🚀 go-pugleaf

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0067_01C09784.62AF3260
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

http://www.nraila.org/show.cgi?page=3D/research/19990729-RighttoCarry-001=
.html

"Right To Carry 2001"


** Michigan makes 32. . . and counting! For the first time, most =
Americans live in RTC states. In January, Michigan became the 32nd Right =
to Carry state; the 29th to adopt a "shall issue" firearm carry permit =
system. More than half the U.S. population, including 60% of handgun =
owners, live in RTC states. Prof. John Lott, co-author of the most =
comprehensive study of RTC's effectiveness, rejected anti-gun lobby =
gloomy predictions: "Concerns that permit holders would lose their =
tempers in traffic accidents have been unfounded. Worries about risks to =
police officers have also proved unfounded....National surveys of police =
show they support concealed handgun laws by a 3-1 margin....There is =
also not a single academic study that claims Right to Carry laws have =
increased state crime rates. The debate among academics has been over =
how large the benefits have been." ("Should Michigan keep new concealed =
weapon law? Don't believe gun foe scare tactics," Detroit News, =
1/14/01.)

      ** The right of self-defense is a fundamental right to which the =
right to arms is inextricably linked. RTC laws respect the right to =
self-defense by allowing individual citizens to carry firearms for =
protection against criminals.

      ** RTC laws reduce crime. In their landmark study, John R. Lott, =
Jr. and David B. Mustard found, "allowing citizens to carry concealed =
weapons deters violent crimes and it appears to produce no increase in =
accidental deaths. If those states which did not have Right to Carry =
concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 =
murders; 4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults would have =
been avoided yearly....(T)he estimated annual gain from allowing =
concealed handguns is at least $6.214 billion....(W)hen state concealed =
handgun laws went into effect in a county, murders fell by 8.5 percent, =
and rapes and aggravated assaults fell by 5 and 7 percent." ("Crime, =
Deterrence, and Right To Carry Concealed Handguns," 1996.)

      ** Violent crime has decreased every year since 1991, during which =
time 17 states adopted RTC and 13 others improved their RTC laws. No =
state made its carry law more restrictive.

      ** RTC states have lower violent crime rates: On average, a 26% =
lower total violent crime rate, 20% lower homicide rate, 2% lower rape =
rate, 39% lower robbery rate, and 22% lower aggravated assault rate, =
compared to other states and D.C. Eight of the 10 states with the lowest =
violent crime rates are RTC states. (FBI)

      ** Restrictive carry laws have never reduced crime. Of the five =
major U.S. cities with the highest homicide rates in 1999, two =
(Baltimore and Detroit) severely restrict carrying; two (D.C. and =
Chicago) have banned handguns.

      ** Carry permit holders are much more law-abiding than the rest of =
the public. "Whenever a state legislature first considers a =
concealed-carry bill, opponents typically warn of horrible consequences. =
. . . But within a year of passage, the issue usually drops off the news =
media's radar screen, while gun-control advocates in the legislature =
conclude that the law wasn't so bad after all." (David Kopel, "The =
Untold Triumph of Concealed-Carry Permits," Policy Review, July-Aug. =
1996, p. 9.)

      State RTC Permit Statistics
      Florida: (10/1/87-12/31/00) 736,355 issued, 130 (0.02%) revoked =
due to firearm crimes by licensees. (Dept. of State, =
http://licgweb.dos.state.fl.us/stats/index.html)
      Kentucky: As of 2/5/01, 57,923 valid permits. From =
10/1/96-12/31/99, 165 revoked for any reason. (State Police)
      Louisiana: (11/1/96-2/1/01) 13,645 issued, 56 (0.4%) revoked for =
any reason. (State Police)
      Oklahoma: Through Feb. 2, 2001, 33,386 issued, 17 (0.05%) revoked =
for any reason. (SBI)
      N. Carolina: (12/1/95-7/5/00) 42,682 issued, 182 (0.4%) revoked =
for any reason. (SBI, =
(http://sbi2.jus.state.nc.us/crp/public/other/conceal/chp072000.pdf)
      S. Carolina: (8/96-1/29/01) 29,124 issued, 121 (0.4%) revoked for =
any reason. (SLED)
      Texas: (1/1/96-1/1/01) 215,446 issued, 1,553 (0.7%) revoked for =
any reason. (DPS, =
www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/chlsindex.htm) =
Then-DPS Director James Wilson: "it has impressed me how remarkably =
responsible the permit holders have been." (Bruce Tomaso, "Gun law's =
record impresses official," Dallas Morning News, 6/11/96.)
      Tennessee: (12/96-12/31/99) 90,939 issued, 1,176 (1%) revoked for =
any reason. (DPS, http://www.state.tn.us/safety/handguns.html)
      Utah: 22,401 issued, 215 (1%) revoked for any reason.
      Virginia: (7/95-12/98) 156,788 issued. In 2000, 12.302 issued, 74 =
(0.6%) revoked for any reason. (State Police)
      Wyoming: (10/1/94-1/11/99) 5,288 issued, 10 (0.2%) revoked for any =
reason. (Attorney General's Office, Dept. of Criminal Investigation)


      The RTC Success Story=20
      Before 1987, only Georgia, Indiana, Maine, New Hampshire, N. =
Dakota, S. Dakota and Washington had "shall issue" laws, which require =
law enforcement officials or courts to issue firearm carrying permits to =
applicants who meet fair statewide standards established by the =
legislature. As they do today, Alabama and Connecticut had fairly =
administered law enforcement discretion permit issuance systems and =
Vermont respected the right to carry a firearm without a permit. In =
other states, law enforcement discretion over permits regularly resulted =
in permits being arbitrarily denied to eligible applicants, or carrying =
a firearm was prohibited and no permits were available.

      In 1987, Florida enacted a "shall issue" RTC law, now the =
framework for similar laws in other states. The law was supported by the =
Florida Dept. of Law Enforcement, Florida Sheriffs Assn., Florida Police =
Chiefs Assn., and other law enforcement groups. Opponents waged a =
fear-based campaign, claiming crime would increase if law-abiding =
citizens carried guns. Anti-gun politicians predicted Florida would =
become the "GUNshine State." The news media forecast vigilante justice =
and "Wild West" shootouts on every corner. One newspaper said "(A) =
pistol-packing citizenry will mean itchier trigger fingers....South =
Florida's climate of smoldering fear would flash like napalm when every =
stranger totes a piece, and every mental snap in traffic could lead to =
the crack of gunfire." The predictions were proven false. From the =
inception of Florida's RTC law through 1992, Florida's homicide rate =
decreased 23%, while the U.S. rate rose 9%. Thereafter, homicide =
decreased both nationally and in Florida.

      As shown, only about 0.02% of Florida carry permits are revoked =
because of firearm crimes by license holders. Then-Florida Licensing =
Division Director, John Russi, said, "When you compare that to the =
number of licenses that were issued, that's very small." The gun crime =
rate among permit holders is a fraction of the rate for the state as a =
whole. Director Russi also stated that there was "no record of any =
accidents or incidents from a lack of training" and that "Florida's =
concealed weapon law has been very successful. All major law enforcement =
groups supported the original legislation and in the eight years the =
program has been in place, none of these groups has requested any =
changes....(S)ome of the opponents of concealed weapon legislation in =
1987 now admit the program has not created the problems many predicted." =
(Testimony before the Michigan House of Representatives Judiciary =
Committee, 12/5/95.) In a 3/15/95 official correspondence to the =
governor and other state officials, Dept. of Law Enforcement =
Commissioner James T. Moore wrote, "From a law enforcement perspective, =
the licensing process has not resulted in problems in the community from =
people arming themselves with concealed weapons. The strict provisions =
of 790.06, Florida Statutes, preclude the licensing of convicted felons, =
etc., thus allowing the permitting of law abiding citizens who do not =
routinely commit crimes or otherwise violate the law."

      Anti-gun activists claim Florida's three-day waiting period caused =
the state's homicide rate to decrease. However, historically, waiting =
periods have not caused such reductions. Anti-gun researcher David =
McDowell observed, "waiting periods have no influence on either gun =
homicides or gun suicides." ("Preventative Effects of Firearm =
Regulations on Injury Mortality," 1993.) In 1975, California increased =
its five-day waiting period to 15 days; by 1980, its homicide rate was =
up 53%. States subject to the Brady Act's now-expired "waiting period" =
experienced worse violent crime trends than Brady-exempt states. =
Anti-gun activists claim that Florida's high total violent crime rate =
proves that RTC doesn't work. But firearms are involved in only 24% of =
"violent crimes" (homicides, rapes, robberies and aggravated assaults); =
93% of violent crimes are aggravated assaults and robberies, and =
firearms are used in only 19% of aggravated assaults and in 38% of =
robberies. Also, Florida's violent crime rate was significantly higher =
than the national rate for decades before Florida's law took effect. And =
since the law took effect, Florida's violent crime rate has decreased =
9%; the U.S. rate has decreased 8%. (All data, FBI.)

      Since Florida, 23 states have adopted "shall issue" laws (incl. =
some which previously had discretionary issue) or re-affirmed "shall =
issue" through judicial ruling. Other states improved existing "shall =
issue" laws: 1989-- Ore., Pa. and W. Va. (new); Ga. (judicial ruling); =
1990--Id. and Miss. (new); 1991--Mont. (new); Id. (improved); =
1994--Alas., Ariz., Tenn., and Wyo. (new); 1995--Ark., N.C., Okla. and =
Tex. (new); Nev., Ut. and Va. (changed from discretionary); Fla. and Id. =
(improved); Pa. (brought Philadelphia under state law); 1996--Ky., La., =
and S.C. (changed from discretionary); W. Va. (reaffirmed legislatively, =
after state Supreme Court ruled permit issuance by circuit court judges =
unconstitutional), Ga., Id., Okla. and Tenn. (improved); 1997--Ark., =
Ga., Miss., N.D., Okla., Tenn., Tex., Ut. and Va. (improved); =
1998--Alas. (improved); 2001--Mich. (changed from discretionary).

      Citizens can defend themselves -- Analyzing National Crime =
Victimization Survey data, criminologist Gary Kleck found, "robbery and =
assault victims who used a gun to resist were less likely to be attacked =
or to suffer an injury than those who used any other methods of =
self-protection or those who did not resist at all." (Point Blank: Guns =
and Violence in America, 1991, p. 124.) Kleck's research has also shown =
that firearms are used for self-protection about 2.5 million times =
annually. (Kleck and Marc Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime: The =
Prevalence and Nature of Self- Defense With a Gun," Journal of Criminal =
Law and Criminology, Fall 1995, pp. 150-187.) The late criminologist =
Marvin E. Wolfgang, self-described as "as strong a gun-control advocate =
as can be found among the criminologists in this country" who would =
"eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the =
police," said, "it is hard to challenge the data collected. We do not =
have contrary evidence....(T)he methodological soundness of the current =
Kleck and Gertz study is clear. I cannot further debate it....I do not =
like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot =
fault their methodology. They have tried earnestly to meet all =
objections in advance and have done exceedingly well." ("A Tribute to a =
View That I Have Opposed," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall =
1995, pp. 188-192.) A 1986 study for the Dept. of Justice found that 34% =
of felons had been "scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed =
victim," and 40% of felons have not committed crimes, fearing potential =
victims were armed. (J. Wright and P. Rossi, Armed and Considered =
Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms, 1991, p. 155.)

      The right to self-protection has been recognized for centuries -- =
The great Roman philosopher, senator, and lawyer, Cicero, argued 2,000 =
years ago that "There exists a law, not written down anywhere but inborn =
in our hearts; a law which comes to us not by training or custom or =
reading but by derivation and absorption and adoption from nature =
itself; a law which has come to us not from theory but from practice, =
not by instruction but by natural intuition. I refer to the law which =
lays it down that, if our lives are endangered by plots or violence or =
armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves =
is morally right. When weapons reduce them to silence, the laws no =
longer expect one to await their pronouncements. For people who decide =
to wait for these will have to wait for justice, too and meanwhile they =
must suffer injustice first." (Stephen P. Halbrook, That Every Man Be =
Armed: The Evolution of a Constitutional Right, Albuquerque: Univ. of =
New Mexico Press, 1984, p. 17.)

      Centuries later, English jurist Sir William Blackstone observed =
that the English Bill of Rights signified that Englishmen possessed "the =
right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defense" and =
that "having arms suitable for their defence" was one of the five =
auxiliary rights people possessed "to protect and maintain inviolate the =
three great and primary rights," the first of which is "personal =
security." (Halbrook, pp. 45, 54.) Sir Michael Foster, judge of the =
Court of King's Bench, wrote in the late 18th century that the Common =
Law, "The right of self-defense . . . is founded in the law of nature, =
and is not, nor can be, superseded by any law of society." (Robert =
Dowlut and Janet Knoop, "State Constitutions and The Right to Keep and =
Bear Arms," Okla. City Univ. Law Review, 1982, p. 183.)

      The Supreme Court, in U.S. v. Cruikshank (92 U.S. 542, 1876), =
recognized that the right to arms preexisted the Constitution and is =
thus an individual right, stating that it "is not a right granted by the =
Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument =
for its existence." In Beard v.United States (158 U.S. 550, 1895), the =
Court approved the common-law rule that a person "may repel force by =
force" in self-defense, and concluded that when attacked a person "was =
entitled to stand his ground and meet any attack made upon him with a =
deadly weapon, in such a way and with such force" as needed to prevent =
"great bodily injury or death." The laws of all 50 states and the =
constitutions of most states recognize the right to use armed force in =
self-defense. In the Gun Control Act (1968) and the Firearms Owners' =
Protection Act (1986), Congress reaffirmed the right of citizens to =
possess firearms for protection, stating that the law was not intended =
to "place any undue or unnecessary Federal restrictions or burdens on =
law-abiding citizens with respect to the acquisition, possession, or use =
of firearms appropriate to the purpose of hunting, trapshooting, target =
shooting, personal protection, or any other lawful activity. . . ." =
(Public Laws 90-618 and 99-308., 18 U.S.C. Chap. 44.)

      The police are not required to protect individual citizens -- In =
Warren v. District of Columbia (444 A.2d 1, 1981), the D.C. Court of =
Appeals ruled, "official police personnel and the government employing =
them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to =
provide adequate police protection ... this uniformly accepted rule =
rests upon the fundamental principle that a government and its agents =
are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police =
protection, to any particular citizen ... a publicly maintained police =
force constitutes a basic governmental service provided to benefit the =
community at large by promoting public peace, safety and good order." In =
Bowers v. DeVito (686 F. 2d 616, 1982), the Seventh Circuit Court of =
Appeals ruled, "(T)here is no constitutional right to be protected by =
the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen."

      Rep. Stearns' RTC reciprocity bill -- On Jan. 31, Rep. Cliff =
Stearns (R-Fla.) and 15 co-sponsors introduced H.R. 382, the Right to =
Safety and Personal Protection Act. (In the 106th and 105th Congresses, =
H.R. 492 and H.R. 339, respectively.) Rep. Stearns said the bill will =
"greatly expand the security individuals enjoy in their own states when =
they travel or simply cross state lines." H.R. 382 proposes to allow any =
person with a valid firearm carrying permit or license, issued by a =
state, to carry a firearm in any other state, as follows: In states that =
issue carry permits, each state's laws governing where firearms may be =
carried would apply within its own borders. In states that do not issue =
carry permits, a federal "bright-line" standard would permit carrying in =
places other than police stations; courthouses; public polling places; =
meetings of state, county, or municipal governing bodies; schools; =
passenger areas of airports; and certain other locations. People who =
live in states that do not issue permits would be allowed to carry in =
any state, under either the state or federal law, if they possess a =
carry permit issued by another state.

      Gun Control Activists On Self-Defense and RTC
      Of the many kinds of pro-firearm rights legislation and laws at =
the state level during the last dozen years (Instant Check, Local "Gun =
Control" Preemption, Shooting Range Protection, Hunter Protection, etc.) =
none has been so strenuously and consistently opposed and disparaged by =
anti-gun groups and their followers as Right to Carry. That is because =
in adopting RTC laws, states recognize a fact that overrides virtually =
any argument those activists can conceive against private ownership of =
firearms, one also recognized in most state constitutions and in the =
Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: individuals have a right to =
defend themselves and a corresponding right to possess the means with =
which to defend themselves. Also, RTC laws have worked well in every =
state that has adopted them, proving false the anti-gun activists' =
claim, "more guns means more crime."

      Handgun Control, Inc. -- According to HCI Chair Sarah Brady, "the =
only reason for guns in civilian hands is for sporting purposes." (Tom =
Jackson, "Keeping the battle alive," Tampa Tribune, 10/21/93.) Then-HCI =
Chair, the late Pete Shields, advised, "(If attacked) put up no defense =
- give them what they want." (Guns Don't Die - People Do, N.Y.: Arbor =
House, 1981.) According to Dennis Henigan, director of HCI's Center to =
Prevent Handgun Violence Legal Action Project, self-defense is "not a =
federally guaranteed constitutional right." (USA Today, 11/20/91.)

      In Jan. 1999, HCI claimed that between 1992-1997 violent crime =
rates declined less in RTC states than in other states. It was =
noteworthy as the first time that HCI admitted that RTC does not cause =
crime to rise. But HCI's comparison of state crime trends had severe =
flaws. In comparing violent crime trends of RTC states versus other =
states, HCI categorized states according to whether they had RTC in =
1997, but calculated their crime trends from 1992-1997. The error: Of =
the 31 states that had RTC in 1997, only 17 had it in 1992. Since the =
benefits of RTC accrue over time, HCI should have taken into account the =
short period of time that some previously high-crime states (La, S.C.) =
had had RTC. Also, HCI classified Alabama and Connecticut as =
"restrictive" states, even though permits are issued fairly in both =
states, generally. Probably, HCI classified them as restrictive because =
each had large decreases in violent crime, and their inclusion in the =
restrictive states group exaggerated its decrease. HCI's 1992 starting =
point also inevitably underrepresented the impact of RTC laws on violent =
crime. By 1992, many states had had RTC for many years and had already =
experienced significant decreases in crime.

      HCI also erred by crediting restrictive carry laws with the =
decrease in crime in states that have such laws. Every state that has a =
restrictive carrying law has had it for many years. However, crime did =
not begin to decline in those states until the 1990s, due to a variety =
of factors. New York City, which accounts for a significant portion of =
the nation's crime, began a massive city-wide crackdown on a broad range =
of crimes. Texas built prisons and achieved its lowest homicide rate in =
30 years. Other states also significantly increased incarceration rates. =
The violent aspect of the drug trade subsided, with the aging of drug =
gang members. The economy improved.

      HCI failed to mention that violent crime is lower in RTC states. =
In 1991, the last year before crime began to decline nationally, the =
then-17 RTC states had a 20% lower violent crime rate overall, compared =
to other states. The seven states with the lowest violent crime rates =
were RTC states. Fifteen of the 17 RTC states had violent crime rates =
below the national rate. Ten of the 12 states with violent crime rates =
above the national rate were restrictive states, as was D.C., the =
jurisdiction which had the highest violent crime rate. As noted, RTC =
states still have lower violent crime rates, on average. Eight of the 10 =
states with the lowest violent crime rates are RTC states. (The average =
gun law "grade" HCI gives to the 10 states with the lowest violent crime =
rates is "D+".)

      The CDC's Univ. of Md. "study" -- In March 1995, David McDowell =
and colleagues released a "study" paid for with taxpayers' money by the =
federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ("Easing Concealed =
Firearm Laws: Effects on Homicide in Three States.") Congress thereafter =
passed legislation to curtail this misuse of funds. The "study" claimed =
gun homicide rates increased in Miami, Jacksonville and Tampa after =
Florida's carry law took effect. Florida Department of Law Enforcement =
Commissioner James T. Moore expressed doubts about the accuracy of the =
figures. (David van Biema, "Gun Control: License to conceal," Time, =
3/27/95, p. 27-29.) For good reason: homicide rates fell 10%, 18% and =
20%, respectively, in those metropolitan areas, from 1987 until 1993, =
the latest available data at the time.

      McDowell, et al., calculated Jacksonville and Tampa homicide =
trends from the early 1970s, when homicide rates were lower than in =
1993, to suggest that Florida's 1987 carry law caused homicide to rise. =
Then they calculated Miami's trend from 1983, since homicide rates =
before 1983 were higher and their inclusion in the comparison would have =
shown that the city's homicide rate had decreased. In fact, none of the =
homicides studied was committed by a license holder, and no distinction =
was made between homicides that occurred in situations where a license =
would be required to carry a firearm and other homicides. (In a previous =
study, McDowell claimed D.C.'s homicide rate decreased after its 1977 =
handgun ban. In reality, D.C.'s homicide rate tripled after the ban.)

      Violence Policy Center "studies" -- In 1995, this fringe anti-gun =
group released a "study" claiming Florida's carry law "puts guns into =
the hands of criminals." ("Concealed Carry: The Criminal's Companion.") =
The claim was preposterous, since the law permits a person to carry a =
firearm lawfully possessed, not to acquire a firearm. VPC claimed =
"criminals do apply for concealed carry licenses," without stipulating =
that such applications are rejected, just as banks reject loan =
applications from people with bad credit. Contradicting itself, VPC =
pointed out that criminals, after their applications were rejected, =
wanted the rejections reconsidered. Florida Secretary of State, Sandra =
B. Mortham, rejected the VPC's allegations, blaming them on the group's =
"zeal to attack the National Rifle Association." To "set the record =
straight," Secretary Mortham stated, "As of November 30, 1995, the =
Department had denied 723 applications due to criminal history. The fact =
that these 723 individuals did not receive a license clearly indicates =
that the process is working." Secretary Mortham added, "the statistics =
show the majority of concealed weapon or firearm licensees are honest, =
law-abiding citizens exercising their right to be armed for the purpose =
of lawful self-defense." (Letter, St. Petersburg Times, 1/11/96.)

      VPC periodically releases claims it hopes will grab headlines. In =
1997, it attacked NRA's Eddie Eagle Gun Safety Program and was lambasted =
in newspapers normally supportive of "gun control." In 1998, the group =
attacked Texas' firearm carrying law and was rebuked by state officials. =
In 1999, the group attacked target rifles as "sniper rifles" and =
complained that action-type pistol competitions reinforce the legitimacy =
of the private ownership and use of firearms for protective purposes. =
(Contradicting itself again, it complained that the only legitimate =
forms of target shooting are the "bullseye" sort in which both the =
shooter and target are stationary -- precisely the form of target =
shooting in which so-called "assault" rifles are so commonly used.)

      In 2001, VPC released a "study" based upon a flaw previously found =
in a long-discredited study by Arthur Kellermann. (See next paragraph.) =
The VPC piece ("A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense") =
concludes that handguns result in more harm than good, because there are =
more women murdered with handguns than there are criminals who are =
killed by women in self-defense. One problem with the comparison is that =
the value of handguns for self-defense should not be measured by the =
number of criminals killed, but by the number of women who use handguns =
to prevent themselves from becoming crime victims. Simply put, the =
purpose of self-defense is not to rack up a high body count of outlaws, =
but is instead (as the term implies) to protect yourself. Also, VPC's =
number of criminals killed in self-defense is undercounted because it is =
based on only police reports, which do not include homicides the courts =
find to be justifiable.

      Other "gun control" supporters on self-defense -- Researchers =
George D. Newton and Franklin E. Zimring have written, "women generally =
are less capable of self-defense and less knowledgeable about firearms." =
(Firearms and Violence in American Life, National Commission On The =
Causes and Prevention Of Violence, n.d., p. 64.)

      A small study of King's County (Seattle), Washington, often serves =
as the basis for the claim that a gun in the home is "43 times more =
likely" to be used to kill a family member than to kill in self-defense. =
(Arthur L. Kellermann, "Protection or Peril?: An Analysis of =
Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home," New England Journal of Medicine, =
314:1557-1560, 1986.) To reach that ratio, however, self-defense =
firearms uses were grossly undercounted by counting only cases in which =
criminals were killed. In most protective firearms uses, criminals are =
scared off, captured or non-fatally wounded. Additionally, suicides were =
counted as family member killings, increasing the death count more than =
500%.
    =20
      Posted: 2001-02-15 =20





-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
Having difficulty finding ILA-related info?
Try our FAQ Sheet=20
NRAILA.org is maintained for the NRA by
Mainstream Electronic Information Services.

Homepage established 1994 by the NRA Institute for Legislative Action
11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030=20

Copyright 2001, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for =
Legislative Action
This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial =
purposes.=20






------=_NextPart_000_0067_01C09784.62AF3260
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.nraila.org/show.cgi?page=3D/research/19990729-RighttoC=
arry-001.html">http://www.nraila.org/show.cgi?page=3D/research/19990729-R=
ighttoCarry-001.html</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><STRONG><EM><FONT size=3D5>"Right To Carry=20
2001"</FONT></EM></STRONG>
<P></P>
<P><STRONG><EM><FONT size=3D5></FONT></EM></STRONG></P>
<P><STRONG>** Michigan makes 32. . . and counting! For the first time, =
most=20
Americans live in RTC states. </STRONG>In January, Michigan became the =
32nd=20
Right to Carry state; the 29th to adopt a "shall issue" firearm carry =
permit=20
system. More than half the U.S. population, including 60% of handgun =
owners,=20
live in RTC states. Prof. John Lott, co-author of the most comprehensive =
study=20
of RTC's effectiveness, rejected anti-gun lobby gloomy predictions: =
"Concerns=20
that permit holders would lose their tempers in traffic accidents have =
been=20
unfounded. Worries about risks to police officers have also proved=20
unfounded....National surveys of police show they support concealed =
handgun laws=20
by a 3-1 margin....There is also not a single academic study that claims =
Right=20
to Carry laws have increased state crime rates. The debate among =
academics has=20
been over how large the benefits have been." ("Should Michigan keep new=20
concealed weapon law? Don't believe gun foe scare tactics," <I>Detroit =
News,</I>=20
1/14/01.)</P>
<P>
<TABLE width=3D"100%" border=3D0>
  <TBODY>
  <TR>
    <TD colSpan=3D2>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>** The right of self-defense is a fundamental =
right</B>=20
      to which the right to arms is inextricably linked. RTC laws =
respect the=20
      right to self-defense by allowing individual citizens to carry =
firearms=20
      for protection against criminals.</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>** RTC laws reduce crime</B>. In their =
landmark study,=20
      John R. Lott, Jr. and David B. Mustard found, "allowing citizens =
to carry=20
      concealed weapons deters violent crimes and it appears to produce =
no=20
      increase in accidental deaths. If those states which did not have =
Right to=20
      Carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, =
approximately=20
      1,570 murders; 4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults =
would have=20
      been avoided yearly....(T)he estimated annual gain from allowing =
concealed=20
      handguns is at least $6.214 billion....(W)hen state concealed =
handgun laws=20
      went into effect in a county, murders fell by 8.5 percent, and =
rapes and=20
      aggravated assaults fell by 5 and 7 percent." ("Crime, Deterrence, =
and=20
      Right To Carry Concealed Handguns," 1996.)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>** Violent crime has decreased every year =
since=20
      1991</B>, during which time 17 states adopted RTC and 13 others =
improved=20
      their RTC laws. No state made its carry law more =
restrictive.</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>** RTC states have lower violent crime rates: =
</B>On=20
      average, a 26% lower total violent crime rate, 20% lower homicide =
rate, 2%=20
      lower rape rate, 39% lower robbery rate, and 22% lower aggravated =
assault=20
      rate, compared to other states and D.C. Eight of the 10 states =
with the=20
      lowest violent crime rates are RTC states. (FBI)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>** Restrictive carry laws have never reduced =
crime.</B>=20
      Of the five major U.S. cities with the highest homicide rates in =
1999, two=20
      (Baltimore and Detroit) severely restrict carrying; two (D.C. and =
Chicago)=20
      have banned handguns.</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>** Carry permit holders are much more =
law-abiding than=20
      the rest of the public.</B> "Whenever a state legislature first =
considers=20
      a concealed-carry bill, opponents typically warn of horrible =
consequences.=20
      . . . But within a year of passage, the issue usually drops off =
the news=20
      media's radar screen, while gun-control advocates in the =
legislature=20
      conclude that the law wasn't so bad after all." (David Kopel, "The =
Untold=20
      Triumph of Concealed-Carry Permits," Policy Review, July-Aug. =
1996, p.=20
      9.)</FONT></P>
      <CENTER><B><FONT size=3D2>State RTC Permit =
Statistics</FONT></B></CENTER>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>Florida: (10/1/87-12/31/00) 736,355 issued, 130 =
(0.02%)=20
      revoked due to firearm crimes by licensees. (Dept. of State,=20
      http://licgweb.dos.state.fl.us/stats/index.html)<BR>Kentucky: As =
of=20
      2/5/01, 57,923 valid permits. From 10/1/96-12/31/99, 165 revoked =
for=20
      <U>any</U> reason. (State Police)<BR>Louisiana: (11/1/96-2/1/01) =
13,645=20
      issued, 56 (0.4%) revoked for <U>any</U> reason. (State=20
      Police)<BR>Oklahoma: Through Feb. 2, 2001, 33,386 issued, 17 =
(0.05%)=20
      revoked for <U>any</U> reason. (SBI)<BR>N. Carolina: =
(12/1/95-7/5/00)=20
      42,682 issued, 182 (0.4%) revoked for <U>any</U> reason. (SBI,=20
      =
(http://sbi2.jus.state.nc.us/crp/public/other/conceal/chp072000.pdf)<BR>S=
.=20
      Carolina: (8/96-1/29/01) 29,124 issued, 121 (0.4%) revoked for =
<U>any</U>=20
      reason. (SLED)<BR>Texas: (1/1/96-1/1/01) 215,446 issued, 1,553 =
(0.7%)=20
      revoked for <U>any</U> reason. (DPS,=20
      =
www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/chlsindex.htm)=20
      Then-DPS Director James Wilson: "it has impressed me how =
remarkably=20
      responsible the permit holders have been." (Bruce Tomaso, "Gun =
law's=20
      record impresses official," Dallas Morning News, =
6/11/96.)<BR>Tennessee:=20
      (12/96-12/31/99) 90,939 issued, 1,176 (1%) revoked for <U>any</U> =
reason.=20
      (DPS, http://www.state.tn.us/safety/handguns.html)<BR>Utah: 22,401 =
issued,=20
      215 (1%) revoked for <U>any</U> reason.<BR>Virginia: (7/95-12/98) =
156,788=20
      issued. In 2000, 12.302 issued, 74 (0.6%) revoked for <U>any</U> =
reason.=20
      (State Police)<BR>Wyoming: (10/1/94-1/11/99) 5,288 issued, 10 =
(0.2%)=20
      revoked for <U>any</U> reason. (Attorney General's Office, Dept. =
of=20
      Criminal Investigation)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2></FONT></P>
      <CENTER><FONT size=3D2><B>The RTC Success Story</B> =
</FONT></CENTER>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>Before 1987, only Georgia, Indiana, Maine, New =
Hampshire,=20
      N. Dakota, S. Dakota and Washington had "shall issue" laws, which =
require=20
      law enforcement officials or courts to issue firearm carrying =
permits to=20
      applicants who meet fair statewide standards established by the=20
      legislature. As they do today, Alabama and Connecticut had fairly=20
      administered law enforcement discretion permit issuance systems =
and=20
      Vermont respected the right to carry a firearm without a permit. =
In other=20
      states, law enforcement discretion over permits regularly resulted =
in=20
      permits being arbitrarily denied to eligible applicants, or =
carrying a=20
      firearm was prohibited and no permits were available.</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>In 1987, Florida enacted a "shall issue" RTC =
law, now the=20
      framework for similar laws in other states. The law was supported =
by the=20
      Florida Dept. of Law Enforcement, Florida Sheriffs Assn., Florida =
Police=20
      Chiefs Assn., and other law enforcement groups. Opponents waged a=20
      fear-based campaign, claiming crime would increase if law-abiding =
citizens=20
      carried guns. Anti-gun politicians predicted Florida would become =
the=20
      "GUNshine State." The news media forecast vigilante justice and =
"Wild=20
      West" shootouts on every corner. One newspaper said "(A) =
pistol-packing=20
      citizenry will mean itchier trigger fingers....South Florida's =
climate of=20
      smoldering fear would flash like napalm when every stranger totes =
a piece,=20
      and every mental snap in traffic could lead to the crack of =
gunfire." The=20
      predictions were proven false. From the inception of Florida's RTC =
law=20
      through 1992, Florida's homicide rate decreased 23%, while the =
U.S. rate=20
      rose 9%. Thereafter, homicide decreased both nationally and in=20
      Florida.</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>As shown, only about 0.02% of Florida carry =
permits are=20
      revoked because of firearm crimes by license holders. Then-Florida =

      Licensing Division Director, John Russi, said, "When you compare =
that to=20
      the number of licenses that were issued, that's very small." The =
gun crime=20
      rate among permit holders is a fraction of the rate for the state =
as a=20
      whole. Director Russi also stated that there was "no record of any =

      accidents or incidents from a lack of training" and that =
"Florida's=20
      concealed weapon law has been very successful. All major law =
enforcement=20
      groups supported the original legislation and in the eight years =
the=20
      program has been in place, none of these groups has requested any=20
      changes....(S)ome of the opponents of concealed weapon legislation =
in 1987=20
      now admit the program has not created the problems many =
predicted."=20
      (Testimony before the Michigan House of Representatives Judiciary=20
      Committee, 12/5/95.) In a 3/15/95 official correspondence to the =
governor=20
      and other state officials, Dept. of Law Enforcement Commissioner =
James T.=20
      Moore wrote, "From a law enforcement perspective, the licensing =
process=20
      has not resulted in problems in the community from people arming=20
      themselves with concealed weapons. The strict provisions of =
790.06,=20
      Florida Statutes, preclude the licensing of convicted felons, =
etc., thus=20
      allowing the permitting of law abiding citizens who do not =
routinely=20
      commit crimes or otherwise violate the law."</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>Anti-gun activists claim Florida's three-day =
waiting=20
      period caused the state's homicide rate to decrease. However,=20
      historically, waiting periods have not caused such reductions. =
Anti-gun=20
      researcher David McDowell observed, "waiting periods have no =
influence on=20
      either gun homicides or gun suicides." ("Preventative Effects of =
Firearm=20
      Regulations on Injury Mortality," 1993.) In 1975, California =
increased its=20
      five-day waiting period to 15 days; by 1980, its homicide rate was =
up 53%.=20
      States subject to the Brady Act's now-expired "waiting period" =
experienced=20
      worse violent crime trends than Brady-exempt states. Anti-gun =
activists=20
      claim that Florida's high total violent crime rate proves that RTC =
doesn't=20
      work. But firearms are involved in only 24% of "violent crimes"=20
      (homicides, rapes, robberies and aggravated assaults); 93% of =
violent=20
      crimes are aggravated assaults and robberies, and firearms are =
used in=20
      only 19% of aggravated assaults and in 38% of robberies. Also, =
Florida's=20
      violent crime rate was significantly higher than the national rate =
for=20
      decades before Florida's law took effect. And since the law took =
effect,=20
      Florida's violent crime rate has decreased 9%; the U.S. rate has =
decreased=20
      8%. (All data, FBI.)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>Since Florida, 23 states have adopted "shall =
issue" laws=20
      (incl. some which previously had discretionary issue) or =
re-affirmed=20
      "shall issue" through judicial ruling. Other states improved =
existing=20
      "shall issue" laws: 1989-- Ore., Pa. and W. Va. (new); Ga. =
(judicial=20
      ruling); 1990--Id. and Miss. (new); 1991--Mont. (new); Id. =
(improved);=20
      1994--Alas., Ariz., Tenn., and Wyo. (new); 1995--Ark., N.C., Okla. =
and=20
      Tex. (new); Nev., Ut. and Va. (changed from discretionary); Fla. =
and Id.=20
      (improved); Pa. (brought Philadelphia under state law); 1996--Ky., =
La.,=20
      and S.C. (changed from discretionary); W. Va. (reaffirmed =
legislatively,=20
      after state Supreme Court ruled permit issuance by circuit court =
judges=20
      unconstitutional), Ga., Id., Okla. and Tenn. (improved); =
1997--Ark., Ga.,=20
      Miss., N.D., Okla., Tenn., Tex., Ut. and Va. (improved); =
1998--Alas.=20
      (improved); 2001--Mich. (changed from discretionary).</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>Citizens can defend themselves</B> -- =
Analyzing=20
      National Crime Victimization Survey data, criminologist Gary Kleck =
found,=20
      "robbery and assault victims who used a gun to resist were less =
likely to=20
      be attacked or to suffer an injury than those who used any other =
methods=20
      of self-protection or those who did not resist at all." (Point =
Blank: Guns=20
      and Violence in America, 1991, p. 124.) Kleck's research has also =
shown=20
      that firearms are used for self-protection about 2.5 million times =

      annually. (Kleck and Marc Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime: The=20
      Prevalence and Nature of Self- Defense With a Gun," Journal of =
Criminal=20
      Law and Criminology, Fall 1995, pp. 150-187.) The late =
criminologist=20
      Marvin E. Wolfgang, self-described as "as strong a gun-control =
advocate as=20
      can be found among the criminologists in this country" who would=20
      "eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even =
from the=20
      police," said, "it is hard to challenge the data collected. We do =
not have=20
      contrary evidence....(T)he methodological soundness of the current =
Kleck=20
      and Gertz study is clear. I cannot further debate it....I do not =
like=20
      their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot =
fault=20
      their methodology. They have tried earnestly to meet all =
objections in=20
      advance and have done exceedingly well." ("A Tribute to a View =
That I Have=20
      Opposed," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995, pp.=20
      188-192.) A 1986 study for the Dept. of Justice found that 34% of =
felons=20
      had been "scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed =
victim,"=20
      and 40% of felons have not committed crimes, fearing potential =
victims=20
      were armed. (J. Wright and P. Rossi, Armed and Considered =
Dangerous: A=20
      Survey of Felons and Their Firearms, 1991, p. 155.)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>The right to self-protection has been =
recognized for=20
      centuries </B>-- The great Roman philosopher, senator, and lawyer, =
Cicero,=20
      argued 2,000 years ago that "There exists a law, not written down =
anywhere=20
      but inborn in our hearts; a law which comes to us not by training =
or=20
      custom or reading but by derivation and absorption and adoption =
from=20
      nature itself; a law which has come to us not from theory but from =

      practice, not by instruction but by natural intuition. I refer to =
the law=20
      which lays it down that, if our lives are endangered by plots or =
violence=20
      or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting =
ourselves=20
      is morally right. When weapons reduce them to silence, the laws no =
longer=20
      expect one to await their pronouncements. For people who decide to =
wait=20
      for these will have to wait for justice, too and meanwhile they =
must=20
      suffer injustice first." (Stephen P. Halbrook, That Every Man Be =
Armed:=20
      The Evolution of a Constitutional Right, Albuquerque: Univ. of New =
Mexico=20
      Press, 1984, p. 17.)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>Centuries later, English jurist Sir William =
Blackstone=20
      observed that the English Bill of Rights signified that Englishmen =

      possessed "the right of having and using arms for =
self-preservation and=20
      defense" and that "having arms suitable for their defence" was one =
of the=20
      five auxiliary rights people possessed "to protect and maintain =
inviolate=20
      the three great and primary rights," the first of which is =
"personal=20
      security." (Halbrook, pp. 45, 54.) Sir Michael Foster, judge of =
the Court=20
      of King's Bench, wrote in the late 18th century that the Common =
Law, "The=20
      right of self-defense . . . is founded in the law of nature, and =
is not,=20
      nor can be, superseded by any law of society." (Robert Dowlut and =
Janet=20
      Knoop, "State Constitutions and The Right to Keep and Bear Arms," =
Okla.=20
      City Univ. Law Review, 1982, p. 183.)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>The Supreme Court, in U.S. v. Cruikshank (92 =
U.S. 542,=20
      1876), recognized that the right to arms preexisted the =
Constitution and=20
      is thus an individual right, stating that it "is not a right =
granted by=20
      the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that=20
      instrument for its existence." In Beard v.United States (158 U.S. =
550,=20
      1895), the Court approved the common-law rule that a person "may =
repel=20
      force by force" in self-defense, and concluded that when attacked =
a person=20
      "was entitled to stand his ground and meet any attack made upon =
him with a=20
      deadly weapon, in such a way and with such force" as needed to =
prevent=20
      "great bodily injury or death." The laws of all 50 states and the=20
      constitutions of most states recognize the right to use armed =
force in=20
      self-defense. In the Gun Control Act (1968) and the Firearms =
Owners'=20
      Protection Act (1986), Congress reaffirmed the right of citizens =
to=20
      possess firearms for protection, stating that the law was not =
intended to=20
      "place any undue or unnecessary Federal restrictions or burdens on =

      law-abiding citizens with respect to the acquisition, possession, =
or use=20
      of firearms appropriate to the purpose of hunting, trapshooting, =
target=20
      shooting, personal protection, or any other lawful activity. . . =
."=20
      (Public Laws 90-618 and 99-308., 18 U.S.C. Chap. 44.)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>The police are not required to protect =
individual=20
      citizens</B> -- In Warren v. District of Columbia (444 A.2d 1, =
1981), the=20
      D.C. Court of Appeals ruled, "official police personnel and the =
government=20
      employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal =
acts for=20
      failure to provide adequate police protection ... this uniformly =
accepted=20
      rule rests upon the fundamental principle that a government and =
its agents=20
      are under no general duty to provide public services, such as =
police=20
      protection, to any particular citizen ... a publicly maintained =
police=20
      force constitutes a basic governmental service provided to benefit =
the=20
      community at large by promoting public peace, safety and good =
order." In=20
      Bowers v. DeVito (686 F. 2d 616, 1982), the Seventh Circuit Court =
of=20
      Appeals ruled, "(T)here is no constitutional right to be protected =
by the=20
      state against being murdered by criminals or madmen."</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>Rep. Stearns' RTC reciprocity bill -- </B>On =
Jan. 31,=20
      Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and 15 co-sponsors introduced H.R. =
382, the=20
      Right to Safety and Personal Protection Act. (In the 106th and =
105th=20
      Congresses, H.R. 492 and H.R. 339, respectively.) Rep. Stearns =
said the=20
      bill will "greatly expand the security individuals enjoy in their =
own=20
      states when they travel or simply cross state lines." H.R. 382 =
proposes to=20
      allow any person with a valid firearm carrying permit or license, =
issued=20
      by a state, to carry a firearm in any other state, as follows: In =
states=20
      that issue carry permits, each state's laws governing where =
firearms may=20
      be carried would apply within its own borders. In states that do =
not issue=20
      carry permits, a federal "bright-line" standard would permit =
carrying in=20
      places other than police stations; courthouses; public polling =
places;=20
      meetings of state, county, or municipal governing bodies; schools; =

      passenger areas of airports; and certain other locations. People =
who live=20
      in states that do not issue permits would be allowed to carry in =
any=20
      state, under either the state or federal law, if they possess a =
carry=20
      permit issued by another state.</FONT></P>
      <CENTER><B><FONT size=3D2>Gun Control Activists On Self-Defense =
and=20
      RTC</FONT></B></CENTER>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>Of the many kinds of pro-firearm rights =
legislation and=20
      laws at the state level during the last dozen years (Instant =
Check, Local=20
      "Gun Control" Preemption, Shooting Range Protection, Hunter =
Protection,=20
      etc.) none has been so strenuously and consistently opposed and =
disparaged=20
      by anti-gun groups and their followers as Right to Carry. That is =
because=20
      in adopting RTC laws, states recognize a fact that overrides =
virtually any=20
      argument those activists can conceive against private ownership of =

      firearms, one also recognized in most state constitutions and in =
the=20
      Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: individuals have a =
right to=20
      defend themselves and a corresponding right to possess the means =
with=20
      which to defend themselves. Also, RTC laws have worked well in =
every state=20
      that has adopted them, proving false the anti-gun activists' =
claim, "more=20
      guns means more crime."</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>Handgun Control, Inc. </B>-- According to HCI =
Chair=20
      Sarah Brady, "the only reason for guns in civilian hands is for =
sporting=20
      purposes." (Tom Jackson, "Keeping the battle alive," Tampa =
Tribune,=20
      10/21/93.) Then-HCI Chair, the late Pete Shields, advised, "(If =
attacked)=20
      put up no defense - give them what they want." (Guns Don't Die - =
People=20
      Do, N.Y.: Arbor House, 1981.) According to Dennis Henigan, =
director of=20
      HCI's Center to Prevent Handgun Violence Legal Action Project,=20
      self-defense is "not a federally guaranteed constitutional right." =
(USA=20
      Today, 11/20/91.)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>In Jan. 1999, HCI claimed that between 1992-1997 =
violent=20
      crime rates declined less in RTC states than in other states. It =
was=20
      noteworthy as the first time that HCI admitted that RTC does not =
cause=20
      crime to rise. But HCI's comparison of state crime trends had =
severe=20
      flaws. In comparing violent crime trends of RTC states versus =
other=20
      states, HCI categorized states according to whether they had RTC =
in 1997,=20
      but calculated their crime trends from 1992-1997. The error: Of =
the 31=20
      states that had RTC in 1997, only 17 had it in 1992. Since the =
benefits of=20
      RTC accrue over time, HCI should have taken into account the short =
period=20
      of time that some previously high-crime states (La, S.C.) had had =
RTC.=20
      Also, HCI classified Alabama and Connecticut as "restrictive" =
states, even=20
      though permits are issued fairly in both states, generally. =
Probably, HCI=20
      classified them as restrictive because each had large decreases in =
violent=20
      crime, and their inclusion in the restrictive states group =
exaggerated its=20
      decrease. HCI's 1992 starting point also inevitably =
underrepresented the=20
      impact of RTC laws on violent crime. By 1992, many states had had =
RTC for=20
      many years and had already experienced significant decreases in=20
      crime.</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>HCI also erred by crediting restrictive carry =
laws with=20
      the decrease in crime in states that have such laws. Every state =
that has=20
      a restrictive carrying law has had it for many years. However, =
crime did=20
      not begin to decline in those states until the 1990s, due to a =
variety of=20
      factors. New York City, which accounts for a significant portion =
of the=20
      nation's crime, began a massive city-wide crackdown on a broad =
range of=20
      crimes. Texas built prisons and achieved its lowest homicide rate =
in 30=20
      years. Other states also significantly increased incarceration =
rates. The=20
      violent aspect of the drug trade subsided, with the aging of drug =
gang=20
      members. The economy improved.</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>HCI failed to mention that violent crime is =
lower in RTC=20
      states. In 1991, the last year before crime began to decline =
nationally,=20
      the then-17 RTC states had a 20% lower violent crime rate overall, =

      compared to other states. The seven states with the lowest violent =
crime=20
      rates were RTC states. Fifteen of the 17 RTC states had violent =
crime=20
      rates below the national rate. Ten of the 12 states with violent =
crime=20
      rates above the national rate were restrictive states, as was =
D.C., the=20
      jurisdiction which had the highest violent crime rate. As noted, =
RTC=20
      states still have lower violent crime rates, on average. Eight of =
the 10=20
      states with the lowest violent crime rates are RTC states. (The =
average=20
      gun law "grade" HCI gives to the 10 states with the lowest violent =
crime=20
      rates is "D+".)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>The CDC's Univ. of Md. "study" </B>-- In =
March 1995,=20
      David McDowell and colleagues released a "study" paid for with =
taxpayers'=20
      money by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. =
("Easing=20
      Concealed Firearm Laws: Effects on Homicide in Three States.") =
Congress=20
      thereafter passed legislation to curtail this misuse of funds. The =
"study"=20
      claimed gun homicide rates increased in Miami, Jacksonville and =
Tampa=20
      after Florida's carry law took effect. Florida Department of Law=20
      Enforcement Commissioner James T. Moore expressed doubts about the =

      accuracy of the figures. (David van Biema, "Gun Control: License =
to=20
      conceal," Time, 3/27/95, p. 27-29.) For good reason: homicide =
rates fell=20
      10%, 18% and 20%, respectively, in those metropolitan areas, from =
1987=20
      until 1993, the latest available data at the time.</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>McDowell, et al., calculated Jacksonville and =
Tampa=20
      homicide trends from the early 1970s, when homicide rates were =
lower than=20
      in 1993, to suggest that Florida's 1987 carry law caused homicide =
to rise.=20
      Then they calculated Miami's trend from 1983, since homicide rates =
before=20
      1983 were higher and their inclusion in the comparison would have =
shown=20
      that the city's homicide rate had decreased. In fact, none of the=20
      homicides studied was committed by a license holder, and no =
distinction=20
      was made between homicides that occurred in situations where a =
license=20
      would be required to carry a firearm and other homicides. (In a =
previous=20
      study, McDowell claimed D.C.'s homicide rate decreased after its =
1977=20
      handgun ban. In reality, D.C.'s homicide rate tripled after the=20
      ban.)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>Violence Policy Center "studies" -- </B>In =
1995, this=20
      fringe anti-gun group released a "study" claiming Florida's carry =
law=20
      "puts guns into the hands of criminals." ("Concealed Carry: The =
Criminal's=20
      Companion.") The claim was preposterous, since the law permits a =
person to=20
      carry a firearm lawfully possessed, not to <U>acquire</U> a =
firearm. VPC=20
      claimed "criminals do apply for concealed carry licenses," without =

      stipulating that such applications are rejected, just as banks =
reject loan=20
      applications from people with bad credit. Contradicting itself, =
VPC=20
      pointed out that criminals, after their applications were =
rejected, wanted=20
      the rejections reconsidered. Florida Secretary of State, Sandra B. =

      Mortham, rejected the VPC's allegations, blaming them on the =
group's "zeal=20
      to attack the National Rifle Association." To "set the record =
straight,"=20
      Secretary Mortham stated, "As of November 30, 1995, the Department =
had=20
      denied 723 applications due to criminal history. The fact that =
these 723=20
      individuals did not receive a license clearly indicates that the =
process=20
      is working." Secretary Mortham added, "the statistics show the =
majority of=20
      concealed weapon or firearm licensees are honest, law-abiding =
citizens=20
      exercising their right to be armed for the purpose of lawful=20
      self-defense." (Letter, St. Petersburg Times, 1/11/96.)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>VPC periodically releases claims it hopes will =
grab=20
      headlines. In 1997, it attacked NRA's Eddie Eagle Gun Safety =
Program and=20
      was lambasted in newspapers normally supportive of "gun control." =
In 1998,=20
      the group attacked Texas' firearm carrying law and was rebuked by =
state=20
      officials. In 1999, the group attacked target rifles as "sniper =
rifles"=20
      and complained that action-type pistol competitions reinforce the=20
      legitimacy of the private ownership and use of firearms for =
protective=20
      purposes. (Contradicting itself again, it complained that the only =

      legitimate forms of target shooting are the "bullseye" sort in =
which both=20
      the shooter and target are stationary -- precisely the form of =
target=20
      shooting in which so-called "assault" rifles are so commonly=20
      used.)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>In 2001, VPC released a "study" based upon a =
flaw=20
      previously found in a long-discredited study by Arthur Kellermann. =
(See=20
      next paragraph.) The VPC piece ("A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, =
and=20
      Self-Defense") concludes that handguns result in more harm than =
good,=20
      because there are more women murdered with handguns than there are =

      criminals who are killed by women in self-defense. One problem =
with the=20
      comparison is that the value of handguns for self-defense should =
not be=20
      measured by the number of criminals killed, but by the number of =
women who=20
      use handguns to prevent themselves from becoming crime victims. =
Simply=20
      put, the purpose of self-defense is not to rack up a high body =
count of=20
      outlaws, but is instead (as the term implies) to protect yourself. =
Also,=20
      VPC's number of criminals killed in self-defense is undercounted =
because=20
      it is based on only police reports, which do not include homicides =
the=20
      courts find to be justifiable.</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2><B>Other "gun control" supporters on =
self-defense --=20
      </B>Researchers George D. Newton and Franklin E. Zimring have =
written,=20
      "women generally are less capable of self-defense and less =
knowledgeable=20
      about firearms." (Firearms and Violence in American Life, National =

      Commission On The Causes and Prevention Of Violence, n.d., p.=20
      64.)</FONT></P>
      <P><FONT size=3D2>A small study of King's County (Seattle), =
Washington,=20
      often serves as the basis for the claim that a gun in the home is =
"43=20
      times more likely" to be used to kill a family member than to kill =
in=20
      self-defense. (Arthur L. Kellermann, "Protection or Peril?: An =
Analysis of=20
      Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home," New England Journal of =
Medicine,=20
      314:1557-1560, 1986.) To reach that ratio, however, self-defense =
firearms=20
      uses were grossly undercounted by counting only cases in which =
criminals=20
      were killed. In most protective firearms uses, criminals are =
scared off,=20
      captured or non-fatally wounded. Additionally, suicides were =
counted as=20
      family member killings, increasing the death count more than=20
      500%.</FONT></P></TD></TR>
  <TR>
    <TD><FONT size=3D-3>Posted: 2001-02-15</FONT></TD>
    <TD align=3Dright></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></P>
<P></P>
<CENTER>
<P>
<HR noShade SIZE=3D1>
<FONT size=3D-2>Having difficulty finding ILA-related info?<BR>Try our =
<A=20
href=3D"http://www.nraila.org/grassroots/19990813-GeneralInfo-015.html">F=
AQ=20
Sheet</A>=20
<P>NRAILA.org is maintained for the NRA by<BR></FONT><A=20
href=3D"http://www.mainstream.net/"><FONT size=3D-2>Mainstream =
Electronic=20
Information Services</FONT></A><FONT size=3D-2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.nraila.org/archive.shtml">.</A></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D-2>Homepage established 1994 by the NRA Institute for =
Legislative=20
Action<BR>11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030=20
<P>Copyright 2001, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for=20
Legislative Action<BR>This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced =
for=20
commercial purposes. </FONT></CENTER></P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0067_01C09784.62AF3260--