untitled

Are doctors getting to be a menace? Some of them are so anti-gun they have no compunction about doctoring statistics to “prove” that people should not have guns.

The worst and most enduring factoid from physicians is the claim that a person with a gun in the home is 43 times as likely to shoot someone in the family as to shoot a criminal.

We’ve heard that kind of nonsense time and again since two doctors published it in 1986. Doctors ARTHUR L. KELLERMANN and DONALD T. REAY wrote “Protection or Peril?: An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home,” which appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Of course, such anti-gun propaganda is baloney, but it was recently updated by the anti-gun Violence Policy Center (VPC) in a report titled, “A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns and Self-Defense.”

Citing FBI figures, the report said “In 1998, for every time a woman used a handgun to kill in self-defense, 101 women were murdered with a handgun.”

“Currently, only a small minority of adult American women own a handgun,” said the VPC report. “Before a woman purchases a handgun for protection, she must pause to consider whether the grave risk is one she is willing to accept.”

In short, if you defend yourself with a handgun, you’ll get killed.

Do you see the trick they’re pulling with statistics?

MIGUEL A. FARIA Jr., editor-in-chief of Medical Sentinel — the official journal of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons — said VPC’s figures were flawed because they were based on bad statistical analysis.

“What they are doing,” FARIA said, “is, on the one side, counting the number of women who have been killed in criminal acts, and on the other side they are placing the number of women who have used a gun in self-defense.”

“In other words, self-defense vs. murders,” he said.

The trick is that the two numbers are totally unrelated. There is no mention in VPC’s “statistics” of how many women who were murdered had a handgun in their hands at the time. And who says you have to kill in order to scare off a criminal? So VPC isn’t even comparing apples and oranges, it’s more like comparing apples and bicycles. The conclusion about self-defense resulting in your own death has nothing to do with either set of numbers. Dumb.

If women buy the message, they may be denying themselves real protection.

FARIA said, “But they are ignoring the most important uses of firearms. They are ignoring the protective benefits of firearms, which are not necessarily the number of deaths.

“In fact, we’re happy to say that in less than 2 percent of cases does a person have to fire a gun to protect themselves,” he said.

“In 98 percent of the cases, all that a person has to do is brandish a firearm; that’s all it takes.”

FARIA added that research shows that only “in 0.1 - 0.2 percent of cases does anybody actually get shot by people who are protecting themselves.”

JUDGE ORDERS STATE TO REVEAL CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT HOLDERS

In a clash between the First and Second Amendments, a Wyoming judge has ordered the state to release the names of about 7,000 people with concealed carry permits.

First District Judge EDWARD GRANT rejected an attempt by the Wyoming Division of Criminal Investigation to keep the names private. The agency argued that releasing the names would violate the privacy rights of permit holders and possibly endanger them.

The Gillette News-Record sought the names after the number of permits rose sharply following the passage of a 1994 concealed carry law.

State attorney BRYAN SKORIC has appealed the ruling and the judge’s order will not take effect until all appeals are exhausted.

SKORIC said, “If I were a permit holder, which by the way I am not, I would very strongly resent that my name could be published.”

The judge said the privacy of permit holders is a legitimate issue, even though state law does not specifically keep the names private.

ANN FRANSCELL, publisher and editor of the Gillette News-Record, said she is pleased with the ruling but thinks changing public sentiment against releasing the names could be an uphill battle.

The newspaper does not intend to print the entire list of names but to contact people who hold permits and interview them for stories about the effectiveness of the law, FRANSCELL said.

A bill moving through the Wyoming legislature would keep the names private. It has passed the Senate and has good chances in the House.

A state law prevents information about a driver’s license holder from being made public. The permit law now in effect suggests a similar intention because it protects the confidentiality of comments made by law enforcement during a background check on an applicant, state attorney SKORIC said.

LOS ANGELES WANTS TO FINGERPRINT GUN BUYERS

Some members of the Los Angeles City Council have said they will vote for a measure that would require gun buyers to provide fingerprints before they could purchase a firearm.

A committee of the City Council recently approved the proposal, which now goes to the entire 15-member council for consideration.

Councilman MIKE FEUER, author of the measure, says that it would be an effective tool for local prosecutors to use when building cases against people who try to illegally purchase guns.

SAM PAREDES, executive director of Gun Owners of California, says that FEUER and those who support the proposal have a lot to learn about state law and citizens’ rights.

“The council panel has just looked at state law and completely ignored it,” said PAREDES.

“In California we have what’s called a preemption law. Under its provisions, the whole area of regulation of firearms ownership in usurped by the state.”

PAREDES said the state attorney general has an obligation to step in and stop the city of Los Angeles from trying to enforce a measure like the one proposed by FEUER.

If Sacramento doesn’t get involved, PAREDES said his own organization and other pro-gun groups will challenge fingerprinting in court.

CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS URGE DROPPING GUN CONTROL BILLS

Some conservative Democrats have three words of advice for their party leadership: Drop gun control.

Rep. JIM TURNER (D-TX) said, “This is not an issue that helps the Democratic Party, particularly in rural America.”

TURNER and fellow House Democrats and Texans RALPH HILL and MAX SANDLIN are concerned about renewed efforts to push gun control in Congress.

Two powerful senators - JOSEPH LIEBERMANN (D-CT) and JOHN McCAIN (R-AZ) - are working on a bill that would increase background checks at gun shows and provide additional money to enforce existing laws.

Sen. JACK REED (D-RI) plans to introduce a measure that would mandate background checks for all buyers at gun shows and expand the definition of a gun show to include events such as flea markets and swap meets where firearms are not the main product sold.

The Texas lawmakers say gun control efforts have hurt Democrats, including former Vice President AL GORE.

OHIO GUN OWNERS CAMPAIGN FOR BETTER CONCEALED CARRY LAW

Ohio law allows only law enforcement officers or officers of state and federal government to carry concealed weapons.

A test case now before an Ohio court may change that.

It all began with PAT FEELY, who worked in a pizza delivery business when someone robbed it and fired a shot into the building. Then he began carrying a handgun for protection.

FEELY never had to use the gun, but police arrested him in 1999 for carrying it. It was then that CHUCK KLEIN, a private investigator, recruited him for a test case challenging the restrictive Ohio concealed carry law.

FEELY agreed to fight his arrest in court rather than plea bargain, and KLEIN found him an attorney and raised about $1,000 toward legal expenses.

A Hamilton County Common Pleas judge acquitted FEELY in May 2000. The judge said that Ohio’s law is flawed because it does not distinguish between criminals and people who carry guns for their protection.

KLEIN said, “He risked a felony conviction, losing his citizenship, going to jail, the whole thing. He was a hero, to have done this.”

Next, KLEIN and three others - a hair dresser, a personal fitness trainer and the owner of the pizza delivery business - sued to overturn the law. FEELY was not part of the lawsuit because by then he had given up pizza delivery for a factory job where he no longer handles cash late at night.

The plaintiffs do business in higher-crime neighborhoods, sometimes after dark and when they are alone.

The Second Amendment Foundation, the Bellevue, WA-based gun-rights organization, is funding the lawsuit.

Last year, the judge in the case temporarily barred Cincinnati-area police agencies from enforcing the concealed-carry ban. But a state appeals court overturned that ruling and sent the case back to the judge. It could go to trial soon.

Even if the Ohio general Assembly were to re-do the law and allow carrying concealed weapons, KLEIN said he wants a trial to have the state’s current ban thrown out by a court. It would send a message to lawmakers who otherwise might change their minds later, he said.

KLEIN blames Gov. BOB TAFT for discouraging lawmakers who would change the law to allow concealed carry, something that 43 other states allow. TAFT refuses to sign such a law unless police groups back it.

Of the states that allow carrying concealed weapons, some require permits, firearms training or police approval for obtaining handguns. Vermont does not require any license for carrying concealed weapons. Missouri voters in 1999 rejected a ballot issue that would have legalized carrying concealed weapons in that state.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES HIT POLICE WITH LIABILITY FOR “UNSAFE” GUNS

Gun control advocates in California rejoiced when a 1999 law declared every handgun “unsafe” unless it passes a series of state-mandated performance tests.

However, police throughout the state now face liability for carrying handguns the law deems “unsafe.”

The law only allows manufacturers to submit guns for testing and only current production handgun models have been submitted for testing. All previous production models carried by police departments across the state are branded “unsafe” by the law, regardless of their quality and safety features.

The California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA) has identified guns carried by police that fall under the new liability.

Although law enforcement agencies are exempt from restrictions on buying new guns under the law, there is no provision immunizing them from the increased liability resulting from carrying an existing untested “unsafe” handgun.

Several attorneys representing city and county governments have already advised their police departments against allowing the guns to be carried by their officers, and have contacted the Attorney General about the increased liability problem.

The Attorney General’s office maintains that there is no problem because all police handguns would presumably pass the test. They have not yet addressed the question of increased liability.

JIM ERDMAN, executive director of the CRPA, said, “This is exactly the same situation as if the state, by law, had declared everything except this year’s models of automobiles to be unsafe and made illegal for used car dealers to sell them.”

A SKUNK BY ANY OTHER NAME

Insiders say that Handgun Control, Inc. (HCI) is in the process of changing its name because the term “handgun control” is “too far to the political left.”

Newsweek recently reported that the new name will probably include a reference to JIM and SARAH BRADY, who have been the public faces of HCI since the late 1980s. Public sympathy runs high for former White House Press Secretary JIM BRADY, who was shot in the head during the assassination attempt on Pres. RONALD REAGAN.

HCI board members privately voted for the name change to improve the group’s image with mainstream America.

This will be the second name change for HCI, which began in 1974 as the National Council to Control Handguns (NCCH).

The new “Friends of Jim Brady” (or whatever touchy-feely name they decide on) will probably not fool anyone beyond the naive and the zealous. HCI has been on record as a gun ban group long enough to be burned into the public memory.

HCI supported the 1994 ban on certain semi-automatic firearms. In its original incarnation as NCCH, the group stated its intention to establish an eventual handgun ban through gradual steps. They even brag about their legal defense of the Washington, D.C. and Morton Grove, IL handgun bans.

Be on the lookout for the same old gun ban group with the sweet-smelling new name.

NEW GROUP, OLD LIES

A new gun-ban group has been launched with the money of billionaire ANDREW J. McKELVEY of Monster.com. It calls itself “Americans for Gun Safety” (AGS).

Ads for the group say it recognizes “the right to own a gun,” BUT...

You know the drill: they love guns, but there’s just too much gun violence (the guns do the violence all by themselves with no help from criminals, if you believe their propaganda). So we really need to control guns just a little.

Well, the new group is really just another version of the old HCI. McKELVEY is a former board member of HCI. Just about all of AGS’s new affiliates are longtime HCI affiliates. Looks like this year’s fashionable color is camouflage.

APPEALS COURT HALTS MIAMI-DADE SUIT AGAINST GUN INDUSTRY

A Florida state appeals court has upheld a lower court ruling that Miami-Dade County’s lawsuit against the nation’s gun industry may not proceed because the county has no standing to sue on behalf of gunshot victims.

The Third District Court of Appeal noted that the county’s request that the trial court use injunctive powers to mandate that guns be redesigned and that gun makers’ business methods be deemed a public nuisance was “an attempt to regulate firearms and ammunition through the judiciary.”

The suit, filed in 1999, had been dismissed with prejudice by Dade County Circuit Court Judge AMY DEAN. The appellate court upheld Judge DEAN’s ruling.

The suit also asked that the nation’s major gun manufacturers and those who sell guns be held liable for the costs the county incurred when it paid for victims’ medical expenses at public hospitals.

The appeal court noted that it had examined similar appellate decisions and that in all but one, had “precluded relief similar” to that requested by Miami-Dade.

County Attorney ROBERT GINSBURG said he would “give the ruling serious consideration in terms of any further appellate proceedings.”

GUN MAKERS SEEK DISMISSAL OF NEW YORK’S SUIT AGAINST THEM

Three gun manufacturers have filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought against them by the New York State attorney general, ELIOT L. SPITZER, who said they were responsible for injuries to state residents from unsafe and illegal weapons.

Lawyers for Beretta U.S.A., Glock and Hi-Point Firearms argued before Judge LOUIS B. YORK in State Supreme Court in Manhattan that the firearm companies could not be held responsible for crimes committed with guns that were legally sold to wholesalers and then to retailers.

“Supreme Court” in the state of New York denotes the lowest level state court, and not the highest appeals court, unlike most state and federal courts.

Deputy Attorney General PETER B. POPE said the gun manufacturers constituted a public nuisance because they were partly responsible for the carnage from the guns. Mr. POPE emphasized that the state was not seeking damages, but was just trying to force gun makers to adopt a code of conduct that would change the way they manufactured and distributed firearms. The goal was to reduce the flow of weapons to criminals.

New York State’s lawsuit is a worrisome escalation of the legal war against the gun industry - the first time a state has taken gun makers to court. Some 32 cities and counties across the nation have filed similar suits.

LAWRENCE S. GREENWALD, a lawyer for Beretta U.S.A., in Accokeed, MD, argued against the state’s case, saying that the “harm they complain of is indirect. The manufacturers are three or four steps removed. If a car ends up in the hands of a speeder or drunken driver, no one is suggesting that G.M. is creating a nuisance.”

Last March, Smith & Wesson, the nation’s largest handgun maker, agreed to the proposed code of conduct. In return, S&W was dropped from city and county lawsuits, and it was left out of Mr. SPITZER’s suit.

GUN BUYBACK BACKFIRES

The Libertarian Party of Chicago (LPC) has filed suit against the Cook County Sheriff’s Department for numerous firearms violations, including allowing a number of guns from a buyback program to “vanish into thin air.”

LPC chairman MATT BEAUCHAMP said the suit seeks to obtain information on the whereabouts of guns purchased during a 1999 “Safe Streets, Safe Neighborhoods 2000” gun buyback program. The guns are unaccounted for.

BEAUCHAMP also contends that the Sheriff’s Department did not keep proper records of guns with serial numbers removed. He said, “This program was a great way for criminals to get rid of evidence with no questions asked.”

MOM VIOLENCE: MILLION MOMS MARCH ACTIVIST CONVICTED IN SHOOTING

A bereaved mom whose son was shot and killed nearly two years ago - and who is a Million Mom March activist - was recently convicted of shooting a man she wrongly believed was her son’s killer.

BARBARA GRAHAM was found guilty in District of Columbia Superior Court “of trying to avenge her son’s death by shooting KIKKO SMITH, a young man she blamed for the killing,” according to the Washington Post. The shooting left SMITH paralyzed and confined to a wheelchair for life.

GRAHAM’s son was killed in 1999 in a shooting death at a Martin Luther King Jr. rally. She became active in a Washington-area group, “Mothers on the Move Spiritually,” which helped sponsor the Million Moms March event, where GRAHAM spoke out against guns.

The Million Moms March group says it is “dedicated to preventing gun death and injury and supporting victims and survivors of gun trauma.”

Witnesses said GRAHAM was distraught over the loss of her son and frustrated with failed police efforts to catch her son’s killer. She went to Smith’s house with her son’s .45-caliber handgun and took along 30-year-old ERSKINE MOORER, boyfriend of one of GRAHAM’s daughters.

Outside SMITH’s residence, GRAHAM twice asked SMITH his name. Prosecutors said GRAHAM and MOORER then pulled out guns and began shooting at SMITH as he ran from them. SMITH identified both GRAHAM and MOORER in the courtroom as having been his assailants.

Prosecutors surmised that GRAHAM confused SMITH’s first name, KIKKO, with the name of her son’s alleged killer, “TEACCO.”

SMITH’s mother, MARY ANN SMITH, said “From a mother to a mother, she knew better. You can’t tell the kids to stop the violence with the mothers running around like this.”

GRAHAM faces 15 years to life in prison for three of the most serious charges against her.

With this incident of mom violence, will a mom control group emerge?

DO BLIND PEOPLE HAVE RIGHT OF SELF DEFENSE?

CAROLYN ANN KEY, a Louisville, Kentucky woman, blind for 18 years from a retinal disease, recently pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court for carrying a .32-caliber derringer on federal property. She was forced to at least temporarily surrender her gun and her concealed carry permit.

Federal prosecutor McKAY CHAUVIN, assigned to KEY’s case, said it’s “outrageous” she had a permit and makes as much sense as giving driver’s licenses to the blind.

Handgun Control, Inc. called it “frightening” and said it shows that the standards for carrying concealed guns are too lax.

Rep. BOB DAMRON, author of Kentucky’s concealed carry law, said that no one, not even blind people, has erroneously shot anyone.

RAY YEAGER, whose range trains and tests thousands of permit applicants a year, said the blind “should have just as much right to defend themselves as anyone else, as long as they exercise responsibility when they pull the trigger.”

AUDIT SAYS UTAH’S GUN-SAFETY PROGRAM A FAILURE

Legislative auditors have recommended that the State of Utah consider junking the gun-safety program used to qualify citizens for concealed-carry permits and replace it with a simple written test.

The current system in Utah requires training by one of hundreds of private instructors. Course materials varied widely from one instructor to another, said the audit, so it was not possible to asses skills and knowledge of permit holders.

In addition, the program was costing $144,000 more annually than the permit fees charged. However, the current legislative session is finished, so the issue will not be dealt with immediately.

GUN NEWS TICKER: SHORT TAKES ON GUNS

• Great Britain: How well is the British handgun ban working? In 1999 in England and Wales, 62 people were shot to death, up from 49 the year before. Many were gangland shootouts and robberies. So Great Britain will develop a computer database of citizens who legally own firearms and raise the legal age for obtaining firearm certificates. Police, who patrol unarmed, hailed the measure. The pro-gun Sportsman’s Association opposes the move, said Director RICHARD MALTON. “All we’re got left are gas pistols, air pistols and muzzle-loading pistols. We have no political clout.” The Countryside Alliance, another British pro-gun group, also opposed the move.

• Arizona: The Tucson City Council has voted 4-2 to require background checks on all gun show sales at the Tucson Convention Center. Because the state prohibits cities from regulating gun sales, the city will make it the responsibility of the gun show promoter, as a condition of renting the center, to have a licensed gun dealer available to do the checks for private sellers. KEN REINER, firearms rights activist, expressed anger over the move and threatened to sue the city. However, two bills before the state legislature may affect his decision: one that allows cities to regulate firearm sales and another that strictly preempts cities from any regulatory authority over guns.

• Missouri: WILLIAM W. JOHNSTON, the former federal prosecutor from Waco, Texas, recently entered a guilty plea in Federal Court in St. Louis to the felony charge of misprision of a felony. Misprision of a felony is concealing a felony committed by another. The charge was made in a superceding Information filed by the Office of Special Counsel. An Information is an indictment brought by a prosecutor rather than a grand jury. Johnston, 41, entered a guilty plea to charges of hiding his notes about the FBI’s use of incendiary tear gas rounds at their 1993 attack on the Waco compound of the Branch Davidians from the Justice Department and Congress. He also is accused of later lying about the notes to the grand jury and investigators for John C. Danforth, special counsel in the case. In return for his guilty plea, the Office of Special Counsel has agreed to dismiss the remaining charges against Johnston at the time of his sentencing.

• Washington, D.C.: U.S. Attorney General JOHN ASHCROFT recently stood by gun rights in an interview with CNN’s LARRY KING. His view is that the cure for criminal violence in America is better enforcement, not more laws. “Law abiding citizens have a right under our Constitution to have firearms,” ASHCROFT told KING, “but there’s no reason for us to look the other way when people misuse them and commit crimes. We should nail them.”

• Traverse City, Michigan: Open a bank account, get a gun. That’s the latest gimmick being used by North Country Financial Corp. to get depositors. The bank is exchanging firearms for deposits, giving away rifles and shotguns in lieu of the interest that normally accompanies accounts. Put as little as $869 in a 20-year certificate of deposit, and the bank will hand over a Weatherby Inc. Mark V Synthetic rifle that normally lists for $779. Deposit more and you have a choice of six Weatherby shotguns or limited-edition rifle with walnut stock and oak-leaf engravings.

• California: State legislators are sharply divided over a new gun control measure that would require handgun owners to get licenses the same way drivers’ licenses are obtained. Capitol Democrats said they were running out of patience and would push for the legislation, which was shelved last year at the request of Gov. GRAY DAVIS (D). Advocates of gun rights are outraged at the licensing proposal. “Driving a car and fishing and hunting and things like that are privileges,” said GERRY UPHOLT of the California Rifle and Pistol Association. “They’re not guaranteed to the individual by the Constitution. Ownership of a firearm is. So what they’re trying to license is a Constitutional right.” Republicans pointed out that licensing would not reduce the number of guns in criminal hands.

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION DOES SOMETHING SENSIBLE

It’s one of those “will-miracles-never-cease” kind of things, but the usually anti-gun American Bar Association (ABA) has decided to oppose zero tolerance policies that allow kids to be kicked out of school for possession of “weapons” like fingers and photographs of guns.

The leadership of the ABA recently voted to recommend an end to zero-tolerance policies in the nation’s 14,000 school districts.

The 400,000-member lawyer’s organization, which held its winter meeting in San Diego, said such policies are a misguided “one-size-fits-all solution to all the problems schools confront” and have “redefined students as criminals.”

Zero-tolerance policies - many mandated by state law after the tragic school shootings at Columbine High School in Colorado - require government-run schools to expel or suspend students for any violation of weapons regulations.

Such policies have led to bizarre results, including:

In New Jersey, a 9-year-old was suspended and forced to undergo psychiatric counseling for threatening to shoot a classmate with a rubber band.

Three grammar school students in Colorado were suspended for possessing a weapon, a water pistol.

In Michigan, a third-grader was suspended for showing his classmates a gun-shaped medallion, slightly larger than a charm for a necklace. He had found the piece of jewelry in a snowbank. “State law requires us to take action even though it was a toy,” said a school administrator.

In Maryland, a school suspended a 9-year-old after he drew a picture of a gun on a piece of paper.

A school in New Jersey suspended two kindergarten students for playing “cops and robbers” on the playground. They had pointed their fingers at each other like guns and shouted, “Bang, bang!”

That shows how ineffective these policies are.

At their worst, the kind of zero-tolerance policies opposed by the American Bar association send a chilling message to children.

They teach kids that rules don’t make any sense and thus teach disrespect for the law. and they teach children that they have no rights, that they are criminals if they play normal childhood games. A society that teaches children they are criminals cannot long endure.

American Bar Association, good work. Keep it up.