Category: Gun Control

Gun Free Doesn’t Work

By Steven W. Dulan
In addition to my law practice, I am an adjunct law professor at Western Michigan University Thomas M. Cooley Law School. One of the courses I teach there is called “Gun Control Seminar.” My students write and present research papers on the topic each term. I’m also a member of the Board of Directors of the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners and serve as its press contact too.
The good news is that schools are generally safe. The bad news is that this is only because school shootings are rare. In research cited by The Washington Post just last month, it was revealed that, on any given day since 1999, the odds of an individual public school student being shot to death at school was approximately one in 614,000,000.
The bad news is that the security situation at most schools is abysmal. It has become clear that simply declaring schools, or any other area, to be “gun free” doesn’t work, even when there are emphatic signs posted and strict policies adopted. Individuals focused on committing multiple-victim public killings don’t obey the law. However, there is some evidence, reported during Michigan Senate committee testimony by researcher Dr. John R. Lott, that several mass shooters selected their “gun-free” locations because there would be no one there to shoot back.
The Michigan-specific data (publicly available on the Michigan State Police website), shows that individuals with Concealed Pistol Licenses are extremely law abiding. In fact, for 2016, the most recent year for which full data is available, the general public has a crime rate 25 times higher than the rate for CPL holders.
According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, there are 18 states where teachers and staff may carry concealed pistols. While it is difficult to ascertain exact numbers, there are many individuals who have carried guns in those schools over a period of several years. The media is quick to report any negative incidents. There have only been a few.
Recently, it was revealed that the Centers for Disease Control failed to report their findings that armed citizens use guns in self-defense approximately 2.5 million times each year, confirming the findings of researcher Dr. Gary Kleck. This figure is approximately eight times the number of criminal gun uses each year.
The choice is clear -either continue to do nothing and rely on blind luck to protect our school children, spend large amounts of money on airport-like security measures, or allow teachers, staff and parents who are members of a group (CPL holders) that has demonstrated responsibility and public utility, to carry their pistols on school premises.
Steven W. Dulan, J.D., is the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners’ Second Vice Chair, MCRGO Legal Foundation Chair, Media Contact and Director South-Central Lower Peninsula, as well as serving as an attorney and real estate broker in the Lansing area. He can be reached at dulans@cooley.edu or 517.333.7132.
Gun Control

NSSF’s Project ChildSafe Named Finalist for National Safety Council Award

Project ChildSafe recognized for contributions toward promoting firearms safety at national, local level.

CHICAGO — Project ChildSafe, the firearms safety education program of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), was honored to be named among finalists vying for the National Safety Council’s 2018 Green Cross for Safety Awards, which were presented May 23. NSSF and Project ChildSafe’s selection as one of three finalists for the Excellence in Safety Award recognized the program’s continued commitment to helping prevent firearms accidents, thefts and misuse. Read more

Firearms, Gun Control

NSSF Releases Statement in Wake of Santa Fe, Texas High School Shooting

Our hearts go out to victims and their families of the Santa Fe, Texas High School tragedy.

On behalf of the members of our industry, the National Shooting Sports Foundation has long advocated for effective solutions to prevent unauthorized access to firearms by children, criminals, the dangerously mentally ill and others who cannot be trusted to handle firearms in a safe and responsible manner. Members of the firearms industry believe that preventing the unauthorized access to firearms of any kind at any time can help prevent accidents and deter thefts, suicides and the criminal misuse of firearms.

At the center of this commitment is NSSF’s Own It? Respect it. Secure it.® initiative, which is built on the firearm industry’s long-standing commitment to safety and was developed to promote and encourage firearm safety and storage. It also serves to enhance and amplify the messages of ongoing firearm safety and education campaigns such as Project ChildSafe®, which has distributed more than 37 million free firearm safety kits which include a gun lock to gun owners through partnerships with law enforcement agencies in all 50 states.

The firearms industry welcomes participation in the conversation in Texas and across the nation to make our communities and our schools safer. We will continue to lead and participate in finding and enhancing practical solutions that protect lives and preserve our citizens’ liberties.

Firearms, Gun Control

CDC and Firearms–By Their Numbers

GW:  So, more gun laws are the answer?  Then why have they not worked before?  While the answers may be multi-faceted, we do know man has never stamped out evil since the beginning of time.  Where there’s a will, there have always been the means.
By Michael D. Faw

I recently stopped in to take a look at some Center for Disease Controls—a federal agency—reports and came across First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws; Findings from the Task Force on Community Preventive Services.

This is the famous 2003 report that caused a lot of public scorn—and for good reasons.

In the very first paragraph this taxpayer funded report notes gun deaths in the US are declining. Here a federal agency admits what liberal mass media news outlets will not report. And for the 26,800 plus firearms related deaths reported and recoded in 2003, the numbers reveal 16,500 were suicides. Next, only about 10,000 firearms related deaths were homicides and about 700 of the recorded deaths were unintentional, equals accidents or other.

Thus, the recent NSSF program to combat suicides and prevent them is spot on.

Now, back to the numbers in this federally funded CDC report. Wow, there 1.4 MILLION violent crimes committed in 1999 in the US but only 24% involved the use of a firearm.  This ia LOW number! What is lacking is what was used in the other approximately 850,000 other violent crimes. Maybe there should be restrictions and ownership tests applied to baseball bats, knives, hammers and other if we want to save lives. A science-based study would have reported the numbers on the other contributors to those deaths. More interesting is that the CDC report indicates there are enough guns in the US that there is basically one per person. The report further reveals that the number of homes with firearms has been rising, from 35% to more than 40%.

More numbers from the report are: there are basically 192 million firearms owned in the United States (in a 1994 survey) and 65 million of those were handguns; 70 million were rifles; 49 million were shotguns; and the remainder were other guns (7). Among handgun owners, 34% kept their guns loaded and unlocked. An estimated 10 million handguns, one sixth of the handguns owned, were regularly carried by their owners, approximately half in the owners’ cars and the other half on the owners’ persons.

Due to increased firearms sales, especially handguns, from 2004 to 2016 because of federal government leadership and an election and re-election, those ownership numbers have definitely risen, especially in the handguns category. This has been reported by firearms trade organizations and BATF. The fact that there are so many CC classes offered in communities, and resulting in CC licenses applied for, the number of firearms carried in the US has also risen—dramatically.

The CDC  report does note that the manufacture, distribution, sale, acquisition, storage, transportation, carrying, and use of firearms in the United States are regulated by a complex array of federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Then, however, the report takes a fatal jump and examines firearms laws as one of many approaches to reducing firearms violence. But eventually this CDC report does note evidence was insufficient to determine the effectiveness of gun control and other anti-2A laws for the following reasons:

 

The numerous programs or groups of laws related to firearms and ownership were inconsistent in producing any noted results. These include: Bans on ammunition; restrictions on firearms acquisitions; studies on waiting periods; zero tolerance of firearms in schools (gun free zones); child access laws; shall issue laws; and combinations of firearms laws. All, again, were found inconsistent in doing anything to prevent a death by firearm.

The report sums the complete CDC study and effort with one telling sentence: “In summary, the Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence.” Like most government funded research, the report indicates more research is needed, um, “that more high-quality research is needed.” This effort has resulted in states calling homes and conducting firearm and health research, like the one recently done in Oregon, and in doctors asking patients questions about firearm ownership and placement in the home. Since doctors, however, are not trained to conduct professional surveys and focus groups, these questions and the resulting reports would be seriously flawed.

One thing missing is the cost to taxpayers of this 2003 CDC report. Funding for this and the other proposed reports became such an issue that it was eventually cut off. Now anti-gun groups are again trying to fund this anti-gun research effort because the first attempt did NOT meet their agenda. In fact, on the other side of the fence, this report revealed bans, gun-free zones, waiting periods and gun laws have accomplished NOTHING.

You can read the full report at: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

 

Firearms, Gun Control

SAF: Bloomberg’s “Epidemic of Dishonesty” Includes His Own Anti-Gun Efforts

BELLEVUE, WA – When billionaire anti-gun former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg launched a tirade during Rice University’s graduation ceremonies over the weekend about an “epidemic of dishonesty” in the nation’s capital, he could easily have been talking about the gun prohibition movement he largely finances, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.
“Bloomberg criticized what he called ‘an endless barrage of lies,’” noted SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “But that’s exactly what we’ve seen from the gun prohibition lobby, exemplified by Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety. From deceptively combining suicide and homicide data to inflate what they call the number of ‘gun violence’ victims, to inflating the number of school shootings, which the Washington Post called ‘flat wrong,’ and suggesting that raising the age limit for purchasing firearms and banning modern sporting rifles will somehow prevent mass shootings, the gun control campaign has been built on layers of false promises.
“Anti-gun lobbying groups even claimed that 40 percent of gun transactions occurred without a background check,” he added, “until research proved that claim to be bogus.
“Each gun control failure has been followed by demands for even more restrictions on law-abiding citizens,” he continued. “Each new erosion of fundamental Second Amendment rights is sold to the public as a preventive measure, until the next tragedy occurs, followed by more demands that gun owners give up a little more privacy and a little more liberty.”
Bloomberg also warned about a trend toward “alternate realities” during his speech. Gottlieb suggested that the billionaire former mayor might be an expert on that subject.
“Behind all of the gun control rhetoric,” Gottlieb observed, “elitists like Bloomberg, with their billion-dollar bankrolls and armed private security continue their campaigns for public disarmament from the safety of walled estates or gated communities. Nothing more accurately reflects an ‘alternate reality’ than the one enjoyed by people like Bloomberg, who live behind walls or gates, and have their own bodyguards.
“Suggesting that surrendering a basic right of self-defense and the tools to protect one’s home and family will somehow move average citizens closer to the idyllic security of the rich and famous is the most dishonest thing of all,” he said.
The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.
Gun Control

Mossberg Terminates Relationship with Dick’s Sporting Goods

NORTH HAVEN, CT – O.F. Mossberg & Sons, Inc., a leading American firearms manufacturer, announced today its decision to discontinue selling products to Dick’s Sporting Goods, and its subsidiary, Field & Stream, in response to their hiring of gun control lobbyists in April 2018.

Effective immediately, O.F. Mossberg & Sons will not accept any future orders from Dick’s Sporting Goods or Field & Stream, and is in the process of evaluating current contractual agreements.

“It has come to our attention that Dick’s Sporting Goods recently hired lobbyists on Capitol Hill to promote additional gun control.” said Iver Mossberg, Chief Executive Officer of O.F. Mossberg & Sons. “Make no mistake, Mossberg is a staunch supporter of the U.S. Constitution and our Second Amendment rights, and we fully disagree with Dick’s Sporting Goods’ recent anti-Second Amendment actions.” Read more

Firearms, Gun Control

NSSF Expels Dick’s Sporting Goods

The National Shooting Sports Foundation® (NSSF®), the trade association for the firearms, ammunition, hunting and shooting sports industries, Board of Governors today unanimously voted to expel Dick’s Sporting Goods from membership for conduct detrimental to the best interests of the Foundation.

Dick’s Sporting Goods recently hired a Washington D.C.-based government affairs firm, for “[l]obbying related to gun control.” Dick’s Sporting Goods CEO Edward W. Stack announced earlier this year the retail chain would end sales of modern sporting rifles, voluntarily raise the age to 21 to purchase firearms in their stores and called for more restrictive legislation. Dick’s later announced they would destroy the remaining modern sporting rifle inventory. NSSF responded that business decisions should be individually made, but was nonetheless disappointed and the decision does not reflect the reality of the vast majority of law-abiding gun owners.

Firearms, Gun Control

Springfield Armory Cuts Dick’s, Field & Stream

GW:  You’re either for us or against those that are law-abiding citizens and Springfield’s sentiment and subsequent action speaks volumes.

GENESEO, IL, (05/03/18) – Springfield Armory is severing ties with Dick’s Sporting Goods and its subsidiary, Field & Stream, in response to their hiring a group for anti-Second Amendment lobbying.

This latest action follows Dick’s Sporting Goods’ decision to remove and destroy all modern sporting rifles (MSR) from their inventory. In addition, they have denied Second Amendment rights to Americans under the age of 21. We at Springfield Armory believe that all law abiding American citizens of adult age are guaranteed this sacred right under our Constitution.

It is clear where Dick’s Sporting Goods and its subsidiary, Field & Stream, stand on the Second Amendment, and we want to be clear about our message in response. Their position runs counter to what we stand for as a company. At Springfield Armory, we believe in the rights and principles fought for and secured by American patriots and our founding forefathers, without question. We will not accept Dick’s Sporting Goods’ continued attempts to deny Second Amendment freedoms to our fellow Americans.

Firearms, Gun Control

Rights, Needs, and the Second Amendment Pondered

By Glen Wunderlich

To safeguard individual liberty, the State of Virginia became the last to approve the Bill of Rights on December 15, 1791, thus limiting government’s power over its citizens.  Today’s protesters have called on government to “do something” about guns and point to retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens’ recent cry to abolish the Second Amendment.  Well countrymen and women, there’s an “app” to do just that.  What’s missing in any discussions, however, seems to be some basic understanding of the process to repeal an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as well as the reasons why so many Americans find the notion utterly revolting when their liberties are under attack.
 

The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. A proposed amendment becomes part of the Constitution as soon as it is ratified by three-fourths of the States (38 of 50 States).  In today’s divide – evidenced at every turn in government – it’s difficult to comprehend any such agreement on anything, let alone something as drastic as limiting foundational, unalienable rights of self-protection.  Yet, our Forefathers have provided a roadmap that cannot be superseded by any amount of bellyaching alone.
 

Rationale for gun owners to own a particular type of firearm or sheer numbers of them is often heard in sentences beginning with the words, “Why do you need…?”  It’s a bogus question, it’s irrational, and a non-starter for any sensible discussion about guns.  Here’s why.
 

The psychologist Abraham Maslow developed a theory suggesting humans are motivated to satisfy five basic needs, the first of which relates to issues of survival.  While many folks today may focus more on pay and benefits to satisfy their most basic needs, others see survival in a more literal sense.  On June 27, 2005 the Supreme Court ruled, once again, that police have no constitutional duty to protect a person from harm.  That duty and its inherent stark reality, therefore, rest on the shoulders of individuals.  That’s where the “need” for guns begins for so many of us.  What type and how many become no more than personal preference for various situations.  Yet, the desire to own even more guns goes deeper than that.
 

Many people will invest in firearms and knives as alternatives to antique vehicles, gold, or other forms of capital; others keep them for myriad hunting purposes.  Firearms in a general sense were not always the best of investments, however, increasing in value at a lesser rate than inflation in years gone by.  But we’ve witnessed the fact that as protesters protest and politicians push for infringements on Second Amendment protections, demand for firearms increases proportionately.
 

Consider the Obama administration years as a prime example of this economic reality and incessant talk about banning certain types of guns.  The total economic impact of the firearms and ammunition industry in the United States increased from $19.1 billion in 2008 to $51.4 billion in 2017, a 169 percent increase, while the total number of full-time equivalent jobs rose from approximately 166,000 to almost 310,000, an 87 percent increase in that period, according to a recent report released by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the industry’s trade association.  There has been no better gun salesman than President Obama and his minions in the history of this country and it occurred in an otherwise downward economy!
 

So, for those that desire change, you have it.  Tens of millions more firearms are in the hands of law-abiding American citizens since the failed enactment of the “assault weapons” ban of 1994.  If  “no more guns” means confiscation, just how will it be implemented?  How will they be gotten from criminals?  And, how will anyone prevent basement manufacture or black market trade?
 

So, if anyone wants to begin an honest discussion about guns, let’s begin with some honest reality and not mere hyperbole so prevalent today.
 

Firearms, Gun Control
1 … 73 74 75 76 77 … 149