"GUILTY
of criminal negligence", so saith the
court, "for denying the
right of self-protection."
Will
this be the outcome of your decision?
Not since the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968 has
the debate in America been so intense about firearms and the Second
Amendment to the Constitution.
In less than two-years time several barbaric shootings
by students of their fellow classmates and teachers has prompted
outrage among our citizens. Emotions are so inflamed that what is
occurring can not by any means be called a debate of the issues. The
rhetoric is hot and impassioned … and often facts, knowledge and reason
are the casualties left bleeding from the engagements.
Although millions of Americans own, carry, and use
firearms peacefully, their significant numbers are nevertheless a
minority. This means there is a good possibility that people in the
position to make decisions affecting the ownership and purchase of
firearms and handguns in particular have no direct knowledge about
firearms. Firearms and the facts about them are not something they are
versed in at all.
Therefore these people, these decision makers, are most
likely to be have their opinions affected by the headlines of the day
and by statements proclaimed by advocates and pundits.
What can be the result of making irrevocable
decisions based on a lack of information or false information? Who are
these decision makers? Are you one of them?
Policies and decisions have and will be made that,
literally, affect life and death.
They are made by corporate executives, personnel
directors, shop keepers, press and broadcast reporters and journalists,
judges, lawyers, legislators, bureaucrats, police officers, and voters.
Here are a few examples:
- Shall I ban legal firearms from the workplace even
when held by employees licensed to carry such firearms?
- Shall I also ban these same law abiding citizens from
having a legal firearm stored in their vehicle if parked on company
property?
- Shall I ask at the time of employment if an applicant
owns firearms? Has a concealed-carry permit? Is a member of a shooting
or hunting club? Is a member of a pro-firearms organization?
- Shall I refuse to allow employees to legally carry a
firearm while working in my store? Even if my business is open to the
public late at night? Even if they handle large amounts of money or
valuable items?
- Shall I ban customers from entering my place of
business with a legally concealed firearm? How will I know … metal
detectors at the entries? Will I allow entry if they temporarily store
them in a lock-box that I provide?
- As a journalist or reporter, will I fact-check
statements made regarding firearms before repeating it in print or
broadcast? Even if such statements undermine my own opinion of the
issue? If my repeating false or misleading information can be shown to
have affected the outcome of a public referendum and is later
discovered to be false, can I be held liable? If not legally liable,
liable in the court of public opinion?
- As a legislator, should I cast a deciding vote on a
firearms related matter based on emotion and the current public
sentiment or on known facts? Should I adhere to a strict interpretation
of the U.S. Constitution? My own state's constitution? Will my vote
inadvertently lead to the death of innocent, unprotected people?
- As a voter, will my vote prevent a fellow citizen
from defending his life, his spouse, his children, his property? What
if that fellow citizen is a member of my own family or a close friend?
What will be the consequences of my vote?
- If as a result of any of these decisions I may make,
an innocent, defenseless citizen is killed or injured by a criminal or
deranged person MAY I BE HELD RESPONSIBLE IN CRIMINAL OR CIVIL COURT?
If my decision effectively prevents someone from defending themselves,
AM I NOT AT FAULT? How will I ever be able to live with myself and look
in the mirror?
If you are a decision maker, either by virtue of office
or position. If you are a voter. Then I suggest that you DO inform
yourself because the day will come when you WILL be forced to make a
decision.
Every single item that follows is fact, not fiction.
Complete references are at the end of this document. DO NOT make a
life-and-death decision and say you were ignorant of the facts … the
facts are here for you now.
GUNS IN AMERICA: THE FACTS
(collected by Paul Gallant)
SELF-DEFENSE
& CRIME
- In 1990, a convicted felon could expect to serve the
following prison time:
1.8 years for murder,
60 days for rape,
23 days for robbery,
6.7 days for arson, and
6.4 days for aggravated assault.
According to a U.S. Justice Department survey in 17 states, of felony
offenders placed on probation in 1986, 43% were re-arrested on other
felony charges within 3 years of their release. (1)
- Passage of the Brady Law in 1994 has not
been accompanied by a statistically significant decline
in murder or robbery. It has been associated with
significant increases in rape and aggravated
assaults, presumably from the increased difficulty encountered by
law-abiding citizens in obtaining firearms for self-defense. (2)
- In 1987, Florida's concealed-carry law went from
"may-issue" to "shall-issue" (also known as "Right-To-Carry," or RTC).
This meant that issuing authorities must
provide a concealed-carry handgun license to all qualified applicants.
Other states followed suit, and modeled their own RTC laws after
Florida's.
On 4/7/98 (the latest date such figures were available), Florida's Dept
of Law Enforcement announced that the state's murder rate had dropped,
again, in 1997, just as it had in each of the 5 previous years. The
additional drop marked the lowest murder rate experienced by "Dodge
City East" since 1933. (3)
- In 1982, Kennesaw, GA (pop. 17,000) passed a law
requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in their
home, exempting those with criminal records or religious objections.
Seven months after it took effect, the residential burglary rate
dropped 89%, vs. 10.4% statewide. Since 1982, only 2 murders
have occurred (1984 and 1989), both committed with knives. (4)
- Allowing citizens to carry concealed handguns reduces
violent crime. The reduction corresponds very closely to the number of
concealed-handgun licenses issued. On average, murder rates
in states banning concealed-carry are 127% higher than in states having
the most liberal carry laws. A 1% increase in firearm
ownership reduces violent crime by 4.1%. Large, densely populated urban
areas benefit the most from concealed-carry laws. (5)
- Ordinary, law-abiding Americans use
guns defensively 2.5 million times, or more, each year.
About 75% of these instances are with handguns. That translates to
rapes prevented, injuries avoided, medical costs saved, and property
protected. (6)
- Firearms provide the safest and most
effective means of resisting violent criminal attack. For
robbery and assault, resistance by defenders armed with a gun leads to
termination of the incident with the smallest chance of injury to the
victim. In U.S. government studies, victims resisting robbery with a
gun were injured 17.4% of the time. Those who did nothing at all were
injured 24.7% of the time. Those who used non-violent resistance, like
trying to run away, were injured 35.9% of the time. Those who resisted
with a knife were injured 40.3% of the time.
For assault, injury rates were 12.1%, 27.3%, 25.5%, and 29.5%,
respectively. While 17.4% of those who resisted robbery with a gun were
injured overall, this includes victims who were first injured before
they used their guns; less than 6% of robbery victims were injured
after using a gun to resist. (7)
- Women who carry concealed handguns provide a greater
margin of safety for other women. While murder rates decline when
either more men or more women carry concealed handguns, the drop is
even greater among women than among men. Rapists are
particularly susceptible to the deterrence of a potentially armed woman.
(5)
- Increased incidents of "road rage" from allowing more
citizens to carry guns have not materialized. In the 31 states where it
is currently legal for citizens to carry a concealed handgun, there
have been no documented instances of such
acts by armed law-abiding citizens. (2)
- Armed defenders lose their guns to an
attacker less than 1% of the time. (7)
- The net value of private firearm ownership - the
dollar savings from defensive gun use, minus the costs of
"gun-violence" - has been estimated at up to $38.9 billion, annually.
(8)
- So-called "assault weapons" are military look-alike
semi-automatic firearms, and are exactly the same as guns which have
been around for over 100 years — only their looks
have changed. Semi-automatic firearms do not "spray" bullets, and are
not machine guns - they require a separate pull of the trigger for each
shot to be fired, just like a revolver - and are used in 3% or less of
all firearm-related crimes. They are the most modern tools
the law-abiding citizen can use for self-defense and protection of home
and family. They are especially valuable for physically
handicapped victims. (9)
- In 1856, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that local
law-enforcement had no duty to protect
individuals, but only a general duty to enforce the laws. (10) In 1982,
the U.S. Court of Appeals held that "there is no
Constitutional right to be protected by the state against criminals or
madmen. The Constitution does not require Federal or
State government to provide services, even so elementary a service as
maintaining law and order." (11)
[See a thorough examination
of this subject by TYSK]
- In Great Britain, handguns are outlawed, and
possession of long guns is severely restricted. Yet, despite strict gun
control, as of 1995, rates for robbery, assault, burglary, and motor
vehicle theft in England and Wales had surpassed those here in the
States. On average, for all 4 crimes, English rates were
double U.S. rates. (12)
MASS
SHOOTINGS & "GUN-FREE" SCHOOL ZONES
- Deaths and injuries from mass public shootings (like
Jonesboro AR, and Littleton CO) fall dramatically after RTC
concealed-handgun laws are enacted. Where data was available, both
before and after passage of such laws, the average death rate
from mass shootings plummeted by up to 91% after such laws took effect,
and injuries dropped by over 80%! (2,13)
- Armed with a hunting rifle, 16-year-old Luke Woodham
killed his ex-girlfriend and her close friend, then wounded 7 other
students, in 1997 at a high school in Pearl, Mississippi. Assistant
Principal Joel Myrick retrieved a handgun from his car, and interrupted
Woodham's shooting spree, holding him at bay until police arrived.
Earlier that morning, Woodham had stabbed his mother to death. (14)
A similar script played out in 1998 in Edinboro, Pennsylvania, when
local merchant James Strand used his shotgun to "coax" 14-year old
Andrew Wurst into dropping his gun, and surrendering to police. Wurst
had just killed one teacher, wounded another and two classmates. (14)
- "...the recent rash of public school
shootings...raise[s] questions about the unintentional
consequences of laws. The five public school shootings
[which occurred during the 1997-98 school year] took place after a 1995
federal law banned guns (including permitted concealed handguns) within
a thousand feet of a school. The possibility exists that
attempts to outlaw guns from schools, no matter how well meaning, may
have produced perverse effects.
"It is interesting to note that during the 1977 to 1995 period [of our
study], 15 shootings took place in schools in states
without right-to-carry laws and only one took place in a state with
this type of law. There were 19 deaths and 97 injuries
in states without the law, while there was one death and two injuries
in states with the law." (13)
- A July 1993 U.S. Department of Justice study found
that "boys who own legal firearms...have much lower rates of
delinquency and drug use [than those who obtained them
illegally] and are even slightly less delinquent than non-owners of
guns." It concluded that, "for legal gun owners, socialization appears
to take place in the family; for illegal gun owners, it appears to take
place 'on the street' ". (15)
ACCIDENTS
& SUICIDES
- In 1994, fatal firearms accidents dropped 11% from
1993 figures, to the lowest annual number since record-keeping began in
1903. They dropped even lower by almost 7% in 1995. Motor vehicle
accidents, falls, fires, drownings, poisonings, suffocation, and other
accidents all accounted for more deaths than did firearm
accidents. Among children aged 0-14 years, there were 185
fatal firearms accidents, vs. 500 per year in the mid-1970s. (16)
- In 1993, there were 1,334 drownings and 528
firearm-related accidental deaths from ages 0-19. While firearms
outnumber pools by a factor of over 30:1, the risk of drowning in a
pool is nearly 100 times higher than from a firearm-related accident. From
ages 0-5, the risk of drowning skyrockets to 500 times the risk from a
gun! (16,17)
- "Trigger-lock" laws don't equal safety. While
California has such a law on the books, it saw a 12% increase in fatal
firearm accidents in 1994. Texas doesn't have one, and experienced a
28% decrease, instead. (16) "Trigger-locks" do, however,
render guns inaccessible for self-defense.
- Accident and suicide rates are unaffected by the
passage of Right-To-Carry concealed handgun laws. (2)
- Suicide rates fluctuate independently of gun control
laws and gun ownership. Banning guns will not affect the
suicide rate -- other equally deadly implements would only be
substituted in their place. (18)
THE U.S.
CONSTITUTION
- The scholarship on the 2nd Amendment overwhelmingly
agrees that it protects an individual right to keep and bear
arms, and not simply the right to arm the "militia." (19)
- In 1982, the Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution
evaluated the historical record, and unanimously
came to the same conclusion. (20)
- From "Survey of Police Officers in Lehigh and
Northampton Counties" by Stephen L. Christopoulos: In addition, my
Internet search uncovered many dozens of articles from law review
journals which dealt with the subject of the Second Amendment. Dr.
Edgar Suter, MD reports that "[o]f the 11 peer-reviewed articles
claiming the Second Amendment is a collective states' right, 5 are by
employees of Handgun Control, Inc. or the Center to Prevent Handgun
Violence and 3 are students. Of the 51 peer-reviewed articles noting
that the Second Amendment guarantees the individual right of
the people to keep and bear arms, 4 are by attorneys employed
by the National Rifle Association. Excluding students and employees of
lobbying organizations then, 47 support the individual right view and 3
support the collective right view." (21)
- On April 7, 1999, U. S. District Judge Sam R.
Cummings in U.S.A. vs
Timothy J. Emerson (Criminal Action No.
6:98-CR-103-C) found that an examination of (a) English
History, (b) Colonial Right to Bear Arms, (c) The Ratification Debates,
and (d) Drafting of the Second Amendment all show clearly that the
right was meant as an individual protection. The Judge repeatedly cited
relevant English and Colonial laws, quoted from numerous founding
fathers, and provided a crucial history lesson on how, "Without that
individual right [to bear arms], the colonists never could have won the
Revolutionary War." (22)
REFERENCES
1. Reynolds M, Caruth W;
"Myths About Gun Control"; National Center for Policy Analysis, 1992
http://www.ncpa.org/studies/s176/s176.html
2. Lott J; "More Guns, Less
Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws"; University of
Chicago; 1998
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html
3. Florida Department of
State documents
http://dlis.dos.state.fl.us/index.html
4. "Kennesaw Update"; The
New American, 6/10/96
5. Lott J, Mustard D;
"Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns"; Journal of
Legal Studies; Vol 26(1); Jan 97
http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/~llou/guns.html
6. Kleck G, Gertz M; "Nature
of Self-Defense with a Gun"; Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology;
Vol 86 1, Fall 1995
7. Kleck G; Targeting Guns:
Firearms and Their Control; Aldine de Gruyter; NY 1997
8. National Center for
Policy Analysis, March 1999
http://www.ncpa.org
9. Suter E;
"Assault-Weapons" Revisited - An Analysis of the AMA Report; Journal of
the Medical Association of Georgia, May 1994
10. South v. Maryland, 59 US
(HOW) 396, 15 L.Ed.433 (1856)
11. Bowers v. DeVito, US
Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit 686F.2d 616 (1982)
12. "Crime and Justice in
the United States and England and Wales, 1981-1996"; U.S. Bureau of
Justice Statistics; October 1998
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/cjusew96.htm
13. Lott J, Landes W;
"Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings, and Right-to-Carry
Concealed Handgun Laws: Contrasting Private and Public Law
Enforcement"; University of Chicago, Working Paper 73, 1999
http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=161637
14. "How to Stop Mass Public
Shootings"; Lott J; The L.A. Times 3/25/98
15. U.S. Department of
Justice study
http://www.tyc.state.tx.us/research/index.html
16. National Center for
Health Statistics
http://www.cdc.gov/nchswww/about/major/dvs/mortdata.htm
17. National Spa and Pool
Institute
http://www.nspi.org
18. Suter E; "Guns in the
Medical Literature: A Failure of Peer Review"; Journal of the Medical
Association of Georgia, Mar 1994
http://www.rkba.org/research/suter/med-lit.html
19. Reynolds H, Kates D;
"The Second Amendment and States' Rights: A Thought Experiment";
William & Mary Law Review; Vol 36 5,8/955
20. Senate Subcommittee of
the Commission of the Judiciary on The Constitution, 97th Congress,
1992
21. "Survey of Police
Officers in Lehigh and Northampton Counties" by Stephen L.
Christopoulos, 1997.
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/2nd_Amend/survey/gun_study.htm
22. United States of America v. Timothy Joe Emerson
(Criminal Action No. 6:98-CR-103-C).
FOR
MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
The Committee for Law Abiding Gun-Owners, Rockland
(LAGR)
Paul Gallant, O.D., Chairman
PO Box 354
Thiells, NY 10984-0354
914-354-9090 or (Fax) 914-354-9091
Email: 70274.1222@compuserve.com
Originally located on:
Political Women
(http://www.politicalwomen.com/document.htm)
Page
history:
May 1999 (original release)
(updated August 1999, ref. #22)
(revised broken links January 2003)
|
