The Philly  sample size of 675 isn’t as small as some other studies, but it pales in comparison to Dr. John Lott’s research, which looked at every single county in the United States.  Dr. Lott concluded that “shall issue” concealed carry permit regulations save lives.  See Dr. Lott’s Book, More Guns, Less Crime.

Unfortunately, the ScienceDaily.com press release trumpeting this research was echoed in the Philadelphia Daily News.  We can expect to see this “study” touted on all the usual anti-gun rights websites and raised to the level of holy writ by Left wing politicians.

See my Categories, “Media Bias,” and “Junk Science” for other examples of the Mainstream Media’s ready acceptance of any “study” that purports to bolster attacks against the fundamental rights of American Citizens to armed self-defense against crime, tyranny, and genocide.

Def Mech

Write your legislators.  Testify at hearings.  Join pro-Second Amendment Organizations.  Join major political parties and become precinct leaders and district captains.  Campaign for electable pro-gun rights candidates.  (The next election cycle has started.  Emily’s List is already working to promote Democrat victories in the 2010 mid-term elections.  Think redistricting!  Think Gerrymandering to create “safe” Democrat districts for the next ten years!  If you don’t know what that means, be very afraid!)

Read the text of H.R. 45 and last session’s H.R. 1022 on the website for the U.S. Congress to get an idea about what we are facing with regard to handgun and semi-automatic firearms registration and a probable semi-auto ban.

Talk to your friends and neighbors about the need to protect the Bill of Rights.  (See my post: “Comments on H.R. 45 revisited,” 02-03-09, under the Category: “Legislation.”

We have to be careful in our public discourse that we do not feed into the stereotypes perpetrated by the Left against gun owners and lovers of individual liberty.  Ninty-nine percent of us are not “wing nuts, ” “whack jobs,” “men who lie to their wives about what they do on weekends.”  “We are not “Bambi killers,” “one-toothed rednecks,” “or kill-crazed militia wild men.”

Let us take the defense of our natural rights one careful step at a time.  Right now, we have about 80,000,000 gun owners in this country.  As has been pointed out, if we all stand up and make our voices heard, we can preserve our rights and our way of life.

We must also be very careful about our sources of information and our quotations.  Double check your sources!  As far as I have been able to determine, the “Liberty Teeth” quote from George Washington is bogus,  as is the quote from Hitler recently mentioned in Comments, which ends, “…and the world will follow our lead into the future.”

The “Liberty Teeth” quote from Washington is obviously questionable, because he “mentions” “prairie wagons,” which were not a means of transportation in Colonial America.  No one has been able to find the text of Hitler’s “…follow our lead speech.”  If anyone can give me a solid citation on either of these, I will change my mind, but until that happens, I will not use either one.

Again, let us fight our political battles with relentless, sober resolve and determination and avoid language that may give our equally relentless political enemies an excuse for oppression or a legitimate argument that we are making up quotations.  We do not have to fabricate research data to make our case.  We just have to get the facts out to other gun owners and a public that have been numbed by the constant nattering of a biased Mainstream Media and a well-funded international movement to disarm the American People.

What terrible things do the Liberals plan that makes them fear armed resistance to their schemes?

Def Mech

Senator Stabenow didn’t mention television or the mainstream print media in her call for “accountability.”  Of course, TV, newspapers, and magazines are dominated by Liberal anchors, editors, columnists, and reporters who often disguise “Progressive” propaganda as news reportage.

You may wonder what a Second Amendment blogger is doing talking about First Amendment issues.  “Understand!”  (BHO, “The Chosen One,” uses this so often to imply that his opinions are fact that I like to throw it in every once in a while just to let everyone know how “happy” I am to be under his “rule.”)  Understand! The Bill of Rights is a rich tapestry that protects the fundamental freedoms of all Americans.  Once you begin to tear at any part of the fabric of this most precious national treasure, you risk unraveling the miracle that is our republic.

The Democrats are not the party of free speech.  They are the party of super delegates, of no secret ballots in union elections, of press conferences stacked with Left-wing reporters, and of government research funds used to push political agendas.  Government funding of “Global Warming” studies, “Economic Stimulus” money that rewards “Shadow Party” organizations like ACORN, and funding for gun control studies through the Centers for Disease Control are all examples of ideology driving junk science through the use of taxpayer dollars.

(Read “The Shadow Party,” by Horowitz and Poe to understand what happened in the last election.  Substitute BHO for HRC and you will be enlightened as to how Obama inherited a “turn key” situation of ready-made, top-down-funded, “grassroots” organizations that carried the water for him in 2008.)

President Obama is reportedly on record as being opposed to “The Fairness Doctrine.”  He does, however, seem to support “Localism.”  This term is Liberal code for creating many small radio venues to provide “voices” for women and minorities who will somehow be more “responsive” to the needs of the people than large radio networks that host Conservative programs.  You can interpret this to mean the breakup talk radio as it exists and the replacement of the current system with Libral Radio probably funded by your tax dollars.  National Public Radio obviously isn’t enough for the Left.  I wish we had just one publicly-funded Conservative radio network.

The genius of Socialism and other oppressive statist ideologies is their ability to use tax dollars extracted from productive people to control and disempower the same citizens that they tax.  As we have recently discovered during financial disclosures from several potential Democrat candidates and appointees, some Liberals seem less than enthusiastic about paying their own taxes.  (I guess taxes are just for “ordinary citizens,” not for the Liberal Elite.)

Ironically, Liberals also seek to expand the number of citizens dependent on the public dole, thus broadening their constituent base.  “When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on the support of Paul.”

All supporters of the Constitution and lovers of freedom must be alert to any potential infringement of every liberty recognized by the Bill of Rights.  Eternal vigilance is, indeed, the price of freedom.

As Patrick Henry said, “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel.”  Walt Whitman echoed Henry’s sentiment.  “There is no week nor day nor hour, when tyranny may not enter upon this country, if the people lose their roughness and spirit of defiance-Tyranny may always enter-there is no charm, no bar against it-the only bar against it is a large resolute breed of men.”  (And women.)

The First Amendment is almost as vital to the protection of our liberty as is the Second Amendment.   Let us defend the entire Bill of Rights and work to regain those freedoms that have been taken from us over the years.  Gun control and control of free speech don’t help our society.  They promote corruption, disregard for law and order, tyranny, and genocide.  Support the Bill of Rights!  (See my recent post, “The African-American experience with gun control,” under the Category: “History.”)

Def Mech

The article is more remarkable for what it leaves out, than for what it presents.  For example, the Japanese, who have banned guns, have a higher suicide rate in Japan than Americans, including Americans of Japanese descent.  Read David Kopel’s The Samurai, The Mountie, and The Cowboy for information on Japanese gun laws and suicide. (Prometheus Books, Buffalo, NY, 1992, pages 43,44.)

Two common methods of group suicides in Japan are hoses from auto tail pipes into closed passenger compartments and charcoal braziers in tightly sealed apartments.  Reports have surfaced of young Japanese strangers getting acquainted on the Internet for the purpose of group suicide.  Clearly there are cultural factors at play here independent of the availability of “demonic” guns.

Is suicide even a concern of the Liberal state?  What about the “right” to commit suicide.  Liberal Holland, Belgium, and Luxembourg in “sophisticated” Europe have policies allowing assisted suicide.  Oregon, a Liberal state, has experimented with assisted death.  The Hemlock Society publishes detailed instructions on how to kill yourself using pills and plastic bags.  (Thank God, they don’t advocate guns.  Whoops!  Not politically correct to invoke the Deity.  Might offend somebody.)

What about Colorado ex-Governor Dick Lamm’s “duty to die” comment?  Socialized Medicine has resulted in rationed care and long waiting lists in Great Britain and Canada.  Is suicide a viable option when the waiting time for treatment for a serious, painful disease exceeds the prognosis, i.e., the wait time is a year, the patient will almost certainly die in six months?  What are the choices?  Kill yourself?  Die on the waiting list?  Try to get to the U.S., before socialized medicine takes over here? 

According to the article, the “experts” discount substitution of other suicide methods in the absence of guns.  Why?  Hanging is so easy that special curtain cords are now mandated by child safety laws to prevent accidental death.  How many fatal auto “accidents” are actually suicides.  Not too long ago, a man jumped from an airplane without a parachute after asking his friends if they would rather die that way or jump from a  high place, such as a bridge or building.  I believe suicide prevention, to the degree that a Liberal society wants to prevent suicide, is a mental health issue, not a question of what means are available to carry out the intent.

According to a recent post by Eugene Volokh on the Volokh Conspiracy, most studies that purport to show that guns increase the risk of suicide do not control for criminal affiliation.  Spree killers, serial killers, depressed drug dealers, and other felons who kill themselves with guns rather than face capture and imprisonment, are almost certainly included in the suicide statistics.  (See my recent post “Stay safer.  Avoid criminal behavior and criminals,”  06-30-08, which can be found under the category of “Culture War” on this site.)

What about the overall comparative benefits of guns in society?  The article quotes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and attempts to set up Florida Researcher Gary Kleck as the “straw man” whose counter argument is “easily” demolished by the “experts.”  Not quite so fast!

The CDC, itself admits that after looking at 51 studies, it can not say that gun control has prevented a single crime.  (First Reports evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws)  Keep in mind that in most states the law looks askance at suicide and attempts to assist suicide.  Remember Jack Kevorkian (Dr. Death) and the hard time that he did for his efforts in this area.  The National Academy of the Sciences(NAS) reviewed 253 journal articles, 99 books and 43 government publications in its efforts to “propose new gun control strategies.   The NAS found that it was impossible to say, based on that massive research effort, and some of its own studies that gun control had prevented a single crime.  The conclusions of these august bastions of science?  We need more research.  John Lott.  David Kopel and Glenn Reynolds.

The Small Arms Survey(SAS), a U.N.-affiliated organization out of Geneva recently pointed out that there are nine guns in this country for every ten Americans.  What the SAS also pointed out, but what was not reported by much of the mainstream media, was that there seems to be no significant correlation between gun ownership and violence.  Many countries with numerous guns have low rates of violence, while many countries with draconian gun laws have high rates of meyham.  Mexico is a case in point.

Keep in mind that the above organizations have reputations as being against citizen ownership of firearms.  It is an indication of their honesty in these cases that they admit that the supposed benefits of gun control have little basis in scientific fact. 

A recent Kates and Mauser study, in fact, indicates that there is often an inverse relationship between the number of guns in a society and the rate of violence.  (Kates, Mauser, “Would banning firearms reduce murder and suicide?” America’s First Freedom, NRA, Palm Coast, FLA, August 07, pages 32-35.)  They do not claim to have found causation based on their research, but they have certainly documented correlation.

John Lott, on the other hand, makes a stronger claim based on his research that areas with less gun control have less crime.  More guns, less crime, is a worthwhile read for anyone interested in the debate.  (Lott, John, …, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill., 1998.)  Lott, by the way, looked at every county in the U.S., controlled for numerous variables, and made his data set available to anyone who wants to look at it.

Our article claimed that Gary Kleck, their “straw man,” found up to one million defensive uses of firearms per year.  (Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America, Aldine de Gruyter, Hawthorne, N.Y., 1991)  Kleck’s later research indicates that figure may be as high as 2.0 to 2.5 million.  In over 98 percent of these cases, merely brandishing the weapon causes a felonious attack to cease, mooting the headline that you have to put your boot on the neck of your fallen assailant in order to successfully defend yourself against crime.  In many other cases, the defender merely wounds the attacker, which of course, does not count as a “kill” in the records of the folks who look at this issue as black or white.  (Aren’t Liberals supposed to be fans of relativism and nuance?  I guess not, if it doesn’t fit their agenda.)

Kleck is a bad researcher to pick for a “straw man.”  He started out with the hypothesis that gun ownership crontributes to crime.  He looked at the data and changed his mind.  He is a Democrat, a member of the ACLU, and takes no money from either side in this debate.  The “experts” downplay the effectiveness of phone surveys, yet anti-gun organizations use phone survey results to claim that U.S. gun ownership is rapidly declining.  (See my post “When surveyed, do you admit that you own a gun?” under the categories of “Culture War,” or “Politics” on this site.  Kleck makes many of his claims based on FBI statistics.  A bad “straw man,” indeed.

Finally the “experts” point again to a need for further study.  We can take this to mean that they want to keep doing ”research,” until they get the desired result.  The issue of bias in CDC ”research” was apparently one of the reasons that Congress ordered them to stop promoting gun control in 1996.  Our ”objective” news article, of course, bemoans the fact that the CDC is limited in its ability to use public money to help strip the American People of their right to self-defense against crime and tyranny.  If the Democrats sweep the field in November, we can expect CDC funding to increase in this area.  If you own a gun and/or love freedom, think before you vote.  Campaign and vote for the most pro-Second Amendment electable candidate available.  We can not afford to have a Liberal Democrat in the White House.

Def Mech                                                     

We see a pride of five or so lions attack a herd of cape buffaloes. (The cape buffalo has the reputation of being the most dangerous, vengeful animal in the world.)

The lions manage to cut a straggling calf out of the herd and chase it over a low bank into a river. They leap into the river and drag the desperate calf out of the water, literally pulling it from the jaws of a large crocodile that has taken an interest in their prey.

The lions get the calf up the bank and prepare for the kill. Meanwhile, the cape buffalo herd has stopped their stampede and returned! The lions look up and face a narrowing circle of determined avengers with hard, merciless eyes and menacing black horns that pin the predators against the bank of the river. You can almost smell the lions’ fear. This wasn’t the plan! The herd was supposed to run and keep running. There is no safe escape route. The swift hunters are now the hunted.

Suddenly, a huge buffalo breaks from the packed ranks, catches a lion on the awful points of those powerful horns, and hurls the big cat head over heels into the air. The other lions cower, and the calf, injured but alive, escapes and returns to its own kind. Buffaloes one. Predators nothing.

The surviving lions will, no doubt hunt around the edges of the herd again, but no cat that faced the circle of deadly rage will ever again charge quite so confidently at a straggling calf. One lion, if she recovers, will run a little slower and carry with her forever the scars and the memory of the well-directed anger of the cape buffalo.

The lesson for gunowners is this. Whenever one of our own is attacked by a new gun law, or one of our own is subject to unjust persecution under a current law or a renegade government official, we need to legally emulate, with decisive finality, the absolute, no-nonsense, grim-as-death determination of the cape buffalo.

We lobby our friends, relatives, and other politicians against legislation that impacts our natural right to self-protection from crime and tyranny. We vote against anti-gun politicians every time they come up for election. We campaign for and contribute to their opponents. We peacefullly protest their public appearances. We expose their lies and their attempts to hide behind media bias and junk science. As long as they threaten our freedom, we oppose them in the courts and the legislatures. We support pro-gun rights organizations with our time and our money. In short, we remind the opponents of individual liberty time and time again that the cape buffalo is not the most dangerous, vengeful animal on the planet, and that there are about 80,000,000 of us in the United States of America.

Rights are not a gift granted by a government. Rights must be consistently asserted and defended by a free people. If we do not act together to defend our rights, we will lose them. There are always predators near the edge of the herd.

Def Mech