Mass Shooting and Gun Control Facts Support Ownership by Law Abiding Citizens

Murder is Illegal Gun Control

The Facts About Mass Shootings Support Gun Ownership, Not Gun CONTROL

By    21, 2019

By painting the tragic Parkland shooting as a failure of gun control, however, Pelosi disregards the indisputable fact that the shooter’s rampage was enabled by years-long, system-wide failures of policy and personnel.

Andrew Pollack, the father of shooting victim Meadow Pollack, is on a campaign to hold those who failed the Parkland victims accountable. This includes the resource officer and deputies whose inadequate response allowed the shooting spree to continue for 11 long minutes, the FBI officials who ignored a tip about the shooter’s intentions just over a month prior to the attack, the Broward County superintendent whose “Promise” program kept students’ criminal activities from being reported to police, and the school officialsmental health providers, and officials from the Broward Sheriff’s Office who ignored a series of red flags, not to mention murderer’s lengthy history of violence and mental health issues.

….

Before Democrats look to new measures of gun control, they should concern themselves with the enforcement of existing gun laws, keeping weapons out of the hands of criminals, and holding accountable institutions and policies which allow threats to go undetected.

If Democrats impede law-abiding Americans from arming themselves to protect their fellow citizens, and themselves, then the only people with access to weapons will be those who purchase them illegally, with criminal intent.

Read More: http://thefederalist.com/2019/02/21/facts-mass-shootings-support-gun-ownership-not-gun-control/

Was there one school shooting a week in 2018, as a Florida lawmaker said?

…[Florida Democrat Rep. Alcee] Hastings, of nearby Boynton Beach, called on Trump to support gun control and cited a statistic about school shootings nationwide.

“In 2018, we endured a school shooting nearly once a week,” Hastings said in a statement to the media.

Hastings’ spokesman told us he arrived at the one-shooting-per-week statistic by citing a database of school shootings compiled by Education Week, a national education publication. Hastings divided a 180-day school year by 24 shootings to arrive at one shooting every 7.5 days.

It is not apparent from Hastings’ statement that the underlying data lumps together various types of shootings on school property — everything from indiscriminate mass shootings to an accidental shooting. …

Read More: https://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2019/feb/11/alcee-hastings/was-there-one-school-shooting-week-2018-florida-la/

The School Shootings That Weren’t

 August 27, 2018

This spring the U.S. Education Department reported that in the 2015-2016 school year, “nearly 240 schools … reported at least 1 incident involving a school-related shooting.” The number is far higher than most other estimates.

But NPR reached out to every one of those schools repeatedly over the course of three months and found that more than two-thirds of these reported incidents never happened. Child Trends, a nonpartisan nonprofit research organization, assisted NPR in analyzing data from the government’s Civil Rights Data Collection.

We were able to confirm just 11 reported incidents, either directly with schools or through media reports.

In 161 cases, schools or districts attested that no incident took place or couldn’t confirm one. In at least four cases, we found, something did happen, but it didn’t meet the government’s parameters for a shooting. About a quarter of schools didn’t respond to our inquiries.

Read More: https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/08/27/640323347/the-school-shootings-that-werent

 

Gun Violence Lies to Disarm Law Abiding Citizens

anti-gun liberal

Schools are safer than they were in the 90s, and school shootings are not more common than they used to be, researchers say

… Fridel and Fox used data collected by USA Today, the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Report, Congressional Research Service, Gun Violence Archive, Stanford Geospatial Center and Stanford Libraries, Mother Jones, Everytown for Gun Safety, and a NYPD report on active shooters.
Their research also finds that shooting incidents involving students have been declining since the 1990s.
Four times the number of children were killed in schools in the early 1990s than today, Fox said.

“There is not an epidemic of school shootings,” he said, adding that more kids are killed each year from pool drownings or bicycle accidents. There are around 55 million school children in the United States, and on average over the past 25 years, about 10 students per year were killed by gunfire at school, according to Fox and Fridel’s research.

DOJ STUDY: Gun Control Laws Won’t Work Because Criminals Get Their Guns Illegally

Mac Slavo
January 24th, 2019

It took the United States government’s Department of Justice an entire study dedicated to gun use and criminals to figure out what logical human beings have already understood for decades. The result of their own study found that gun control laws will never work because criminals will never use legal channels to obtain guns.

According to Fox 5, the findings based on the 2016 Survey of Prison Inmates (SPI), discovered that about 1 in 5 or 21% of all state and federal prisoners reported they had “possessed or carried a firearm when they committed the offense for which they were serving time in prison.” The survey released by the DOJ this month declared that criminals unsurprisingly rely on the black market for their guns. 

 According to the study, an estimated 287,400 prisoners has possessed a firearm during their offense. The findings concluded 6 percent had stolen the weapon, 7 percent found it at a crime scene and 43 percent obtained it off the street or on the black market. More than 25 percent had received it from a family member or friend, or as a gift.
 

Study Proves Strictest Gun Control has No Effect on Gun Deaths

Blond with Rifle

Study does not find population-level changes in firearm homicide or suicide rates in California 10 years after comprehensive background check and violent misdemeanor policies enacted

UC Davis Healt  November 19, 2018

study of firearm homicide and suicide rates in the 10 years after California simultaneously mandated comprehensive background checks for nearly all firearm sales and a prohibition on gun purchase and possession for persons convicted of most violent misdemeanor crimes found no change in the rates of either cause of death from firearms through 2000.

The study, which posted online Oct. 12 as in press at the journal Annals of Epidemiology, was conducted by the Violence Prevention Research Program (VPRP) at UC Davis and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. It compared observed annual firearm homicide and suicide rates in California over 10 years following enactment of comprehensive background check and misdemeanor violence prohibition policies in 1991 with expected rates based on data from 32 control states that did not have these policies and did not implement other major firearm policies during the same time.

“In the 10 years after policy implementation, firearm suicide rates were, on average, 10.9 percent lower in California than expected, but we observed a similar decrease in non-firearm suicide,” said Garen Wintemute, professor of emergency medicine and director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at UC Davis, senior author on the study.

“This suggests that the policies’ estimated impact on firearm suicide may be part of broader changes in suicide risk around the time that the California policies were implemented,” he said.

The study found no net difference between firearm-related homicide rates before and during the 10 years after policy implementation.

Read More: https://health.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/13362

Attn. Gun Control Advocates: We Banned Assault Weapons Before … And It Didn’t Work

Investor’s Business Daily 3/01/2018

Gun Control: Maybe they are too young to know, or have faulty memories, but whatever the reason, all those pushing for a ban on “assault weapons” in the wake of the Florida school shooting ignore the fact that the last time the country imposed such a ban it failed to make a measurable difference.

It turns out that various independent studies came to the same conclusion: the ban had no measurable impact on the number of shootings or the number of shooting deaths while it was in effect.

A 2005 report from the National Research Council, for example, noted that “A recent evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes.”

A 2004 study sponsored by the National Institute of Justice found that while the ban appeared to have reduced the number of crimes committed with “assault weapons,” any benefits were “likely to have been outweighed by steady or rising use of non-banned semiautomatics.

As a result, the Justice study found “there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence, based on indicators like the percentage of gun crimes resulting in death or the share of gunfire incidents resulting in injury.”

The main reason the failure of the ban to make a difference: “assault weapons” account for a tiny share of gun crimes — less than 6%. Even among mass shootings, most didn’t involve an “assault weapon” in the decade before the ban went into effect.

Mass shootings didn’t stop during the ban, either — there were 16 while the ban was in effect, which resulted in 237 deaths or injuries. In fact, it was while the ban was in effect that the Columbine High School massacre happened, in which 13 students were killed and 24 injured.

What’s more, gun deaths have steadily declined since 1994, even though the rate of gun ownership has climbed.

Read More: https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/we-banned-assault-weapons-before-and-it-didnt-work/

 

If You Think the 2nd Amendment Doesn’t Protect from Tyranny, Think Again

Ralph Wiggum is his own Militia because the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

How Gun Ownership Protects Citizens From An Abusive Government

those who are unconvinced that civilian gun ownership protects against authoritarianism would do well to give the argument some more thought.

If well-armed citizens could not defend themselves against the U.S. Army, terrorist groups such as ISIS should have shriveled and died long ago. Instead, the U.S. government has been operating in the Middle East since 1990 trying to stamp out whichever comparatively low-budget terrorist group or rogue state was causing chaos. Still, the United States has not succeeded.

If the U.S. government did try to force its citizens into an authoritarian governing system, it would not be wise to use its vast arsenal to bomb cities and destroy infrastructure like it has in places like Raqqa, Syria. The government would be spending money to blow its own assets to pieces.

Who would be carrying out the government’s attacks? Many members of the armed forces would be appalled at the idea of unleashing U.S. military force upon their own country–especially an armed country. Although some members of the military would undoubtedly be loyal to an authoritarian government, many would side with the civilians.

History provides many examples of an armed populace keeping its government in check. Peter Leeson, a professor of economics and law at George Mason University, contends that the ownership of longbows among non-nobles likely led to the Magna Carta’s final reissue. Once documents establishing universal rights bound the aristocrats and royals, politics became more stable and monarchs abused power less frequently. Society respected the rights of the lower classes much more broadly.

Stripping people of self-defense is not only a violation of rights, it spits in the face of America’s own beginnings. The American Revolution itself could not have happened without an armed populace. The U.S. Army was outgunned and often outmaneuvered, but Americans aren’t singing “God Save the Queen” before sporting events because individuals had the agency to protect themselves from an overbearing government.

Many more examples of armed civilian resistance to unwanted government authority exist: America’s failure in Vietnam, the 1989 overthrow of Romanian Communist Nicolae Ceausescu, and the ongoing Syrian Civil War, to name a few.

The Bielski partisans, a small group of Jewish guerilla World War II fighters, were able to protect more than 1,200 Jews from dying at the hands of the Nazis. The group’s main focus was to protect women, children, and the elderly. The Weimar Republic had disarmed its citizens in 1931, and Adolf Hitler’s party seized power in 1933.

It would be foolish to claim an armed German populace would have somehow stunted Hitler’s rise to power, but from their forest headquarters the Bielski partisans were able to run “one of the most successful rescue efforts during the Holocaust,” accordingto the U.S. Memorial Holocaust Museum’s website. That’s obviously a positive benefit to an armed populace.

Armed civilians have the power to resist a bad government, and the collective force of millions of armed Americans absolutely acts as a deterrent to increased authoritarianism from its own leaders.

Read More: http://thefederalist.com/2018/04/04/guns-help-americans-protect-abusive-government/

The FBI Didn’t Follow Up With Google After Parkland Shooter’s Youtube Threat

If their goal is to keep us safe, then law enforcement and the surveillance state failed at every step of the Parkland shooting.

They want us to give up more of our rights based on their complete failure?

(No one has yet shown how limiting ownership to law-abiding citizens will stop the actions of those who would break the law and commit the ultimate sin of murder, in a country with 300 million firearms in circulation.

Simpsons FBI were warned of the shooter and did nothting

FBI didn’t contact Google during probe on Florida shooter

The FBI was told of a threat accused Florida shooter Nikolas Cruz made on YouTube last September but never contacted the company to track down its source, missing an early indicator, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said Friday.

Someone reported the online threat to the FBI and the bureau opened a counterterrorism investigation but closed it on Oct. 11 saying it never managed to identify the person behind the post.

It wasn’t until after last week’s school massacre that the FBI did track down the author and found it was the 19-year-old man now accused of slaying 17 people at his former high school, Mr. Grassley’s office said, after getting briefings from both the FBI and Google.

Google would have been able to help confirm the commentator’s identity if the FBI had followed up, Mr. Grassley’s office said.

The FBI also missed a crucial tip from a caller in January. The person described Mr. Cruz as “mentally ill with violent tendencies,” Mr. Grassley’s office said. The caller said Mr. Cruz mutilated small animals and had pulled a rifle on his late mother, and had threatened more violence.

Read More: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/23/chuck-grassley-fbi-didnt-contact-google-during-pro/

 

By the Numbers: Gun Control is not the Answer

Gun Control in Springfield Does Not Lower Murder Rates

Gun Control Fails: What Happened in England, Ireland, and Canada

12/10/2015

If gun-control advocates want to claim credit for recent declines in homicide rates, they’ll need to explain why they remain blameless for increases in the murder rates that came on the heels of increasing gun controls through much of the 20th century. Of course, in these countries, one could also claim that the lack of sufficiently restrictive gun control was what really caused the increases in homicides mid-century, and that it was the build-up in restrictive laws that finally took effect ten or twenty years ago, thus pushing down homicide rates.

However, this could not be applied to the US where gun ownership has expanded in recent years while homicide rates have fallen.

United States: Homicide Rate Has Collapsed Since the 1970s

Naturally, we should take a look at the US to get a sense of what is happening there during this time period. According to the WHO data, murder rates increased significantly in the United States during the 1960, hitting a peak of 10.5 homicides per 100,000 in 1974. After a series of ups and downs during the 1980s and early 90s, homicides began a significant decline:

Source: World Health Organization 

According to the data published by the World Bank, up through 2012, the homicide rate in the US has continued to decline over the past decade, and is now back at 1950s or early 1960s levels:

Source: World Bank 

Of course, during this period in the United States, gun ownership rates have exploded, with enormous increases in total gun ownership. I examine gun totals here.

Moreover, the number of conceal carry permits has increased significantly over the past twenty years, and as the Washington Times recently noted:

Since 2007, the number of concealed handgun permits has soared from 4.6 million to over 12.8 million, and murder rates have fallen from 5.6 killings per 100,000 people to just 4.2, about a 25 percent drop…

Meanwhile, the federal “assault” weapons ban expired in 2004 and numerous states greatly expanded their provisions for conceal carry.

The homicide rate has steadily declined over this period. Not surprisingly, a 2003 CDC report on gun violence concludes:

The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes.

And that was before the continued declines in homicides that occurred during the decade following 2003.

Read More: https://mises.org/wire/gun-control-fails-what-happened-england-ireland-and-canada