Researcher changes mind on gun control laws

October 4, 2017

In the wake of the horrific mass shooting in Las Vegas, liberals predictably and opportunistically started calling for more gun control laws without even waiting to learn whether they would have made any difference (indeed, without even waiting until the gun smoke had cleared away.) They label these proposals “common sense gun laws,” which is part of the common leftwing tactic of winning debates by rewriting the terms, like renaming illegal aliens “immigrants,” confusing “health coverage” with “health care,” or insisting that a man in a dress is a woman. I have tried over the years in various media outlets to explain, calmly and rationally, what the boosters of these gun laws get wrong and why the laws might even make gun violence worse by taking away self-defense from the law-abiding.

Well, I get that people who are outraged, sad, scared and operating largely on emotions don’t want to hear cold facts from a conservative. So maybe they’ll listen to this. At the link (surprisingly, from the Washington Post) is an article by professional statistician Leah Libresco. She was not only a gun control advocate herself, she also used to work for Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight.com, a revered oracle among the liberal, New York Times-subscribing set.


Commentary continues below advertisement


She explains that she had all the usual liberal beliefs about guns (that the NRA was blocking “common sense” laws that could prevent violence, such as banning “assault weapons,” restricting silencers, etc.) So she and her colleagues set out on a three-month analysis of all 33,000 annual cases of gun deaths in the US, as well as the results of strict gun laws in Britain and Australia. She was stunned to learn that the more they examined the evidence, the more the case for gun control laws crumbled (again, these were not conservative gun owners; they were pro-gun control, liberal number crunchers.)

Among the things she discovered were facts I have long discussed on TV, radio, books and the web: that the term “assault weapon” was invented for something that doesn’t really exist (think about it: you can assault someone with any weapon; that’s what makes it a weapon. “Assault weapon” is like “baseball ball.”) “Silencers” do not silence guns. Gun buyback programs and gun bans have virtually no effect on mass shootings or other gun crimes. Two-thirds of all gun deaths in the US are suicides which gun control laws would not prevent. There’s much more (I urge you to read the entire article, whether you oppose or support gun control.)


Commentary continues below advertisement


After analyzing all the facts, Ms. Libresco still opposes guns personally, but she reluctantly concedes that most policies being promoted by gun control advocates are at best useless, that they are written by people who’ve never even seen a gun outside of the news or in briefing books, and that the only selling point of such laws is that gun owners hate them. She does offer some suggestions that might actually help reduce gun deaths, but they’re very narrowly targeted, which is what would make them effective. They aren’t just sweeping gun bans that would vastly expand the power of government and only target people who aren’t killers.

If we really wanted to get serious about preventing gun deaths, we would be talking about things that might actually accomplish that. Unfortunately, the current mantra on the left and in the media is “Do something even if it’s wrong.” Or maybe I should rewrite that for them: "Do something, especially if it’s wrong.”

READ MORE

PLEASE LEAVE ME A COMMENT BELOW.  I READ THEM!

Comments 1-5 of 6

  • Don Saavedra

    10/05/2017 09:21 PM

    You make a lot of false statements as if they were fact yet produce not a single source to validate your claim .... how about you check the definition of Assault weapons and Assault rifles in the Merriam-Webster dictionary .... it's been there since the 1800s proving well and truly that even Americans new back then what a military assault rifle was ...... Problem here is that you and many others have brainwashed yourselves into believing your own lies to justify your arrogant belief in that you can have whatever you want even if that puts the lives of thousands pf people, many of them children, in danger ... you are as guilty of murder as all those mass murderers who squeezed the trigger.

  • Matt F

    10/05/2017 11:36 AM

    Where is the link? The READ MORE link at the bottom has an error. I want to read the article and see the source please. Thanks

  • William Booher

    10/05/2017 10:26 AM

    I personally believe that what happened recently was a total setup, getting our minds off what is important to this nation, and taking the President away from that importance, setting up laws that can make our President look like the bad guy. Liberal 'Think Tank' logic, which is really not proper logic if logical at all.

  • James Stewart

    10/05/2017 09:13 AM

    Need more facts regarding gun ownership and the homicide rate in America. Less emotional debate. Americah Journal of Public Health conducted a study-needs to be aired on all media. Also, Switzerland's homicide rate and gun ownership. Testimonies of criminals regarding what homes they do or do not invade as to "gun free zones" vs gun ownership. And last it is not the car or the gun but the operator that kills. Movie and TV need to quit airing killing and assault-warps too many minds. And auto industry should advertise the safety and enjoyment their autos provide and not the horsepower that shows how fast it can travel around our roads--warps too many minds. Look forward to watching your TV show tonight!

  • Dave Bardell

    10/05/2017 07:40 AM

    Hey Harold,
    Let me know how that works out over there. Seems like you are only a year or so away from becoming a Muslin state. And you willingly roll over and let it happen.

Researcher changes mind on gun control laws

October 4, 2017

In the wake of the horrific mass shooting in Las Vegas, liberals predictably and opportunistically started calling for more gun control laws without even waiting to learn whether they would have made any difference (indeed, without even waiting until the gun smoke had cleared away.) They label these proposals “common sense gun laws,” which is part of the common leftwing tactic of winning debates by rewriting the terms, like renaming illegal aliens “immigrants,” confusing “health coverage” with “health care,” or insisting that a man in a dress is a woman. I have tried over the years in various media outlets to explain, calmly and rationally, what the boosters of these gun laws get wrong and why the laws might even make gun violence worse by taking away self-defense from the law-abiding.

Well, I get that people who are outraged, sad, scared and operating largely on emotions don’t want to hear cold facts from a conservative. So maybe they’ll listen to this. At the link (surprisingly, from the Washington Post) is an article by professional statistician Leah Libresco. She was not only a gun control advocate herself, she also used to work for Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight.com, a revered oracle among the liberal, New York Times-subscribing set.


Commentary continues below advertisement


She explains that she had all the usual liberal beliefs about guns (that the NRA was blocking “common sense” laws that could prevent violence, such as banning “assault weapons,” restricting silencers, etc.) So she and her colleagues set out on a three-month analysis of all 33,000 annual cases of gun deaths in the US, as well as the results of strict gun laws in Britain and Australia. She was stunned to learn that the more they examined the evidence, the more the case for gun control laws crumbled (again, these were not conservative gun owners; they were pro-gun control, liberal number crunchers.)

Among the things she discovered were facts I have long discussed on TV, radio, books and the web: that the term “assault weapon” was invented for something that doesn’t really exist (think about it: you can assault someone with any weapon; that’s what makes it a weapon. “Assault weapon” is like “baseball ball.”) “Silencers” do not silence guns. Gun buyback programs and gun bans have virtually no effect on mass shootings or other gun crimes. Two-thirds of all gun deaths in the US are suicides which gun control laws would not prevent. There’s much more (I urge you to read the entire article, whether you oppose or support gun control.)


Commentary continues below advertisement


After analyzing all the facts, Ms. Libresco still opposes guns personally, but she reluctantly concedes that most policies being promoted by gun control advocates are at best useless, that they are written by people who’ve never even seen a gun outside of the news or in briefing books, and that the only selling point of such laws is that gun owners hate them. She does offer some suggestions that might actually help reduce gun deaths, but they’re very narrowly targeted, which is what would make them effective. They aren’t just sweeping gun bans that would vastly expand the power of government and only target people who aren’t killers.

If we really wanted to get serious about preventing gun deaths, we would be talking about things that might actually accomplish that. Unfortunately, the current mantra on the left and in the media is “Do something even if it’s wrong.” Or maybe I should rewrite that for them: "Do something, especially if it’s wrong.”

READ MORE

PLEASE LEAVE ME A COMMENT BELOW.  I READ THEM!

Comments 1-5 of 6

  • Don Saavedra

    10/05/2017 09:21 PM

    You make a lot of false statements as if they were fact yet produce not a single source to validate your claim .... how about you check the definition of Assault weapons and Assault rifles in the Merriam-Webster dictionary .... it's been there since the 1800s proving well and truly that even Americans new back then what a military assault rifle was ...... Problem here is that you and many others have brainwashed yourselves into believing your own lies to justify your arrogant belief in that you can have whatever you want even if that puts the lives of thousands pf people, many of them children, in danger ... you are as guilty of murder as all those mass murderers who squeezed the trigger.

  • Matt F

    10/05/2017 11:36 AM

    Where is the link? The READ MORE link at the bottom has an error. I want to read the article and see the source please. Thanks

  • William Booher

    10/05/2017 10:26 AM

    I personally believe that what happened recently was a total setup, getting our minds off what is important to this nation, and taking the President away from that importance, setting up laws that can make our President look like the bad guy. Liberal 'Think Tank' logic, which is really not proper logic if logical at all.

  • James Stewart

    10/05/2017 09:13 AM

    Need more facts regarding gun ownership and the homicide rate in America. Less emotional debate. Americah Journal of Public Health conducted a study-needs to be aired on all media. Also, Switzerland's homicide rate and gun ownership. Testimonies of criminals regarding what homes they do or do not invade as to "gun free zones" vs gun ownership. And last it is not the car or the gun but the operator that kills. Movie and TV need to quit airing killing and assault-warps too many minds. And auto industry should advertise the safety and enjoyment their autos provide and not the horsepower that shows how fast it can travel around our roads--warps too many minds. Look forward to watching your TV show tonight!

  • Dave Bardell

    10/05/2017 07:40 AM

    Hey Harold,
    Let me know how that works out over there. Seems like you are only a year or so away from becoming a Muslin state. And you willingly roll over and let it happen.