiance is writing a school paper about Gun Control and i dont want her putting a bunch of false stuff in there. I rember seeing a good one that had really good facts about how gun control really doenst work but i cant rember what it is any suggestions.
Facts and Myths about gun control website?
- Thread starter xd45gaper
- Start date
- Status
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Keep in mind that with the responses you get, the concept of something being a "fact" is interpreted by each side as information that favors their perspective. Information not favoring their perspective is said to be false, created, biased, misinterpreted, etc.
Another aspect is that both sides will take some sort of correlation, call is causation, and say it proves a point. For example, when states get concealed carry legalized, the crime rate drops.
Back in Sept 2005, I crunched some numbers after a "Gun Tests" article said NIOSH data indicate a decline in crime in states with CCW versus those without. It was very interesting. One of the things I found was that for my home state, Texas, that instituted CHL in 1996, the crime rate dropped from 1996-2000. Concealed carry must be working, right! This is actually a correlation, not a causation.
How well was Texas CHL working? From 1996-2000, with the institution of Texas CHL, it worked so well that crime fell in MA, CA, NY, and ME, the latter states not being terribly pro gun states at all. And that, my friends, demonstrates just how powerful the Texas CHL is. We do things bigger and better in Texas!
As it turned out, crime had been dropping quite a bit in the last decade or two and quite a few states got concealed carry in that time. Did the crime drop because of concealed carry or was it a correlation such as crime dropping in all those non concealed carry states when Texas got its concealed carry?
You will find that both sides conveniently leave out a lot of this sort of information. They will and do present information in a manner that will best suite their perspective. As such, the "facts" of the gun control debate are hard to call as "facts" unless you actually know where those facts came from, how they were derived, how they were massaged, and what biased were put into their presentation.
Another aspect is that both sides will take some sort of correlation, call is causation, and say it proves a point. For example, when states get concealed carry legalized, the crime rate drops.
Back in Sept 2005, I crunched some numbers after a "Gun Tests" article said NIOSH data indicate a decline in crime in states with CCW versus those without. It was very interesting. One of the things I found was that for my home state, Texas, that instituted CHL in 1996, the crime rate dropped from 1996-2000. Concealed carry must be working, right! This is actually a correlation, not a causation.
How well was Texas CHL working? From 1996-2000, with the institution of Texas CHL, it worked so well that crime fell in MA, CA, NY, and ME, the latter states not being terribly pro gun states at all. And that, my friends, demonstrates just how powerful the Texas CHL is. We do things bigger and better in Texas!
As it turned out, crime had been dropping quite a bit in the last decade or two and quite a few states got concealed carry in that time. Did the crime drop because of concealed carry or was it a correlation such as crime dropping in all those non concealed carry states when Texas got its concealed carry?
You will find that both sides conveniently leave out a lot of this sort of information. They will and do present information in a manner that will best suite their perspective. As such, the "facts" of the gun control debate are hard to call as "facts" unless you actually know where those facts came from, how they were derived, how they were massaged, and what biased were put into their presentation.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
One book that I've found very helpful and non-controversial is "Under The Gun" by Wright, Rossi & Daly. Univ. of Fla. Press; 1985. The authors have also had other works published.
They are statisticians by trade. They don't use emotional language, and yet are quite readable. The primary conclusion of their research is that no gun control law ever passed in Florida had made any difference in the rate of violent crime.
FSU Prof. Gary Kleck's work is another useful body. He's most noted for his statistical research on the use of firearms to prevent a crime from occurring. His first published work stated that firearms are used in crime prevention at least 800,000 times per year in the US, and possibly up to 2.5 million. He first published in the 1990s, at a time when there were some 600,000 crimes per year involving firearms.
Art
They are statisticians by trade. They don't use emotional language, and yet are quite readable. The primary conclusion of their research is that no gun control law ever passed in Florida had made any difference in the rate of violent crime.
FSU Prof. Gary Kleck's work is another useful body. He's most noted for his statistical research on the use of firearms to prevent a crime from occurring. His first published work stated that firearms are used in crime prevention at least 800,000 times per year in the US, and possibly up to 2.5 million. He first published in the 1990s, at a time when there were some 600,000 crimes per year involving firearms.
Art
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
www.guncite.com
Collections of VERY good articles there, many from referenced primary sources. For example,
Kates et al, "Guns and Public Health: Epidemic of Violence or Pandemic of Propaganda?" [61 Tenn. L. Rev. 513-596 (1994).]
Kopel, David B., "Rational Basis Analysis of 'Assault Weapon' Prohibition" [20 J. of Contemp. L. 381-417 (1994)].
Good source on why the current crusade to ban nontraditional-looking civilian rifles is so idiotic:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/offense_tabulations/table_20-22.html
(All rifles combined account for less than 3% of homicides, and many states had zero rifle homicides in 2004.)
And so on.
Also, at the risk of shameless self-promotion
, I also wrote a post on Democratic Underground (I'm a center-left independent and a regular on DU) that may help put things in a broader perspective:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=97165
Collections of VERY good articles there, many from referenced primary sources. For example,
Kates et al, "Guns and Public Health: Epidemic of Violence or Pandemic of Propaganda?" [61 Tenn. L. Rev. 513-596 (1994).]
Kopel, David B., "Rational Basis Analysis of 'Assault Weapon' Prohibition" [20 J. of Contemp. L. 381-417 (1994)].
Good source on why the current crusade to ban nontraditional-looking civilian rifles is so idiotic:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/offense_tabulations/table_20-22.html
(All rifles combined account for less than 3% of homicides, and many states had zero rifle homicides in 2004.)
And so on.
Also, at the risk of shameless self-promotion
, I also wrote a post on Democratic Underground (I'm a center-left independent and a regular on DU) that may help put things in a broader perspective:http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=97165
Zundfolge
Member
I think Hoppy590 was trying to send you here http://www.gunfacts.info/
that's an excellent place to go to get the tools to counter anti-gun arguments.
that's an excellent place to go to get the tools to counter anti-gun arguments.
One good thing to do is check the source of stats if possible.
for deaths, there is WISQARS.
http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/wisqars/
for deaths, there is WISQARS.
http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/wisqars/
One good source is the second amendment to the Bill of Rights.
Then you can also try www.nra.org for factual information about unconstitutional gun control "laws".
Then you can also try www.nra.org for factual information about unconstitutional gun control "laws".
geekWithA.45
Moderator Emeritus
Myth: The 2nd protects the right of states for form militias, which today is the national guard
Fact: It's the People.
http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
http://www.guncite.com/journals/reycrit.html
http://www.guncite.com/journals/bk-ufire.html
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/2nd_Amend/fourteenth_amend.htm
Fact: It's the People.
http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
http://www.guncite.com/journals/reycrit.html
http://www.guncite.com/journals/bk-ufire.html
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/2nd_Amend/fourteenth_amend.htm
molonlabe
Member
Baba Louie
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 3,831
Don't neglect to quote Brady with their inane "grading" system of states "Gun Control" relative to actual crime in those states. A passing grade of "A" = plethora of death/crime, but lotsa GC laws. An "F" = far fewer death/crime with minimal GC law, thus, they fail the GC test. That logic ought to be worth at least a paragraph or two to help sum up any worthwhile discussion on the effects and rationale of Gun Control.
- Status
