The state of Oregon uses your tax dollars to say that George Washington and company were stupid. The state uses your tax dollars to try to convince you not to excercise your constitutional right. The state of Oregon makes wild statements without bothering to back them up with so called "facts" or footnotes.
From DHS: (yes, the organization that borrows $55 million that it can't repay)
Guns are now a prevalent health hazard. More than half of American's families keep firearms in their homes. Injuries and deaths from firearms are escalating at an alarming rate in the United States. (no we won't back that statement up with actual "data")
The truth is, all children are potentially at risk of unintentional firearm injury.
(all children are potentially at risk of being sexually abused at a public school as well...)
Currently, 17 states have enacted child access prevention laws, which may hold adults criminally liable for failing either to store loaded firearms in a place inaccessible to children or to use safety devices to lock guns. Safe storage laws are effective: they have been proven to reduce unintentional firearm-related deaths among children an average of 23 percent.
And this is what they would like. No footnote was present for the "23 percent" statistic. Also I don't see any info on how many children have been hurt/killed because a parent couldn't get to their defensive firearm fast enough, but since we aren't providing links to actual research I will say that having a firearm in the house has saved approximately 1,000,000 kid's lives... this week.
SAFE KIDS also supports both child access prevention laws (described above) and safe storage laws, which require gun owners to store guns with a gun lock or in a lock box.
Why do our tax dollars go towards this crap? This groups is housed at DHS offices and they actively lobby against gun rights.
I believe that the NRA has done more for children's safety with their Eddie Eagle program (stop, don't touch it, tell an adult) than SAFE KIDS has done with all their programs.
7 comments:
During the same period an estimated annual average of 62,000
violent crime victims (approximately 1 percent of all violent
crime victims) used a firearm in an effort to defend
themselves. In addition, an annual average of about 20,000
victims of theft, household burglary or motor vehicle theft
attempted to defend their property with guns.
In most cases victims defending themselves with firearms
were confronted by unarmed offenders or those armed with
weapons other than firearms. During the six-year period,
about one in three armed victims faced an armed offender.
US DOJ statistics from 1994
Nope, only in the "pajama press" which is a new name for the blog community. (remeber the condescending remarks about those "guys in their pajamas...)
I'll try to remember to ask Jayson Blair who said that.
Not to send people away from Daniels very fine blog, but you might want to give a read over at: Civilian Gun Self-Defense
Clayton & Pete do what the title suggests - listing defensive uses of guns.
"With blogs, you have "a guy sitting in his living room in his pajamas writing." -- Jonathan Klein
Fighting Jonathan and the MSM is:
The Pajamhadeen
Most Creative Word of the Year (2004) pajamahadeen: bloggers who challenge and fact-check traditional media.
Daniel, your numbers are only cases where people 1) actually used the gun and 2) had the incident reported to the DOJ. We have no idea how many more times the mere presence of a gun turns a potential conflict into a back-down. I believe that most of the time when a gun is drawn, its mere presence is enough to sober up people and get tempers back down without a shot being fired. I know if I was getting out of line, and the other party drew a pistol on me and told me to just back away easy, I would. And odds are both parties in a situation like this, where no one is actually hurt and no damage is done, would just as soon go their separate ways rather than file a police report. Such events are often never reported to anyone and certainly aren't tracked by the DOJ. I've heard experts like John Lott say that actual number of times each year that guns may play some role in stopping or preventing harm could be in the millions.
And yet another instance of blogs being better than the MM. Ric and Gullyborg have something very worthwhile to add and it didn't have to get filtered through some jerk deciding which letters to the editor to print. (hint: don't print Daniel's)
When I was 17/18, I got into a situation in Salem where I drew a pistol on a guy. He chased me in on foot (I was driving my mom's car, which had a S&W .38 in the map pocket) to the end of an alley next to my parent's office. Too many cars were going by on the street so I could not pull out. I was shaken by this guy, who was telling me all about what he was going to do to me (I drove through a puddle and it splashed water on him) I told him to step away from the car, at his refusal, I drew the pistol and set it in my lap. That did nothing at all but make the situation worse. He got more pissed, and called his buddies out of the chop shop next door. they stood behind the car. (if you were keeping track, I now have no avenue of escape, a legal shoot situation in OR.)
About this time my dad and brother came out of the office. (I think they were both carrying also, but I can't remember) My dad talked the guy down and I drove the hell out of there and got on my cell to 9-1-1. The cops came, and he was gone. I was told that had I shot him, I would have been arrested. They made me put the gun in my trunk and go home. I later identified the guy at a parole hearing he was having for being a meth head. (at the time I think it was 8-balls though) Not much came of it ever. I was scared by the situation. All my life I had been told that a firearm was the great equalizer in a situation. That wasn't the case that day. This guy was unphased by the presence of a gun. It was about that time that I learned that MAN was the great equalizer, and that a gun was just another tool to use.
Before a person carries a gun, or even has one in their house, they have to make a 120% commitment physically, mentally, and emotionally, that they are prepared to kill. Remember folks, these people that would do us harm are no different than the piece of paper we practice shooting at. they are not human beings, and we should never feel remorse, or hesitance, or guilt at defending ourselves, our families, and our way of life from those that would hurt us. Be it in our house, on the street, or in the sands of Iraq.
Well said Gunslinger.
Post a Comment