This morning’s report carried by MSNBC.com headlined “Record numbers now licensed to pack heat” further confirms what gun rights activists have been arguing for years: More guns in private hands does not equate to more homicides.
It’s obvious that Senior News Editor Mike Stuckey did his homework, invested a lot of effort and worked hard to make this a balanced, objective report. What his story revealed comes as no surprise to Second Amendment advocates. America’s homicide rate has declined while gun ownership has risen dramatically, and an increasing number of law-abiding citizens are now packing heat.
The highest gun homicide rate is in Washington, D.C., which has had the nation’s strictest gun-control laws for years and bans concealed carry: 20.50 deaths per 100,000 population, five times the general rate. The lowest rate, 1.12, is in Utah, which has such a liberal concealed weapons policy that most American adults can get a permit to carry a gun in Utah without even visiting the state.-MSNBC.com
No wonder, one might observe, that Wednesday morning’s lame effort by a handful of gun prohibitionists led by Washington CeaseFire’s hoplophobic Ralph Fascitelli to further bully Starbucks coffee into banning legally-armed citizens from their coffee shops essentially fell on deaf ears as Starbucks shareholders filed in for their annual meeting at the Seattle Center. CeaseFire and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence want Starbucks to acquiesce to its demands that the coffee chain become a surrogate in their effort to push social bigotry against gun owners to a new low. (I have written about this here, here, here and here.) The folks at OpenCarry.org just shake their heads; since this flap erupted, more gun people appear to be buying Starbucks coffee. That's a profit boost. Starbucks probably couldn't buy publicity like this, while gaining ground with a huge number of American firearms owners. In business, money talks and...well, you know the rest. So, too, evidently, do Starbucks shareholders, who seemed to largely blow off the anti-gunners.
The decline in gun homicides also comes asfirearm sales are skyrocketing, according to federal background checks that are required for most gun sales. After holding stable at 8.5 to 9 million checks from 1999 to 2005, the FBI reported a surge to 10 million in 2006, 11 million in 2007, nearly 13 million in 2008 and more than 14 million last year, a 55 percent increase in just four years.- MSNBC.com U.S.
Alan Gottlieb, executive vice president of the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation, lauded the MSNBC.com report (he was interviewed by Stuckey, as was my colleague, Minneapolis Gun Rights Examiner John Pierce) not only for its balance, but for its conclusions. He said the report confirms “everything gun rights groups have been saying for years, that more armed citizens does not equate to increased violence, and actually coincides with a reduction in homicides.” He sees the report as something of a vindication from years of anti-gun hysteria generated by a typically unfriendly mainstream press.
By Stuckey’s calculations – based largely on estimates from gun rights groups and MSNBC.com research – some 6 million Americans are now licensed to carry. Homicide rates have declined. The FBI reports a skyrocketing number of background checks for firearms purchases.
This is further evidence that everything the gun prohibitionists have been claiming and predicting over the past two decades has been fundamentally fraudulent,”—SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb.
And how do anti-gunners react? Dr. David Hemenway, Ph.D., of Harvard contended that because firearms fatalities parallel an overall drop in crime, according to MSNBC.com, he “suspects the decline ‘has nothing to do with concealed-carry laws’.” There’s another perspective, which has as much, if not more, credibility: It’s the increase in private gun ownership combined with the widely-reported record number of concealed carry licenses that has put criminals on notice that Americans will fight back. I addressed this concept in my book with Alan Gottlieb, America Fights Back: Armed Self-Defense in a Violent Age.
The gun prohibition lobby is on the ropes. They’ve been reduced to corporate demagoguery against Starbucks for not banning open or concealed carry in their shops in an attempt to create publicity and “stay relevant.” Their campaign has less steam than a cup of hot Joe on a cold Seattle morning.
For more info: America Fights Back: Armed Self-Defense in a Violent Age. Assault on Weapons: The Campaign to Eliminate Your Guns. Second Amendment Foundation
Atlanta: Ed Stone | Austin: Howard Nemerov | Boston: Ron Bokleman | Charlotte: Paul Valone | Cheyenne: Anthony Bouchard | Chicago: Don Gwinn | Cleveland: Daniel White | DC: Mike Stollenwerk | Denver: Dan Bidstrup | Fort Smith: Steve D. Jones | Grand Rapids: Skip Coryel | Knoxville: Liston Matthews | | Los Angeles: John Longenecker | Minneapolis: John Pierce | National: David Codrea | Parkersburg: Nicholas Arnold | Phoenix: Douglas Little | Pittsburgh: Dan Campbell | Seattle: Dave Workman | St. Louis: Kurt Hofmann | Tucson: Chris Woodard | Wisconsin: Gene German
Comments
Have you ever noticed that the anti-gun groups always focus on "gun" fiolence? The increase in law abiding citizens carrying handguns in public for self defense, openly or concealed, has had a big effect on violant crime in general.
I'm happy and surprised to hear that MSNBC was the outlet for this story. Kudos to them.
I think that even if there eventually proves to be little causation between more guns/less crime , the more telling reality is that more guns [indeed, a LOT more guns] do NOT CAUSE more crime. And that....on its own, should cause the anti's to drop their objections to liberalizing and eliminating many worthless gun laws. If the anti's want to be relevant, they should go into accident prevention, gun training, promoting ranges and so on. Indeed, their interest in promoting gun safety would be best served by joining the NRA...which is the most active organization in all those areas. Personally, I look forward to meeting them at the range or in a gun safety class soon.
I was very amazed after reading that story that the anti-gun groups could even say that more guns are the problem while keeping a straight face. 5 million more CCW permits and a drastic reduction in gun crime does not equate???? What planet are they from?
Its interesting to note scattered stories about the violent crime rate dropping in DC since DC v Heller was decided. We haven't had enough time elapsed to tell if this is a merely a blip or an actual trend. But it is interesting because not many people in DC have been able to wade through all the red tape to actually get a "legal" firearm. There are only two FFL holders in DC to do the transfers, and one of those is Josh Sugarman of the notoriously antigun Violence Policy Center. So if it actually exists, the drop has to be an indication that the bad guys are reacting to the mere perception that more people are armed and that perception causes them to change their behavior. Surprise, surprise!
I just wish gun rights groups would lay off any suggestion that more guns equals less crime. It is too much of a stretch to make that argument. They should just stick with more guns don't equal more crime. However, I think they just can't resist using the falling crime rate stats.
Blgoao is a prime example of the liberal's concept of statistics - they ignore the facts; they can't admit to the proven research that more guns do equal less crime. That's the trouble with liberals, they won't admit to their mistakes even when categorically proven wrong, for they will fine ways to twist the truth and/or use bogus stats. It's a proven fact that criminals will think twice if they feel their prey is armed (proven also by stats!)."It's not that our liberal friends are ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so!" - Ronald Reagan. The Second Amendment - the bulwark of our freedom! "From our cold dead hands!" Charlton Heston
Tomas Sowell Put it best.
"Some ideas seem so plausible that they can fail 9 times in a row and still be believed the 10th time. Other ideas seem so implausible that they can succeed 9 times in a row and still not be nelieved the 10th time. Gov. controls in the economy are the 1st kinds of ideas and the operation of the free market is among the the 2nd kinds of ideas". The same can be said for gun control. In the last decades of the cattle drives the Wild West was mor crime free than the civilized East.
You people should try actually reading the article. It doesn't hammer the "myth that more guns lead to more homicides".
The numbers don't mean anything. They can change every minute of a 24- hour-day. My main concern is what will happen to our society when all of us are carrying guns. It's the wild west once again. Those were not great times. People weren't living happy lives.
Why would anyone want to walk around with guns strapped to their waists. For power. But, if everyone has a gun then no one person has any power. They just have guns strapped around their waists. This is what happens with gangs. Someone always gets killed. That's what guns are for. They are used to kill people and animals and birds. It's just that simple.
When we had the riots in L. A., I was very frightened. My husband took me to a gun store and I purchased one. I had decided that I would use that gun to kill anyone that endangered my life or those close to me. I remember how that felt and I don't ever want to feel that threatened again. I didn't like that gun and I still don't.
I don't object to having the right to own a gun. I object to people using them. Remember Columbine and Virginia Tech! Don't ever forget those and all the other mass killings we've had in the United States. There are some crazy people out there. What we should be concentrating on is keeping those crazies from purchasing guns. That's the problem. And just because you can own a gun and have a permit to carry it does not make you safe from those crazies.
BAMA, what are you talking about? I agree that more guns do NOT equal more crime. I just haven't seen anything make the connection that more guns equals less crime. Remember, we are talking about an INDIVIDUAL right. If we base our claims on the right to own guns on stats, then the stats could change and we could lose them. If there is a sudden spike in crime, Helmke will be screaming it is because of the guns.
You wont' find a bigger gun rights activist than me. I've read all the studies and just haven't seen anything convincing that the drop in crime is due to gun ownership. Personally I think it has more to do with the end of the crack wars and an aging population.
The onus, however is on the gun control freaks to show that some societal "danger" justifies restricting a right. The good news is they can't do that with these numbers.
Allly wrote (and it looks like the first post as Ally was her too), "When we had the riots in L. A., I was very frightened. My husband took me to a gun store and I purchased one. I had decided that I would use that gun to kill anyone that endangered my life or those close to me. I remember how that felt and I don't ever want to feel that threatened again. I didn't like that gun and I still don't."
You didn't purchase a handgun for immediate use during the '92 Rodney King riots, as you had a 15-day waiting period for a handgun, which many found out to their dismay. You had a five-day wait for a handgun in the '65 Watts riot too. So you're saying you purchased a rifle/shotgun to protect yourself during the riot.
And more, "Why would anyone want to walk around with guns strapped to their waists. For power. But, if everyone has a gun then no one person has any power." You left out your own alleged purchase for personal protection giving you equal power with the lawless.
I agree with the conclusion of more guns less crime but not for the obvious reason. I believe that the guns are only tools. The thing that has resulted in lower crime rate is a sea-change in the attitude of the citizens about actively resisting criminals. The increase in concealed carry permits, although a necessary part, is as much a result of that change in attitude as is the reduction in violent crime.
Ally
you are a dip stick HUA factor plus 20
Good article Mr. Workman. I had a woman go absolutely bonkers as she stood behind me in line and I paid for a box of ammunition...she was demanding the clerk check my identification, and "Doesn't he have to fill out a form?" and other inanities. I waggled my ears at her and exclaimed "Booger Booger Booger" and left.
bigoao...and the rest of you, shoukld pay attention to the armed Mexican drug gangs and what they are accomplishing against an unarmed citizenry AND against the government.
Ally, would you also have objected to the teacher or one of the students at VT USING a gun to shoot the creep that killed all those students, saving many lives. Do you not want law enforcement to USE a gun to defend their own lives? Would you really not USE a gun to save the lives of your family? See, depending on how a gun is USED, it can save lives.
owlafaye and BAMA, I will try this one more time.
I am the biggest gun rights supporter you will ever meet. My point is that we should be careful about claiming that "more guns mean more crime" and instead focus on the fact that the "blood in the streets" claims of the antis have not materialized.
By saying that more guns = less crime, even if it is true can put us in a statistical trap. If there is a spike in crime (and there will be at some point) the antis will say "see, they claim that more guns = less crime. They are wrong."
Claiming such a thing also frames the argument as gun rights should only be extended to citizens if it can be statistically shown to provide a benefit to society as a whole. That is rubbish. As Scalia said in McDonald, (paraphrase) we don't decide "rights" based on statistics.
The antis have hung themselves with the blood in the streets prediction. We should keep hammering them on that. However, we need to be careful not to overstate our side.
Furthermore, if you really dig into the studies the correlation between more guns = less crime is in fact nebulous. But so what? What we are talking about is an INDIVIDUAL right to protect oneself. It is not up to us to prove that. What IS important is that more guns do NOT equal more crime. Keep the burden of proof on the antis.
Framing the debate as More guns=less crime can also hurt us on the local level. NJ has also seen a crime drop, the antis will no doubt attribute that to NJs strict gun laws.
I live in DC. Despite Heller, we still have the most restrictive gun laws in the country. Just recently I heard the architect of the laws claim that the drop demonstrates that his draconian gun laws are working.
more guns = less crime is a statistical trap we need to stay out of. RKBA is the default. It is up to the antis to prove that it is somehow dangerous.
Furthermore, if you really dig into the studies the correlation between more guns = less crime is in fact nebulous. But so what? What we are talking about is an INDIVIDUAL right to protect oneself. It is not up to us to prove that. What IS important is that more guns do NOT equal more crime. Keep the burden of proof on the antis.
Framing the debate as More guns=less crime can also hurt us on the local level. NJ has also seen a crime drop, the antis will no doubt attribute that to NJs strict gun laws.
I live in DC. Despite Heller, we still have the most restrictive gun laws in the country. Just recently I heard the architect of the laws claim that the drop demonstrates that his draconian gun laws are working.
more guns = less crime is a statistical trap we need to stay out of. RKBA is the default. It is up to the antis to prove that it is somehow dangerous.
The whole argument is a distraction... I don't care if crime goes up 6000% for every new gun purchased, "THE RIGHT TOO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SALL NOT BE INFRINGED"
Period, end of story. If you don't like it, don't own a gun and get the rulebook (i.e. the Constitution) changed. If someone kicks your door down weilding a 12 guage, I hope that butter knife works out for you.
Apparently telling the truth was beyond MSNBC.com since by the 26th (from the 24th) the article is GONE.
The direct link perished to new news and:
Searching for the title “Record numbers now licensed to pack heat” or even portions of the title gets you nowhere.
Why when there are a slight drop in homicides do guns get the credit, but where there is an increase its always "guns don't kill people, people do!"
Homicide rates are influenced by literally hundreds of factors including things as ridiculous as weather, such as a hot summer. Other things like many cops there are per shift, density of population, average income, policing strategies such as neighborhood policing...the factors in influencing homicide rates number in the hundreds.
Claiming more guns equals less homicides is patently ridiculous.
It's not your all powerful magical handguns that are doing it.
"HerbM"
Haven't a clue what you're talking about. I clicked on the link at the top of this column just to check, and the story comes up.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!