Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 10:36 AM
To:
Subject: more guns: less cime
How many times over the last 20 years has more guns less crime been a suppressed subject of honest investigation? Joe Farah chronicles data from the newest accumulation being carefully avoided by the mainstream media. shirl
==============================================
BETWEEN THE LINES
Proof: More guns = less crime
Exclusive: Joseph Farah shares good-news data from D.C. subsequent to Heller case
Posted: January 16, 2010
There it was. Good news on New Year's Day on the front page of the Washington Post.
"Homicide totals in 2009 plummet in District, Prince George's," the headline read.
In a story that likely got lost amid the holiday revelry, the paper reported that the nation's capital in 2009 experienced its lowest number of homicides in 45 years. In case you can't do the math real quick, that previous year would be 1964.
And for those too young to remember, 1964 was pretty much the end of an era. It was before the riots, before the Vietnam War was seriously escalated to become a national dividing point, before the drug explosion.
So what happened in Washington, D.C., in 2009 that might account for such a dramatic decline in homicide deaths?
Hmmmmm. Let me see. Nothing comes to mind.
Oh, wait a minute! Wasn't 2009 the first full year following the overturning of Washington's gun ban by the Supreme Court in the Heller case?
Could that have something to do with it?
Will blue-helmeted U.N. personnel be knocking on your door demanding your firearms? Wayne LaPierre lays out the agenda to limit your rights in "The Global War on Your Guns"
Apparently the Washington Post newsroom didn't think so. It was not even mentioned in the New Year's Day story – not even as an afterthought. That should tell you something about the political culture and worldview in elite newsrooms of America's major metropolitan newspapers.
But think about it!
Once again, we have more real-life evidence of the theory so well articulated by John R. Lott in his breakthrough book, "More Guns, Less Crime."
Remember what was predicted by the naysayers following the Heller case?
They foresaw blood in the streets. They believed a sort of citywide Armageddon would ensue. They prophesied gloom and doom. In fact, even in his Supreme Court dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer argued the gun ban was necessary for public-safety reasons because "guns were 'responsible for 69 deaths in this country each day.'"
What Breyer didn't understand was that guns are not responsible for any deaths. People are. Bad guys are. Murderers are. And when those guys have a virtual monopoly on force, because law-abiding citizens can't bear arms, that's when blood flows in the streets.
For 20 years before the Heller decision, Washington was known alternately as the murder capital of the country and the "District of Criminals."
(Column continues below)
But something happened to make 2009 different. There was a significant drop in violent crime and property crime. The sharpest drop was in homicides – 25 percent. There was a 16 percent drop in sexual assaults and a 10 percent decrease in car thefts.
Can anyone point to another factor?
Was it Barack Obama's anointing presence? I don't think so.
It was Heller.
By the way, you probably also heard the news that 2009 was a banner year for gun sales nationwide. Americans, in fear Obama and the Democrat-dominated Congress would move quickly to limit their ability to exercise their Second Amendment rights, went out and got guns while they could.
These folks braved the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression to go out and buy firearms, which are not cheap. They also bought ammunition, which is getting more expensive all the time.
And guess what resulted?
Were more people killed by guns as the gun-control freaks always predict?
Nope.
Just the opposite.
According to the FBI's uniform crime report, law-enforcement agencies across the country experienced a decrease in violent crime for the first six months of 2009 from the same period the year earlier. Violent crime, which includes homicide, rape, robbery and aggravated assault, decreased by 4.4 percent. The complete annual report is not yet released.
But, mark my words, when it is out it will show violent crime down throughout America – because more people have guns.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.147/2628 - Release Date: 01/17/10 07:35:00
Fwd: FW: more guns: less cime
1/18/2010 06:23:00 AM
|
Key Words:
GUN CONTROL,
GUNS,
WASHINGTON D.C.,
WASHINGTON POST
|
This entry was posted on 1/18/2010 06:23:00 AM
and is filed under
GUN CONTROL
,
GUNS
,
WASHINGTON D.C.
,
WASHINGTON POST
.
You can follow any responses to this entry through
the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response,
or trackback from your own site.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
Yes, DCs homicide rate was lower in 2009. To automatically connect this with heller is sloppy at best, insane at worst.
DC's homicide rate has been on a strong downward trend for 20 years. 2009 was a continuation of that trend. 2009's lower rate, besides being a product of natural statistical variance, is more likely caused by gentrification and a stronger police presence in formerly violent neighborhoods. The DC police have installed roadblocks and checkpoints (which were very controversial as you might imagince), stepped up patrols, added cameras, etc etc.
I also love how they go back to John Lott, a "researcher" whose work has been proven falsified in the past.
Even if we accept this premise, where is the evidence? Is there anything to show that people are buying, carrying, or using more guns for self protection in DC? My guess is no.
Agree w/Anon: sloppy "research" if you're being kind; a load of crap if you're being honest.
I'll admit that I've done no research on this, but if memory serves, I believe that violent crime, in general, has been declining nationwide. This is due to numerous factors, including improved nationwide crime & gang databases, which assist the PDs, the FBI and so on across the country to track criminal activity better and work together to solve crimes.
I don't believe that there's ever been a study that links citizen gun ownership levels to having any impact whatsoever on the increase or decrease in crime. This is just stupid & typical rightwing fantasy land, which is proven by the devolution into a link to tin foil hat wearing Wayne LaPierre and teh eeevul UN taking away yer gunz 'n ammo. Bring on the black helicopters, citizens!
Per usual: brought to you by the guns and ammo industry, who will happily relieve you of your $$$ by scaring you into thinking you NEED more guns (for no reason).... and then they will laugh all the way to their banks.
FOOLS!
Plus, what the hell is "cime"???
And nationally the trend is also the same over the last two decades. Crime decreased in the first half of 2009, but it also decreased by the same rate in 2008.
Los Angeles saw twice the decline in homicides that DC did last year. By this insane wingnut logic, I conclude that the repeal of the DC gun ban actually contributed to a higher murder rate in that city.
Interestingly, violent crime was actually up a bit under Bush.
Also interesing was that this recent decline in homicide happened only in larger cities. Cities under 10000 actually saw an INCREASE in homicides. Now, if one were to stereotype one might wonder why all the good, small town Americans (who cling to their guns and religion, naturally), seem to be killing each other at a higher rate.
I will never understand why our education system teaches kids stuff like algebra and trigonometry BEFORE they are given a course in basic statistics.
The vast majority of Americans are utterly unable to see or grasp the fact that correlation does not equal causation, and have zero ability to think critically when presented with "facts", especailly those that are "backed up" by statistics, because they have no grasp of how this stuff works.
Not to mention the fact that it is still more or less impossible to buy guns in DC. As far as I know, there are no gun shops open in the District, and good luck finding someone who will sell one to you as they are all leery of the legal hoops they need to jump through.
All Heller did was made it legal to own handguns in DC. You have to register it, get fingerprinted, pay a $50-odd dollar fee per gun, and undergo training. It's not like Guns-R-Us has suddenly opened a dozen big-box gun stores in DC in the last 18 months.
But it's obviously true that an armed society is a polite one. Just look at Afghanistan and Iraq.
The funny thing is Obama has more pro gun laws approved under him, and the Brady campaign just gave him an F for gun control.
To last Anon: you are being too logical, SIR!
Thanks for the info; useful to know. But remember: this is all just put out there to turn the misinformed even more against BHO, if possible. It has nothing to do with logic, facts, reality, truth, etc.
Post a Comment