Gun Control

Everything you say about the NJEA may be true. In fact, it probably is. But that sophomore kid's paper certainly doesn't have anything to do with proving it.

Wow! You devastated the arguments of that high school kid from New Jersey. Maybe we can get a hold of some of his other homework - I bet we could find lots of mistakes in it too. If only the other side was always represented by tenth grade kids. Man, that would be sweet.

The sad part is that kid's arguements are better than most ASD'ers.

Man...you picked that apart SOOOOO NICE!!!

Bookmarked!

It's nothing more than as Aerosmith says, the "same ole song and dance".

Every time a gun is fired, negative, more often than positive, effects follow.

Guns are fired Billions of times a year. Only a miniscule fraction of those times do negative effects follow.

In response to the Bergen County article.

I wasn't able to post it on their website, so if anyone else can, feel free.

----

I have recently reviewed the posting on gun control on your web site and am dismayed by the large number of incorrect assumptions, primarily based on incorrect data.

1) To quote your article directly, "Every time a gun is fired, negative, more often than positive, effects follow."

While there are approx. 30,000 deaths a year from firearms (including homicide, suicide, and accidents), intervention by armed citizens stops millions of crimes each year, often without the need for actually needing to fire a weapon. This fact consistently goes unreported by traditional media outlets, which consistenly show a bias in favor of gun control legislation versus responsible ownership of firearms.

2) Given that there are over 20,000 gun control laws on the books in this country, why is there no example of one of these laws which has successfully led to a reduction in violent crime? Gun control laws are praised based on their level of severity, such as those in Massachusetts, rather on their effectiveness. In fact, violent crime rates in Massachusetts have gone up since the new laws have been passed. In addition, according to recent BATF statistics, Boston ranks as one of the most likely cities for a juvenile to be in posession of a weapon when arrested.

Research by John Lott at the University of Chicago has shown the opposite to be true. In the 34 states where "right to carry" laws have been passed, violent crime has shown a general reduction, including multiple-victim shootings.

3) The United States no longer ranks among nations with the highest murder rates. It has been surpassed by nations which have introduced universal bans on private firearms ownership, including, but not limited to Australia and England. While firearm fatalities in the United States went up from 1960 to 1980, they have gone down consistently since then to where they are now at the lowest point in the last thirty years. These rates in the United States have gone down while, at the same time, the number of firearms owned by American citizens has gone up.

4) According to the 1998 National Vital Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control, firearms are the preferred method of suicide among males. Of the 17,242 suicides using firearms, only 1,241 were individuals of age 19 or below. This is less than half the number cited. There are till more non-firearm suicides (13,151) in this country that there are homicides by firearms (12,102), reflecting that this is more of a mental health issue than a gun-control issue.

5) Accidental deaths by firearms have consistently been below 1000 per year, less than 1% of all accidental deaths in the United States. The CDC numbers for 1998 list only 832. Of these, only 262 were individuals under the age of 19. A large number of these deaths are not due to children having access to guns, but accidental discharges of firearms in the hands of white males in their 20s, usually with alcohol involved.

6) The NRA has over 4 million members.

7) The inclusion of the Second Amendment in the Constitution of the United States has nothing to do with hunting. It's purpose in guaranteeing the right to "the people" is political, to prevent all power by force from being concentrated in the hands of the governement. According to the definition by Thomas Jefferson, when the people fear the government, it's tyranny and when the government fears the people, it's democracy.

The version of second amendment quoted is not the "real" one. There is only one comma in the Second Amendment. I've also seen a version where the s in state is not capitalized. This implies that they were refering to a "state of freedom" rather than a nation/country.

United States Government Printing Office - Second Amendment--Bearing Arms
Old FR thread on commas: The Second Amendment and Commas (Repost- Revised)
Second Amendment Sisters: QUESTION ON THE COMMA IN THE 2nd A

I just checked out that message board, and it has definitely been FREEPED!

I sent the following reply to both the message board.

Regarding the article on gun control by Michael Sienko the author's whole argument falls apart because of this statement:

"Since picking a criminal out of a crowd is impossible, it should be assumed that anyone and everyone could be a criminal."

This is presuming that everybody is guilty until proven innocent. This is a violation of the Fifth and Sixth amendments.

Another thing that stuck out in my mind was that the author called everybody up to the age of 18 "children".

The fact is that for children age 1-14, 142 died in 1997 from firearms. This is a far cry from 3,650 each year, as Michael Sienko would have you believe. (Source: Figures are for 1997. National Safety Council, Accident Facts: 2000 Edition, at 10, 11, 18.)

Dr. Kleck notes that, "Accidental shooters were significantly more likely to have been arrested, arrested for a violent act, arrested in connection with alcohol, involved in highway crashes, given traffic citations, and to have had their driver's license suspended or revoked." (Dr. Kleck is a professor in the school of criminology and criminal justice at Florida State University.)

If we are to go by things that cause child deaths as reason to control items, then swimming pools (965 deaths), fires (676 deaths), small objects (suffocation - 474 deaths), and food (185 deaths) should be controlled. (Source: See above National Safety Council source)

Mre Sienko also states, "No matter how they are looked upon, guns will be, as they always have been, dangerous. Every time a gun is fired, negative, more often than positive, effects follow."

I've fired some form of a firearm more than 1,000 times. In most cases, the result was a hole in a piece of paper. Other cases resulted in holes in other assorted inanimate targets. One shot resulted in the death of a varmint on our property. No shots resulted in human fatalities. When you multiply this times all the other gun owners who shoot for recreation and sport, the statement that "every time a gun is fired, negative effects follow" falls apart.

Compound this with the fact that law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day. Of these, less than 8% of the time does the citizen shoot or kill his attacker. This means that usually, a law abiding citizen merely needs to brandish his weapon to stop a crime from occurring.

I also wish to take issue with the argument that guns cause suicides. About 57% of all suicides are done with a gun. So, if we take guns away, will it stop this 57% from killing themselves? I'd say that more likely, most of this 57% would find some other way to kill themself.

And finally, I want to say something about waiting periods. I'd say that most of the time, waiting periods keep people from purchasing a gun when they need one. Possible examples include women who have recieved threats from past partners, and other individuals who have been threatened by ill intended persons. And of course, there's the masses of people in Massachusetts who, because of 911,went out to buy a gun and found out that they have to wait 60 days to purchase a gun.

If I want to assassinate somebody, believe me, I wouldn't be stopped because of a waiting period. If one were to make a serious assassination attempt, it would be planned out well in advance, which would allow the person ample opportunity to purchase a gun long before the planned attempt.

No amount of legislation would stop criminals from getting guns. Case in point: any drug of your choice. All are illegal, yet millions of people are able to acquire a regular supply of whatever it is they're addicted to. Making something illegal simply makes it so that only criminals have that item which is illegal.

In closing, both Britain and Australia have banned private gun ownership. Since those bans went into place, gun related crimes have gone UP instead of down.

I also included a link to the GunOwners.org firearms fact sheet.

http://www.gunowners.org/fs0101.htm

Here's one of the best quotes about the insanity of gun control working;

"I'm a felon. If I need a gun, i'm not going to a gun show, to a gun shop, to a store, or any place where i'll have to fill out paperwork. I'll call somebody I met in the joint to get a gun. There's no waiting period."

-G. Gordon Liddy (paraphrased from memory)