Opinion: Gun Control Emotions vs. Gun Control Facts
John R. Lott Jr
Just 24 hours after the shooting in Tucson, politicians were calling for more gun control. And the drumbeat has continued.
On Sunday, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called for using the information supplied on people’s applications to join the military to determine whether they will be banned from buying guns. Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Richard Lugar, R-Ind., promised a new push for renewing at least part of the federal assault weapons ban. The previous week had been filled with calls for everything from gun show regulations to a thousand-foot gun-free zone around politicians.
But while the emotional reaction to a mass shooting is understandable, the fact is that some of the proposals would at best only make people feel better and at worst make them less safe.
Schumer’s proposal, for example, would try to pick up criminal activities included in military applications for which there are no criminal convictions. But the military has a good reason to maintain confidentiality when it interviews new recruits: It wants to get the most honest answers it can.
With Schumer’s proposed change, new recruits would be more reluctant to tell the military that they’d been smoking marijuana, for example, knowing that any answers they gave could haunt them the rest of their lives, with serious consequences such as being banned for life from being able to own a gun.
And while it would be wonderful if these background checks were able to keep pot smokers, criminals or the insane from getting guns, existing regulations have been extremely ineffective at keeping those prohibiting from buying guns from getting them.
Indeed, the evidence shows that the only people inconvenienced by the Brady Act background checks for gun purchases — which have been in place since 1994 — are law-abiding citizens. In fact, over 99.9 percent of those purchases initially flagged as being illegal under the law were later determined to be misidentified.
Take the numbers for 2008, the latest year for which data are available. The 78,906 initial denials resulted in only 147 cases involving banned individuals trying to purchase guns. Of those 147 cases, prosecutors thought the evidence was strong enough to proceed on only 105, and they won convictions in just 43. But few of these 43 cases stopped career criminals or those who posed real threats. The typical case was someone who had misdemeanor convictions for an offense he didn’t realize prevented him from buying a gun.
Given this, it’s not surprising that no academic studies by economists or criminologists have found that the Brady Act or other state background checks have reduced violent crime.
Just as futile would be reinstituting the parts of the assault weapons ban limiting magazine size. No research by criminologists or economists has found that the either the assault weapons ban or the magazine-size restrictions reduce crime. This is not surprising, as magazines are simply small metal boxes with a spring and are thus very easy to make. Besides, someone planning to harm a large number of people can easily bring two or more loaded guns.
A proposal by Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., is probably the stupidest. King and gun control groups want a 1,000-foot gun-free zone around politicians and senior government officials. To many, if you want to make an area safe, simply ban guns. But when you don’t have metal detectors moving around at a 1,000-foot distance from politicians as they walk down the street, who is going to obey this ban? The bad guys with guns will be the only ones who end up right next to the politician.
Clearly, criminals don’t obey gun-free zones. And, likewise, they do not respect gun bans, as was seen in the increased murder rates in Chicago and Washington, D.C., following their handgun bans. The recent 36 percent drop in murder rates in D.C. right after the Supreme Court struck down its gunlock and handgun ban laws provides even more evidence.
Supporters blame those gun ban failures on the ease of getting guns in the rest of the country. They claim that unless the ban covers the entire country, it isn’t a fair test of how well a ban will work. Still, that doesn’t explain why gun bans actually increase, rather than decrease, murder rates. As I demonstrate in my third edition of “More Guns, Less Crime,” even in island nations such as Ireland, the U.K. and Jamaica — with easily defendable borders — gun bans have failed to stop drug gangs from obtaining both drugs and guns (see the figures here). In Australia, murder rates were flat after many types of guns were banned in 1996.
Fortunately, polls indicate that voters have become more educated about the problems surrounding these knee-jerk, quick-fix solutions. A new Quinnipiac University Polling Institute poll found that a slim 9 percent believe the Tucson shootings could be blamed on lenient gun control laws.
Yes, mentally unstable people and violent criminals ought not to possess guns. But the new laws being offered will create more problems than solutions.
John R. Lott Jr. is a Fox News.com contributor. He is an economist and author of the revised edition of “More Guns, Less Crime” (University of Chicago Press, 2010).
Merry Christmas!
ATF: Pistol Grips and Shotguns
Pistol Grips and Shotguns
Firearms with pistol grips attached:
The definition of a shotgun under the GCA, 18 U.S.C.
§ 921(a)(5), is “a weapon designed or redesigned, made or
remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed
or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of
an explosives to fire through a smooth bore either a number
of ball shot or single projectile for each single pull of the trigger.
Under the GCA, 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(29)(A), handgun
means “a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to
be held and fired by the use of a single hand.”
Federal law provides under 18 U.S.C. 922(b)(1), that if the firearm to be
transferred is “other than a rifle or shotgun,” the purchaser
must be 21 years of age or older.
Certain commercially produced firearms do not fall within
the definition of shotgun under the GCA even though
they utilize a shotgun shell for ammunition. For example,
firearms that come equipped with a pistol grip in place of
the buttstock are not shotguns as defined by the GCA.
A firearm with a pistol grip in lieu of the shoulder stock is
not designed to be fired from the shoulder and, therefore,
is not a shotgun. Since it is a firearm “other than a rifle or
shotgun,” the purchaser must be 21 years of age or older.
Additionally, interstate controls apply. The licensee and
transferee must be residents of the same State.
Other questions raised pertain to entries made in the
licensee’s required records with respect to firearm “type.”
These entries should indicate the firearm type as “pistol grip
firearm.”
ATF to Require Multiple Sales Reports for Long Guns
December 17, 2010 By Larry Keane View Comments
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is moving to require federally licensed firearms retailers to report multiple sales of modern sporting rifles beginning January 5, 2011. Specifically, the ATF requirement calls for firearms retailers to report multiple sales, or other dispositions, of two or more .22 caliber or larger semi-automatic rifles that are capable of accepting a detachable magazine and are purchased by the same individual within five consecutive business days.
Today’s Washington Post suggests that the reporting mandate would be limited to retailers along the Southwest border; however, the Federal Register Notice does not limit the geographic scope of the reporting requirement.
This ATF “emergency” mandate was originally pushed by the anti-gun Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) coalition, headed by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, more than a year and a half ago. And the Post reports that the Department of Justice has “languished” over this plan for several months. Given this timetable, it’s hard to see exactly where the “emergency” is.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation opposes this reporting requirement because it further burdens America’s law-abiding firearms retailers with yet another onerous regulation that will do nothing to curb crime. Multiple sales reporting of long guns will actually make it more difficult for licensed retailers to help law enforcement as traffickers modify their illegal schemes to circumvent the reporting requirement, thereby driving traffickers further underground. This is not unlike how criminals maneuvered around one-gun-a-month laws in states like Virginia – which is still considered an “exporting source state” by anti-gun organizations like the MAIG despite its restrictions on the number of firearms law-abiding residents may purchase.
Multiple sales reporting for long guns is an ill-considered mandate and one that ATF does not have the legal authority to unilaterally impose. In fact, ATF has not specified under what legal authority it presumes to act. The decision as to whether ATF can move forward with this agenda-driven mandate will be left to Cass Sunstein who heads the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). This is the same Cass Sunstein who in a 2007 speech at Harvard University said, “We ought to ban hunting, if there isn’t a purpose other than sport and fun. That should be against the law. It’s time now.”
NSSF will be submitting comments in opposition to this registration scheme and is encouraging all firearms retailers, sportsmen and enthusiasts to do the same.
Please voice your concern by doing the following:
1. Call the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulation Affairs, Department of Justice, Desk Officer at (202) 395-6466.
2. E-mail Barbara A. Terrell, ATF, Firearms Industry Programs Branch at Barbara.Terrell@atf.gov
3. Call your Senators and Representative: United States Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121
Points to make:
- Multiple sales reporting of long guns will actually make it more difficult for licensed retailers to help law enforcement as traffickers modify their illegal schemes to circumvent the reporting requirement. Traffickers will go further underground, hiring more people to buy their firearms. This will make it much harder for retailers to identify and report suspicious behavior to law enforcement.
- Long guns are rarely used in crime (Bureau of Justice Statistics).
- Imposing multiple sales-reporting requirements for long guns would further add to the already extensive paperwork and record-keeping requirements burdening America’s retailers – where a single mistake could cost them their license and even land them in jail.
- Last year, ATF inspected 2,000 retailers in border states and only two licenses were revoked (0.1%). These revocations were for reasons unknown and could have had nothing to do with illicit trafficking of guns; furthermore, no dealers were charged with any criminal wrongdoing.
- According to ATF, the average age of a firearm recovered in the United States is 11 years old. In Mexico it’s more than 14 years old. This demonstrates that criminals are not using new guns bought from retailers in the states.
- Congress, when it enacted multiple sales reporting for handguns, could have required multiple sales of long guns – it specifically chose not to.
SAF SUES N.J. OFFICIALS FOR ‘DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS’ ON PERMIT DENIALS
NEWS RELEASE
Second Amendment Foundation
12500 NE Tenth Place • Bellevue, WA 98005
(425) 454-7012 • FAX (425) 451-3959 • www.saf.org
SAF SUES N.J. OFFICIALS FOR ‘DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS’ ON PERMIT DENIALS
For Immediate Release: 11/22/2010
BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today filed suit in U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against several New Jersey officials for deprivation of civil rights under color of law.
SAF is joined in the lawsuit by the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, Inc. and six private citizens whose applications for permits to carry have been denied generally on the grounds that they have not shown a “justifiable need.” One of the plaintiffs is a kidnap victim, another is a part-time sheriff’s deputy, a third carries large amounts of cash in his private business and another is a civilian employee of the FBI in New Jersey who is fearful of attack from a radical Islamic fundamentalist group. Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys David D. Jensen and Robert P. Firriolo with the firm of Duane Morris, LLP in Newark.
Named as defendants in the case are three Superior Court judges, Philip J. Maenza, Morris County; Rudolph A. Filko, Passaic County and Edward A. Jerejian of Bergen County, plus Col. Rick Fuentes, superintendent of the State Police, Hammonton Police Chief Frank Ingemi and New Jersey Attorney General Paula T. Dow.
“Law-abiding New Jersey citizens have been arbitrarily deprived of their ability to defend themselves and their families for years under the state’s horribly-crafted laws,” said SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “The law grants uncontrolled discretion to police chiefs and other public officials to deny license applications even in cases where the applicant has shown a clear and present danger exists.
“If being a kidnap victim, or part-time law enforcement officer, or the potential target of a known radical group does not clearly demonstrate a justifiable need,” he continued, “the defendants need to explain what would. Do citizens need guns to their heads or knives to their throats before the state considers their need to be justified?
“Supreme Court rulings have made it clear that the Second Amendment prohibits states from completely banning the carrying of handguns for self-defense,” Gottlieb said. “Nor may states deny citizens the right to carry handguns in non-sensitive places or deprive them of the right to carry in an arbitrary and capricious manner. That’s what is happening today in New Jersey, and we intend to stop it.”
-END-
Obama Nominates Rabid Anti-gunner to Head the ATF — Ask your Senators to Support a Filibuster
Monday, November 29, 2010
It was not a good sign that Barack Obama kept his nominee to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives a secret until after the midterm election –- and then quickly announced that anti-gun zealot Andrew F. Traver would be named to fill the slot.
After being blasted before November 2’s election by the liberal New York Times for failing to beef up the ATF by appointing a director –- for fear of the wrath of the “gun lobby” -– Obama gets right past the election and, presto chango, a nominee appears. How ’bout that?
And not just any nominee.
As special agent in charge of Chicago’s ATF field division, Traver had taken the lead in calling for a ban on semiautomatic firearms.
And Chicago, of course, has been the epicenter of anti-gun government activism. It is not surprising that Traver has also been active in the virulently anti-gun International Association of Chiefs of Police, which has worked to empower Handgun Control-type activists and has commissioned panels to:
* support one-gun-a-month and lock-up-your-safety laws, as well as “ballistic fingerprinting” files on all firearms;
* espouse an “effective” ban on .50-caliber firearms, and a redefinition of “armor-piercing” ammunition that could effectively ban handgun use;
* mandate gun-destruction policies for law enforcement and enhanced funding to go after guns;
* prohibit all private gun sales and make “prohibited persons” out of a much wider variety of persons committing simple misdemeanors;
* back a repeal of the Tiahrt amendment; and,
* allow federal health and safety oversight of the firearms industry (through agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control, the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Food and Drug Administration).
It is disconcerting that ANY organization espousing these views would be taken seriously. That an activist in such an organization would be put in charge of the ATF is truly troubling.
ACTION: Contact your Senators. Urge them to support a filibuster of the Traver nomination to head the ATF. You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center to send your Senators the pre-written e-mail message below.
—– Pre-written letter —–
Dear Senator:
It was not a good sign that Barack Obama kept his nominee to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives a secret until after the election — and then quickly announced that anti-gun zealot Andrew F. Traver would be named to fill the slot.
As special agent in charge of Chicago’s ATF field division, Traver had taken the lead in calling for a ban on semiautomatic firearms.
And Chicago, of course, has been the epicenter of anti-gun government activism. It is not surprising that Traver has also been active in the virulently anti-gun International Association of Chiefs of Police, which has worked to empower Handgun Control-type activists and has commissioned panels to:
* support one-gun-a-month and lock-up-your-safety laws, as well as “ballistic fingerprinting” files on all firearms;
* espouse an “effective” ban on .50-caliber firearms, and a redefinition of “armor-piercing” ammunition that could effectively ban handgun use;
* mandate gun-destruction policies for law enforcement and enhanced funding to go after guns;
* prohibit all private gun sales and make “prohibited persons” out of a much wider variety of persons committing simple misdemeanors;
* back a repeal of the Tiahrt amendment; and,
* allow federal health and safety oversight of the firearms industry (through agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control, the Consumer Product Safety Commission or the Food and Drug Administration).
It is disconcerting that ANY organization espousing these views would be taken seriously. That an activist in such an organization would be put in charge of the ATF is truly troubling.
Please support a filibuster of the Traver nomination to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Sincerely,
Now offering Alexander Arms products
Tools of the Trade is proud to offer products from Alexander Arms,
please check out their site and let us know what you would like!
Also watch the video on the 6.5 Grendel and what Hornady has to say about it.
GOA Congressional Ratings are Now Posted on the Web — Time for fall cleaning of House and Senate!
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org
Thursday, September 30, 2010
With one of the biggest elections of our lifetimes only a month away, Gun Owners of America has now released its Congressional Ratings for the House and Senate.
Democrats have taken a radical turn to the left under the leadership of liberal anti-gunners like Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama, and the electorate is ready to make a correction.
There is no doubt that the country is at a crossroads, with America’s Constitutional Republic hanging in the balance.
So the GOA Rating Guide is your tool for cutting through the bull that candidates are throwing at you during this election season.
Candidates who have established a voting record, either in the office for which they are running or in another elected office, are evaluated primarily on the basis of that voting record.
If an incumbent or challenger has not established a voting record or demonstrated his or her position in some other way, that candidate is evaluated on the basis of his or her responses to the GOA 2010 Federal Candidate Questionnaire.
You can go to http://gunowners.org/2010-candidate-ratings-guide.htm to see the ratings of every candidate on Second Amendment issues.
For 20 years, GOA has been the only gun group publishing an open-source national rating for gun owners to use. Our rating has been so devastating in smoking out the anti-gun bias of phony politicians that the Brady Campaign even took us before an administrative court three years ago to try and silence us. They lost.
Current GOA members will be receiving a printed version of this rating, and they are encouraged to photocopy it and distribute it around to their pro-gun family, friends and clubs. This newsletter not only contains ratings for every House and Senate race in the country, it includes explosive evidence that more and more government shrinks are using the Veterans Disarmament Act to disarm our military veterans.
To start receiving your own copy of The Gun Owners newsletter, please go to http://gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm to join GOA today.
The November elections are an exciting, if not anxious, time for millions of concerned Americans. Again, GOA encourages all members and supporters to go online and look up their candidates in the GOA Rating Guide to see where they stand on the Second Amendment. Then, make sure you pass this link along on to fellow gun owners, shooting ranges and gun clubs.
We have been to the marches, rallies, and town hall meetings. Now, it is time for millions and millions of concerned gun rights supporters to make their way to the polls and make their voices heard on Election Day.
To learn more about candidates endorsed by Gun Owners of American Political Victory Fund, please visit www.goapvf.org.