Report Links State Gun Laws To Rates of Slayings, Trafficking

Washington Post ^ | 12/5/08 | Cheryl W. Thompson

[sig226]

States with lax gun laws had higher rates of handgun killings, fatal shootings of police officers, and sales of weapons that were used in crimes in other states, according to a study underwritten by a group of more than 300 U.S. mayors.

[sig226]

Note that the group of mayors is Richard Daley and Mike Bloomberg's "Fascists (mayors) against illegal guns," the same group that got its indictments quashed on the grounds of perjury, entrapment, and violation of the 1968 Gun Control Act. More to follow as I analyze the data.

[radar101]

This is like the Tobacco Companies paying for a study that declares that cigarettes don't cause cancer.

It is total BS

[Niteranger68]

No doubt this was a premise hunting mission to support a predetermined conclusion.

Since “Fat Ass” Daley in involved, I can't wait for the Militant Marksman's next podcast.

[voteNRA]

My town’s mayor is in this gang. We have had 2 murders in the last 15 years, both family related and 1 involved a shotgun (obtained lawfully, AFAIK).

He still insists on joining dictator Bloomberg and won’t answer any questions on the subject, even when door knocking for re-election.

[ExSoldier]

I'll bet that nimrod Beisiles (sp?) did the survey. You remember the guy from one of those prestigious universities that got rave reviews for disproving the role of firearms in early America? Got all kinds of awards until it was proven he fudged LIED on all the "data." His rewards were withdrawn and he was fired from his cushy job in academia. Just goes to show that if you're going to lie about this topic, you can make good as long as you don't get caught and leave the antigun movement with egg on their face. Maybe he's trying to make a comeback. Bloomberg can afford him.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Funny how they look at “states” and not cities.

[smokingfrog]

...according to the study by Mayors Against Illegal Guns...
That's all I need to know - it's B.S.

Her twisted logic and use of terms like "export crime guns" is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read. When doing a true investigative report, it is customary to interview people on both sides of an issue. She doesn't.

[sig226]

Before I start adding analysis, I thought I'd share two articles I found while searching for data on statewide gun traces.

Reuter's
Georgia, Florida and Texas Top Crime Gun Suppliers; Hawaii, Rhode Island, New Jersey...

Commondreams.org (breaking news and views for the "progressive" community")
Gerogia, Florida and Texas Top Crime Gun Suppliers; Hawaii, Rhode Island, New Jersey Supply Fewest Crime Guns

Both links will open in separate windows so they can be compared side by side. Reuters published a press release from the brady campaign and dressed it up as news by attributing it to the PRnewswire. The Reuter's trash is attributed at the very bottom. It must be nice for Peter Hamm to know that his servants at Reuters will at least acknowledge that they are fellow travelers, and provide contact information for useful idiots.

[sig226]

You mean Michael A. Bellesiles, author of Arming America, a book that claimed to show that American colonists did not actually own many firearms. Bellesiles concluded that since nobody in the early United States owned any guns, the second amemdment was not intended to protect the right of individuals to own something they did not have.

He got caught because he attributed data to San Francisco area archives that were destroyed in the 1906 earthquake, as well as probate records that other historians knew not to exist. He still won't admit that he lied, even in he face of overwhelming evidence. He says his records were washed away in a flood. Funny, so were all of my guns.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

I’ve become convinced that a goodly number of gun-control nuts are not really opposed to bullets as much as loud, unexpected noises. If guns were not common, they would demand balloon and small paper bag control, or at least that for individuals to make loud noises trying to scare others be outlawed.

This is not as ludicrous as it sounds. Remember that many parents try to prohibit their children from being “emotionally devastated” by losing a game with other children, so prohibit keeping score. They also support insane levels of zero tolerance in schools, because children drawing pictures of monsters is so frightening to the parents.

Heck, it goes way back. I remember a parent getting upset in the mid 1960s because preschoolers were allowed to use black finger paint along with the other colors, and black was a “morbid” color the adult associated with death. Other parents at the time prohibited their children from watching television or eating anything sweet (raw peanuts were okay).

So is it hard to imagine their wanting to ban guns because they make loud noises? Can you imagine what their home lives must be like? Walls painted in faded pastel colors. Rounded corners on everything because right angles are “threatening”. Only plastic spoons and butter knives to eat their tofu and bean sprout smoothies. Easy listening music or preferably just white noise. Hypoallergenic shag carpeting.

[sig226]

The press release (I mean "article") published in the Washington Post gives the following states as the most gun traces per 100,000 residents. I thought that Georgia, Florida, and Texas were the primary suppliers of illegal guns because the press release carefully researched news story in Reuter's said so. But no, according to mayors against illegal guns The Washington Post, West Virginia is the worst offender.

Traces by state (per 100,000 residents of the originating state)

State	Traces/100K	2006 Population	Total traces
WV	41	1.8M	738
MS	39	2.9M	1131
SC	30.6	4.4M	1346
KY	29.7	4.2M	1247
AL	29.4	4.6M	1352
VA	29.3	7.7M	2256
GA	27.6	9.5M	2622
IN	26.2	6.3M	1651
NV	23.7	2.6M	616
NC	19.6	9.1M	1784

This doesn't even make sense. Among the highest crime cities of the northeast are Cincinatti, Philadelphia, Boston, New York, Washington, D.C., and Newark. On the west coast, Los Angeles and Oakland have well earned reputations for being hell-holes. All of these cities are in notorious gun ban states, with California, surprisingly, being the least restrictive in the amount of bureaucratic failures needed to buy a handgun. California has got an infamous export, which we'll get to later.

Why would the highest number belong to West Virginia? It doesn't make any sense. West Virginia is bordered by Ohio, Pennsylania, Virginia, and Kentucky. In all of these states, it is very easy to buy a gun. Why go to West Virginia to do something that can easily be done at home?

Why go at all? Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine are much closer to Boston than West Virginia. Pennsylvania is much closer to New York and New Jersey, and Washington, D.C., than West Virginia. So is Virginia. Again, why bother to go to West Virginia when you can get it much closer to home?

What is North Carolina even doing on this last? North Carolina requires a permit to buy a handgun. The law is not as draconian as New Jersey's law (for example), but the permit is required. Why not go to South Carolina, or Virginia, or Georgia?

Which brings us back to Nevada. It's neighbor, California, has a million or so scumbags known as bloods, crips, and ms-13. These semi-men have a habit of murdering each other whenever they can presume a reason. California gun stores aren't enamored of the local homey population. California restricts the number of handguns that can be purchased, and some misdemeanor convictions in the state are a legal bar to owning a gun. So where do they get them? West Virginia?

Even if they use straw purchases in California to get the guns, the rest of the country has a serious problem with one of California's most notorious exports: bloods, crips, and ms-13. One funny thing about gangsters and guns is that they are amazing tight wads in this area. They want used Glocks, High Point 9mms, and revolvers that look like they'd best be used as sinkers. They'll drop $5,000 on some stupid piece of jewelry, teeth caps, or 24" wheels, but not on a gun. You would think that when they visit their sleaze on the rest of the country, they would take their stolen, or straw purchased, California guns with them. But California is not one of the top states on this list. Nevada, although it made the list and is an easy drive from Los Angeles or Oakland, had only 616 out of state traces. maryland, which is a "progressive" state with tons of paperwork and nonsense to obtain a gun, had 442 traces.

And Florida and Texas aren't even on the list. Someone should tell Mayor Daley and Mayor Bloomberg that Florida and Texas are not progressive, so the list should include them. It's not fair. </sarc>

[sig226]

What is a crime gun trace?

If you think that an ATF trace on a gun results from the dedicated investigation of some dogged detective from CSI who set up laser beams to track bullet trajectories and studied DNA pried up floorboards until he found the NRA membership card that could prove that little Johnny was murdered by a republican, you're to be commended.

That's exactly what you are supposed to think.

1997 Boston gun trace report (pdf)

The Massachusetts Gun Owners' Action League studied firearms traces from Boston for the period of July 1, 1996 through April 30, 1997. Boston originated 1,020 traces. 111 of the traces originated from homicide, assault/threat, and robbery. That's right. 10.88% of the traces involved guns that might have been used in a crime of violence. Assault/threat does not specify if the gun was actually used in the crime or found later.

131 guns were found in arrests for vice. There is a separate category for narcotics crimes, so that means that more guns 10.88% of the guns were traced after crimes of violence, while 12.55% of the guns were taken from prostitutes and johns.

Of 1020 "crime gun traces," 111 had something to do with a violent crime. 1020 "crime gun traces" sounds good when some talking head parrots the latest talking points of a permanent democrat administration. They never mention that 90% of their effort was a waste of time and money. And since the report doesn't mention how many guns were taken away from Boston city officials, we can't even tell how many guns were taken away from pimps.

[sig226]

ping

[marktwain]

The “trace” data is totally unscientific. It is more a fabrication of the preferences and prejudices of the people asking for traces than it is an indication of any crime. If a department requires all guns that officers come in contact with to be traced, they will have a lot of trace data, and it will have nearly zero meaning. Most traced guns have not been involved in any crime.

[sig226]

The incentives to falsify the data are financial and political. Make the bosses look good, it’s always a good career move. Make the department look good, it gets a bigger budget. So what if it’s a lie. The press lives on the lie and they’ll never tell the truth.