AWB Ends, Homicide Rate Drops

Forums: Politics, Assault Weapons
Email this Topic • Print this Page

New FBI Crime Report Debunks Predictions About End of Semi-Auto Ban
6/7/2005 5:30:00 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: National Desk

Contact: Alan Gottlieb, 425-454-7012; or Joe Tartaro, 716-885-6408, both of the Second Amendment Foundation

BELLEVUE, Wash., June 7 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Recently released data from the FBI clearly show that the dire predictions by anti- gunners last fall over the end of the so-called "assault weapons ban" have proven to be groundless, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) noted today.

The FBI reported that for the first time since 1999, homicides declined last year 5.4 percent in cities with more than 1 million people, and overall, murders fell 3.6 percent nationwide.

"Anti-gun hysterics have once again been proven wrong in their fear mongering," said SAF Founder Alan Gottlieb. "Their forecasts of blood running in the streets were baseless, and they knew it. However, when you're in a war to crush a Constitutional right, one class of firearms at a time, truth is typically the first casualty."

The ten-year-old Clinton Administration ban on certain semiautomatic firearms expired last September, amid alarmist warnings that violent crime would escalate, including violence against children.

"Here we are as a nation, nine months after the sunset of that onerous law," said SAF President Joe Tartaro, "and all the doom and gloom has been exposed as pure claptrap. Not only are murder rates down, so are the overall rates for violent crime.

"Where is the news media on this," he wondered. "If homicides had gone up, you can be certain that would be making front page headlines, with reporters linking the rise to the end of the ban. But that's not the case, and the mainstream press, with the exception of an April 28 New York Times article, has been pretty quiet about it.

"This is more proof," Tartaro said, "that the rhetoric from anti-gunners is bogus. The press should now question all the other outrageous claims and predictions from the gun control crowd. For example, the Palm Beach Post reported that violent crime in Florida is down while the number of concealed pistol licenses has climbed. Anti-gunners predicted gunfights at traffic stops and cocktail lounges, and that scenario never happened, either.

"The gun control movement is, and always has been, built on a foundation of hysteria and lies," Gottlieb stated. "From their lawsuits against gun makers to their assaults on the firearm civil rights of law-abiding American citizens, these gun grabbers have been deliberately deceitful and consistently wrong."

The Second Amendment Foundation -- http://www.saf.org/ -- is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 600,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers & an amicus brief & fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=48495

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,780 • Replies: 48

No top replies

What news?

The only thing I see is a partisan report that doesn't understand how the FBI crime report works.

The FBI crime report is for the entire previous year. The weapons ban ended last fall as the story stated. So.. the FBI report covers a year in which the ban was in effect for the majority of the year. Not something you can make much out of. Perhaps the majority of the murders last year were after the ban was no longer in place?

0 Replies

I'm always happy to see crime numbers drop, no matter what the cause.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

This is a prediction, not a fact. I want to see the report next year.

0 Replies

My prediction: As more and more states adopt CCW laws the crime rate will continue to decline.

0 Replies

Remember, most of the weapons on the banned list were not used in crime even before the ban.

0 Replies

Excellent point, Intrepid. For myself, at least, I wonder why they were banned in the first place.

0 Replies

Ask Oprah.

0 Replies

roger wrote:

Excellent point, Intrepid. For myself, at least, I wonder why they were banned in the first place.

I think the reason was because they were finding their way into gang shootings in the late 80s and early 90s. It only takes a couple of highly publicized incidences to get the politicians all worked up over it.

0 Replies

Agreed.

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

My prediction: As more and more states adopt CCW laws the crime rate will continue to decline.

Sounds like it's time for a refresher course on the post hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy.

Intrepid wrote:

Remember, most of the weapons on the banned list were not used in crime even before the ban.

Quite right. We'll never know how useful a bazooka can be in a bank robbery if we never let criminals use it at least once.

0 Replies

One news item which sort of amazed me at the time is that the two D.C. area snipers were using an M16 but, basically, were using it as if it were a single shot rifle. They could have just as easily been using a muzzle-loader. I don't think they ever took more than one shot on a given occasion.

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

cjhsa wrote:
My prediction: As more and more states adopt CCW laws the crime rate will continue to decline.

Sounds like it's time for a refresher course on the post hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy.

Intrepid wrote:
Remember, most of the weapons on the banned list were not used in crime even before the ban.

Quite right. We'll never know how useful a bazooka can be in a bank robbery if we never let criminals use it at least once.

My point was to the fact that the report claimed crime had dropped even after the ban. The dropped crime had nothing to do with the banned weapons.

Did they have bazooka's on the list? My personal opinion is that all guns should be banned. Or, in keeping with the 2nd amendment or whatever it is, everybody should be allowed to have muzzle loaders like they did when that was written.

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

Quite right. We'll never know how useful a bazooka can be in a bank robbery if we never let criminals use it at least once.

That certainly seems true* to me, but what seems even more true* to me is that if we're going to ban weapons on the premise that we are preventing people from using them to commit crimes, we're likely to have the most success if we start with the ones they are using. (We can always get around to banning the ones they aren't using later. Even the bazookas.)

* Much of what seems true to me may not in fact be true.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

My point was to the fact that the report claimed crime had dropped even after the ban. The dropped crime had nothing to do with the banned weapons.

Hence my reference to the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. To assert (as the author of the article in cjhsa's original post implied) that there is some kind of causal connection (or lack of a causal connection) between a weapons ban and crime simply by comparing crime rates before and after the ban is to indulge in a common logical error.

Intrepid wrote:

Did they have bazooka's on the list? My personal opinion is that all guns should be banned. Or, in keeping with the 2nd amendment or whatever it is, everybody should be allowed to have muzzle loaders like they did when that was written.

You point out one of the great mysteries of the second amendment crowd. On the one hand, they are staunch proponents of an original intent interpretation of the constitution. On the other hand, they are universally unwilling to interpret the word "arms" in the second amendment according to the original intent of its drafters. Very curious indeed.

0 Replies

Scrat wrote:

That certainly seems true* to me, but what seems even more true* to me is that if we're going to ban weapons on the premise that we are preventing people from using them to commit crimes, we're likely to have the most success if we start with the ones they are using. (We can always get around to banning the ones they aren't using later. Even the bazookas.)

* Much of what seems true to me may not in fact be true.

Well, it appears that Scrat has returned.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Did they have bazooka's on the list? My personal opinion is that all guns should be banned. Or, in keeping with the 2nd amendment or whatever it is, everybody should be allowed to have muzzle loaders like they did when that was written.

Yes, and the First Amendment should only apply to thoughts and writings that were either hand printed or made with a hand typeset printing press.

And free speech should only be allowed within the distance of an unamplified speaking voice. Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

"post hoc ergo propter hoc"

Another reason to have an open season on lawyers.

0 Replies

When you guys come out and admit you "want to ban all guns", well, you might as well go join Al Queda. You are the enemy of America because you don't respect our constitution.

I want you to shut up, but the 1st amendment protects your right to spew (given you are a citizen).

0 Replies

Although I suppose a handset old fashioned printing press could kill somebody or one could through an amplifier at someone's head, the analogy is as transparant as Saran Wrap.

0 Replies

AWB Ends, Homicide Rate Drops

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know