Comforting Myths about Gun Control
"Give the robber what he wants and he probably won't hurt you" and other fairy tales.
There are certain comforting myths that the gun-control movement likes to promote. “Mandatory gun registration would help us solve gun crimes” is a big one. Perhaps the most comforting — and dangerous — of all is: “Give the robber what he wants, and he probably won’t hurt you.”
This news story from Atlanta is valuable for a number of reasons (emphasis mine):
(WSB Radio) — A 17-year-old Atlanta teen has been arrested and charged with the January 7, 2009 murder of John Henderson, a bartender at the Standard Restaurant and Spirits in Grant Park.
(…)
Detective Keith Meadows told reporters that it was Redding’s Smith and Wesson 9mm handgun that led to his being charged with 22 crimes including felony murder, aggravated assault and armed robbery.
Two days after Henderson’s murder on January 9th, police say Redding and three other teens were involved in a home invasion. Police say during that break-in, the homeowner, armed with an semi-automatic rifle fired at Redding striking him in the shoulder.
The news account doesn’t tell us if this “semi-automatic rifle” is one of those terrifying “assault weapons” or a more common semi-automatic hunting rifle. The next time that someone asks why anyone would need an assault weapon, here’s your answer: four armed criminals forcing entry into a home that they know is occupied. The invaders knew that the inhabitants were probably going to be able to identify them later. What do you think these home invaders were going to do to potential witnesses before they left? Against a crew like this, a weapon that lets you fire 20 to 30 shots without reloading suddenly sounds useful.
Police say Redding dropped his weapon as he fled the home. Because police were conducting ballistic tests on weapons in crimes committed after Henderson was killed, they were able to connect Redding to the murder at the Standard and also to an armed robbery in the parking lot of the Standard two and a half weeks before.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Clayton E. Cramer is a software engineer and historian. His sixth book, Armed America: The Remarkable Story of How and Why Guns Became as American as Apple Pie (Nelson Current, 2006), is available in bookstores. His web site is www.claytoncramer.com.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
104 Comments
1. WhyamInotsurprised?:As the son of a career Army man, I was taught at an early age how to use weapons safely and to always respect them for what they were. Unfortunately, liberals think that they can legislate protection from criminals or those who are irresponsible and probably shouldn’t have guns. Owning a gun is a right they are willing to give up and are willing to “force” others to give up.
If you are responsible, you try to anticipate different scenarios and how you would handle them. With the proliferation of illegal guns used by criminals, I can’t imagine being at home and having someone breaking in and trying to fend them off with just my hands, a bat/stick, or a knife. A gun would give me and my family the best chance to scare them away or to survive an actual attack.
Beyond that, of course, ownership is part and parcel of being a responsible citizen who will fight to fend off a tyrannical government who seeks to take what is not theirs or to control my life to the point where I am a slave.
May 13, 2009 - 2:48 am 2. Anonymous:mmmmmmmmmmm
May 13, 2009 - 3:28 am 3. BPT (Australia):Gun control doesn’t work here. Been there – done that.
May 13, 2009 - 4:26 am 4. Cato:When I was a kid in the early 1950s, a friend of my Dad’s confronted some (armed) burglars with his (quite legal, tax paid, owned since the mid-1920s) Thompson submachine gun. It was a local joke for many years, because not only did the would-be robbers drop their Saturday nigh specials and run, they lost control of their bowels and beshat themselves, and so were easily found by the sheriff’s dogs who followed their ’scent’.
May 13, 2009 - 5:27 am 5. sheesh:Here’s a great story . . . It has everything: gun owners defending their property; the importance of the “castle doctrine” and other “make my day laws” for which the NRA fights so hard; and the need to expand such laws, like Florida has done, so people can enforce their own justice without fear of legal repercussions.
The protagonists are Shiela and Gayle Muhs, a good, god-fearing, NRA-American couple whose love for the Second Amendment is matched only by their longing for the return of the Confederacy.
They live a simple life in a simple house on the edge of a simple lake in Texas. They love their property. It is sacred land to them. To them it symbolizes one of the last remnants of their beloved Confederacy, or so the Stars and Bars they fly above it would suggest.
The Muhses do not tolerate even the slightest intrusion, and warn potential intruders with a sign upon which is written: “Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be re-shot. Smile, I will.”
Finally, after years of waiting to exercise their Second Amendment rights to the fullest extent possible, the Muhses got their chance. A family stopped to take a pee on the edge of their property. Sheila shot first, and then passed the shotgun to her husband, who fired again. Later, Sheila would tell the 911 operator, “They’re out here tearing up the levee, so I shot them.”
It’s unclear which of shots killed seven-year-old Donny Coffey and which one wounded his five-year-old sister, Destiny, father Don Sr, and family friend Patrick. It’s not even clear whether the family was shot on the Muhses’ property. The only certainty is that at least one of the Muhses killed a child and shot three other people for driving on a levee.
The question of location is important here. If the family was on the Muhses property, Texas law gives the couple a legal right to shoot them. If not, Sheila and Gayle can be tried for murder.
In Florida, the Muhses would be in better shape. That state’s “Make My Day Law,” which was passed a few years ago, allows people to shoot anyone anywhere, regardless of who owns the property, if they “feel threatened.”
They are the perfect poster couple for the NRA’s “Make My Day Law” campaigns–just a pair of legal gun owners who killed a kid in the wrong location.
Thank you Jesus’ General.
May 13, 2009 - 5:35 am 6. Broadsword:Well, criminals “..enforce their own justice without fear of legal repercussions”, why not the rest of us, eh? Commonsense Gun laws: “CSGL: “End criminal violence! Arm yourself.” “End criminal violence, return fire.” “When calling 911, ask for police without guns, it’s safer.” “Be safer around rapists, submit.” “Criminals prefer the unarmed, 99-1″. “End criminal violence against women. Arm women.” “End drive-by gun violence, Ban motor oil”. And a little story. Supposedly when the LA riots showed signs of spreading into the areas where not so many people believed in self defense, Charlton Heston got a call from on of his movie-neighbors. “Uh, hi Chuck. Say, um, you own guns, don’t you…?” “Yes…I have some.” “Um,…do you suppose I might borrow one of them?”
May 13, 2009 - 6:04 am 7. MarkD:(I don’t recall where I heard this, but it was Heston telling the story.)
Let’s see, somebody broke a law, so all gun owners are idiots. By your logic, all drivers are likewise idiots, because someone drove drunk and killed somebody somewhere.
I’m sure it wasn’t an Obama voter.
/sarc
May 13, 2009 - 6:25 am 8. Gary Ogletree:Sheesh, you don’t get it.
May 13, 2009 - 6:25 am 9. Mark Turner:Gee Sheesh,
Did that strawman you are fornicating with give you syphallus or are you ust that retarded?
Murder is still against the law and make my day laws does nothing to change that.
May 13, 2009 - 6:26 am 10. FiremanBob:Sheesh tries ineptly to write satire and spin the Muhs story into a broad-brush painting of legitimate gunowners. Even Robert Gibbs could do better.
The Muhses violated law, shooting protocol and human morality by shooting 1) without clearly identifying their target 2) shooting when there was no threat to their lives or property. They deserve the full penalty for their irresponsible actions.
There is no excuse for their behavior. However, there is no connection between their behavior and that of the many peaceable citizens who legitimately defend themselves against attacks by violent criminals.
May 13, 2009 - 6:27 am 11. JohnB:I don’t think private gun ownership should be optional for law abiding citizenry; it should be mandatory.
May 13, 2009 - 6:29 am 12. TennesseeVolunteer:Last Friday a former student named Ben of my wife was shot after being held up while managing his small business. He freely gave up his wallet, then was shot. The assailants went through his pockets and kicked him in the head for good measure. His funeral was yesterday and the Mother of that 23 year old young man cried in my wife’s arms for 10 minutes. He had no gun, only his wallet.
May 13, 2009 - 6:29 am 13. ridgerunner:something has happened in a society where people who are only working their jobs are held up and killed and the gun is blamed. Something is wrong when upstanding citizens want to protect themselves are held up as crazies and the people with illegal guns have no accountability because the gun did it.
My wife and I are not gun owners but I absolutely don’t understand how criminals are enabled and victims are not even mentioned. God bless Ben’s Mom and Dad, he was their only son.
The Mushes’ justification for firing did not include feeling threatened. Therefore they were not exercising any rights of castle-doctrine defense, and your attempt to connect them to self-defense statutes is totally bogus.
May 13, 2009 - 6:32 am 14. sheesh:4. Cato: Ah, the story with everything – submachine guns, bad guys, loose bowels, hound dogs, all played out in the glorious 1950s! Here’s the interesting part – he didn’t shoot them.
May 13, 2009 - 6:35 am 15. JSebast:You remind me of another very similar fairy tale, one that was very violently debunked by the end of 2001: “When your airplane gets hijacked, don’t panic, remain quiet and do what the hijacker says.”
May 13, 2009 - 6:59 am 16. Old Soldier:Thank you Mr. Cramer for this article and your blog – where I direct all my gun-controlling liberal acquaintances.
As for that semi-auto rifle – I doubt a politician could define the difference between a “good” semi-auto hunting rifle and a “bad” assault rifle. I’m a Veteran and gun-owner and can’t define the difference.
May 13, 2009 - 7:04 am 17. Old Soldier:sheesh – “he didn’t shoot them.” Exactly dummy.
That is why Cato’s story is about proper defense using a weapon – shooting is a last resort.
May 13, 2009 - 7:07 am 18. Bill:Sheesh, yes you’re right he didn’t shoot them. Most of the time when firearms are used in self-defense they aren’t fired. And as ridgerunner said, the Muhs’ criminal activity has nothing to do with the castle doctrine.
May 13, 2009 - 7:07 am 19. JED:The cop, God bless him, is the guy you call after the crime has been committed. The reason I carry a gun is because a cop is too heavy to carry.
May 13, 2009 - 7:09 am 20. Joe Bison:Probably won’t hurt you sounds very reassuring.
May 13, 2009 - 7:26 am 21. EnemyoftheState:Sort of like leaping between rooftops. You
probably won’t fall and get killed. Also
very reassuring. How come all the bigshot
liberals have armed bodyguards and seem to
get caught with weapons? Oh yeah I forgot
their lives are important and probably
doesn’t cut it for them.
I’ve been told: “Always remember, when seconds count, the police are just minutes away.”
May 13, 2009 - 7:29 am 22. Reformed Trombonist:> something has happened in a society where people who are only working their jobs are held up and killed and the gun is blamed.
People think that because liberals are in favor of separation of church and state, that liberals must be in favor of keeping religion out of politics. Which is nonsense: they only want Christians to keep *their* religion out of politics. The religion of liberalism is the official religion of the state, as far as they’re concerned.
All this follows from their assumptions about humanity, which are religious in nature: man is *not* a fallen creature. The only things that keeps man from becoming perfect are our failed institutions (the Constitution, the rule of law, the church, the family, marriage, etc.) and a lack of “education” (meaning indoctrination into the liberal religion).
Since man is perfectible, yet is clearly not perfect, then everything *else* is to blame, not the evil choices made by some men. So we don’t talk about shooting criminals in self-defense or punishing evil; we talk about society’s guilt (for tolerating failed institutions), fixing the “root causes” of “anti-social behavior”, and “re-habilitation”. And, of course, blaming the object (gun) as opposed to the person firing it. Like kicking the dog when Grandma farts.
May 13, 2009 - 7:31 am 23. Rose Ann:Post #19
I love it!! This post says it all.
May 13, 2009 - 7:37 am 24. Stella:Sheesh, have you ever been a victim of a violent crime? How about know someone close who has? As for me, being killed in my home by some thug looking for drug money AIN’T gonna happen. You do what YOU can to keep YOUR family safe.
May 13, 2009 - 7:41 am 25. Barry 0351:Give the robber what he wants and he “probably” won’t hurt you.
May 13, 2009 - 7:56 am 26. anton:Give the robber .125 gr S&W .38 spl JHP and he “will not” hurt you
sheesh
Dude, where do you live (adress and city please)? I know some B&E boys that would love to know that they could bust into a house with nothing to fear but a wimpy liberal whiner and some slow-responding police.
Oh….wait a minute, you probably live in your parent’s basement. I wouldn’t want to upset them so forget about it.
May 13, 2009 - 7:58 am 27. Clayton E. Cramer:“Here’s the interesting part – he didn’t shoot them.”
When you are sufficiently well armed, bad guys often remember an urgent appointment elsewhere.
The Muhs sound, from all the news accounts that I can find, like marginally crazy sorts–with a previous arrest history.
May 13, 2009 - 8:01 am 28. Clayton E. Cramer:“In Florida, the Muhses would be in better shape. That state’s “Make My Day Law,” which was passed a few years ago, allows people to shoot anyone anywhere, regardless of who owns the property, if they “feel threatened.””
There’s still a requirement that the perception of being threatened have some basis in reality. (”I was sure that he was actually one of the Martians sent to take over Earth,” would not get you off the hook in Florida.) The Muhs’ situation doesn’t meet any standard of reasonable. Even if these offroaders had been on their property (which they weren’t), there was no basis for feeling threatened. Do you think that they would not have been prosecuted in Florida for this incident? You are deeply mistaken.
May 13, 2009 - 8:07 am 29. Falconsword:As for “Sheesh”, please folks, please don’t feed the trolls!
May 13, 2009 - 8:38 am 30. iconoclast:Clayton
May 13, 2009 - 8:42 am 31. TheMightyMonarch:Sheesh, have you ever been in the room when a shell is chambered in a pump-action shotgun? That sound is usually enough to make your typical home invader soil himself and beg for mercy. It scares the hell out of my dog, for cripes’ sakes.
Your one example of someone using poor judgment with a firearm is a pathetic attempt to justify the disarming of responsible, law abiding citizens. You’d be right at home in Congress.
May 13, 2009 - 8:54 am 32. iconoclast:Sheesh is not mistaken…it is intentionally lying. It understands that meth-head type crazies like the Muhses broke multiple laws and are likely to be charged with murder. And would be charged with murder in every other state as well.
It is amusing that many commenters think the Muhses–with their confederate flag–are Republicans. No self-respecting confederate would belong to any other party than the slaver (D) party. And certainly not belong to the party of Lincoln and individual liberty.
May 13, 2009 - 8:54 am 33. Dave Goin:Sheesh,
You think like every other liberal, for that matter most all rather timid, mediocre people. A few such cases and that’s it, ban the whole lot. Blanket regulations are for blanket stupidity.
This mentality pervades every bit of our lives, my job included. I work oil rigs,a job that has inherent risks. Since the 1990’s safety has become paramount, above all else. This was a good thing in the beginning but it has progressed to the point of being absolutely ridiculous. You can’t carry a pocket knife because someone might cut themselves, some companies ban sledgehammers heavier that 5 lbs. The list goes on. It’s retarded. It’s like being in playschool not a job. All industry has gone stupid in this fashion.
Gun control uses the same blanket policy mindset. Policy by nitwits created to stop a few nitwits.
As far as that story in Texas,it is a terrible thing for victim’s family but it sounds to me like a straightforward case of premeditated murder so they will probably ride the needle for it but in any case how in hell is gun control going to prevent that? I think perhaps you mean gun confiscation.
There are other stories in Texas,(and all over the country), that come to mind including that old boy that killed those illegal immigrants ransacking his neighbors home, a home owned by legal immigrants so I understand, just to head off the racist retort. The right to property without the right to defend it against people who would take it is useless. They weren’t kids on a prank and they weren’t innocent and they wouldn’t have been killed had they not been thieving. People work hard for what they have and I for one do think that property is more important than the life of a thief who would take it.
People defend themselves with firearms thousands of time each year with most incidents resulting in no shots fired and often without the weapon being pointed. Most of these incidents are not reported to police because of the hassle, only when shots are fired.
“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and the keystone under independence… From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurances and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle, and pistol are equally indispensable… The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.”-George Washington
May 13, 2009 - 9:11 am 34. AlanABQ:OK, I know that this has likely been stated before, but after reading the comments just now, I want to remind people of something.
The post is about the logical fallacies behind gun control. While there have been several comments that clearly show that some people get it, there have been almost as many responding to any given troll who gets off on watching you do what he/she/it intended:
To distract you from the issue & focus on him instead.
So why do it? It’s not as though you’re going to force someone to get the point, and there’s no shortage a petty men & women who have this ability to divide & conquer in a small way as their only source of validation. You cannot force someone to abandon their tenacious grasp on their own ignorance, and you’re even less likely to do so when, even though they know you’re right, they’ll still rile you. Because they know they can…if you let them.
They’ll start using diferent names, as the sock puppetry is a way of making sure you stay focused on them. So instead of engaging them each time they post their folly, ignore it or do this:
If we simply cannot resist responding to them, we all, over the next few days, start universally using a generic or dryly sarcastic response. Something like “Gee, #___, you’ve got it all figured out” or some such.
Seriously – if you want to make them angry, ignore them entirely or treat them like the little brats they are; they’re certainly not mature, so don’t give into the notion that you’ll “show them”.
When you see them hereafter, and they’re certainly not hard to pick out, remind others of this idea & smile when you think about how angry they’ll get when they realize they’re not affecting your day in the least.
May 13, 2009 - 9:14 am 35. shaun fischer:To sheesh, B.S. that is a stupid urban legend that was made up years ago by someone like yourself. You forgot that original story that had the as KU KLUX KLAN members or one later that said they were NEO NAZIS flying the swastika. Also if true what’s the name of the lake HMMMM? Go slither back to the huffington post and move on .org,put on your BDS T-shirt and tell your’e URBAN LEGEND Ghost Stories to a more gullible sheep brained audience.
May 13, 2009 - 9:14 am 36. JohnB:In my part of Texas, “Gun Control”; refers to how steady you hold your gun and how careful is your aim.
I did read some of the above mentioned blog and noted that the armed citizen most often survives a home invasion while the unarmed guy is just defenseless, unless as in several stories, the victim is able to somehow disarm the bad guy. That’s not how I’d like to have to tell the story if someone breaks down my door in the middle of the night.
And to Stella #24:
Yes, it happened to our family. In 1970, both my 22 y.o. sister and her 25 y.o. husband were fatally shot by a home invader high on some kind of drug.
I was still in the Navy, on a ship at sea and 5 days away from port, I didn’t get home in time for the funeral.
As far as I know their killer was never caught.
May 13, 2009 - 9:25 am 37. Clayton E. Cramer:“Gun controllers and their enablers in the media and academia are intentional liars.”
I know that there are such liars–I played a significant part in causing Professor Michael Bellesiles to lose his tenured position at Emory University for his lies. But there are a lot of very emotional gun control advocates out there who don’t think very clearly–and they can be neutralized or even brought to our side if we make our case well.
Heck, I used to be a mild supporter of gun control (in my youth), until I started to research the subject.
May 13, 2009 - 9:29 am 38. Tina Trent:A little more information about the Atlanta case: I’m not in a position to confirm this, but I have followed this story closely for my crime victimization blog, and I know the neighborhoods. My guess, and it’s just a guess, is that the apartment dweller in the second crime, the one who defended himself, was involved in something too — internecene gang violence? That may explain why the media waited to report on the case, because the detectives knew what they had on their hands and needed to solidify their evidence. They are still looking for the other gang members in the murder of John Henderson.
I know this, too: if I had stayed in that neighborhood any longer, I would have bought a gun and learned how to use it. It’s getting worse and worse. But I’d never be as good at using a weapon as the people I’d likely encounter. The only real answer is to put some energy behind efforts to put people away when they commit crimes with guns, and put them away for good. And that requires gun laws that the gun ownership lobby often opposes.
There needs to be more strategic cooperation between the gun ownership lobby and pro-prosecution advocates.
May 13, 2009 - 9:34 am 39. Dean wormer:Sheeshs is stirring up the place again? I love it.
I say let’s not stop with half measures: apply that approach of “one moron’s wrong eradicates the basis for a right and renders the defender’s of the right to be morons also” to newspapers that get the facts wrong (no more hiding behind NYT v Sullivan); affirmative action, that routinely ruins lives far more than campus “hate speech,” the right of non-property owners to vote, since they did such a horrendous job electing George Bush..and time to dump the idea that 9 wrinkly fuds in D. C. should funtion as a “supreme court” since lord knows they’ve got mistakes from Dread Scott to Koramatsu establishing their fallibility (not to mention Bushv Gore). Yup, strict accountability for mistakes: one moron’s error should be the test.
May 13, 2009 - 9:39 am 40. Clayton E. Cramer:““Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself.”
Great quote from George Washington. Unfortunately, he never said it. Don’t use it.
May 13, 2009 - 9:39 am 41. Stella:Dear JohnB, your story is my absolute worst nightmare. I am so sorry for your loss.
May 13, 2009 - 9:39 am 42. Clayton E. Cramer:“that is a stupid urban legend that was made up years ago by someone like yourself.”
If you mean the incident with the Muhs couple, it happened a couple of days ago. There’s plenty of news coverage of it. I wish such depraved idiots didn’t own guns, but I’m inclined to think that such would be among the last disarmed by a gun control law.
A mass murder averted by an armed college student, a couple of weeks ago, however, received only local news coverage in Atlanta. We know that a mass murder was about to happen, because the home invaders had separated the men from the women, and one of them asked the other if he had enough bullets.
May 13, 2009 - 9:48 am 43. Clayton E. Cramer:“I know this, too: if I had stayed in that neighborhood any longer, I would have bought a gun and learned how to use it. It’s getting worse and worse. But I’d never be as good at using a weapon as the people I’d likely encounter.”
You are pretty sure of that. The fact is that most violent criminals are intoxicated when committing their crimes–that’s why the Civilian Gun Self-Defense Blog has a category just for situations where the victim used the criminal’s own gun on him. It is actually quite rare for a criminal to disarm a civilian victim.
“The only real answer is to put some energy behind efforts to put people away when they commit crimes with guns, and put them away for good. And that requires gun laws that the gun ownership lobby often opposes.”
Name one. NRA has aggressively supported (and even assisted with some funding) of prosecution under the federal statute that guarantees five years in prison for felons being in possession of a gun or even one round of ammunition.
“There needs to be more strategic cooperation between the gun ownership lobby and pro-prosecution advocates.”
Like what? We strongly support sending people to prison for committing violent felonies, with or without guns.
May 13, 2009 - 10:00 am 44. iconoclast:More than good for you…absolutely fantastic, in fact.
Does being mildly suspicious of allowing anyone to own a fully-automatic weapon like a SAW or M2 qualify as a mild supporter of gun control? If so, then I probably still qualify as a mild supporter of control.
(I cringe inside every time I have to type “gun” control. I feel like there is an E-5 rolling over in his grave…)
May 13, 2009 - 10:20 am 45. robotech master:Brady has a new facebook up at
http://www.facebook.com/login.php#/pages/Brady-Campaign-to-Prevent-Gun-Violence/6236054211?ref=nf
Last one went down quickly because it got spammed by pro-gun ppl so much so their were more pro-gun ppl on it then anti-gun.
May 13, 2009 - 10:31 am 46. TheMightyMonarch:“The only real answer is to put some energy behind efforts to put people away when they commit crimes with guns, and put them away for good. And that requires gun laws that the gun ownership lobby often opposes.”
That doesn’t require gun laws, that requires prosecution of crimes committed, and sentences designed to discourage repeat offenders. No gun law ever written will ever prevent a criminal from using a gun. The only purpose gun laws serve is to discourage ownership by law-abiding citizens, which in itself encourages gun crime as criminals are increasingly assured that their victims will not be armed.
Even if we could somehow prevent criminals from packing, what’s next? Outlawing bats and knives? Confiscating every blunt object in existence? You’re right to suggest putting these people away when caught (I’d go further to suggest hard labor and nothing beyond basic needs for prisoners), but it does nothing to prevent crime. As someone mentioned above, I only carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.
May 13, 2009 - 10:45 am 47. shaui-jan:sheepsh; live in florida, have a cc,know the laws.nice try.but go ahead and come here and shoot someone who is not a threat to you.if you miss you only get 20 years minimum mandatory.graze them and get an automatic life sentence.
May 13, 2009 - 10:56 am 48. Cato:of course dispatching an unsaviory person trying to rape,rob or kill you and it is local custom for the police to buy you a beer.i think you also get a smiley face sticker.i cannot really remember…it has been so long since i shot someone……
there are tens of millions of gun owner and hundreds of millions of guns.finding stories about dumb people using firearms irresponsibly is like shooting fish in a barrel,so to say.
still i give you an ‘a’ for effort on #5
I’m all in favor of gun control: it’s essential that every shooter understand the importance of using 3 round bursts on automatic fire to control ‘climbing’ and ammunition wastage…. and to understand safety and put rounds where you want them when you need to.
May 13, 2009 - 10:59 am 49. Dave Goin:I see that quote quite often. Can you tell me who is the author?
This is one site I see it on, although it is slightly different.
I stand corrected.
http://www.truthusa.org/quotes/S-Z.htm
May 13, 2009 - 11:13 am 50. SeanLA:when freedom is outlawed, only outlaws will be free.
May 13, 2009 - 1:12 pm 51. JohnB:dr. thompson
who also said: when the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
from a true professional tea partier…
I have one bit of advice for the would-be/soon-to-be gun owner for home defense.
Probably the worst gun you could buy for home defense is a handgun. Accuracy at ranges out to 30 feet is very difficult to achieve for most shooters without lots of experience. Police officers spend hours on end at the practice range to hone their skills with a handgun. Unless you are willing to duplicate their training, the average person would find it almost impossible to hit a man size target at 10 yards while under the mental stress of a home invasion.
Meanwhile, the lowly shotgun will do the job of scaring the bejesus out of a bad guy better and faster than anything else. The size and caliber (gauge) can be purchased to suit the size and weight of the shooter. Petite women can easily learn to handle the smaller shotguns, i.e.,410’s, and 20’s, while us big and brawny men love our cannons, also known as 12 bores. I don’t personally recommend a 28 or a 16 ga because ammunition is rather hard to find and usually expensive.
You also don’t need a permit to buy a shotgun in any state I know of. Heck,,, you can buy one at most Wal-Marts.
However, there is the old wisdom that says; “The best gun to have when you need one, is the gun you have.” So,,, if all you’ve got is granddad’s old .22 rimfire varmint rifle when the home invader comes to your house, don’t think it’s not up to the task, use it~!
May 13, 2009 - 1:13 pm 52. Clayton E. Cramer:“More than good for you…absolutely fantastic, in fact.”
This last book of mine (Armed America) is something of a refutation of Bellesiles’s claims. Go ahead, buy a copy. There’s no shortage from the first print run, I’m told.
May 13, 2009 - 1:48 pm 53. Clayton E. Cramer:“I see that quote quite often. Can you tell me who is the author?”
Not sure, but it’s almost certainly at least 19th century. I read all the various claimed locations, searched the entire text of the online Washington Papers collection at the Library of Congress, and spoken to the editor of that collection as well. Along with not being found anywhere, there are a number of elements that suggest 19th or even 20th century writing. “Safe and sane” and in some versions of the quote, references to the prairies.
See http://www.claytoncramer.com/popular/CheckingSources.PDF for an August 19, 2002 Shotgun News article by me about not trusting every source that you find.
May 13, 2009 - 2:34 pm 54. Whatnow?:Well more than 500 kids die annually from gun accidents. That’s 5000 deaths in the last 10 years and thats just kids.
May 13, 2009 - 4:20 pm 55. TheMightyMonarch:“Well more than 500 kids die annually from gun accidents. That’s 5000 deaths in the last 10 years and thats just kids.”
According to 2005 data, 10,000 non-drivers were killed in auto accidents. Chances are that equates to far more than 500 children. Should we outlaw cars?
1000 children die per year from shaken baby syndrome. No guns involved. Should we outfit all children in special shake-proof riot gear?
2500 children die per year from SIDS. The causes are myriad, including putting babies to sleep on their stomachs as opposed to their backs, babies in lower socio-economic classes, babies who sleep in their parents’ bed instead of a crib, and babies in day-care centers. I guess we should outlaw day-care centers, beds, poor people, and require use of harnesses to prevent babies from sleeping on their stomachs.
Or, we could just accept that accidents happen and encourage parents to use sound judgment and safety with regards to their children, instead of insisting on laws for every conceivable situation. All the nanny-state mentality accomplishes is ensuring that we all remain children.
May 13, 2009 - 5:48 pm 56. macko:The number of children being killed by accident with a handgun most likely doesn’t reach 500 annually(Please link to a statistic if I’m wrong). Underage kids being killed intentionally along with bystanders is something else. Remember this story is about underage murderers.
Shotgun is best for the home and the sound made when shucking a pump is internationally known. Besides there will be less chance of being demonized by an anti-gun prosecutor the way you would be if you used an AR style semi-automatic carbine.
May 13, 2009 - 5:49 pm 57. Joe Camel:As one who has carried a concealed firearm for years and used it to “dissuade” some “inter-city” toughs from perpetrating just another “crime”; I can assure you, they don’t like the idea of meeting someone who is armed. I have used weapons three times in defense of my life and those others I was with.
May 13, 2009 - 5:56 pm 58. Bones Z:I also have had neighbors who have come to my house to ask that I look around as they heard a noise outside or in their house. So, I did what a smart individual would do; I asked them to come in, get comfortable, and called the police to do the looking around. Never tempt fate by being a tough guy; intelligence is not a bad thing.
Whatnow?,
Just checked the CDC site and your numbers are about 6 times too high.
In the age group 0-16, there were 83 accidental deaths from firearms in 2006. Where did you get your stats from?
May 13, 2009 - 5:59 pm 59. cannedjam:how many kids die from choking on food annually? How about car accidents? How many kids die each year from TVs falling on them? How many kids die from medication reactions? What about peanut allergies?
Should we ban all those things?
May 13, 2009 - 6:01 pm 60. Bones Z:Indeed you have to go all the way up to age 53 before you hit the 500 “Kids” you claim as accidental shootings. Please provide the source of your “statistics”.
May 13, 2009 - 6:02 pm 61. JohnB:Whatnow makes an excellent, however misguided, point.
According to Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motorcycle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year
there were 38,417 motorcycle deaths in the 9 year period ending in 2007. I would hazard a guess that a fair percentage were also kids. That was just for M/C’s, I didn’t check the stats for all classes of motor vehicle killings.
Interestingly, there are many times more guns in private ownership than there are motorcycles and cars in America. While the libs are happily justifying and concocting a ban on sale and ownership of firearms, I say we ought to go after the real killers. What’s that you say? “Those were ‘accidents’,,, I can’t do without my car!” yeah, right. I can’t do without my guns either.
Whatnow, on a more sober note, I’m sure you can do the math, what percentage of 300 million is 500? I’m not denigrating those kids, but if you backed out the number of kids killing kids in ghetto gangland style drive-by shooting each year, I think you”d find the number of ‘gun accidents’ killing kids would be a lot lower.
Just my humble opinion, YMMV.
May 13, 2009 - 6:03 pm 62. John Coleman:Re: #54
You do understand that that number includes gang bangers shot by police? And other things normal people would not consider an “accident”, like murders.
Seeing as 3600 kids a year drown in 5 gallon buckets, your kid is safer with a gun than a mop.
May 13, 2009 - 6:21 pm 63. Deet:Hmm, 500 kids per year and 5000 in ten years…
Hey did you know that in 2005, approximately 43,440 people died in a fatal auto accidents.
If I multiplied that number by ten I could claim that, “in ten years that would be close to half a million people…” Then I could say that what we really needed is a nationwide automotive drivers licensing scheme.
Why it could be backed by a Federal or a State funded bureaucracy which could ensure that automobiles will never fall into the wrong hands, due to the Federal and State bureaucracy’s proven track records of doing extensive background checks.
Or we should just ban those death dealing auto’s all together, for the sake of the children…
Even better, I’ll give up my 2nd Amendment rights when you give up your First Amendment rights.
If I’m to give up my firearms, then you should be forced to sign a legally binding document which means that you have rescinded all of your rights to free speech. After all, harsh language kills more people than guns ever have.
Then the Federal government could simply regulate your Free Speech via a State or Federally funded committee; or they could take away your rights to free speech all together, just for the sake of those children…
May 13, 2009 - 6:41 pm 64. David Thomson:“Probably the worst gun you could buy for home defense is a handgun.”
That is why I purchased a rather simple, single shot Harrington & Richardson shot-gun. It weighs perhaps ten pounds. It is very easy to use. The fact that it shoots only one bullet at a time is admittedly a negative. Still, the good outweighs the bad. This weapon requires little training—and during a stressful situation this may be the most important factor to consider.
May 13, 2009 - 7:41 pm 65. Bohemond:“Shotgun is best for the home and the sound made when shucking a pump is internationally known.”
Yes, and that’s an important point- because shooting the bastard is an absolute last resort. No sane person wants to kill anyone, not even a criminal. And although you might happen to be an Olympic-class pistol shot, *he doesn’t know that.* But nobody in his right mind will challenge a 12ga at close range. Nobody. Ideally he’ll get down on his knees and whimper until the cops arrive. Most likely he’ll run away.
May 13, 2009 - 8:27 pm 66. BADBOY:In early February, as I exited an ice cream store in a strip mall in Plantation, Fl.,I accosted 3 teen-aged robbers who had just knocked a lady down and taken her purse-I could hear her screaming. I demanded they drop the purse and when they didn’t I warned them I was armed, and pulled my gun. When they didn’t comply I fired a shot into the air, causing their getaway driver to pull off and drive away. As the 3 chased after their ride I fired into the air again,”persuading” the one to drop the purse. I instructed some bystanders to call police-which they’d done already-and went to check on the lady. She was lying on the ground, injured; she later required surgery…the police arrived, but seemed to me more concerned with the fact that I fired my gun than with a description of the vehicle, robbers, or the injured lady. Of course they seized my pistol; it took 6 weeks of “investigations” before it was returned.When I was finally allowed to leave the scene,(after a 2-hour interview) I was asked by a couple of stringers who’d shown up some provocative questions: did I always carry a gun?(”yes”) did I advocate carrying a gun for EVERYONE?(”I don’t advocate ANYTHING for everybody”)could I describe the robbers?(”they were kids”)were they BLACK kids? (”they were YOUNG kids”)what’s your name?(”Drew”)Drew what?(”Drew Badboy-that’s what my motorcycle club named me”)…I was careful, I thought; I didn’t want to be edited into some sort of racist vigilante cowboy…the local news picked up the story; 3 stations ran it that night, but one sensationalism-slanted station ran the story morning noon and night for 3 days as their lead-in;you wouldn’t believe the phone calls, texts, and e-mails that expressed support and approval; people actually stopped me on the street and in a grocery store…people are getting tired of the nonsense, and are less inclined these days to give up their safety, possessions, or freedom-FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS…
May 13, 2009 - 8:34 pm 67. BADBOY:#45…I just went to Brady’s facebook; I managed to get one comment posted before they removed it-had already commented on 3 other postings,but they denied me permission to post any more. Rational, respectful commentary, nothing malicious-typical liberal party-line -type censorship, if you ask me…that to me is what is so dangerous about liberals: they don’t care whose rights they trample on to get their way!
May 13, 2009 - 9:23 pm 68. George Bruce:“I know this, too: if I had stayed in that neighborhood any longer, I would have bought a gun and learned how to use it. It’s getting worse and worse. But I’d never be as good at using a weapon as the people I’d likely encounter.”
You state that as a fact, but it is not. A sober and competent first time gun owner who reads a book or takes a class on safe gun handling and engages in modest amounts for practice from time to time will be much more skilled than even the above average punk. Competent marksmanship involves patience and self dicipline. Those are precisely the character traits that punks fail to display when they drop out of tenth grade to use dope. You ever see those pictures of gang bangers holding pistons sideways to shot? It might look cool to them, but you simply cannot aim that way. The punks have no advantage in gun skills over armed citizens. Their main advantage is that before the incident occurs they know they are planning to commit a felony and you don’t.
May 13, 2009 - 9:47 pm 69. George Bruce:It would be nice to have an edit function for our posts.
May 13, 2009 - 9:49 pm 70. George Bruce:54. Whatnow? said:
“Well more than 500 kids die annually from gun accidents. That’s 5000 deaths in the last 10 years and thats just kids.”
That number includes 17 year old gang bangers who kill each other or are killed by store clerks. If you define kids as under 12 and accidents as true accidents, then the number of deaths of children in gun accidents is tiny, and no where near the top ten causes of accidental childhood deaths per year.
May 13, 2009 - 9:55 pm 71. Paul:Whatnow?
Sorry, the days of easy lefty spew stats are way, way over. Working stiffs can access data bases now and don’t have to kneel down to pompous, bow tied, lefty pseudo academics.
Maybe there is a New York Times subscriber support group you can join and get group hugs, and big tall iced glasses of lefty Kool-Aid.
May 14, 2009 - 4:26 am 72. JohnB:64. David Thomson:
I was military for 13 years and received firearms training and qualification testing periodically throughout my military time, and I have to say, I was never a decent shot with a handgun. That’s with professional training and practice and lots of ammo I didn’t have to pay for. Handguns, IMHO, work best when you are close enough to stick the gun in your opponent’s ear and pull the trigger.
I agree that a shotgun is the better solution as a home defense weapon. Although I don’t think that old H&R single shot would be my first choice for a gun. Decent, serviceable, semi-auto and pump shotguns can be had for a song at just about any pawn shop in my town. These guns will hold 3 shots each, and are simplicity itself to learn to use.
Of course, you could join me in the dog house where my wife lets me sleep because of how much time and money my passion for trap and skeet costs.
May 14, 2009 - 5:08 am 73. RobertG:“Well more than 500 kids die annually” is one of the great lies put out by the Violence Policy Institute and fellow banners. They lie about other things to.
I have carried for close to forty years when I could. I have needed it exactly once. It took the police twelve minutes to respond-a decent time for a Friday I am told-twelve minutes I would have been dead. Hint: the bad guys do not wait for you to make a phone call.
May 14, 2009 - 5:08 am 74. sheesh:29. Falconsword:
So tell me . . . is it falcons word or falcon sword? Do you have a costume that goes with it?
May 14, 2009 - 6:35 am 75. momof3:I think you can shoot in defense of property, at least here in texas. Whether or not one should is another matter. And certainly not with kids around. One asshole couple does not a pattern make.
Very few criminals-or cops for that matter-are good shots. Most crimes are up close, and even then the hit rate is pretty low. It’s hard to aim calmly in the heat of the moment, which is why training is really important. Criminals don’t go target shooting. We shoiuld.
May 14, 2009 - 7:03 am 76. Clayton E. Cramer:“IMHO, work best when you are close enough to stick the gun in your opponent’s ear and pull the trigger.”
You need a better handgun! While it is true that handguns are intrinsically less accurate than long guns, and in the stress of a confrontation, one’s target skills degrade substantially, a pistol is not necessarily a contact weapon. With a Browning Hi-Power, it is surprisingly easy to hit man-sized targets at 75 yards if you brace yourself against a wall. (The police officer who stopped the Luby’s Cafeteria massacre in Kileen, Texas, hit the killer from 75 yards.)
If someone is shooting at you, the effective range will be a tiny fraction of that–but most people can reliably hit a man-sized target, even under stress, with a quality full-sized pistol at 10 yards. Even with many compact pistols, five yards is a realistic distance under stress. You do need a pistol that fits your hand, however. My wife, when well practiced, is a really crack shot with a Colt Government Model or Browning Hi-Power. I suspect that the M9 wouldn’t work for her very well at all, because it is such a big gun for her hand. (And probably not very well for me, either–my hands aren’t huge.)
Of course, even a near miss will encourage many attackers to rethink the wisdom of their choice of victim.
May 14, 2009 - 7:30 am 77. Clayton E. Cramer:“I think you can shoot in defense of property, at least here in texas. Whether or not one should is another matter.”
Texas law is rather more relaxed on this than other states–and a bit more relaxed than I consider sensible. My concealed weapons instructor many years ago was a deputy sheriff. He told us that if we ever had occasion to shoot someone, even if it was a completely righteous shoot, plan on spending at least $15,000 defending yourself from a civil suit by the criminal, or his next of kin.
Just about any piece of property that you own that’s worth enough money to justify such a civil suit should be insured. Let the insurance company deal with it.
But when it comes to the trauma of recovering from being a victim of a violent crime–that’s going to be worth an enormous amount of money to you. I’ve seen way too many people still recovering, many years later, from what the monsters do.
May 14, 2009 - 8:04 am 78. Tina Trent:Hi, Clayton. You are right that the NRA supports sentencing enhancement for gun crimes. But their resistance to sales regulations doesn’t help law enforcement. Their efforts in the area of law enforcement aren’t exactly energetic, though, of course, they aren’t responsible for gun crime and are serially wrongly accused.
May 14, 2009 - 9:44 am 79. JohnB:Clayton:
I posted:
“I have one bit of advice for the would-be/soon-to-be gun owner for home defense.
Probably the worst gun you could buy for home defense is a handgun. Accuracy at ranges out to 30 feet is very difficult to achieve for most shooters without lots of experience.”
-and-
“the average person would find it almost impossible to hit a man size target at 10 yards while under the mental stress of a home invasion.”
I will admit that I’m not a tournament grade marksman with a handgun, but I never said I couldn’t hit a man sized target at 10 yards with a handgun. And I don’t need a better handgun. I actually own 5 of ‘em, a Walther PPK/S,.380, a Beretta Mod. 92F, 9 mil, and my ‘under the bed’ home gun is a Taurus .45 ACP, knock off 1911-A1, (which actually shoots pretty good), and some black power cap and ball revolvers that I like to play with. There are no children in this house so some of the guns are always loaded.
However, I’ve put 100’s, if not 1,000’s of rounds through a pistol in my lifetime. In that time I’ve witnessed many new shooters who couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn with a handgun. My comment was directed toward the worried homeowner who contemplates purchasing a new gun for home defense. I’m sorry if you mistook the intent of my posts here.
My real passion is trap and skeet. I probably go through over 3,500 shot shells a year.
signed,
May 14, 2009 - 10:42 am 80. Anthony:JohnB
NRA member ********3545
Clayton has posted on the racist roots of gun control at his website, but the flowers are still there. The only places where gun control is popular is where there are lots of liberals living near lots of blacks.
In places like Vermont, where there are lots of liberals, but almost no blacks, they don’t have much gun control, and former Gov. Howard Dean didn’t support any additional gun control. In places like Alabama, there are lots of blacks, but not many liberals, so they don’t have a lot of gun control, either.
May 14, 2009 - 12:37 pm 81. JohnB:Anthony,
Get a grip.
Racism has no argument in gun control and 2nd Amendment rights. The two are not even remotely connected.
Let me ask you a question; are you a black man?
If you are, (I’m guessing you are) let me pose a quandary for you.
Suddenly,,, imagine this scene,,, every white man, every white woman, and every white child, were to magically disappear from north America, and you are left with only black folks to run things,,, how long do you think it would take for politics and governance to deteriorate to the mass slaughter and chaos we have seen over and over in recent Africa?
Not too long in my estimation.
The real reason society would collapse is that blacks do not have the same work ethic as whites,,, (Is that racist enough for you?) The 2nd reason is that without whites there is no imagination for something bigger, better, and greater. Lets face the reality of genetics, blacks in Africa have not yet invented the wheel on their own.
God~! I must be a racist. But you have to admit it’s all true.
May 14, 2009 - 1:44 pm 82. tom swift:“(The police officer who stopped the Luby’s Cafeteria massacre in Kileen, Texas, hit the killer from 75 yards.)”
I seem to recall that in that atrocity, the miscreant scuttled into the men’s room and shot himself there as soon as the police arrived. But perhaps I’m confusing it with some other atrocity.
I have no trouble hitting man-sized targets with a pistol at thoroughly impractical ranges – but the historical record of missed shots at very close ranges in duels tells me that there are other factors besides pure marksmanship involved.
May 14, 2009 - 1:50 pm 83. JohnB:Tom Swift,
Thanks for reminding me to check sources before opening my mouth. There are many lies out there, as has been pointed out.
Regards the Kileen Massacre: official records show, “He reloaded several times and still had ammunition remaining when he committed suicide by shooting himself in the head after being cornered and wounded by police.”
There was no ‘75 yard police shot’ to take this criminal down,,, sorry, Mr. Clayton. That just wasn’t the case.
Care to comment?
May 14, 2009 - 2:25 pm 84. Diane D:Posted to Craig’s List Personals:
To the Guy Who Tried to Mug Me in
Downtown Savannah night before last. Date: 2009-03-23, 3:43AM EST I was the guy with the black Burberry jacket that you demanded I hand over,shortly after you pulled the knife on me and my girlfriend.
You also asked for my girlfriend’s purse and earrings.I hope you somehow come across this message. I’d like to apologize.
I didn’t expect you to crap in your pants when I drew my pistol after you took my jacket. Truth is, I was wearing the jacket for a reason that
evening, and it wasn’t that cold outside.
You see, my girlfriend had
just bought me that Kimber Model 1911 .45 ACP pistol for Christmas, and we had just picked up a shoulder holster for it that evening. Beautiful pistol, eh?
It’s a very intimidating weapon when pointed at
May 14, 2009 - 6:39 pm 85. Clayton E. Cramer:your head, isn’t it? I know it probably wasn’t a great deal of fun walking back to wherever you’d come from with that brown sludge
flopping about in your pants. I’m sure it was even worse since you also ended up leaving your shoes, cellphone, and wallet with me. I
couldn’t have you calling up any of your buddies to come help you try to mug us again. I took the liberty of calling your mother, or “Momma” as you had her listed in your cell, and explaining to her your situation. I also bought myself and four other people in the gas station this morning a tank full of gas on your credit card. The guy with the big motor home took 150 gallons and was extremely grateful! I gave your shoes to one of the homeless guys over by Vinnie Van Go Go’s, along with all of the cash in your wallet. I threw the wallet in a fancy pink “pimp mobile” parked at the curb after I broke the windshield and side window out and keyed the drivers side. I called a bunch of phone sex numbers from your cellphone. They’ll be on your bill in case you’d like to know which ones. Ma Bell just shut down the line, and I’ve only had the phone for a little over a day now, so I don’t know what’s going on with that. I hope they haven’t permanently cut off your service. I could only get in two threatening phone calls to the DA’s office and one to the FBI with it. The FBI guy
was really pissed and we had a long chat (I guess while he traced the number). I’d also like to apologize for not killing you and instead
making you walk back home humiliated. I’m hoping that you’ll reconsider your choice of path in life. Next time you might not be so lucky.. – AlexP.S. Remember this motto…… an armed society is a polite society!
“Hi, Clayton. You are right that the NRA supports sentencing enhancement for gun crimes. But their resistance to sales regulations doesn’t help law enforcement.”
Probably because the evidence suggests that sales regulations aren’t terribly effective. If you mean their opposition to bans on private party sales (often mistated as the “gun show loophole”), to my surprise, a recent evaluation of murder and suicide rates in zipcodes around gun shows by a gun control advocate indicates that gun shows don’t increase murder or suicide rates.
May 15, 2009 - 9:07 am 86. Clayton E. Cramer:I recall reading news accounts at the time that indicated a police officer who was in a training class nearby was the first responder, and fired at 75 yards, hitting Hennard, and causing him to crawl into the bathroom to commit suicide. Perhaps this range was incorrect; initial news reports often have factual errors.
May 15, 2009 - 9:11 am 87. Clayton E. Cramer:“In that time I’ve witnessed many new shooters who couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn with a handgun.”
Practice, practice, practice! Shortly after my wife and I completed concealed weapons class in Sonoma County, we went up to Nevada to visit some friends. He was an MP at Fallon Naval Air Station, and had a rather…traditional view of women and their place in the world.
We went shooting. Since he carried a M1911A1 on duty, he shot a pretty decent group with my Colt Government Model at about seven yards–all seven shots in a group about the size of a large hand. My wife picked it up–and made one ragged hole. (I’m not that good a shot.) He was utterly startled.
May 15, 2009 - 9:16 am 88. Clayton E. Cramer:“Racism has no argument in gun control and 2nd Amendment rights. The two are not even remotely connected.”
They are closely connected. While not the only factor driving it, many of America’s earliest gun control laws (and some of the current ones) were aimed specifically at blacks or other racial minorities. (California’s current concealed weapon permit law, in the words of its supporters, was to disarm Chinese and Hispanics.)
While researching my book Armed America, I was struck by how often Colonial gun control laws disarming blacks were passed the same year, or within a year or two, of laws taking the vote away from free blacks. Arms have traditionally been a symbol of citizenship; it was not that many years ago that in some Swiss cantons, you showed up to vote wearing a sword, as a symbol of citizenship.
May 15, 2009 - 9:20 am 89. Clayton E. Cramer:“Lets face the reality of genetics, blacks in Africa have not yet invented the wheel on their own.
“God~! I must be a racist. But you have to admit it’s all true.”
I admit nothing of the sort. The wheel’s origins are lost in antiquity. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the New World had the wheel; the Indians made little use of it (except in children’s toys) because until the arrival of the horse and cows with the Europeans, they didn’t have any particularly suitable draft animals to draw wheeled conveyances.
Black Africa actually had some pretty advanced civilizations in the 12th and 13th centuries, not much, if any, behind Europe. When slave traders started to raid Kongo in the 16th century, Kongo’s king wrote to the Pope asking him to stop European slave traders, because Kongo was a Catholic nation by then.
May 15, 2009 - 9:26 am 90. Clayton E. Cramer:“I have no trouble hitting man-sized targets with a pistol at thoroughly impractical ranges – but the historical record of missed shots at very close ranges in duels tells me that there are other factors besides pure marksmanship involved.”
Remember that originally the purpose of a duel was not to kill, but to demonstrate your willingness to face the possibility of death. (My book Concealed Weapon Laws of the Early Republic: Dueling, Southern Violence, and Moral Reform examines how this changed, to the horror of visiting Europeans.) Missing your target was often quite intentional.
A lot of the pistols of the period are smoothbores–not terribly accurate.
And of course, if you are sufficiently scared and shaking, yeah, that impairs your aim pretty badly.
May 15, 2009 - 9:31 am 91. shaui-jan:handguns are generaly poor stoppers compared to longarms.
May 15, 2009 - 5:25 pm 92. robins111:if you want a small taste of what shooting under stress with a pisol is like,try a idpa or ipsc match.most ranges have some variation of them.
You must understand that you are going to have a very vicious fight on your hands in the near future. You have the anti-gun lobby lined up against you in this proposal to innocently “just register your guns” after all what harm is there in this.
I’ll tell you what harm there is, In Canada we share a common heritage with you in the United States, we listened to ‘just register’ many years ago, after all, it’s not like the government is taking them away.
Well they did come and take away firearms which they deemed at that time to be dangerous to the public.
The only Canadian incident of gun crime in the last 70 years using a machine gun, was done by a police officer in London, Ontario, however they took any fully automatic weapons, and anything that could be changed or modified into one.
Handguns are now so restricted that the only time you can have them unlocked is at a range. You had better not use one for home defense or any firearm for that matter because you will be charged with murder. Even if the perp, is a career criminal with a history of home invasion and assault, you WILL BE CHARGED.
Next was the registration of long guns, after all we aren’t after your deer rifle!
Sorry, but if it’s Remington semi-automatic 308, it’s probably on the chopping block, after all it’s almost an assault weapon.
We as Canadian gun owners are fighting hard to get rid of the long gun registry, it has cost tax payer 2 billion dollars plus, and to this date has never solved a crime, it has never made the police job easier, in fact, it has caused the life of several officers because of misleading information.
The population of the US is roughly 10 times the Canadian population which would extrapolate into a 20 billion dollar boondoggle.
If your lawmakers really want to reduce gun violence in the US, put more cops in the street, not in management, fix your court system, don’t end up with a catch & release program like we have.
I wish you all the best, but remember; the anti’s will lie, cheat and misuse every incident to further their agenda. You have to get mean, and use the same tactics on them, otherwise you’ll end up like us, fighting over bad laws that never should have been passed.
May 16, 2009 - 11:07 am 93. longrifle:Tina Trent:
There are so many gun laws on the books now (over 20,000) that just enforcing those would go along way to putting bad guys away for a long time. And the VAST majority of gun ownership advocates DO agree with and actively promote gun laws that work to keep criminals in jail. One such law that is supported and promoted by the NRA (it was developed by the NRA as well) is called “Project Exile”. It adds 5 years to the sentence of anyone that uses a firearm in the commission of a crime. And the 5 years is MANDATORY. It cannot be negotiated in any way. It also applies if a convicted criminal is just caught with a firearm, even when no crime has been committed. If caught the “CON” goes away for 5 years, non-negotiable. Project Exile is law in Virginia and a couple of other states. As a result, the use of guns in the commission of a crime there has dropped significantly. As has the instance of ex-cons being caught with weapons on the street.
The NRA and others of the “guns ownership” lobby support and applaud common sense gun laws (ACTUAL common sense guns laws) like this one. But for some reason the “gun control” lobby opposes such laws. I wonder why that is????
Longrifle,
May 16, 2009 - 2:06 pm 94. GregGS:Lifetime NRA member
5. sheesh:
SHEEEEEEEEESH! the Muhs… they will be brought to justice
as any law breaker and murderer are in a courtroom.
For those of you wondering whether the law protects this sort of ridiculous “protection of property,” the answer is no. Not even in Texas.
May 16, 2009 - 3:47 pm 95. tedders:The Muhs are going to be doing hard time if not the death penalty, rightly so.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090508/texas_couple_090508/20090508?hub=World
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/6414373.html
May 16, 2009 - 6:02 pm 96. Momma of 4:My father and grandfather always told me “Sweetie, any intruder who sticks around after hearing you pump that shotgun deserves to be shot.”
May 16, 2009 - 7:33 pm 97. Mr.Model 1911:While I have to agree that the sound of a shotgun being racked will make the intruder think twice, and handguns are more difficult to aim and fire without training and practice. There are several makes of laser sights that are just as intimidating as that shotgun being racked. That bright red or green dot on the intruders chest even if higher than a Georgia Pine would I think probably break through the haze. Shooting is like driving, if you do it often and well it simply becomes second nature. Besides the best way of blowing off a weeks worth of stress is shredding a target at the range. I’ve got a pair of Wilson Combats so any intruder gets to choose. Would you like a lot of small caliber holes ala .223 or just a few large bore ones from the .45? Guests sorry I mean intruders choice.
May 17, 2009 - 3:46 am 98. shaui-jan:a firearm being racked can either drive an intruder off,or give away yor general position and get your fired apon.i prefer a laser/light combination.it blinds them completly and illuminates them clearly so you can see what weapons they are/aren’t holding.with the laser….you can focus on the threat,not on your sights.best $300.00 i ever spent.
May 17, 2009 - 8:24 am 99. Blackwater:I think Americans should be able to own any gun they want as long as they pass a background check, buy a lock for each gun and take a safety course. I have zero problems with my neighbors and fellow citizens owning fully automatic assualt rifles, handguns, silencers, collapsable shoulder rests, armor piercing rounds, etc, you name it. The arguments against people owning these weapons is just silly.
“Oh, someone might go crazy and start killing everyone with their gun.”
That’s always going to be a very small danger no matter what we do. People go on killing sprees all around the world unfortunately. Including in countries where guns are completely banned and are even islands making it much harder to smuggle in illegal guns. They use knives instead of guns, or mailbox bombs, or vehicles, you name it. If someone flips out they’re going to do damage whether they just have a hunting rifle or an AK 47. Better to have more ordinary every day citizens armed so they can shoot these insane people themselves. And that happens all the time. It just very rarely gets reported in the news. If people aren’t allowed to have guns then they’re sitting ducks and at the whims of insane people and criminals.
“Oh, what about accidental shootings.”
Accidental shootings are a tragedy but they’re also very rare. And if people were taught proper gun safety then accidental shootings would be greatly reduced. Children especially need to be taught gun safety as well.
Not to mention banning guns in this country would be nearly impossible. There’s hundreds of millions of guns in this country. You’d never be able to get rid of all of them even if you wanted to. And the people that would work hardest to get illegal guns would be criminals. So hooray for being helpless to defend your loved ones and yourself against criminal losers.
Besides, an armed populace would be one of the best safeguards against islamist jihadist terrorist attacks on America. Who here would try to hijack a plane if you knew a lot of people onboard were armed? Would you try to carry out a Mumbai style attack if you knew most pedestrians were packing? I doubt it. Plenty of American citizens are willing to be that last net of security to protect America from another terrorist attack.
And who knows, we might need our guns someday. For all you know the Chinese could invade us tomorrow. It would be exponentially harder to take over America if most of its citizens owned assualt rifles and knew how to use them. It wouldn’t be a few thousand insurgents who can’t aim for shit like it was in Iraq. It would be millions of highly armed and highly skilled American marksmen picking off invaders like it was a duck hunt.
At the end of the day most people are sane, law abiding decent Americans. Banning all guns in the country because ghetto gangs shoot each other every day or because some whack job goes crazy is ridiculous. Taking the guns away from people in Virginia because inner city low lifes in Chicago can’t stop shooting each other is insane. Maybe if our politicians grew some balls and started throwing these gang members in jail permanently before they had a chance to kill someone we wouldn’t have all these shooting deaths.
America isn’t Europe, Australia or Japan. We aren’t going to allow our government to take our guns away without raising hell. We’re going to fight their attempts to confiscate our guns every step of the way. You aren’t going to force us to register our firearms in the name of fighting crime only to use that list of gun owners to arrest them when you eventually ban all guns like the politicians in the UK did. It’s not going to happen. We’ll march on Washington D.C. and throw you out of office. If you want to live in some anti-gun utopia then go move to Europe where you can get mugged and be totally helpless.
May 17, 2009 - 6:27 pm 100. Pappadave:When did we reach the point in this country where a woman lying raped and murdered in an alley is somehow considered to be more “moral” than another woman, standing in the entrance to that same alley, explaining to police how that rapist got a hole in his chest?
May 18, 2009 - 12:46 pm 101. Renee:Hey, all you gun control peeps out there! Don’t forget the sign you all need to put on your front lawns, where everybody and their dog can see it…the one that says “Occupant is Unarmed”. That way, you can proudly show which side you are on. And the B&E thugs know which house is cool to break into.
I’d rather be in a room with 10 people who are all armed, than in a room with 10 people and only one is armed. Case in point…Kennesaw, GA, where they passed a law that homeowners were required to own a firearm. Crime rate went down 89% that following year.
The criminals are not going to give up their guns if your lovely gun control laws get passed. And if you think the terrorists are going to give up theirs cause you ask ‘em nicely, you are out of your mind.
And believe me people, when I tell you that the terrorists are already here. My sister watched them dancing for joy in the streets of Dearborn MI on 9/11. You want my guns? Have fun with that.
May 18, 2009 - 9:18 pm 102. s:I have recently been bulglarized. If I have a gun it would be taken as well since I am not home. So much for protection.
May 31, 2009 - 2:38 pm 103. s:This blog thread cited the story of 4 armed robbers breaking in and intending to kill the occupants. How often is that? Let’s be realistic. And if that is the case, how much chance do you think the occupants have while they were asleep?
I came from a country with very strict gun control. If no one is allowed to have guns we would not even have these arguments here.
I want to be safe but I don’t think gun is necessary the answer.
Blackwater says “People go on killing sprees all around the world unfortunately.” True. But if these insane individual only has knife as Blackwater suggested, I know I have a fighting chance or at least a chance to out run the knife. I can’t out run a bullet. As to what he said regarding protecting himself from mugger, unless he carries the gun around his belt, I don’t see how he can protect himself.
May 31, 2009 - 2:56 pm 104. samuel - texas hunting man:By the way, so long as some of us (like Blackwater) feel that we need guns to protect our homes, let’s also give everyone the right to mine their front and backyards. Guns do not kill, let’s also give everyone hand grenade. As a matter of fact, let’s give everyone a nuclear bomb. See, there, I am agreeing with you all who needs protection. I’ll say let’s go all the way. Nuclear protection. Yeah!!!
Thanks for keeping up that blog of the new related incidents. It could be that they are not so well known because they are considered local news. But when compiled together they may make a more compelling story… wishful thinking I know.
Jun 15, 2009 - 5:20 pm