Chicago and D.C. lift ban on hand guns

[Danno 1,228]

Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News

By John Lott

Published September 30, 2011 | FoxNews.com

Murder and violent crime rates were supposed to soar after the Supreme Court struck down gun control laws in Chicago and Washington, D.C.

Politicians predicted disaster. "More handguns in the District of Columbia will only lead to more handgun violence," Washington’s Mayor Adrian Fenty warned the day the court made its decision.

Chicago’s Mayor Daley predicted that we would "go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun and we'll settle it in the streets . . . ."

The New York Times even editorialized this month about the Supreme Court's "unwise" decision that there is a right for people "to keep guns in the home."

But Armageddon never happened. Newly released data for Chicago shows that, as in Washington, murder and gun crime rates didn't rise after the bans were eliminated -- they plummeted. They have fallen much more than the national crime rate.

Not surprisingly, the national media have been completely silent about this news.

One can only imagine the coverage if crime rates had risen. In the first six months of this year, there were 14% fewer murders in Chicago compared to the first six months of last year – back when owning handguns was illegal. It was the largest drop in Chicago’s murder rate since the handgun ban went into effect in 1982.

Meanwhile, the other four most populous cities saw a total drop at the same time of only 6 percent.

Similarly, in the year after the 2008 "Heller" decision, the murder rate fell two-and-a-half times faster in Washington than in the rest of the country.

It also fell more than three as fast as in other cities that are close to Washington's size. And murders in Washington have continued to fall.

If you compare the first six months of this year to the first six months of 2008, the same time immediately preceding the Supreme Court's late June "Heller" decision, murders have now fallen by thirty-four percent.

Gun crimes also fell more than non-gun crimes.

Robberies with guns fell by 25%, while robberies without guns have fallen by eight percent. Assaults with guns fell by 37%, while assaults without guns fell by 12%.

Just as with right-to-carry laws, when law-abiding citizens have guns some criminals stop carrying theirs.

The benefit could have been even greater. Getting a handgun permit in Chicago and Washington is an expensive and difficult process, meaning only the relatively wealthy go through it.

Through the end of May only 2,144 people had handguns registered in Chicago. That limits the benefits from the Supreme Court decisions since it is the poor who are the most likely victims of crime and who benefit the most from being able to protect themselves.

The biggest change for Washington was the Supreme Court striking down the law making it illegal to have a loaded gun. Over 70,000 people have permits for long guns that they can now legally used to protect themselves.

Lower crime rates in Chicago and Washington, by themselves, don’t prove that gun control increases murders, even when combined with the quite familiar story of how their murder rates soared and stayed high after the gun bans were imposed.

But these aren’t isolated examples. Around the world, whenever guns are banned, murder rates rise.

Gun control advocates explained the huge increases in murder and violent crime rates Chicago and Washington by saying that those bans weren’t fair tests unless the entire country adopted a ban.

Yet, even island nations, such as Ireland and the U.K. -- with no neighbors to blame -- have seen increases in murder rates. The same horror stories about blood in the streets have surrounded the debate over concealed handguns.

Some said it was necessary to ban guns in public places. The horror stories never came true and the data is now so obvious that as of November, only one state, Illinois, will still completely ban law-abiding from carrying concealed handguns.

Forty-one states will have either permissive right-to-carry laws or no longer even require a permit.

The regulations that still exist in Chicago and Washington primarily disarm the most likely victims of crime.

Hopefully, even the poor in these areas will soon also have more of an opportunity to defend themselves, too.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/30/media-silence-is-deafening-about-important-gun-news/print#ixzz1ZZtXLeaH

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

This can't be going over too well with the libs. They don't like it when people can defend themselves against criminals.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I have been a life member of the NRA since 1973. In 1977 they had an upheaval that many in the media at the time predicted would be the end of the NRA.

They converted themselves from a competition regulating authority into a legislative powerhouse. They ceased and reversed the trend for more gun control laws. They repealed the GCA of 1968 in 1986 with the NRA backed "Firearm Owners Protection Act". They have since protected firearms manufacturers from frivilous lawsuits with federal legislation, all was ignored by the media.

In 1986 there were 5 states that allowed people to carry concealed handguns. Now 49 do! 8 of which with some restrictions or qualifications. Crime has decreased dramatically as this has been implemented. No one with functioning brains can even suggest that relaxed gun laws will increase crime.

Hunter education and firearm safety training has increased dramatically.

Even the "Brady Act" was completely ussuped by the NRA! It was not implemented until it was amended to eliminate the waiting period when instant check was established. NRA had pressured for instant check for a decade before the Brady Act. The Brady Act waiting period was 1900 technology. NRA was cutting edge. Thanks to that, our law enforcement and even our visa processing can use NICS

The Heller and McDonald decisions were the icing on top, plus the inclusion of the last few states holding out on concealed carry. Except the Kingdom of Chicago.

Looking back over all these years, I can now say what I thought all along. The refual of the mainstream media to report the progress of the NRA was to the benefit of the NRA. Would we have made the progress we did if the media had whipped up a frenzy every time we succeeded?

Now we are gradually eliminating the need for concealed carry permits at all. Alaska and Arizona have joined Vermont in not requiring permits (but they stil offer them as an option so there residents can carry in other states) The federal reciprocity bill will prbably come up in the next few years...I suspect the best chance will be in 2013. This will require all states to accept the concealed carry permits of other states. The way they do with drivers licenses, marriage, etc.

Federal gun laws are history for the most part. The last one passed was in 1994 and it expired 7 years ago. No attempt has been made to revive it.

Alla will be able to vote next year, she is a very avid and capable shooter now, if I cannot go along, it does not stop her! She shoots at least every Wednesday afternoon and usually Tuesday and Thursday evening also at the indoor range. She will get a life membership to the NRA for her birthday in a few weeks. She is completely comfortable around firearms and has no problems with the guns around the house. She is now keeping her favorite rifle (A Winchester M52b sporter with Burris 2.5x scope) in her office next to the desk, her ammunition in the desk drawer. The boys are completely comfortable with guns and quite skilled, they like skeet shooting best. Alla has no fear the "children" will play with the guns or get hurt. The kids have been "gun proofed". It is impossible to "kid proof" guns but you can gun proof kids! Guns draw no more interest from the kids in the house than the mop bucket or broom.

I am very pleased with the progress and for all I care, I hope the mainstream media continues to ignore the accomplishments of the NRA

This can't be going over too well with the libs. They don't like it when people can defend themselves against criminals.

The "libs" are largely ignorant of this...as well as a lot of other things, and it is better that way. It is not important if they know I can carry a gun anywhere I want with no permit...it is only important that I know.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I'd like a bit more time before I decide firearms made the difference, but overall sounds good

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I'd like a bit more time before I decide firearms made the difference, but overall sounds good

Take all the time you'd like. We'll hold your guns for you.

Edited October 2, 2011 by Gary and Alla

[Leatherneck 693]

Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News

By John Lott

Published September 30, 2011 | FoxNews.com

Murder and violent crime rates were supposed to soar after the Supreme Court struck down gun control laws in Chicago and Washington, D.C.

Politicians predicted disaster. "More handguns in the District of Columbia will only lead to more handgun violence," Washington's Mayor Adrian Fenty warned the day the court made its decision.

Chicago's Mayor Daley predicted that we would "go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun and we'll settle it in the streets . . . ."

The New York Times even editorialized this month about the Supreme Court's "unwise" decision that there is a right for people "to keep guns in the home."

But Armageddon never happened. Newly released data for Chicago shows that, as in Washington, murder and gun crime rates didn't rise after the bans were eliminated -- they plummeted. They have fallen much more than the national crime rate.

Not surprisingly, the national media have been completely silent about this news.

One can only imagine the coverage if crime rates had risen. In the first six months of this year, there were 14% fewer murders in Chicago compared to the first six months of last year – back when owning handguns was illegal. It was the largest drop in Chicago's murder rate since the handgun ban went into effect in 1982.

Meanwhile, the other four most populous cities saw a total drop at the same time of only 6 percent.

Similarly, in the year after the 2008 "Heller" decision, the murder rate fell two-and-a-half times faster in Washington than in the rest of the country.

It also fell more than three as fast as in other cities that are close to Washington's size. And murders in Washington have continued to fall.

If you compare the first six months of this year to the first six months of 2008, the same time immediately preceding the Supreme Court's late June "Heller" decision, murders have now fallen by thirty-four percent.

Gun crimes also fell more than non-gun crimes.

Robberies with guns fell by 25%, while robberies without guns have fallen by eight percent. Assaults with guns fell by 37%, while assaults without guns fell by 12%.

Just as with right-to-carry laws, when law-abiding citizens have guns some criminals stop carrying theirs.

The benefit could have been even greater. Getting a handgun permit in Chicago and Washington is an expensive and difficult process, meaning only the relatively wealthy go through it.

Through the end of May only 2,144 people had handguns registered in Chicago. That limits the benefits from the Supreme Court decisions since it is the poor who are the most likely victims of crime and who benefit the most from being able to protect themselves.

The biggest change for Washington was the Supreme Court striking down the law making it illegal to have a loaded gun. Over 70,000 people have permits for long guns that they can now legally used to protect themselves.

Lower crime rates in Chicago and Washington, by themselves, don't prove that gun control increases murders, even when combined with the quite familiar story of how their murder rates soared and stayed high after the gun bans were imposed.

But these aren't isolated examples. Around the world, whenever guns are banned, murder rates rise.

Gun control advocates explained the huge increases in murder and violent crime rates Chicago and Washington by saying that those bans weren't fair tests unless the entire country adopted a ban.

Yet, even island nations, such as Ireland and the U.K. -- with no neighbors to blame -- have seen increases in murder rates. The same horror stories about blood in the streets have surrounded the debate over concealed handguns.

Some said it was necessary to ban guns in public places. The horror stories never came true and the data is now so obvious that as of November, only one state, Illinois, will still completely ban law-abiding from carrying concealed handguns.

Forty-one states will have either permissive right-to-carry laws or no longer even require a permit.

The regulations that still exist in Chicago and Washington primarily disarm the most likely victims of crime.

Hopefully, even the poor in these areas will soon also have more of an opportunity to defend themselves, too.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.c...t#ixzz1ZZtXLeaH

Libs will never admit they were wrong, you'll only get silence from them...and they will ignore that the sky did not fall as they predicted.

Libs in the media, the cone heads in academia and statist politicians will not give in on this issue. For them it is not about the facts or stats, it is

dogma and conviction.

Show them facts and stats of how gun control causes more death and crime than it prevents and that logic will escape them.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

This can't be going over too well with the libs. They don't like it when people can defend themselves against criminals.

Their stupidity baffles me. I thought they were about 'fairness'?

[Darnell 8,479]

I wonder how Mr. Lott feels now that his article has been reposted on a DIY immigration web portal ?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I wonder how Mr. Lott feels now that his article has been reposted on a DIY immigration web portal ?

I know that Mr. Lott has granted blanket authority for anyone to reprint his study results provided they give him credit and do not change the context or meaning. He has worked closely with the NRA over the years and his work has been the foundation which resulted in the passage of dozens of states concealed carry laws

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

If any of you were paying attention in 1986 when Florida was the first state to pass non-discretionary concealed in many years, the prediction was that it woul dbe like the "wild west" Of course this did not happen

At first, Florida's law required that a person be a Florida resident to obtain a concealed carry license and did not recognize the licenses of other states. The crime rate went down, as it has in every state that has done this, but an interesting phenomonon occurred. TOURIST began being victimized! Even to the point that criminals were following htem out of the airports from rental car companies and staging a "fender bender" then robbing the occupants of the car. At the time, Florida rental care plates listed, rather than the county of registration on them, the word "lease".

In response to this, the legislature did a few things

1. Eliminate the word "lease" from rental car license plates

2. Allow non-residents to receive concealed carry licenses

3. Agree to reciprocity for other states concealed carry licenes

The crime wave against tourists STOPPED! STOPPED.

In 1991 there was a series of rapes on the campus of the University of Florida, 13 rapes in a short period if I recall correctly. It was addressed by the University by offering concealed carry classes for students to obtain concealed carry licenses! The rapes STOPPED. STOPPED!

These issue have also not been reported on. But they were reported to the legislatures of other states and other states jumped on board.

Oklahoma passed concealed carry just after the bombing in OKC. Colorado passsed concealed carry just shortly after the Columbine massacre. Texas passed concealed carry in response to the Lubby's Cafeteria massacre. State after state addressed their crime problems with armed citizens and it worked perfectly. And the problems have STOPPED in most cases and have been greatly reduced across the board.

In addition as the states have found out that the predictions of mayhem never came true, the concealed carry laws have been consistently relaxed, made less onerous to get a permit issued, increased reciprocity, in general they have expanded on a good thing when they saw it.

The results have been so overwhelmingly, unquestionably positive that anyone who is against concealed carry really needs to answer..."Why do you want increase crime?"

WHY does Illinois not want to reduce crime? Why would Illinois be different than all the other states?

[ready4ONE 5,400]

This can't be going over too well with the libs. They don't like it when people can defend themselves against criminals.

Since Dannos hack piece was far from convincing regarding any of its alleged points, there isn't much to not sit well.

[Danno 1,228]

Since Dannos hack piece was far from convincing regarding any of its alleged points, there isn't much to not sit well.

You referred to the article as a "hack piece".... your criticism would have had a lot more weight had you offered any evidence, that gun crime has not fallen dramatically.

Feel free to take a second opportunity to share what information you have.

[mawilson 2,133]

Their stupidity baffles me. I thought they were about 'fairness'?

They want you to depend on the government for protection, as well as everything else.

[Darnell 8,479]

I know that Mr. Lott has granted blanket authority for anyone to reprint his study results provided they give him credit and do not change the context or meaning. He has worked closely with the NRA over the years and his work has been the foundation which resulted in the passage of dozens of states concealed carry laws

oh - is no issue for reprinting, just the 'demographic', instead.

A DIY Immigration Web Portal? Really?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Since Dannos hack piece was far from convincing regarding any of its alleged points, there isn't much to not sit well.

what about it is not accurate?

oh - is no issue for reprinting, just the 'demographic', instead.

A DIY Immigration Web Portal? Really?

Really. I am glad to see the truth about firearms published anywhere.