Monday, November 24, 2014

Harvard Study On Guns

Harvard study shows privately owned guns are very effective crime fighting tools

By Kevin “Coach” Collins
A little heralded Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy study holds some devastating news for those who are trying to take guns from America’s population.
Here are the facts the study found.
The overall message of the report is that nations with private gun ownership have less crime.
In the period 1991 to 2011 gun ownership rose steadily; murders by guns fell 39% and firearms related crimes dropped 69%.
The nine European countries with the fewest guns have a combined murder rate three times higher than the nine European countries with the most guns in private hands.
With rare exceptions, since 1950 mass shootings have virtually always occurred in states with restrictive gun ownership laws. Moreover despite very strict laws against private gun ownership, three of the worst recorded school shootings have happened in Europe.
Contrary to liberal lies, while America leads the world in private gun ownership, we are just 28th in gun murders per 100,000 people.  
From 1991 to 2011, America’s overall violent crime rate and our murder rate both fell by half; a remarkable feat by any measure.   
On average 200,000 American women protect themselves from sexual attacks each year using guns.
By a ratio of 80 to 1 Americans use guns for crime prevention rather than to commit murders.
During the period studied (1991 to 2011) deaths by accidental discharges of firearms fell 58%.
Much to the contrary of liberal lies the UK’s violent crime rate in 4 times higher than ours and their rape rate is 125% higher than ours. The UK also has 133% more assaults than we do. 
After plunging into extreme gun banning Australia has experienced a 19% increase in murders and an increase of 69% in armed robberies.
Despite passing increasingly more restrictive gun control laws, Chicago’s homicide rate jumped 17% last year and by many measures it’s the most deadly city in the world.
Over the 23 years, following its implementation of a law requiring each household to have a gun, Kennesaw Georgia saw its overall crime rate drop by 50% and its burglary rate fall by 89%.

Sunday, November 16, 2014

FBI & Self-Defense Statistics

For reference re: justifiable homicide

Posted by David Hardy · 29 August 2014 11:45 AM
In the dispute over how many self-defense cases occur, one data point often cited by those seeking to minimize the number is the FBI Uniform Crime Report's count of justifiable homicides (a legal category that includes self-defense). This is usually in the range of 900 a year, including several hundred by police. While that doesn't count self-defense that doesn't result in the perp's death, it is argued that it is inconsistent with hundreds of thousands or millions of defensive uses annually.
What's not realized is that the FBI count is artificially defined in a way that far undercounts defensive uses. The usual definition of self-defense with a deadly weapon is use of force immediately necessary in light of a reasonable belief that the perp is likely to inflict death or serious bodily injury.
But the FBI UCR Reporting Handbook at pp. 17-18 uses a completely different definition. Reporting officials are instructed, in the case of use of force by a non-LEO, to include under justifiable homicide only killings "The killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen."
The illustration given (do NOT list as justifiable a situation where a citizen shoots a fellow attacking him, in a crime of passion, with a broken bottle -- the author must have watched too many 1950s movies about street fights) makes it apparent that the assault itself does not count as "commission of a felony."

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

Race, Guns, Drugs & Violence

In reading the "press offerings" on this subject, I do note that those who depreciate the gross misuse of guns by Blacks:
1. Point out the issue of poverty among Blacks--Without providing data as to such crimes among poor Whites; And,
2. Blame the illegal drug trade for such gun-related violence----Without providing parallel data as to any, if such, disproportional violence among Whites involve in illegal drug sales/distribution.

I wish I could find the "research"; But, I recall that the removal of Blacks from our statistics as to gun-related and other violence would leave the USA with a record of violent crimes no worse than Belgium, a nations whose citizens (For a EU nation) can easily obtain handguns (Or were so).

Friday, November 07, 2014

Questions For Nominees For AG/Federal Judgeships

I have yet to read or hear the fullness of (Federal) judges or candidates for Federal elective/appointive offices (Especially to the Federal Bench) responses to the following questions.

1. Do you agree or disagree that the original Constitution of the United States could not be ratified without a Bill Of Rights, that resulting in the latter document being the first ten amendments to the first?
2. Do you agree or disagree with President Thomas Jefferson that the intent of the authors of the Constitution (ie As the above-noted "Package Deal") is to be considered when involved in interpretation of that document?
3. As to the Second Amendment, do your agree or disagree that we can clearly understand the intent of those authors be understood from the comments of Presidents Jefferson, Washington and Madison---And, the other patriots who established our Republic?
4. Do you agree or disagree with the statement that the "Shall Not Be Infringed" clause of the Second Amendment is the strongest statement of a limit-to or prohibition-against Federal acts in violation of the above-noted "package deal"?
5. Will you obey or resist the ruling of the Supreme Court Of The United States in declaring the rights under the Second Amendment as due every citizen without regard to membership in  a "militia"?
6. Will you obey or resist that Court's making that ruling binding, through the 14th Amendment, on the States?
7. How (If at all) have Federal judges considered/addressed the noted "shall not be infringed" clause?