Posted by CJ on 12 June, 2012 at 4:26 pm. 36 comments already!


I keep very close tabs on news relating to gun control, concealed carry, the 2nd Amendment and gun rights. As a gun owner and constitutionalist, I'm concerned that groups like the Brady Campaign use false or incomplete facts to further their efforts to suppress our rights to self-defense.

Reading Daniel Gross' piece, you'd almost want to agree with him. After all, who wants to empower maniacs to kill five unarmed, innocent people. The Gabriel Giffords shooting also spurred gun grabbers into action.

In all fairness, authorities should have been authorized to pull Mr. Stawicki's permit if there was a legitimate fear and a history of violence and mental health issues. Then again, where do we draw the line? All anyone that doesn't like guns would have to do would be to just claim that their neighbors are dangerous and shouldn't be allowed to carry guns or that they feel unsafe.

On the other side of the argument, one could argue that had those five victims of Stawicki been armed, the situation could have turned out much different. This is, many say, the exact reason why guns should be more accessible, not less.

With that argument neutralized, there's this paragraph in the Huffington Post article:

In the NRA's view of the world, flooding our communities with guns “deters would-be murderers.” Never mind that Stawicki and so many deranged killers before him could kill so many people so quickly because the gun lobby made it so easy for them to venture out armed and ready to kill. Never mind that study after study has linked public gun carrying to increased rates of violent crime like robbery and murder.

Whoa! Sounds like a no-brainer to me. I mean, who wants more people dead? Who wants higher rates of murder and robbery? I don't think either gun grabbers or gun rights advocates want that. Maybe the Huffington Post is on to something here and the Stawicki story is just one of many anecdotes that leads to a logical conclusion. Or not…

You see, I believe in actual facts and evidence. It just so happens that the FBI has just released its annual Uniform Crime Report designed to “to meet a need for reliable, uniform crime statistics for the nation.” I'm sure that the Huffington Post cited this report to support its claims of increased crime. If that is true, Daniel Gross more than likely failed reading comprehension in middle school. Or maybe he's just taking a page from the Brady Campaign book and omitting evidence that contradicts their efforts.

According to the FBI's 2011 preliminary findings, violent crime was actually DOWN last year. As a matter of fact, crime is down across the country by 4% as a whole compared with the previous year. The report states that “the violent crime category includes murder, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault” (emphasis added). Oops.

Let's focus just on the two crimes specified in Gross' screed – murder and robbery. Violent crime rates in metropolitan areas dropped 4.1 and 7.5 percent for murder and robbery respectively (non-metropolitan areas 1.1 and 3.6 percent respectively).

How can that possibly be? In January, the Huffington Post's own Josh Horwitz wrote that 2011 brought the largest jump in gun ownership (1.3 million more) since 1999. In other words, there was a 13% increase in the number of guns in American hands but violent crime FELL by 4%!! If you live in a city, you're safer than the national average as a result of the guns that you carry or possess, not more likely to be killed or robbed.

It's an inconvenient truth; but a truth that liberals can't deny.

To my fellow Americans, I urge you to help lower the crime rate even more. Go out and buy more guns as soon as possible. Arm yourselves. Get your carry license to carry either openly or concealed. Only YOU can stop violent crime! When seconds count, the police are only minutes away!

0 0 votes
Article Rating