30 March, 2010
Republican/Voyeur morality
AND WE thought the repubs were zombies. From now on they are THE VOYEUR PARTY spending their "stimulus money," and preaching morality to the rest of us. Such hypocrites!
Republican Party should be named the Voyeur Party
The Republican party at the Voyeur night club (which features topless dancers wearing horse bridles and other bondage gear while mimicking sex acts) spent $1,946.25 of donors money for "meals was attended by a group of Republicans who had been at an official party event at the Beverly Hills Hotel the same night. The attendees are part of the Republican National Committee program to cultivate future donors.
How Republicans spend your money
The Republican National Committee's latest expense filings captured widespread attention for expenditures at a risque nightclub: $1,946.25 for "meals" at Voyeur in West Hollywood, which features topless dancers wearing horse bridles and other bondage gear while mimicking sex acts.
They also spent $17,000 for private jet service; more than $35,000 for upscale hotels; and more than $43,000 in expenses, not including airfare, for the committee's winter meeting in Hawaii.
They also spent $17,000 for private jet service; more than $35,000 for upscale hotels; and more than $43,000 in expenses, not including airfare, for the committee's winter meeting in Hawaii.
24 March, 2010
First year benefits of Healthcare Reform
- Health insurance providers cannot deny any child coverage because of a pre-existing condition
- Insurance companies can no longer drop someone when he or she becomes ill
- Young adults can stay on their parents' health insurance plan up to their 27th birthday
- Health Insurers must now reveal how much money is spent on overhead
- New health insurance plans must cover checkups and other preventative care without co-pays
- New measures will be implemented to help eliminate health insurance waste, fraud, and abuse
- Small businesses (fewer than 50 employees) will get tax credits covering up to 50% of premiums
- Seniors on Medicare will get a rebate to fill the "donut hole" in their drug coverage
- Insurers will be required to put more premiums dollars toward actual health care services, not administration, advertising, or profits
- Insurance premium increases will be have to be reviewed and justified
- Lifetime caps on the amount of insurance a person can have will be banned
- A temporary high-risk pool will be set up to cover adults with pre-existing conditions
- Insurance companies can no longer drop someone when he or she becomes ill
- Young adults can stay on their parents' health insurance plan up to their 27th birthday
- Health Insurers must now reveal how much money is spent on overhead
- New health insurance plans must cover checkups and other preventative care without co-pays
- New measures will be implemented to help eliminate health insurance waste, fraud, and abuse
- Small businesses (fewer than 50 employees) will get tax credits covering up to 50% of premiums
- Seniors on Medicare will get a rebate to fill the "donut hole" in their drug coverage
- Insurers will be required to put more premiums dollars toward actual health care services, not administration, advertising, or profits
- Insurance premium increases will be have to be reviewed and justified
- Lifetime caps on the amount of insurance a person can have will be banned
- A temporary high-risk pool will be set up to cover adults with pre-existing conditions
22 March, 2010
CBO analysis shows cuts in deficits
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the legislation awaiting the president's approval would extend coverage to 32 million Americans who lack it, ban insurers from denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions and cut deficits by an estimated $138 billion over a decade. If realized, the expansion of coverage would include 95 percent of all eligible individuals under age 65. They are usually conservative in their estimates.
racists protest at House healthcare passage
Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind., told a reporter that as he left the Cannon House Office Building with Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a leader of the civil rights era, some among the crowd chanted "the N-word, the N-word, 15 times." Both Carson and Lewis are black, and Lewis spokeswoman Brenda Jones also said that it occurred.
"It was like going into the time machine with John Lewis," said Carson, a large former police officer who said he wasn't frightened but worried about the 70-year-old Lewis, who is twice his age. "He said it reminded him of another time."
"It was like going into the time machine with John Lewis," said Carson, a large former police officer who said he wasn't frightened but worried about the 70-year-old Lewis, who is twice his age. "He said it reminded him of another time."
18 March, 2010
Pass the Bill
Congressional Democrats say the final version of their comprehensive health-care plan -- set to be unveiled Thursday and likely to be voted on Sunday -- would cut the federal deficit by $138 billion over the next decade and $1.2 trillion 10 years after that.
The legislation would cost an estimated $940 billion over 10 years and deliver on the White House's top domestic priority: providing insurance to more than 30 million people who currently lack it. The bill would expand insurance coverage through a combination of tax credits for middle-class households and an expansion of the Medicaid program for low-income people.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters the legislation is "the largest deficit-reduction bill that members will have a chance to vote on" in most of their congressional careers -- a key enticement for a bloc of undecided Democratic lawmakers who fear that the legislation would run up the mounting federal deficit. The savings estimates came from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
The legislation would cost an estimated $940 billion over 10 years and deliver on the White House's top domestic priority: providing insurance to more than 30 million people who currently lack it. The bill would expand insurance coverage through a combination of tax credits for middle-class households and an expansion of the Medicaid program for low-income people.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters the legislation is "the largest deficit-reduction bill that members will have a chance to vote on" in most of their congressional careers -- a key enticement for a bloc of undecided Democratic lawmakers who fear that the legislation would run up the mounting federal deficit. The savings estimates came from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
Texas republicans
Historians on Tuesday criticized proposed revisions to the Texas social studies curriculum by the right wing republican controlled State Board of Education as appointed by Texas Govenor Perry (the right wing republican who suggested Texas should part from the Union). Historians say that many of the changes are historically inaccurate and that they would affect textbooks and classrooms far beyond the state's borders.
The board is made up of 10 whites and 5 minorities. It also deleted references to minorities and minority leaders. All this and more in a state, Texas, which is a state where Anglos will be the minority sooner than in most states.
The new curriculum also plays down the role of Thomas Jefferson among the founding fathers, and questions the separation of church and state. Among other things, there were changes that asserted Christian faith of the founding fathers. Historians say the founding fathers had a variety of approaches to religion and faith; some, like Jefferson, were quite secular.
The board is made up of 10 whites and 5 minorities. It also deleted references to minorities and minority leaders. All this and more in a state, Texas, which is a state where Anglos will be the minority sooner than in most states.
The new curriculum also plays down the role of Thomas Jefferson among the founding fathers, and questions the separation of church and state. Among other things, there were changes that asserted Christian faith of the founding fathers. Historians say the founding fathers had a variety of approaches to religion and faith; some, like Jefferson, were quite secular.
09 March, 2010
Ex-republican Massa from NY-hypocrite
New York Rep Masssa says he resigned so as to not put his wife through the inquiry but on the radio he says to ask his wife about his sexual preferences. He says the Democratic Leadership was after him but he hits on a male staffer at an after-hours party. He says they were after him but instead of s staying to vote, he resigns in disgrace. We know what he is and it says a lot about what his Republicans buddies like Beck and Limbaugh are--
05 March, 2010
Republicans AGAIN lie about reconciliation
In a Feb. 23 USA Today op-ed, Republicans wrote that the dastardly Dems were planning to use "special rules to circumvent bipartisan Senate opposition" and "jam this bill through Congress." But that's A LIE, and they know it. Why? Because they were actually in the Senate on Dec. 24 when Obama's bill passed. Sixty yea votes, 39 nay—which is nine votes more than the Dems needed, at least according to the U.S. Constitution. (A few weeks earlier, the House passed its own version of the bill, 220–215.)
Furthermore, the opposition in the Senate was hardly bipartisan: every one of the 39 senators who voted against the bill was a Republican, and every one of the 60 senators who voted for it was a Democrat.
So Obama doesn't need to resort to reconciliation to pass health-care reform. He's already passed it. What he does need it for, however, is passing the revisions necessary to get the House and the Senate to agree on a single version of the legislation.
This means that after the House passes the Senate version of the bill, the Senate will approve what's known as a "sidecar"—a small package of budget-related tweaks designed to make the House happy. These revisions represent the only part of health-care reform that Senate Democrats are seeking to pass through reconciliation, i.e., with a simple majority rather than a supermajority. This is less ambitious than the usual reconciliation process, which typically applies to entire bills, not more.
As it turns out, every major health-care innovation of the last three decades has been done through reconciliation, including COBRA, the popular law that allows people to keep their health insurance after losing their jobs, and the Children's Health Insurance Program, which, together with Medicaid, provides access to health care for one third of American children.
And remember: these bills were passed in their entirety through reconciliation. Obamacare, on the other hand, passed the Senate with a 60-vote supermajority; it's only the sidecar that Democrats plan to pass with less.
Reconciliation has never been used for legislation this substantial? Really?
Last month, Repbulican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said reconciliation "has never been used for this kind of major systemic reform"; later, Republican Lamar Alexander told ABC's This Week that "there's never been anything of this size and magnitude and complexity run through the Senate in this way."
But THAT IS A LIE, as reconciliation has not only been used to pass major health-care initiatives, it's actually been used to pass major initiatives of all sorts, including the Republicans' favorite "major systemic reform" of the last 20 years (the 1996 welfare-reform bill) and at least two bills (Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts) that cost about twice as much over 10 years ($1.8 trillion) as health-care reform is estimated to cost ($950 billion).
Furthermore, the opposition in the Senate was hardly bipartisan: every one of the 39 senators who voted against the bill was a Republican, and every one of the 60 senators who voted for it was a Democrat.
So Obama doesn't need to resort to reconciliation to pass health-care reform. He's already passed it. What he does need it for, however, is passing the revisions necessary to get the House and the Senate to agree on a single version of the legislation.
This means that after the House passes the Senate version of the bill, the Senate will approve what's known as a "sidecar"—a small package of budget-related tweaks designed to make the House happy. These revisions represent the only part of health-care reform that Senate Democrats are seeking to pass through reconciliation, i.e., with a simple majority rather than a supermajority. This is less ambitious than the usual reconciliation process, which typically applies to entire bills, not more.
As it turns out, every major health-care innovation of the last three decades has been done through reconciliation, including COBRA, the popular law that allows people to keep their health insurance after losing their jobs, and the Children's Health Insurance Program, which, together with Medicaid, provides access to health care for one third of American children.
And remember: these bills were passed in their entirety through reconciliation. Obamacare, on the other hand, passed the Senate with a 60-vote supermajority; it's only the sidecar that Democrats plan to pass with less.
Reconciliation has never been used for legislation this substantial? Really?
Last month, Repbulican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said reconciliation "has never been used for this kind of major systemic reform"; later, Republican Lamar Alexander told ABC's This Week that "there's never been anything of this size and magnitude and complexity run through the Senate in this way."
But THAT IS A LIE, as reconciliation has not only been used to pass major health-care initiatives, it's actually been used to pass major initiatives of all sorts, including the Republicans' favorite "major systemic reform" of the last 20 years (the 1996 welfare-reform bill) and at least two bills (Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts) that cost about twice as much over 10 years ($1.8 trillion) as health-care reform is estimated to cost ($950 billion).
04 March, 2010
Top 30 Reasons to Oppose Gun Control
Read today:
1. In over two hundred years of American history, the courts have never invalidated a gun control law based on the second amendment, but the NRA knows more about the law and the Constitution than the courts.
2. Patrick Henry opposed adding the second amendment to the Constitution. That's why quotations from Henry are used by pro-gun activists to support their interpretation of the second amendment.
3. The Founding Fathers intended to create a libertarian utopia. That's very evident from reading the following quotations:
James Madison wrote, "In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place, oblige it to control itself." (Federalist 51).
John Jay explained, "Nothing is more certain than the indispensable necessity of government, and it is equally undeniable, that whenever and however it is instituted, the people must cede to it some of their natural rights in order to vest it with requisite powers." (Federalist 2)
4. Guns don't kill people, they just make the bullets go faster so that they can kill people.
5. It's a good idea to own a gun at home because a gun is more likely to be used to kill a friend or family member rather than a criminal.
6. There have been gun control laws for over 200 years in America, but because of modern day circumstances gun-control is no longer needed.
7. The NRA knows more about American history than historians do.
8. Although firearms are inanimate objects and therefore can't kill people, they do somehow have the magical power to keep a person safe from criminals.
9. Although firearms are inanimate objects and therefore can't kill people, they do somehow have the magical power to protect a person against political tyrrany.
10. Guns are a protection against political tyrrany. For example, private ownership of guns was very common in Iraq while Sadam Hussein was in power. Guns are the reason the Iraqi people have enjoyed so much more freedom than people in England where guns have been banned.
11. It's a good idea to make it easy for criminals to obtain guns.
12. According to the British Crime Survey, crime in England has gone down. However, the NRA is the best source of information about crime.
13. Using Gary Kleck's methodology it could be shown that millions of Americans have seen spacecraft from another planet or have been visited by aliens. Despite this, Kleck's studies reveal the truth about defensive gun use.
14. John Lott is a reliable source of information although he kept changing his story about where he got his information for a study in his book More Guns Less Crime.
15. Gun advocate Gary Kleck commented in his book Targeting Guns: Firearms and their Control, "More likely, the declines in crime coinciding with relaxation of carry laws were largely attributable to other factors not controlled in the Lott and Mustard analysis." Kleck and Lott contradict each other so they both must be right.
16. During the 1980's the NRA tried to convince President Reagan to abolish the ATF, the law enforcment agency in charge of enforcing federal gun control laws. This is because the best way to enforce current gun laws is to abolish law enforcement.
17. It's a good idea to always have a loaded gun around when you lose your temper.
18. Children are safer if they have easy access to guns.
19. The International Crime Victim Survey found a positive correlation between gun ownership and increases in homicide and suicide, but the right to life doesn't matter.
20. Pro-gun propaganda is very good logic. Let's apply pro-gun propaganda to cars to demonstrate this- Cars don't kill people, people kill people. That's why stop signs and speed limits should be abolished.
21. Criminals don't obey laws and that's why all laws should be abolished.
22. Gun violence means more freedom. Just ask the family of any gun violence victim to verify this.
23. James Madison's first draft of the second amendment was "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person." It is clear from this that the term "bear arms" refers to rendering military service and not to carrying guns for personal purposes. However, modern day circumstances have changed the meaning of the second amendment.
24. In United States v. Miller the Supreme Court recognized that the "possession or use" of a weapon must be reasonably related to a well regulated miltia to enjoy second amendment protection. That's why there is an individual right to own any military weapon whether or not its possession or use is related to militia activity.
25. In United States v. Miller the Supreme Court stated that the purpose of the second amendment is to promote an effective militia. That's why the first part of the second amendment doesn't matter.
26. Assault weapons crime decreased after the passage of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban. Gun crime went down the most in states that didn't previously have their own ban on assault weapons. That's why the ban was ineffective.
27. There is much more gun violence in the US than other industrialized nations, but it's better to face an armed criminal.
28. Chanting a lie over and over again will somehow make it come true.
29. The gun industry should have a special immunity to lawsuits that isn't enjoyed by other industries. The gun industry should not be held responsible when it's negligent.
30. Most murders in the US are commited with guns, but killing is not the purpose of a gun.
1. In over two hundred years of American history, the courts have never invalidated a gun control law based on the second amendment, but the NRA knows more about the law and the Constitution than the courts.
2. Patrick Henry opposed adding the second amendment to the Constitution. That's why quotations from Henry are used by pro-gun activists to support their interpretation of the second amendment.
3. The Founding Fathers intended to create a libertarian utopia. That's very evident from reading the following quotations:
James Madison wrote, "In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place, oblige it to control itself." (Federalist 51).
John Jay explained, "Nothing is more certain than the indispensable necessity of government, and it is equally undeniable, that whenever and however it is instituted, the people must cede to it some of their natural rights in order to vest it with requisite powers." (Federalist 2)
4. Guns don't kill people, they just make the bullets go faster so that they can kill people.
5. It's a good idea to own a gun at home because a gun is more likely to be used to kill a friend or family member rather than a criminal.
6. There have been gun control laws for over 200 years in America, but because of modern day circumstances gun-control is no longer needed.
7. The NRA knows more about American history than historians do.
8. Although firearms are inanimate objects and therefore can't kill people, they do somehow have the magical power to keep a person safe from criminals.
9. Although firearms are inanimate objects and therefore can't kill people, they do somehow have the magical power to protect a person against political tyrrany.
10. Guns are a protection against political tyrrany. For example, private ownership of guns was very common in Iraq while Sadam Hussein was in power. Guns are the reason the Iraqi people have enjoyed so much more freedom than people in England where guns have been banned.
11. It's a good idea to make it easy for criminals to obtain guns.
12. According to the British Crime Survey, crime in England has gone down. However, the NRA is the best source of information about crime.
13. Using Gary Kleck's methodology it could be shown that millions of Americans have seen spacecraft from another planet or have been visited by aliens. Despite this, Kleck's studies reveal the truth about defensive gun use.
14. John Lott is a reliable source of information although he kept changing his story about where he got his information for a study in his book More Guns Less Crime.
15. Gun advocate Gary Kleck commented in his book Targeting Guns: Firearms and their Control, "More likely, the declines in crime coinciding with relaxation of carry laws were largely attributable to other factors not controlled in the Lott and Mustard analysis." Kleck and Lott contradict each other so they both must be right.
16. During the 1980's the NRA tried to convince President Reagan to abolish the ATF, the law enforcment agency in charge of enforcing federal gun control laws. This is because the best way to enforce current gun laws is to abolish law enforcement.
17. It's a good idea to always have a loaded gun around when you lose your temper.
18. Children are safer if they have easy access to guns.
19. The International Crime Victim Survey found a positive correlation between gun ownership and increases in homicide and suicide, but the right to life doesn't matter.
20. Pro-gun propaganda is very good logic. Let's apply pro-gun propaganda to cars to demonstrate this- Cars don't kill people, people kill people. That's why stop signs and speed limits should be abolished.
21. Criminals don't obey laws and that's why all laws should be abolished.
22. Gun violence means more freedom. Just ask the family of any gun violence victim to verify this.
23. James Madison's first draft of the second amendment was "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person." It is clear from this that the term "bear arms" refers to rendering military service and not to carrying guns for personal purposes. However, modern day circumstances have changed the meaning of the second amendment.
24. In United States v. Miller the Supreme Court recognized that the "possession or use" of a weapon must be reasonably related to a well regulated miltia to enjoy second amendment protection. That's why there is an individual right to own any military weapon whether or not its possession or use is related to militia activity.
25. In United States v. Miller the Supreme Court stated that the purpose of the second amendment is to promote an effective militia. That's why the first part of the second amendment doesn't matter.
26. Assault weapons crime decreased after the passage of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban. Gun crime went down the most in states that didn't previously have their own ban on assault weapons. That's why the ban was ineffective.
27. There is much more gun violence in the US than other industrialized nations, but it's better to face an armed criminal.
28. Chanting a lie over and over again will somehow make it come true.
29. The gun industry should have a special immunity to lawsuits that isn't enjoyed by other industries. The gun industry should not be held responsible when it's negligent.
30. Most murders in the US are commited with guns, but killing is not the purpose of a gun.
the Second Amendment
Amendment II 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."
Read today:--Setting aside the issue of "incorporation" the Second Amendment to our Constition does not say, 'individually armed citizens, being necessary to the security of a free state . . . . ' The Amendment explicitly refers to the 'militia,' a collective organization and a specific kind of militia at that, one that is 'well regulated.' It is hard to imagine individuals being 'well regulated' by the government. They are only 'regulated' as a group. Otherwise, why is the "well regulated militia phrasse in there?
Read today:--Setting aside the issue of "incorporation" the Second Amendment to our Constition does not say, 'individually armed citizens, being necessary to the security of a free state . . . . ' The Amendment explicitly refers to the 'militia,' a collective organization and a specific kind of militia at that, one that is 'well regulated.' It is hard to imagine individuals being 'well regulated' by the government. They are only 'regulated' as a group. Otherwise, why is the "well regulated militia phrasse in there?
undestanding reconciliation
The republican underlying "principle" seems to be that it's fine to pass tax cuts for the wealthy on narrow votes in reconciliation but an outrage to use reconciliation to help middle-income and poor people get health insurance.
It's not just legitimate to use reconciliation to complete the work on health reform. It would be immoral to do otherwise and thereby let a phony republican argument about process get in the way of health coverage for 30 million Americans.
It's not just legitimate to use reconciliation to complete the work on health reform. It would be immoral to do otherwise and thereby let a phony republican argument about process get in the way of health coverage for 30 million Americans.
03 March, 2010
gun control myths
MYTH: Keeping guns in the home increases personal protection.
TRUTH: Obviously, self defense is not a good argument against gun control since those who own firearms are actually more likely to be victims of homicide. Two studies published in The New England Journal of Medicine revealed that keeping a gun in the home increases the risk of both suicide and homicide.
Keeping a gun in the home makes it 2.7 times more likely that someone will be a victim of homicide in your home (in almost all cases the victim is either related to or intimately acquainted with the murderer) and 4.8 times more likely that someone will commit suicide . Guns make it more likely that a suicide attempt will be successful than if other means were used such as sleeping pills.
MYTH: Guns are used defensively 2.5 million times each year in the US.
TRUTH: Gary Kleck conducted a survey which concluded that 2.5 million people in the US each year use guns to defend themselves. One percent of the US population is between 2 and 3 million. So if only one percent of the survey respondents had answered the survey dishonestly that would make the results of the survey inaccurate by millions. According to the NCVS (National Crime Victim Survey) guns are used defensively less than 100,000 times each year. The NCVS surveyed over 90,000 people. In contrast, Kleck only surveyed about 5,000 people.
Thus it would be reasonable to conclude that the NCVS provides a more reliable estimate of the number of defensive gun uses in the US. An article published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (Northwestern)87 (1997): 1430 revealed that using methods similiar to Kleck's, it could be concluded that nearly 20 million Americans have seen aircraft from another planet and that one million Americans have had contact with aliens.
MYTH: A decrease in crime in Kennesaw, Georgia after it passed a law which required people to keep a firearm in their homes shows that guns reduce crime.
TRUTH: Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig explain, "The case of Kennesaw, Georgia, which adopted an ordinance in 1982 requiring every household to keep a gun, has been prominent. There have been several published analyses of the burglary trends in Kennesaw around the time of the ordinance, with contradictory results. In any event, this is not a good test of the deterrence hypothesis, since the ordinance was purely symbolic.
Most homes in Kennesaw already had a gun before the ordinance, and it seems unlikely the ordinance had any effect on prevalence since there was no penalty specified in the law for refusal to comply." ("Guns and Burglary", Evaluating Gun Policy, pages 81-82)
MYTH: People in Switzerland are heavily armed. There is an assault weapon in every Swiss home.
TRUTH: It's true that Swiss soldiers are required to keep their assault rifles at home. How big is the Swiss Army? 400,000 . There are about 3 million Swiss households . 400,000/3,000,000= 0.133. Therefore, there is a military assault rifle in about 13% of Swiss homes. Switzerland also has rather strict gun control laws. In Switzerland a permit is required in order to purchase a weapon (The permit shows that you are at least 18 and don't have a criminal record).
A permit is also required to carrry a weapon. Such a permit is mostly issued to people who work in security-type occupations. To obtain this permit, you have to demonstrate that you need to carry a weapon and that you know how to handle a gun safely and have knowledge of the law regarding firearms use. Soldiers in the Swiss Army are required to store their military weapons at home under lock and key and to undergo regular training. Strict gun laws in Switzerland minimize the dangers of gun ownership.
However, such dangers can not be completely eliminated as illustrated by the case of Friedrich Leibacher who rushed into a session of parliament in the Swiss town of Zug. He used his Swiss Army assault rifle and a grenade to murder fourteen people. Eleven of these people were lawmakers.
MYTH: The 1976 handgun ban in Washington D.C. caused an increase in crime.
TRUTH: The handgun ban has prevented 47 deaths each year Gun control has saved lives. Let's look at a graph that displays information about the homicide rate in the District of Columbia a decade before the ban and a decade after. There are random fluctuations in the crime rate from year to year so it's best to look at homicide data from many years. In the decade preceding the ban, the homicide rate exceeded 35 per 100,000 4 times. In the decade following the ban this happened only once.
The average homicide rate of the ten years that followed the ban was lower than the homicide rate of the previous decade. Was this part of a general decrease in homicide that would have happened without the ban? If that were so you would expect the non-gun homicide rate to have declined as well as the gun homicide rate. However, there was only a statistically significant decrease in the number of homicides that involved firearms.
MYTH: If you outlaw guns only the outlaws will have guns.
TRUTH: If you outlaw guns, very few criminals will have guns. In America guns start out legal. Then they enter the black market one way or the other . So if you have less legal guns then there will less guns entering the black market and consequently less outlaws owning guns. Think about it. Nations with very strict gun control laws such as the UK, Australia, and Japan have much lower gun crime rates than the US.
The most probable explanation for this is that criminals in the US have much greater access to guns due to less gun control. Saying "If you outlaw guns only the outlaws will have guns" is very misleading and completely absurd. If you outlaw guns, less outlaws will have guns. Would you rather have more or less outlaws owning guns? The answer is obvious.
MYTH:Gun ownership is a protection against political tyranny.
TRUTH: Private ownership of guns was very common under Saddam Hussein's regime .It certainly didn't protect the Iraqi people against political tyranny. Gun ownership was legalized in Germany in 1928, five years before Hitler rose to power. Despite the claims of pro-gun activists, gun ownership did nothing to stop a tyrant like Hitler from seizing power. In 1938, Germany's gun laws were relaxed except in the case of Jews.
Although the gun lobby has tried to associate racism with gun control, white supremacists have often praised the Nazis for being pro-gun and have opposed gun control. An example of that is this quote: "If you register your gun with anybody, you're a nut! When the conspiracy comes for your firearm, give it to 'em like this grand dragon is going to - right between the eyes." -Klu Klux Klan (Richmond Times- Dispatch, July 5, 1967)
TRUTH: Obviously, self defense is not a good argument against gun control since those who own firearms are actually more likely to be victims of homicide. Two studies published in The New England Journal of Medicine revealed that keeping a gun in the home increases the risk of both suicide and homicide.
Keeping a gun in the home makes it 2.7 times more likely that someone will be a victim of homicide in your home (in almost all cases the victim is either related to or intimately acquainted with the murderer) and 4.8 times more likely that someone will commit suicide . Guns make it more likely that a suicide attempt will be successful than if other means were used such as sleeping pills.
MYTH: Guns are used defensively 2.5 million times each year in the US.
TRUTH: Gary Kleck conducted a survey which concluded that 2.5 million people in the US each year use guns to defend themselves. One percent of the US population is between 2 and 3 million. So if only one percent of the survey respondents had answered the survey dishonestly that would make the results of the survey inaccurate by millions. According to the NCVS (National Crime Victim Survey) guns are used defensively less than 100,000 times each year. The NCVS surveyed over 90,000 people. In contrast, Kleck only surveyed about 5,000 people.
Thus it would be reasonable to conclude that the NCVS provides a more reliable estimate of the number of defensive gun uses in the US. An article published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (Northwestern)87 (1997): 1430 revealed that using methods similiar to Kleck's, it could be concluded that nearly 20 million Americans have seen aircraft from another planet and that one million Americans have had contact with aliens.
MYTH: A decrease in crime in Kennesaw, Georgia after it passed a law which required people to keep a firearm in their homes shows that guns reduce crime.
TRUTH: Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig explain, "The case of Kennesaw, Georgia, which adopted an ordinance in 1982 requiring every household to keep a gun, has been prominent. There have been several published analyses of the burglary trends in Kennesaw around the time of the ordinance, with contradictory results. In any event, this is not a good test of the deterrence hypothesis, since the ordinance was purely symbolic.
Most homes in Kennesaw already had a gun before the ordinance, and it seems unlikely the ordinance had any effect on prevalence since there was no penalty specified in the law for refusal to comply." ("Guns and Burglary", Evaluating Gun Policy, pages 81-82)
MYTH: People in Switzerland are heavily armed. There is an assault weapon in every Swiss home.
TRUTH: It's true that Swiss soldiers are required to keep their assault rifles at home. How big is the Swiss Army? 400,000 . There are about 3 million Swiss households . 400,000/3,000,000= 0.133. Therefore, there is a military assault rifle in about 13% of Swiss homes. Switzerland also has rather strict gun control laws. In Switzerland a permit is required in order to purchase a weapon (The permit shows that you are at least 18 and don't have a criminal record).
A permit is also required to carrry a weapon. Such a permit is mostly issued to people who work in security-type occupations. To obtain this permit, you have to demonstrate that you need to carry a weapon and that you know how to handle a gun safely and have knowledge of the law regarding firearms use. Soldiers in the Swiss Army are required to store their military weapons at home under lock and key and to undergo regular training. Strict gun laws in Switzerland minimize the dangers of gun ownership.
However, such dangers can not be completely eliminated as illustrated by the case of Friedrich Leibacher who rushed into a session of parliament in the Swiss town of Zug. He used his Swiss Army assault rifle and a grenade to murder fourteen people. Eleven of these people were lawmakers.
MYTH: The 1976 handgun ban in Washington D.C. caused an increase in crime.
TRUTH: The handgun ban has prevented 47 deaths each year Gun control has saved lives. Let's look at a graph that displays information about the homicide rate in the District of Columbia a decade before the ban and a decade after. There are random fluctuations in the crime rate from year to year so it's best to look at homicide data from many years. In the decade preceding the ban, the homicide rate exceeded 35 per 100,000 4 times. In the decade following the ban this happened only once.
The average homicide rate of the ten years that followed the ban was lower than the homicide rate of the previous decade. Was this part of a general decrease in homicide that would have happened without the ban? If that were so you would expect the non-gun homicide rate to have declined as well as the gun homicide rate. However, there was only a statistically significant decrease in the number of homicides that involved firearms.
MYTH: If you outlaw guns only the outlaws will have guns.
TRUTH: If you outlaw guns, very few criminals will have guns. In America guns start out legal. Then they enter the black market one way or the other . So if you have less legal guns then there will less guns entering the black market and consequently less outlaws owning guns. Think about it. Nations with very strict gun control laws such as the UK, Australia, and Japan have much lower gun crime rates than the US.
The most probable explanation for this is that criminals in the US have much greater access to guns due to less gun control. Saying "If you outlaw guns only the outlaws will have guns" is very misleading and completely absurd. If you outlaw guns, less outlaws will have guns. Would you rather have more or less outlaws owning guns? The answer is obvious.
MYTH:Gun ownership is a protection against political tyranny.
TRUTH: Private ownership of guns was very common under Saddam Hussein's regime .It certainly didn't protect the Iraqi people against political tyranny. Gun ownership was legalized in Germany in 1928, five years before Hitler rose to power. Despite the claims of pro-gun activists, gun ownership did nothing to stop a tyrant like Hitler from seizing power. In 1938, Germany's gun laws were relaxed except in the case of Jews.
Although the gun lobby has tried to associate racism with gun control, white supremacists have often praised the Nazis for being pro-gun and have opposed gun control. An example of that is this quote: "If you register your gun with anybody, you're a nut! When the conspiracy comes for your firearm, give it to 'em like this grand dragon is going to - right between the eyes." -Klu Klux Klan (Richmond Times- Dispatch, July 5, 1967)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)