Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gun Control: Gun Banners Want NRA 'Out of San Francisco'
ChronWatch ^ | January 28, 2005 | Howard Nemerov

Posted on 01/28/2005 11:32:34 AM PST by neverdem

With this exhortation for justice, Bill Barnes of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and Burke Strunsky of Ban Handgun Violence promote their thesis that banning guns in San Francisco will reduce homicide. We will examine some of their supporting arguments to determine the veracity of their claim. (1)

Gun Ban Justice Means Misinterpreting Supreme Court Decisions

“Since 1939, the Supreme Court has found that the Second Amendment doesn't give an individual a Constitutional right to own a gun.” – SF Bay Guardian editorial

They refer to U.S. v. Miller, where two men were apprehended with a type of firearm restricted by the National Firearms Act of 1934. (2) They appealed their indictment by claiming the Firearms Act “offends the inhibition of the Second Amendment” against government infringement of the right to keep and bear arms. The United States Supreme Court ruling focused only upon the gun’s “reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.”

Referencing Constitutional law, the justices discussed the term militia, concluding:

“With obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such forces the declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were made.”

The Court also referred to the “debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators,” concluding:

“These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.”

Since the military was not using short-barreled shotguns at the time, the court decided “we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.”

The justices agreed with the Founders that the militia is the people, and that the government cannot abridge the right of the people to be armed, as that would render the militia ineffective. A reasonable deduction of the Miller decision is that the justices believed the Second Amendment may not enshrine a broad right to own non-military firearms.

Gun Ban Justice is Not Dependent Upon Understanding Statistical Reality

More than 20 years ago, the District of Columbia enacted a similar handgun ban and is on its way to a 20-year low of homicides.” – SF Bay Guardian editorial

The claim is based upon preliminary 2004 crime data, verified by a Washington Post article. (3)

In the last 10 years, the D.C. murder rate has dropped 37%, partially reversing a severe longer-term trend. Since the gun ban was enacted in 1976, the D.C. murder rate is up 65%, while the national rate dropped 35%.

Violent crime statistics from 1964 to 2003 show that while D.C. has consistently been more violent than the national average, it has become more deadly over time. The table below shows that while the overall violent crime rate has been relatively steady throughout the entire time period, D.C. homicide rates have been accelerating, now over eight times the national average. (4)

13-Year Increments

DC/US Violent Crime Ratio

DC/US Homicide Ratio

1964-1976 (pre-ban)

4.4

3.7

1977-1990 (post-ban)

3.1

4.3

1991-2003 (post-ban)

3.5

8.1

 

The 2004 numbers alone do not represent a significant downward trend; relying on one year’s data for making public policy decisions is perilous at best. The Post article agrees:

“Despite last year's reduction, the District remains one of the most deadly cities in the country.”

Gun Ban Justice Favors Biased Research

The New England Journal of Medicine found that a handgun in the home makes it 43 times more likely that a friend, family member, or acquaintance will be killed than an intruder.” –– SF Bay Guardian editorial

This quote references a 1986 study which compared two cities with differing levels of gun ownership and firearm death rates. (5)

In a recent radio interview, when Peter Hamm of the Brady Campaign was asked to consider that the firearm-related death rate for minors in Texas, a CCW state, was less than California’s, a leader in state gun control laws, he called it a “statistical aberration.” (6) Therefore, according to Brady criteria, the paper quoted here, which compares only two metropolitan populations, is also a statistical aberration. Yet gun banners tout this paper as proof that handgun ownership increases homicide rates.

A Bureau of Justice Statistics report found that from 1993 through 2001, firearm violence declined 63%. (7) A Centers for Disease Control report found the firearm-related death rate declined 29% between 1990 and 2001. (8)

Over 31 million handguns were sold between 1986 and 1999. (9) If handgun owners were truly 43 times more likely to be involved in homicide, shouldn’t rates have increased, rather than declining 34% since 1986? (10)

This highlights the flaw of selecting two cities and one year’s data to base a statistical analysis upon, rather than using broader populations over a longer time frame.

What might cause the murder rate to decline?

Let’s look at two cities with long-standing, strict civilian disarmament which experienced significant drops in homicide rates in recent years.

What has changed in Washington, D.C. that might cause dropping homicide rate mentioned in the Washington Post article?

“D.C. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey said police got results by making more arrests and seizing more guns, rigorously analyzing crime trends and joining other city agencies in focusing on 14 ‘hot spots.’”

“Aggressively attacking crime has had an impact on the streets.” – Chief Ramsey

From a CNN article covering New York City:

“Citywide, serious crime is expected to fall for the 13th straight year in 2004. The homicide tally so far this year – 547 – is down 4.4 percent from last year…”

Why is New York experiencing this downward trend in crime?

“Officials with the New York Police Department credit their success to a series of crime-fighting initiatives.” (11)

Due to gun control laws, there were few if any legal guns to round up in order to impact crime according to gun control dogma. Instead, the police began targeting criminals using more sophisticated methods, and murder rates declined significantly.

Conclusion

Since targeting criminals reduces homicide, it would be more just to enforce criminal law, instead of diverting police resources to tracking down and confiscating firearms from people who have no criminal intent.

How can the op/ed authors claim to represent justice when they hold innocent citizens guilty for the actions of criminals? When they wish to enact laws that have been proven to be dangerous to future generations of innocents?

The Brady Campaign wants the NRA, an organization comprised of four million American citizens, to leave San Francisco. Is this representative of democratic justice that fair-minded San Franciscans support, or is this more representative of tyranny?

Footnotes

(1) NRA out of S.F., Bill Barnes and Burke Strunsky, San Francisco Bay Guardian.
http://www.sfbg.com/39/15/x_oped.html 

(2) U.S. Supreme Court, United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=307&invol=174

(3) Killings In D.C. Fewest Since '86, Del Quentin Wilber and Jamie Stockwell, Washington Post, January 1, 2005.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39858-2004Dec31.html

(4) The three following data sources were used in the comparative discussion:

District of Columbia Crime Rates 1960-2000, The Disaster Center.
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm

United States Crime Rates 1960-2000, The Disaster Center.
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

FBI Uniform Crime Reports. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm     

(5)  Arthur L. Kellerman, Protection or Peril?: An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home, 314 New Eng. J. Med. 1557-60 1986.

(6)  NRA News, January 14, 2005.

(7)  Weapon Use and Violent Crime, Craig Perkins, National Crime Victimization Survey 1993-2001, page 1, Bureau of Justice Statistics, September 2003.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/wuvc01.pdf       

(8) Table 47 (page 1 of 3). , according to sex, race, Hispanic origin, and age: United States, selected years 1970–2001, Centers for Disease Control. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/tables/2003/03hus047.pdf

(9)    Firearms Commerce in the United States 2001/2002. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.
http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/firearmscommerce/firearmscommerce.pdf

(10) FBI Index of Crime, 1983-2002. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_02/xl/02tbl01.xls

(11) Murder rate decline no comfort to mother of three slain sons, CNN.com Law Center, December 23, 2004. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/12/23/murder.one.mother.ap/

About the Writer: Howard Nemerov is a Bay Area freelance writer who has a special interest in the preservation of the Second Amendment. Howard receives e-mail at hnemerov@netvista.net.

Copyright © 2005 ChronWatch. All rights reserved.
Questions? Contact us today!

 

WebSite by KRAFFT.COM

 


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California; US: District of Columbia; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: banglist; bayarea; nra
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-54 next last
Check out this bill in Florida. We can't post from that source.

Bill would broaden deadly force rights

1 posted on 01/28/2005 11:32:34 AM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower; All
BANG!

Check comment# 1

2 posted on 01/28/2005 11:34:58 AM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

No Guns ~ No Rights!


3 posted on 01/28/2005 11:36:17 AM PST by blackie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Any laws they try to pass should be challenged as UNCONSTITUTIONAL.


4 posted on 01/28/2005 11:37:03 AM PST by RasterMaster (Saddam's family were WMD's - He's behind bars & his sons are DEAD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Out of San Francisco? Ok, but exactly how do they plan to force them out?


5 posted on 01/28/2005 11:38:00 AM PST by Zeppelin (Keep on FReepin' on.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
“SAN FRANCISCO HAS long been a leader for justice… Now, with 87 homicides so far this year – 56 of which involved handguns – it's time to continue this work for justice. We'll have that opportunity at the next election.” – San Francisco Bay Guardian editorial

That was the exhortation to justice which I inadvertantly edited out of the start of the column. Please accept my humble apology.

6 posted on 01/28/2005 11:39:38 AM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Bill Barnes of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and Burke Strunsky of Ban Handgun Violence promote their thesis that banning guns in San Francisco will reduce homicide.

Show me ONE city, or town where this is the case, please.

Allow me to show you Kennesaw, GA.

7 posted on 01/28/2005 11:39:43 AM PST by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Yet another demonstration of the incredible tolerance practiced by the Politicos of San Francisco - If your leanings are to the Far Left or Anti-Gun Rights.

Interesting the approach being followed in SF vs. that in Florida - Two opposite ends of the spectrum.

8 posted on 01/28/2005 11:39:50 AM PST by drt1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

bang!


9 posted on 01/28/2005 11:42:28 AM PST by Rakkasan1 (john f'n kerry-the original 'million dollar baby'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: Chaos_Axiom

Amen!


11 posted on 01/28/2005 11:49:39 AM PST by ABG(anybody but Gore) ("Oh no, not Hans Brix!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
"Since the military was not using short-barreled shotguns at the time, the court decided “we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.”

Wrong wrong wrong!

What the Court actually said was that they didn't KNOW of any military use of short-barreled shotguns.

The exact wording is:
"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument."

In point of fact, there have been numerous military uses of short-barreled "trench guns."

12 posted on 01/28/2005 11:53:53 AM PST by Redbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chaos_Axiom

Thanks for posting that. It's good to see rational thought being expressed these days.


13 posted on 01/28/2005 11:54:40 AM PST by Renderofveils (8th Engineer Bn, 1 Cav. "Cannibals!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
"“The New England Journal of Medicine found that a handgun in the home makes it 43 times more likely that a friend, family member, or acquaintance will be killed than an intruder.” –– SF Bay Guardian editorial"

I can't believe people still trot out this tired, worn out, discredited statistic!

The Fallacy of “43 to 1” The all-time favorite statistic of the gun-prohibition lobby.

14 posted on 01/28/2005 11:54:44 AM PST by need_a_screen_name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

of course not solving the real problem of gangs or such wouldn't even occur to them....without guns they will still kill each other for sure.....fix the problem idiots, not the side issue


15 posted on 01/28/2005 11:56:50 AM PST by NorCalRepub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

To: neverdem

About 4 years ago our grandson and his family lived 4 doors from a family newly arrived from Mexico. The father had been legally here working and saving money to buy his home and import his family. My Greatkids became chummy with their youngest child (about 9 years old) and on occasion I got to talk with the boy while waiting for the bus to pick the kids up for school. Asking about customs and holiday events, I learned that all boys in Mexico are taught by their fathers to use rifles and hand guns from about the age of 7. I asked the obvious question and was told, "Yes. My Dad takes me out in the farm areas almost every Saturday to shoot at targets. I'll get my own gun as a birthday present in 3 years."
OK. That was 4 years ago. I assume the kid got his present.
I taught high school locally for 30+ years, retiring in '92; I had some boys from Mexico (some legal families/some not...we weren't allowed to discriminate OR report). I KNOW those boys had access to guns, too. When the newspapers came up with stories about guns being brought into our schools by students, guns found in lockers, guns found in teen cars, I was surprised to find that my neighbors were surprised!
The Columbine High situation of '99 was a real eye-opener to some people.
The Mexican kids are taught at an early age that a weapon is their right of passage. Once this becomes known (through the fine art of teen bragging) to the kiddoes born and bred in this country, is it any wonder that some American kids feel they need weapons, too?





17 posted on 01/28/2005 11:57:20 AM PST by Grendel9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

To: need_a_screen_name

yeah........by that logic, owning a car will do the same thing.........idiots


19 posted on 01/28/2005 11:58:38 AM PST by NorCalRepub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Grendel9

I was given a shotgun by my grandfather on my 12th birthday, as was my brother. He had also previously instilled in us a respect for firearms (as well as how to use them) that goes hand in hand with respect for life. Not just human life. The second part of that is the major point, and the first becomes a non-issue when respect is part of the gun bearer's life.


20 posted on 01/28/2005 12:04:08 PM PST by Renderofveils (8th Engineer Bn, 1 Cav. "Cannibals!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson