Word For It. . .

2Chronicles7:14-“If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”

Who’da Thunk? Guns Best Crime Deterrent, after all (Second Amendment)

Posted by wordforit on February 29, 2008

‘People who say bad guys will stop because of 1 more law are full of it’
 

by Bob Unruh

WorldNetDaily

When sexual assaults started rising in Orlando, Fla., in 1966, police officers noticed women were arming themselves, so they launched a firearms safety course for them. Over the next 12 months, sexual assaults plummeted by 88 percent, burglaries fell by 25 percent and not one of the 2,500 women who took the course fired a gun in a confrontation.

And that, says a new brief submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court by police officers and prosecutors in a controversial gun-ban dispute, is why gun ownership is important and should be available to individuals in the United States.

The arguments come in an amicus brief submitted by the Law Enforcement Alliance of America, whose spokesman, Ted Deeds, told WND there now are 92 different law enforcement voices speaking together to the Supreme Court in the Heller case.

That pending decision will decide whether an appeals court ruling striking down a District of Columbia ban on handguns because it violates the Second Amendment will stand or not. The gun ban promoters essentially argue that any gun restriction that is ruled “reasonable” is therefore constitutional, such as the D.C. handgun ban.

Deeds said this probably is the largest unified law enforcement statement in support of the Second Amendment ever, and includes nearly a dozen organizations that represent tens of thousands of police officers across the country, dozens of state attorneys general, dozens of prosecutors and a long list of federal law enforcement experts up to and including federal judges.

Oral arguments in the case are scheduled on March 18, and the LEAA brief is just one of 46 that have been filed on the side of seeking affirmation that the Second Amendment does, indeed, document a right for individuals to own guns in the United States.

The brief notes when the Georgia town of Kennesaw decided to require all residents, with exceptions for conscientious objectors, to keep a firearm at home, home burglaries fell from 66 to 26 to 11 in consecutive years.

In Orlando, the deterrence to criminals who simply knew that their victims may have a gun and may know how to use it and may be willing to do just that had a significant impact, because while Orlando’s rapes were plummeting, assaults were up 5 percent across the state and 7 percent nationally.

The brief cites a study that discovered, based on interviews with felony prisoners in 11 prisons in 10 states, one third of the felons had been “scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed victim,” and nearly four in 10 had decided against committing a specific crime because they thought the victim might have a gun.

“Seventy-four percent agreed with the statement that ‘One reason burglars avoid houses where people are at home is that they fear being shot,'” the study said.

The brief suggested the nation’s crime rate could rocket should more restrictions be placed on guns.

“Numerous surveys show that firearms are used (usually without a shot needing to be fired) for self-defense at least 97,000 times a year, and probably several hundred thousands times a year. The anti-crime effects of citizen handgun ownership provide enormous benefits to law enforcement, because there are fewer home invasion emergencies requiring an immediate police response, and because the substantial reductions in rates of burglary, assault, and other crimes allow the police and district attorneys to concentrate more resources on other cases and on deterrence.”

“Guns save lives,” the brief said. “In the hands of law-abiding citizens, guns provide very substantial public safety benefits. In all 50 states – but not the District – it is lawful to use firearms for defense against home invaders. The legal ownership of firearms for home defense is an important reason why the American rate of home invasion burglaries is far lower than in countries which prohibit or discourage home handgun defense.”

The brief said handgun ownership reduces the number of confrontational home invasions, so “the total U.S. violent crime rate [is reduced] by about 9 percent.”

Deeds said it’s always hard to predict the U.S. Supreme Court, but ideally the ruling would clarify the Second Amendment means exactly what its words say: that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.

He compared it to the discussion of freedom of religion, should the Bible be banned. “For Christians there’s no effective freedom of religion if they didn’t have a Bible,” he said.

“To have the Second Amendment right on paper, but to be denied the effective means of exercising that right at a moment of truth, when you’re trying to defend yourself or your loved one from an aggressor, [is wrong,]” he said. “The gun is the only answer.”

Where the rubber meets the road, he said, is when a good guy needs to survive an encounter with a bad guy, he said. There are two possible results: Police arrive on the scene later to have the innocent victim hurt or killed, or they arrive on the scene to “find the victim hearty and the offender on the floor.”

“Every cop in American is going to pick the second closing of the story,” Deeds said.

He said gun control originally was sold to Americans as a way to lower crime, but he disagreed. “People who sell this idea that bad guys are going to stop because of one more law are just full of it,” he said.

“That’s a lie. That’s a fraud,” he said. He also said it’s a terribly slippery slope to say that under the Second Amendment, some gun restrictions are good because they are “reasonable.”

“We are hoping that they [the Supreme Court] make a very clear, very unambiguous decision in favor of the Second Amendment,” Deeds told WND.

Montana officials already have argued the U.S. already resolved any dispute about the meaning of the Second Amendment when it defined in Montana’s compact under which it became a state that “any person” has the right to bear arms.

And U.S. Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., has led a congressional delegation in asking President Bush to order the U.S. Justice Department to submit a brief to the high court supporting the rights of individuals under the Second Amendment.

A similar request already has been submitted by officials for the Gun Owners of America, whose executive director, Larry Pratt, warned: “If the Supreme Court were to accept the Solicitor General’s line of argument, D.C.’s categorical gun ban of virtually all self-defense firearms could well be found to be constitutional. …”

The government’s position is available in a document submitted by by U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement. He said since “unrestricted” private ownership of guns clearly threatens the public safety, the Second Amendment can be interpreted to allow a variety of gun restrictions.

“Given the unquestionable threat to public safety that unrestricted private firearm possession would entail, various categories of firearm-related regulation are permitted by the Second Amendment,” Clement wrote in the brief.

Because of the specifics of the D.C. case, the ultimate ruling is expected to address directly whether the Second Amendment includes a right for individuals nationwide to have a gun or whether local governments can approve whatever laws or ordinances they desire to restrict firearms.

The amendment reads, “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Bob Unruh is a news editor for WorldNetDaily.com.

Special offers:

“Shooting Back: The Right and Duty of Self-Defense”

A special DVD presentation by the man who, confronted by armed terrorists, shot back!

When it’s time to shoot back! Get ‘Armed Response,’ the guide to firearms, self-defense

Perfect gift for pistol-packin’ mama! ‘Stayin’ Alive’ shows guns are indeed for girls


Related stories:Credit card company: No more buying gunsCongressman asks prez to support 2nd Amendment

National firearms ban ‘reasonable’?

Public ‘threatened’ by private-firearms ownership

Drill instructor convicted after rifle jams

BATF rebuked for attacks on gun dealers

Gun shop: Complaint could have been ruse

Gun-shop owner gets ‘breath of fresh air’

‘Blog’ puts fear into gun shop inspectors

New gun control: Shut down shops

Your doctor could put you on no-gun list

Expert offers teachers free weapons training

State quashed bill allowing handguns on campuses

Trial will debate 2nd Amendment rights

Buy a house, get a gun free

New use for schoolbooks: Stopping bullets

New Yorkers rally for ‘illegal’ guns

Clinton-era war on guns revealed

U.N. gun confab ends in frustration

The U.N.: Gunning for more power

NRA warns of U.N. gun control

Michael Douglas backs U.N. gun ban

‘Anti-gang’ bill endangers gun rights?

County drops homeowner gun charges

______________________________________________
 

Advertisements

3 Responses to “Who’da Thunk? Guns Best Crime Deterrent, after all (Second Amendment)”

  1. Seb said

    You Americans are so lucky…so, so lucky. For the Australian police or government to trust us so much would be the end of the world. Sometimes I think Australians are still convicts in their eyes.
    ___________________________________________

    WordforIt Reply~

    Hi, Seb! I just read an article defending Australians about that very dilemma and how minimal some of the reasons for being exiled actually were in those days. In a textbook I have, it’s called “perceptual constancy” when someone cannot get out of a perception rut like that, but all whom I have met from your area, in person or online, are congenial folks! Think it’s more about control? Seems gov’ts/politicians are having simultaneous power trips!

    Is crime as pervasive in your area as it is here? I didn’t think it was but not much is surprising anymore! There’s an adage, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns” and that’s really quite true here (as this article indicates).

    If I can remember where or find that article in my history here, I’ll share it with you.
    Thanks for dropping in and saying hello!
    _____________________________________________

  2. Seb said

    Well, honestly that is the stickler. Australia has never had a serious problem with homicide, with or without guns. The very occasional nutter going ballistic with a firearm is about as bad as it gets. The law change after the Port Arthur Massacre (Australia’s largest) was due more to a freshly elected government and a very disorganised shooting fraternity. It is interesting to note that Australia’s second and third largest massacres were the Whiskey Au Go Go fire and the Savoy Hotel Fire, both acts of arson, both killed 15 people.

    Our levels of homicide have been in steady decline since the 60’s and even the government’s Australian Institute of Criminology and Australian Bureau of Statistics fail to see the justification for the gun buyback. By the way, if you are wondering what my motivation for the pro-gun stance is, my .22 semi-auto rabbit hunter I got from my Dad when I was about eight was taken from me in the buyback. The officer we handed it in to looked at the floor while taking it from us, apoligising and acknowledging the stupidity of the law.

    I will never forget that day….anyway! I think you are right about control. To say the least, our system of government doesn’t have anywhere near the checks on power your does. Madison is a personal hero of mine, I don’t think the brilliance of his system of government is well enough recognised.
    ______________________________________________________

    Thanks for taking the time to share some background with me, Seb! I enjoyed visiting your blog and have it linked here b/c you seem to have a clear and honest grasp and I can gain a better understanding.

    It would have broken my heart to watch my son give up the guns he grew up learning to shoot and use in a responsible manner. The image of you having to do such is beyond sad. And you are monitored as to having a safe place to keep weapons? They love the smell of money, also?!?

    You’re studying law, right? Write a tear-jerker story from your experience and do what I saw a guy perform recently in my state capitiol legislation session. . .he was against a law that would make it a felony (rather than misdemeanor) to be caught a fourth time driving w/out a license or under suspension. This guy got up and went into a rendition of his poor ol’ grandma only going to Sunday School, and other such examples, as to why he was against such a law and it was actually opposed! I guess they’re (politicians) prepared for fighting but not (convoluted) reasoning! :-)

    Here, laws change and affect everyone more b/c of those who lack “home-training” than anything, imo. There’s a study in the pages at the top here in my blog about “The Medicated Child”. The USA accounts for 80% of the psychiactric drugs prescribed/consumed worlwide! Something very wrong there, and doesn’t even include street drugs. Back to the “home-training”—no coping skills. Anyway, almost all, if not all, of the mass shooters were on, or supposed to be on, meds. Nothing against necessary treatment but “kids acting like kids” is not a reason to make them stoners! We’ve got three-year-olds on psych meds. . .

    I can’t imagine what James Madison or any of the founders would think today, but it would sure stir up things! Wonder if they would get shoved out of the way like some others we’ve had who propose to operate as intended?!?

  3. MK said

    I read about this elsewhere, amazing isn’t it, an armed population resulting in lower crime. One of life’s great mysteries eh. ;)
    _____________________________________________________

    WfI Reply~

    Don’t consider myself a redneck but if carrying a weapon for protection is considered such, so be it! Our so-called leaders could take a lesson from kids—if there’s no punishment or boundaries, what’s stopping them?!?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: