Washington Ceasefire Ad Campaign

via Washington Ceasefire

The group’s Know the Facts campaign uses data from a leading book in the gun debate -- “Private Guns, Public Health,” by David Hemenway of the Harvard School of Public Health -- to make the case that a gun in the home generally does more harm than good.

There are estimated to be about 6.5 million guns in Washington State alone -- about one per resident -- and approximately 40% of homes in this state have guns. Many homeowners acquire guns for what they see as a means of protection against intruders, though the facts show that the risks of home gun ownership far outweigh the benefits. One of the Know the Facts ads educates the public that when there is a gun in the home, there is a 22x greater chance of killing a family member or a friend than an intruder.

In one of the largest studies on the topic covering three cities -- Galveston, Memphis and Seattle -- there were only 13 legally justified acts of self-defense out of a total of 626 fatal and non-fatal shootings in residences. The survey was taken in 1994, and several subsequent studies validate the findings. According to ‘Private Guns, Public Health,” there has never been a study demonstrating that a gun in the home can meaningfully deter or thwart burglaries or home invasion.

A spokesman for the organization said they aren't pushing for a change in legislation which would disallow guns in homes, they're trying to educate the public which often suffers from the misconception that a gun in the home makes them safer.

Where do you think that misconception comes from? Cui bono, baby?

Another very interesting statistic was presented in the article.

There are almost 600 gun deaths annually in Washington state – a death toll higher than that from motor vehicle accidents --  including some 350 suicides. Indeed, a majority of completed suicides are via a firearm.

I suppose in low gun states like New Jersey and New York, car accidents take a bigger toll. But Washington State must be typical of the high-gun states.

It all comes back to the simple fact that guns cause more harm than good.

Police Sued for Gun Seizure

The Concord Monitor reports

Heres's the story. The cops went out to confiscate the guns of a domestic abuser. The guy had his parents' address on his driver's license. The police went to that address and took all the guns away. It turned out the young violent man hadn't been living there and the guns seized were the property of his family members.

But, get a load of the way the lawyer describes it.

"The plaintiffs were deprived their constitutional right to keep and bear arms in protection of themselves and their families," the lawsuit alleges. "For the entire period of deprivation, the plaintiffs were unable to engage in the fundamental, natural and constitutional right to defend themselves."

Now, really, isn't that the biggest line of crap you've ever heard? I could accept it if he'd added "with guns" at the end. It might also be pointed out that no home invasions or zombie attacks took place during that entire 10-week period. So the phrase "were unable" is a bit misleading.

More honest would be "WOULD HAVE BEEN unable to defend themselves WITH GUNS if an incident HAD OCCURRED.

Why do the gun-rights folks have to exaggerate and lie so much? What we're doing on the gun control side is relating the facts of avoidable gun violence. Kid Shootings for example, relates one incident after another, no embellishment, no twisting, just facts. Ohh Shoot is another one, just simple reports. Even on our own blog, we report stories like this one, I admit to a little fleshing out from time to time, but the stories speak for themselves.

What's your opinion? Are the gun-rights activists a bit more creative in their arguing style than we are? And if so, why do you think that is?

Please leave a comment.

Tennessee 7-Year-Old Shot in Head

The Times News reports

Investigators report the 7-year-old boy was playing with his 4-year-old and 13-year-old brothers in a bedroom when the gun went off and struck the 7-year-old in the head.

According to investigators, the three boys thought the loaded weapon was a toy.

The unidentified boy was flown to UT with possibly life-threatening injuries.

Major Michelle Jones said the children reside at the home with their parents and grandparents and the gun was registered to a member of the household.

Don't you think it's funny the way gun-friendly news sources report these things as simple accidents, as if they could happen to anyone. And naturally the gun-friendly police in Tennessee report that "At this time, we have not gotten far enough into the investigation to determine if charges will be filed."

How about this for a plan. Every time a child gets ahold of a gun the owner of that gun goes immediately to jail. Then, the investigators can put together all the details for a judge to render the appropriate sentence.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

The Gun-Rights Candlelight Vigil

via Ladd Everitt

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence published a fascinating article listing the irreverant responses to the candlelight vigils by some of our pro-gun friends.

They're a bunch of jokesters all right. That's Weer'd Beard to the left (get it?).

The UK Triple Murder / Suicide

Everyone knows about the incredibly draconian gun laws suffered by the folks in the UK. As our own gun-rights activists keep telling us, British citizens have been disarmed, their weapons confiscated and they've been left left in shivering fear completely unprotected against the knife-weilding home invaders.

Of course that's not the case at all. No one knows how to exaggerate like our gun guys.

Google News reports

A few days ago there was a terrible multiple murder/suicide, which, being fairly rare thereabouts, made international news.  Her are some interesting details.

(Susan McGoldrick, 47, her sister Alison Turnbull, 44, and her niece Tanya Turnbull, 24, were shot dead by Michael Atherton)

police video

Labour MP Grahame Morris said outside the police cordon: "The issue is that in 2008 police responded to a call that there was a domestic argument and Mr Atherton had threatened to self-harm - to shoot himself. At the time the police took his firearms from him and he applied to have them returned. Police made an assessment and they were returned to him."

Durham Police confirmed that the weapons were taken from Mr Atherton's house as a precaution, but as he insisted there had been no threat to harm himself, the weapons were returned. That decision followed national procedure, a force spokesman said. "It was one person's word against another," he added.

What's your opinion? Does that sound like the anti-freedom and anti-rights place they keep telling us about? No, it doesn't.

Why do the pro-gun folks keep lying like that? Why do you think they find it necessary to exaggerate the situation before arguing against it? How many times have we heard about the "gun bans" in England? How many times have they told us the registration would lead to confiscation for us "just like it did in England?"

What's your opinion?  I tend to think our gun enthusiasts are usually just mindlessly repeating what they've heard from others.  The argument sounds good and it supports their obsessive fetish, so they go with it.

What do you think?  Please leave a comment.