Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 1/13/2005 8:20:59 AM EDT
Ok, lets make this a game...

How many lies and misrepresentations can you find?
Bonus points for debunking them.h=85%

by bill barnes and burke strunsky

NRA out of S.F.

SAN FRANCISCO HAS long been a leader for justice, fighting apartheid and advancing same-sex marriage equality. Now, with 87 homicides so far this year – 56 of which involved handguns – it's time to continue this work for justice. We'll have that opportunity at the next election.

Thanks to the political courage of Sups. Chris Daly, Michela Alioto-Pier, Tom Ammiano, Bevan Dufty, and Matt Gonzalez, San Franciscans will consider a measure to make our communities safer by essentially banning private ownership of handguns and ending the sale, manufacture, transfer, and distribution of all firearms in the city.

For years the National Rifle Association has spent millions to spread misinformation: owning a handgun makes you safer, the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own a gun, and meaningful firearm reform makes communities dangerous. When the NRA leaders can't buy politicians, they try legal challenges, aggressive media campaigns, and blacklisting efforts (go to www.nrablacklist.com).

The truth is, the Second Amendment doesn't apply to individuals. Since 1939, the Supreme Court has found that the Second Amendment doesn't give an individual a Constitutional right to own a gun. The amendment clearly focuses on granting that right only to a "well-regulated militia." Even though the NRA and its powerful friends convinced former attorney general John Ashcroft to opine that it did apply to individuals, federal courts have ruled it doesn't, upholding Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban in Seegars v. Ashcroft.

Handguns make our homes more dangerous. Scientific data indicates that, far from providing protection, owning a handgun makes it more likely that a gun-related death will occur that isn't in self-defense. The New England Journal of Medicine found that a handgun in the home makes it 43 times more likely that a friend, family member, or acquaintance will be killed than an intruder. According to data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, firearms are the second leading cause of death for kids 19 and younger. In addition, rates of successful suicide increase fivefold with a handgun.

Meaningful gun reform is one part of making communities safer. New investments in education, community development, and jobs are also needed to provide real alternatives to violence. Nevertheless, fewer handguns in the flow of commerce will make it more difficult to obtain one. A community conversation about the violence caused by handguns will lift our city up, as neighbors talk to one another about strategies to increase the peace in our neighborhoods.

More than 20 years ago, the District of Columbia enacted a similar handgun ban and is on its way to a 20-year low of homicides. Yet Republicans in Washington are working to repeal the law. It was the only vote counted by the NRA in deciding which candidates to support last year. The passage of our measure will help bolster national efforts for sound gun policy.

Since so much is at stake, the NRA, other pro-gun groups, and their savvy media machine will stop at nothing to prevent San Francisco from voting to make our communities safer, and local media coverage hasn't helped. That's why your support is so needed today. Recently in the San Francisco Chronicle, NRA attorney Chuck Michel said, "We're already in the process of putting together the petition for an injunction to try to keep it off the ballot." The NRA wants to silence San Francisco, but we're ready to speak up.

We won't win by spending more than the NRA, or by running a campaign of fear. We'll only win when you join us in a groundbreaking campaign of hope to make San Francisco safer, by going to www.stophandguns.com or calling the campaign at (415) 440-8903.

Bill Barnes is an elected member of the Democratic County Central Committee and a spokesperson for Ban Handgun Violence. Burke Strunsky, a former assistant district attorney, is the coordinator of Ban Handgun Violence.



Here's the link for the article NRA out of S.F.
Link Posted: 1/13/2005 8:22:57 AM EDT
At least a million.
Link Posted: 1/13/2005 8:26:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/13/2005 8:34:53 AM EDT by photoman]

Originally Posted By nwmanitou:
Ok, lets make this a game...

How many lies and misrepresentations can you find?
Bonus points for debunking them.


by bill barnes and burke strunsky

NRA out of S.F.

SAN FRANCISCO HAS long been a leader for justice, fighting apartheid and advancing same-sex marriage equality. Now, with 87 homicides so far this year – 56 of which involved handguns – it's time to continue this work for justice. We'll have that opportunity at the next election.

Thanks to the political courage of Sups. Chris Daly, Michela Alioto-Pier, Tom Ammiano, Bevan Dufty, and Matt Gonzalez, San Franciscans will consider a measure to make our communities safer by essentially banning private ownership of handguns and ending the sale, manufacture, transfer, and distribution of all firearms in the city.

For years the National Rifle Association has spent millions to spread misinformation: owning a handgun makes you safer, the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own a gun, and meaningful firearm reform makes communities dangerous. When the NRA leaders can't buy politicians, they try legal challenges, aggressive media campaigns, and blacklisting efforts (go to www.nrablacklist.com).

The truth is, the Second Amendment doesn't apply to individuals. Since 1939, the Supreme Court has found that the Second Amendment doesn't give an individual a Constitutional right to own a gun. The amendment clearly focuses on granting that right only to a "well-regulated militia." Even though the NRA and its powerful friends convinced former attorney general John Ashcroft to opine that it did apply to individuals, federal courts have ruled it doesn't, upholding Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban in Seegars v. Ashcroft.

Handguns make our homes more dangerous. Scientific data indicates that, far from providing protection, owning a handgun makes it more likely that a gun-related death will occur that isn't in self-defense. The New England Journal of Medicine found that a handgun in the home makes it 43 times more likely that a friend, family member, or acquaintance will be killed than an intruder. According to data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, firearms are the second leading cause of death for kids 19 and younger. In addition, rates of successful suicide increase fivefold with a handgun.

Meaningful gun reform is one part of making communities safer. New investments in education, community development, and jobs are also needed to provide real alternatives to violence. Nevertheless, fewer handguns in the flow of commerce will make it more difficult to obtain one. A community conversation about the violence caused by handguns will lift our city up, as neighbors talk to one another about strategies to increase the peace in our neighborhoods.

More than 20 years ago, the District of Columbia enacted a similar handgun ban and is on its way to a 20-year low of homicides. Yet Republicans in Washington are working to repeal the law. It was the only vote counted by the NRA in deciding which candidates to support last year. The passage of our measure will help bolster national efforts for sound gun policy.

Since so much is at stake, the NRA, other pro-gun groups, and their savvy media machine will stop at nothing to prevent San Francisco from voting to make our communities safer, and local media coverage hasn't helped. That's why your support is so needed today. Recently in the San Francisco Chronicle, NRA attorney Chuck Michel said, "We're already in the process of putting together the petition for an injunction to try to keep it off the ballot." The NRA wants to silence San Francisco, but we're ready to speak up.

We won't win by spending more than the NRA, or by running a campaign of fear. We'll only win when you join us in a groundbreaking campaign of hope to make San Francisco safer, by going to www.stophandguns.com or calling the campaign at (415) 440-8903.

Bill Barnes is an elected member of the Democratic County Central Committee and a spokesperson for Ban Handgun Violence. Burke Strunsky, a former assistant district attorney, is the coordinator of Ban Handgun Violence.



Here's the link for the article NRA out of S.F.



Thats probably one of the bigest ones as the court did in a way affirm the individual rights position, but put on the stipulation of the firearm having a resonable relationship to militia use, weather or not one was actually involved in a militia. The case more or less revolved around a particular gun, not the question of individual Vs. Collective right.


Since when is an 18 or 19 year old a child? And most of those involve shootings by gang members, or "children" involved in criminal activity. And it also includes "children" killed by LEOs while commiting a crime.

While DC may have some of it's lowest homicide rates in history, violent crim in America has been delining since what 1991 IIRC, and even with it's lowest homicide rates it still regularly leads or is close to leading the nation in homicides. Hmmmmmm

The whole artical and idea is a crock of shit because the only people who will be disarmed are the law abiding people. No criminal will lose his gun over this.
Link Posted: 1/13/2005 8:36:24 AM EDT

"More than 20 years ago, the District of Columbia enacted a similar handgun ban and is on its way to a 20-year low of homicides. "


"Handguns make our homes more dangerous. Scientific data indicates that, far from providing protection, owning a handgun makes it more likely that a gun-related death will occur that isn't in self-defense. "
Link Posted: 1/13/2005 8:40:45 AM EDT
I have an idea. Let's find the people who wrote this bullshit article and are attempting to make the ban, dress them up in furry costumes, and drop them off in some rather interesting neighborhoods in D.C.

If any make it out alive, we'll ask if they'd have liked to have a gun to defend themselves with.
Link Posted: 1/13/2005 8:45:51 AM EDT
Anyone want to bet how long it will take after they ban private ownership (if they succeed) for murders and other violent crime to skyrocket?
Link Posted: 1/13/2005 8:54:27 AM EDT

Honestly, these people no longer even care about presenting a mildly believable face; they simply outright lie and hope to snare people in. I guess using the old Nazi model works for them: Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.

I wont loose any sleep over this, they are a bunch of loosers with screws lose in their looser heads.
Link Posted: 1/13/2005 8:58:31 AM EDT
So what - we've got the guns.

I know the grabbers are too stupid to understand that we won't roll over like the Brits and Australians, and they are too stupid to understand the impossibility of a forced confiscation. These articles probably spur more gun sales than Christmas.
Link Posted: 1/13/2005 9:02:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/13/2005 9:04:57 AM EDT by BBQMAN]

Originally Posted By nwmanitou:
Ok, lets make this a game...

How many lies and misrepresentations can you find?
Bonus points for debunking them.



The truth is, the Second Amendment doesn't apply to individuals. Since 1939, the Supreme Court has found that the Second Amendment doesn't give an individual a Constitutional right to own a gun. The amendment clearly focuses on granting that right only to a "well-regulated militia." Even though the NRA and its powerful friends convinced former attorney general John Ashcroft to opine that it did apply to individuals, federal courts have ruled it doesn't, upholding Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban in Seegars v. Ashcroft.




Here's the link for the article NRA out of S.F.



Ok and according to dictionary.com:

mi·li·tia ( P ) Pronunciation Key (m-lsh)
n.
An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.

A military force that is not part of a regular army and is subject to call for service in an emergency.

The whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service.

---------------------------------------------------

pro·fes·sion·al ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pr-fsh-nl)
adj.

Of, relating to, engaged in, or suitable for a profession: lawyers, doctors, and other professional people.
Conforming to the standards of a profession: professional behavior.
Engaging in a given activity as a source of livelihood or as a career: a professional writer.
Performed by persons receiving pay: professional football.
Having or showing great skill; expert: a professional repair job.

n.
A person following a profession, especially a learned profession.
One who earns a living in a given or implied occupation: hired a professional to decorate the house.
A skilled practitioner; an expert.


That's my take on it, literal deffinition.
Link Posted: 1/13/2005 9:05:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By nwmanitou:

– it's time to continue this work for justice. We'll have that opportunity at the next election.




There's a big one. I'd like to know how they define justice.

Creating a safe environment for the disenfranchised, downtrodden criminal to work his trade?
Link Posted: 1/13/2005 9:14:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/13/2005 9:22:38 AM EDT by DonS]

by bill barnes and burke strunsky

Handguns make our homes more dangerous. Scientific data indicates that, far from providing protection, owning a handgun makes it more likely that a gun-related death will occur that isn't in self-defense. The New England Journal of Medicine found that a handgun in the home makes it 43 times more likely that a friend, family member, or acquaintance will be killed than an intruder.



Junk science.

The "43 times more" comes from Kellerman's junk science from the early 90s. Kellerman himself doesn't stand by the 43 figure, he defended a "2.6 times more" figure, but it is still junk science. IIRC, a deadlock on the door increases your chances of homicide by a factor of over 4 . . . more than having a gun. Can you say REVERSE CAUSATION? Furthermore, Kellerman used questionable means of determining if guns were in the home. The gun used in the killing may have been an "import", it doesn't seem that Kellerman verified that the gun used in the killing came from the home.

Edited to add: Kellerman's research and funding was reviewed by Congress. They basically pulled his CDC funding, and told the CDC to cut out the junk science. They demanded his raw data. He provided some data after awhile, after "scrubbing" it, and never produced all of it despite the demands from Congress.
Top Top