Desertdog
Member
Gun Control and the Next Big Lie
http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=6719
Posted by Howard Nemerov
Wednesday, April 07, 2004
~~o~~
''History will teach us that … of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants.'' The Federalist Papers, Number 1.
Get ready for gun control with a happy face. Gun banners pretend to no longer want to confiscate your firearms. They are concerned about safety. With all those firearms on the streets, now that 37 states have Shall-Issue Concealed Carry laws, the gun banners want to know who has them and where they are at all times. In their hoplophobia (irrational fear of guns) they believe that anybody carrying a gun is a hair’s breadth away from becoming a homicidal maniac or that demon-possessed guns will leap out of holsters and fire of their own volition. Of course, the only way to keep track of all those guns is to have a registry, and history has shown that registration leads to confiscation, which leads to loss of other civil rights. (See last paper.*) So we come full circle to a new confiscation scheme.
An article posted by a Florida newspaper attempts to picture a longtime civil rights organization and supporter of military and police firearms training as turning against police officers. (1)
We will dissect and examine three quotes from the article.
NRA Bad
''Squeezed between the cop on the beat and the powerful National Rifle Association, the Senate leaned toward the NRA Wednesday, tentatively approving a bill that would ban government and private lists of gun owners.'' – Palm Beach Post
So now the NRA, with an extensive history of police training and competition programs, and with a lifelong law enforcement professional as president, is now anti-cop?
This is a bald attempt at divide and conquer, splitting the NRA from one of its closest relationships, the law enforcement professionals who protect and serve, many of whom are themselves NRA members. The NRA Law Enforcement Division has a long history of education and training. ''Our ultimate goal is the saving of lives and prevention of injuries through the safe, effective, and timely use of the law enforcement firearm.'' (2)
Does this sound like an organization that would plot to place law rnforcement professionals in greater danger?
When the Truth Does Not Support You, Use Innuendo
''But crime fighting has proven to be the toughest hurdle for supporters, with police agencies across the state expressing concern that the measure would make it harder to track criminals.'' – Palm Beach Post
Who are these ''police agencies'' and what are their concerns? The article mentions the Police Benevolent Association and the Florida Sheriffs Association later in the article, but no concerns. I went to each organization’s web site to search for information on this issue which reportedly is threatening their lives.
The Florida Police Benevolent Association represents over 30,000 law enforcement and corrections officers. Their five most recent online issues of the membership newsletter, the PBA Capitol Report, communicate primarily on the following issues: time limitations on internal affairs investigations; pay raises; retirement issues; secret agreements between state attorneys and criminals; and pensions. Nothing was mentioned about any need to track law-abiding gun owners in order to control crime. (3)
The Florida Sheriffs Association has been around since 1893. On its ''Frequently Asked Questions'' page, the second question is how new residents can apply for a Concealed Weapon Permit. The writers respond with instructions on how to proceed. There is nothing there or on their ''Legislative Update'' page that mentions any concerns about tracking law-abiding gun owners to help control crime. (4)
The Bias Against Guns
''Open-government advocates are also livid. 'There is no anecdotal evidence that I can find to show that people are being profiled,' said Barbara Petersen, president of the First Amendment Foundation. 'The danger is that there is no opportunity for law enforcement to keep track of people who are using guns to commit crimes.' '' – Palm Beach Post
Here we have the plain-spoken bigotry of the gun confiscator: if you carry a gun, you must be a criminal.
A report by the Department of Justice shows that in 1997, 78.8% of the guns purchased by criminals were from friends, family, or black market. This is up from 74.6% since 1991, perhaps showing an increasing ability of criminals to seek out illegal sources. (5) In 1997, the other 22.2% were supposedly purchased from legal sources, possibly leaving a paper trail of ownership. However, one must keep in mind that these could include straw purchases, meaning that the criminal asked a person with a clean record to buy the gun, in order to pass the background check.
Most criminals already have records and therefore will fail to pass the background check necessary to purchase a legal firearm, would not be affected by the proposed registry. (6) Therefore, we can only reliably keep track of law-abiding people. Since these people are unlikely to commit crime, there is no need to scrutinize them, unless we are planning to reverse our legal system and begin to presume guilt until proven innocent. I find this point particularly interesting, since the person making the statement in the above quotation claims to represent the First Amendment of our Constitution.
Only the Truth Will Keep Us Free
CCW holders, who must take firearms training, be fingerprinted, and have their background checked to qualify for a license, have lower crime rates than the general population.
Here are the most recent statistics compiled by the Florida department responsible for issuing and monitoring Concealed Weapons licensees:
Total licenses issued: 897,986
Licenses revoked due to crime after licensure: 2,234
Crime rate: 249 per 100,000 (7)
Compare this to Florida’s overall crime rate of 5,421 per 100,000 in 2002, the most recent final data available. (8)
The arrest rate for permit holders in Texas from 1996 through 1999, covering the first five years of their Concealed Carry law, was 473 arrests per 100,000 people. Compare this to 5,589 for entire population. (9) Keep in mind that arrests do not equal convictions. Even in cases of lawful self-defense against criminal attacks, it is likely the permit holder will be arrested, and the judicial system will decide if prosecution is indicated. The actual conviction rate for license holders was under 25% of arrests in 1998, or 260 per 100,000. (10,11) Compare this to the FBI Crime Index for Texas in 2002 of 5,190, a more accurate measure of actual crime as opposed to arrests. (12)
And as usual, the confiscators do not present the complete equation: how many crimes were stopped by law-abiding permit holders. This also does not figure in the cost of those crimes, as the violent crime rate was 18.8% lower, and the property crime rate was 3.2% lower, in CCW states. (13)
Who’s Shooting at Police?
I performed a Google search looking for news stories about police officers being shot. In his book, ''The Bias Against Guns,'' John Lott presents a detailed case on how the media provides extensive coverage of guns being used in crime, while ignoring defensive gun use. (14) So I figured if a cop was shot, it would be covered on some media web site.
There were three valid results from the first three pages of the search:
One cop was shot when confronting an armed robber at a credit union. (15)
A sheriff’s deputy was shot while searching for methamphetamine labs in wild area. (16)
Two officers were shot when trying to stop a thief driving a stolen SUV. (17)
Conclusion
The Florida legislature is simply doing its job of representing the People. CCW laws are written in a way that upholds the right to bear arms for defense of self and the community at large, while protecting the privacy of the license holder.
Rush Limbaugh is wont to say ''It’s not the evidence that matters; it’s the seriousness of the charge.'' When confronting the issue of guns and crime, gun confiscators react with knee-jerk predictability: ''let’s get rid of guns. That will cure our discomfort, by making us feel good about ourselves that we care and are doing something.''
In no society has civilian disarmament led to reduced crime. To the contrary, it has led to reduced civil rights, and increased opportunity for criminals, who because of illegal distribution channels have even more access to guns, and a greater disparity of force favoring them.
http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=6719
Posted by Howard Nemerov
Wednesday, April 07, 2004
~~o~~
''History will teach us that … of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants.'' The Federalist Papers, Number 1.
Get ready for gun control with a happy face. Gun banners pretend to no longer want to confiscate your firearms. They are concerned about safety. With all those firearms on the streets, now that 37 states have Shall-Issue Concealed Carry laws, the gun banners want to know who has them and where they are at all times. In their hoplophobia (irrational fear of guns) they believe that anybody carrying a gun is a hair’s breadth away from becoming a homicidal maniac or that demon-possessed guns will leap out of holsters and fire of their own volition. Of course, the only way to keep track of all those guns is to have a registry, and history has shown that registration leads to confiscation, which leads to loss of other civil rights. (See last paper.*) So we come full circle to a new confiscation scheme.
An article posted by a Florida newspaper attempts to picture a longtime civil rights organization and supporter of military and police firearms training as turning against police officers. (1)
We will dissect and examine three quotes from the article.
NRA Bad
''Squeezed between the cop on the beat and the powerful National Rifle Association, the Senate leaned toward the NRA Wednesday, tentatively approving a bill that would ban government and private lists of gun owners.'' – Palm Beach Post
So now the NRA, with an extensive history of police training and competition programs, and with a lifelong law enforcement professional as president, is now anti-cop?
This is a bald attempt at divide and conquer, splitting the NRA from one of its closest relationships, the law enforcement professionals who protect and serve, many of whom are themselves NRA members. The NRA Law Enforcement Division has a long history of education and training. ''Our ultimate goal is the saving of lives and prevention of injuries through the safe, effective, and timely use of the law enforcement firearm.'' (2)
Does this sound like an organization that would plot to place law rnforcement professionals in greater danger?
When the Truth Does Not Support You, Use Innuendo
''But crime fighting has proven to be the toughest hurdle for supporters, with police agencies across the state expressing concern that the measure would make it harder to track criminals.'' – Palm Beach Post
Who are these ''police agencies'' and what are their concerns? The article mentions the Police Benevolent Association and the Florida Sheriffs Association later in the article, but no concerns. I went to each organization’s web site to search for information on this issue which reportedly is threatening their lives.
The Florida Police Benevolent Association represents over 30,000 law enforcement and corrections officers. Their five most recent online issues of the membership newsletter, the PBA Capitol Report, communicate primarily on the following issues: time limitations on internal affairs investigations; pay raises; retirement issues; secret agreements between state attorneys and criminals; and pensions. Nothing was mentioned about any need to track law-abiding gun owners in order to control crime. (3)
The Florida Sheriffs Association has been around since 1893. On its ''Frequently Asked Questions'' page, the second question is how new residents can apply for a Concealed Weapon Permit. The writers respond with instructions on how to proceed. There is nothing there or on their ''Legislative Update'' page that mentions any concerns about tracking law-abiding gun owners to help control crime. (4)
The Bias Against Guns
''Open-government advocates are also livid. 'There is no anecdotal evidence that I can find to show that people are being profiled,' said Barbara Petersen, president of the First Amendment Foundation. 'The danger is that there is no opportunity for law enforcement to keep track of people who are using guns to commit crimes.' '' – Palm Beach Post
Here we have the plain-spoken bigotry of the gun confiscator: if you carry a gun, you must be a criminal.
A report by the Department of Justice shows that in 1997, 78.8% of the guns purchased by criminals were from friends, family, or black market. This is up from 74.6% since 1991, perhaps showing an increasing ability of criminals to seek out illegal sources. (5) In 1997, the other 22.2% were supposedly purchased from legal sources, possibly leaving a paper trail of ownership. However, one must keep in mind that these could include straw purchases, meaning that the criminal asked a person with a clean record to buy the gun, in order to pass the background check.
Most criminals already have records and therefore will fail to pass the background check necessary to purchase a legal firearm, would not be affected by the proposed registry. (6) Therefore, we can only reliably keep track of law-abiding people. Since these people are unlikely to commit crime, there is no need to scrutinize them, unless we are planning to reverse our legal system and begin to presume guilt until proven innocent. I find this point particularly interesting, since the person making the statement in the above quotation claims to represent the First Amendment of our Constitution.
Only the Truth Will Keep Us Free
CCW holders, who must take firearms training, be fingerprinted, and have their background checked to qualify for a license, have lower crime rates than the general population.
Here are the most recent statistics compiled by the Florida department responsible for issuing and monitoring Concealed Weapons licensees:
Total licenses issued: 897,986
Licenses revoked due to crime after licensure: 2,234
Crime rate: 249 per 100,000 (7)
Compare this to Florida’s overall crime rate of 5,421 per 100,000 in 2002, the most recent final data available. (8)
The arrest rate for permit holders in Texas from 1996 through 1999, covering the first five years of their Concealed Carry law, was 473 arrests per 100,000 people. Compare this to 5,589 for entire population. (9) Keep in mind that arrests do not equal convictions. Even in cases of lawful self-defense against criminal attacks, it is likely the permit holder will be arrested, and the judicial system will decide if prosecution is indicated. The actual conviction rate for license holders was under 25% of arrests in 1998, or 260 per 100,000. (10,11) Compare this to the FBI Crime Index for Texas in 2002 of 5,190, a more accurate measure of actual crime as opposed to arrests. (12)
And as usual, the confiscators do not present the complete equation: how many crimes were stopped by law-abiding permit holders. This also does not figure in the cost of those crimes, as the violent crime rate was 18.8% lower, and the property crime rate was 3.2% lower, in CCW states. (13)
Who’s Shooting at Police?
I performed a Google search looking for news stories about police officers being shot. In his book, ''The Bias Against Guns,'' John Lott presents a detailed case on how the media provides extensive coverage of guns being used in crime, while ignoring defensive gun use. (14) So I figured if a cop was shot, it would be covered on some media web site.
There were three valid results from the first three pages of the search:
One cop was shot when confronting an armed robber at a credit union. (15)
A sheriff’s deputy was shot while searching for methamphetamine labs in wild area. (16)
Two officers were shot when trying to stop a thief driving a stolen SUV. (17)
Conclusion
The Florida legislature is simply doing its job of representing the People. CCW laws are written in a way that upholds the right to bear arms for defense of self and the community at large, while protecting the privacy of the license holder.
Rush Limbaugh is wont to say ''It’s not the evidence that matters; it’s the seriousness of the charge.'' When confronting the issue of guns and crime, gun confiscators react with knee-jerk predictability: ''let’s get rid of guns. That will cure our discomfort, by making us feel good about ourselves that we care and are doing something.''
In no society has civilian disarmament led to reduced crime. To the contrary, it has led to reduced civil rights, and increased opportunity for criminals, who because of illegal distribution channels have even more access to guns, and a greater disparity of force favoring them.
