A Brief and Bloody History of Gun Control

Anthony Gucciardi
by
April 29th, 2013
Updated 05/04/2013 at 11:51 pm

You or someone you know may see guns as deadly killing machines that are simply to blame for a large volume of homicides across the nation, but a brief look at the history of gun control actually offers a new perspective into the application of guns on an entirely new level. While normalcy bias (a thinking pattern that causes an individual to underestimate the potential of any event or situation due to currently enjoying a normal and cushy lifestyle) can oftentimes lead individuals away from the reality of history, countless citizens around the world have been highlighting the repetitive history that follows gun control.

history of gun controlIn this breakdown, we will be examining a lot of numbers and extracting them to get some real answers. Then, we’ll see the source of these numbers and whether or not gun control regulations are reducing or increasing overall crime rates in heavily controlled areas.

The first thing to touch upon, and perhaps most relevant to our modern society, is how deadly firearms really are. First of all, let us examine the factors that are responsible for deaths within the United States. This will put death counts into perspective and allow us to go deeper into the firearm-related deaths themselves later. Examining data from the CDC for the leading causes of death and including death statistics from the FBI regarding homicides, we find the following numbers:

Leading US Killers

  • Annual deaths from heart disease based on CDC data: 597,689
  • Cancer deaths from CDC data: 574,743
  • Chronic lower respiratory diseases (CDC): 138,080
  • Stroke deaths (CDC): 129,476
  • Deaths from accidents, unintentional injuries (CDC): 120,859
  • Alzheimer’s disease deaths per year (CDC): 83,494
  • Diabetes (CDC): 69,071
  • Influenza deaths each year (CDC): 50,097
  • Suicide deaths (CDC): 38,364
  • Overall weapons deaths (2009 FBI): 13,636
  • Overall firearm deaths (2009 FBI): 9,146

So there we have the overall death data that comes compiled from the CDC website mixed with the FBI website table that goes as far as 2009. As you can see, the overall firearm deaths are 9,000 per year. If you’ve been following some of the mainstream media rhetoric surrounding guns, you might have thought the number would be at least over 100,000 — perhaps even higher than diabetes or suicide. The reality is that it is quite low overall, despite what you may have been told. But it’s still 9,146, so let’s now break down this figure to get the specific factors.

Of the 9,146 firearm deaths:

  • 6,452 were from hanguns
  • 348 from rifles
  • 418 from shotguns
  • 94 from other guns
  • 1,834 from unknown guns

This is where the numbers cut through even more false information sent forth by the mainstream media. Rifles have been demonized as powerful tools of homicide that are to blame for a large number of yearly deaths, but as it turns out only 348 per year are actually killed using rifles. Now of that number we must ask “how many are using legal weapons and non-gang related?” And furthermore, how many of these murders occur in ‘gun free’ cities? We’ll get to what we know on that shortly.

First, I want to utilize some further statistics from the overall weapons deaths provided by the FBI for 2009. The number, which totals 13,636, also breaks down into several components that will likely be highly shocking when compared to the broken down gun data. Especially when considering that the apparent ‘epidemic’ levels of rifle deaths actually don’t even compare to stabbings, blunt objects like hammers, or even bare hands and feet.

Knives, Hammers, Hands Kill More than Rifles & Shotguns

These FBI statistics really deflate the argument that rifles are ultimate killing machines when you look at how human hands are actually much more dangerous in terms of the sheer numbers. In fact, the digits really deflate the entire movement to ban rifles by realizing that by the same logic bats, hammers, knives, and even hands should therefore be heavily regulated. Going by the numbers alone, all hands should be considered lethal weapons. Of course we know that all hands are not used to kill innocents, just as all guns are not used to kill innocents.

Let’s take a look at the FBI data for the homicides committed via non-firearm sources to get an idea of how it compares to the death toll of key firearms like rifles and shotguns:

  • Knives and cutting tools accounted for 1,825 deaths in 2009, 1,477 more than rifles
  • Clubs, hammers, and other blunt objects totaled 611 in 2009, 263 more than rifles
  • Hands, fists, and feet killed 801 in 2009, 453 more than rifles

At this point one must ask why banning clubs, hammers, and knives is any different than gun control. Beyond that, it would actually be statistically more reasonable when considering the death toll. Even hands and feet would be considered lethal weapons that would require regulation when examining the 801 death count each year. Instead of enacting extreme legislation to regulate these items, however, we generally discount them as irregular incidents that are more to be blamed on the wielder rather than the item itself.

A hammer is usually seen as a tool used in construction, home improvement, or other constructive tasks. A knife is seen mainly as a kitchen instrument. A gun, on the other hand, is oftentimes portrayed as a weapon of non-defense murder as a opposed to a weapon used in the defense of self, family, and innocents. Notice that both purposes are utilized with all of these ‘tools’, it is simply in the perception of what they are that changes. The perception that is created through hysterical mainstream media reports that highlight isolated cases of mass shootings and other events.

Many such shootings are also occurring in ‘gun-free’ areas or strict gun control regions, where access to a gun is supposed to be extremely challenging or impossible. Nevertheless, law abiding citizens are the ones affected while unscrupulous shooters and criminals can access illegal guns with ease.

The Reality Behind ‘Gun Free Zones’ and Gun Bans

Yet another example of rhetoric verses reality, gun free zones and city-wide gun bans actually do not deflate violent crime as you will see below. Notice that below we are examining the statistics, not the emotional ties or opinions relating to gun control. The media uses shooting sprees to prop up the concept that gun bans and gun free zones will somehow stop a deranged killer who has zero regard for the law, when in reality we know this is not a real solution.

Painted signs reading ‘gun free zone’ and gun control legislation that really only affects law-abiding citizens does not prevent mass shootings, as we have seen evidenced by more than one shooting incident. Both the Aurora shooting at the Colorado movie theater dubbed the ‘Batman shooting’ and the most recent Sandy Hook incident in Connecticut both occurred in areas with heavy gun regulation. Amazingly, the Batman shooter actually traveled to the one movie theater in the area that actually did not permit lawful citizens to carry a concealed weapon. According to Dr. John R. Lott in an interview with Newsmax,

 ”…the one he picked was the only one of those movie theaters that banned people taking permit-concealed handguns into that theater.”

In both of these incidents law-abiding citizens were not properly armed to protect themselves against a criminal with a gun, and law enforcement (which actually is being shorted on ammunition and weapons themselves due to heavy demand among looming gun bans) can only respond so quickly.

Perhaps one of the most saddening examples of a gun free zone turned bloody, however, is the Fort Hood massacre. Covered extensively years ago, Islamic extremist Major Nidal Malik Hasan murdered 12 United States soldiers, 1 Army civilian employee, and wounded around 30-38 others in a ‘gun free zone’. This was, of course, inside a United States military base — where guns are not allowed to be carried by soldiers. These soldiers, who could at any instant be shipped off to another nation to wage war against other troops with automatic weapons, tanks, and aircraft, were gunned down by a single lunatic amid a failed unarmed defense.

More soldiers would have died if it were not for an armed security guard.

But what about the overall national implications of gun free zones and heavily regulated areas? Also what about the international implications, as some countries have installed large scale gun bans that are similar to many US cities on a grand scale. Well, first it’s important for us to establish the general trend of US crime to begin with. This includes the overall number of violent crime offenses that we can observe using violent crime data supplied by the FBI statistics available on the FBI website.

Let us take a look at the graph below which shows the general trend of overall violent crime offense figures from 2007 to 2011 (the years in which such stats are available):

fbi violent crime

What these stats tell us is that violent crime has been in rapid decline over the past several years by a considerable amount. In other words, despite much of a fuss being made over the apparent necessity to ban guns due to violent crime, the statistics show that it has actually been on the massive decline.

Now in order to compare this to the resulting crime stats that follow the implementation of gun control laws, we need to examine a chart that demonstrates this relationship. For this, we turn to the Department of Justice (Justice.gov), which offers a graph containing figures that help us to understand the link between gun ownership and crime stat fluctuations. As you can see from the chart below, the increased amount of gun ownership throughout the years (which has been quite dramatic) is known to lead to a sharp decline in violent crime (as can be seen between 1995 and 2003):

department of justic ecrime vs guns

 

The DOJ chart, as you can see for yourself, spans 40 years and shows that violent crime has plummeted as the number of guns in the United States per 1,000 citizens has gone up exponentially. It would seem quite the opposite would be true if guns were truly dangerous in the hands of law-abiding citizens.

We can even narrow down this area further by examining areas in which gun bans have gone into effect and taking a look at the results. We have established that firearm homicides are much lower than many think, that more guns actually statistically suggests less crime, and now it is time to figure out where the concentration of many gun murders are and why. This is how we take a real approach to the issue and determining a solution.

Chicago is a perfect example of a city that has enacted a ban on all handguns with the minor exception of those who had previous gun registrations before that time. Going into law in 1982, we can see how Chicago’s murder rate spun out of control following the extreme regulations, while the rest of the United States (as we documented in the previous graph) saw a decline in murder rates as guns surged:

chicago handgun murders

Following the handgun ban in Chicago, crime increased by 40%. This trend continued for decades, with police revealing that 96% of firearm murders in Chicago were actually committed by handguns. Handguns, of course, had been banned for decades. As it turns out, criminals were getting a hold of firearms with intent to commit crime while normal citizens were not able to carry a firearm to defend themselves. The criminal, in this scenario, has a distinct advantage as they know that their law-abiding targets cannot carry a weapon in self defense.

Below you can also see very similar statistics in Washington, D.C. following an extreme gun ban and a severe change following the 2008 ruling that the control measures were not Constitutional. During the ban, the murder rate in D.C. was 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law. Notice the comparison to overall United States statistics:

washington dc gun control

We also find that the allowance of legal citizens to carry concealed more freely reduces crime and coincides with the nationwide trends. In Texas we see a statistical change with the enactment of the right-to-carry law, which allows individuals who are 21 years of age (18 for active duty military), have a clean mental health record, and have completed the required training courses, to carry concealed. Since the beginning of this law, which is clearly marked on the graph below, crime fell 30% in Texas and the United States murder rate averaged 28% lower overall:

texas gun stats

Another example of this can be found when looking in-depth at Britain’s crime stats. It’s important that we look into the violent crime rates with the understanding that it is nearly impossible for a legal citizen in Britain to obtain a gun. When comparing the violent crime rates in the United Kingdom, we find that it’s not only higher per capita than the United States (which again has declined amid growing gun numbers), but it in fact is actually the highest when it comes to first world wealthy nations — outside of Australia, where similar legislation was passed.

The famous Dunblane school massacre that triggered sweeping confiscation can also be factored into these statistics. Following the shooting at the school, not much unlike Sandy Hook, law-abiding citizens turned in their guns. The result, of course, was that crime virtually doubled throughout the following decade. Wall Street Journal even reported:

“Strict gun laws in Great Britain and Australia haven’t made their people noticeably safer, nor have they prevented massacres.”

Once again here we also see that since non-criminal citizens cannot carry a weapon to defend themselves, criminals are aware that they are defenseless. As a result, we see a startling number of knife deaths that have bumped the risk of stabbing up to being twice as likely in the UK verses the US.

The pattern we see here is that gun confiscations, city-wide gun bans, and ‘gun-free’ zones are actually magnets for violent crime — the very opposite of what many individuals are saying right now in the media. We’ve examined the statistics and the research, however, and the answer is quite clear.

But I will take it a step further. We know that cities with gun bans ultimately find an increase in crime and are to blame for a lot of the death figures, but let’s also take a look at the self defense numbers that surround firearms. After all, it’s important to know how many of the homicide numbers are as a result of self defense, which is a perfectly legal and moral action.

Firearms and Self Defense

When citizens are armed with firearms and criminals are aware of this fact, we see some amazing things happen with the statistics. First, let’s see how prevalent self defense using firearms is within the United States. To do this, we can cite a number of sources ranging from the United States Department of Defense to the Journal of Quantitative Criminology.

Taking a look back to a 1993 survey establishes a basic foundation to build upon. This was a survey involving 4,977 different households and gives us a general understanding of how frequently firearms are used in a defense situation severe enough to which individuals stated that if they had not used the firearm, they reported that they or someone else in the home would have certainly be killed. So in other words, the firearm saved the lives of one or more individuals from a hostile criminal. This excluded military, police, and security guards.

Applying the results of the 1993 survey to the United States population, we find that around 162,000 people are saved per year using a firearm. To put that into perspective, that’s 152,854 more people saved per year than killed — and that’s not discriminating against the 9,146 death toll that includes many self defense cases and so on.

But what about a potentially life threatening scenario diffused by a firearm? Based on a study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, United States citizens defend against these situations an astounding 989,883 times per year. As these situations are diffused before they become lethal, there’s no telling how many would have resulted in homicides on behalf of the criminal. Even if it were a fraction, it would still be hundreds of thousands more lives saved than lost each year.

But there’s more, so let’s break it down:

  • Criminals with ill intent and potential homicidal incentives are fended off by firearms around 498,000 times per year.
  • A major survey of felons imprisoned across the United States found that 34% of the inmates had been scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim at least once. An even greater 40% actually did not commit a crime due to the fear that the victim was carrying a gun, thus showing how an armed public actually stops crime.
  • The United States Centers for Disease Control has found that firearms prevent home break-ins over 490,000 times per year.

Hundreds of thousands of serious crimes are prevented each year through the use and possession of a firearm, far more than they create in yearly homicides — many of which are in defense or centered in ‘gun-free’ zones through illegal use.

It is for this reason that throughout history those who wish to do harm have feared guns and the ability of firearms to prevent crime, excess power, and even takeover. The reality is that a well-armed populace of law-abiding citizens has a very great defense against criminals, gangs, and those who wish to do harm to the citizen base. An unarmed public, on the other hand, can do virtually nothing to defend themselves.

Overall Effectiveness

The major push within the media to unleash extreme gun control legislation across the nation needs to be met with evidence from all sides of the spectrum. A large amount of information examined within this brief history of gun control statistics will be new to more than 90 percent of readers, which is concerning when considering the importance of sharing both sides of the argument in order for citizens to make their own informed opinions.

Ultimately, it comes down to securing the rights provided by the Second Amendment of the Constitution which allow for an armed populace in order for protection against all who wish to do harm. Currently, this right is being challenged on a daily basis through using emotional directive and opinion. We must focus the debate on not only data and reality, but also the fact that the Constitution is not to be altered and remains the law of the land.

You can view an infographic (information meets graphic) image I created which breaks down many of these facts to be shared below:

GunControl

Share Button

Tags: , , , , ,

Category: Constitution, Second Amendment

Anthony Gucciardi

About the Author ()

Google Plus Profile Anthony Gucciardi is the creator of Storyleak, accomplished writer, producer, and seeker of truth. His articles have been read by millions worldwide and are routinely featured on major alternative news websites like the infamous Drudge Report, Infowars, NaturalNews, G Edward Griffin's Reality Zone, and many others. He is also a founding member of the third largest alternative health site in the world, NaturalSociety.com.

Comments (66)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Joshua C. L says:

    This is the best write-up on gun control and the stats on it that I've ever read, and plan on re-reading it a few times over.

    • Anthony Gucciardi Anthony Gucciardi says:

      Thanks, Joshua. I am glad that this information is helpful and getting out there. I simply could not find a consolidated post on the statistics and history, so I compiled a brief write-up on the subject. I admit it is not complete, and we could go into the history of how gun control is used as a weapon throughout regimes, but perhaps in a future post.

      All the best,

      Anthony

      • Tucci78 says:

        Hmph. I had last week put out a query among an old-fashioned e-mail special interest group (SIG) consisting of libertarian “gun culture” types asking for references to precisely this kind of consolidation of statistics pertinent to a realistic calculation of the risk/benefit ratio on the private ownership of firearms, and I got nothing anywhere near as effective of what you’ve produced.

        A definite addition to my bookmarks, and I’ll be passing along the reference to those guys as well. Thanks.

  2. Zeik98 says:

    Gun control has never worked and will never work. It serves only to make Bigger government.

    • Jeff says:

      Gun control has always worked (if you know what the ACTUAL reason for gun control is). I'm sure you've heard the saying "Gun control isn't about guns, its about control."

  3. orange says:

    Thanks Anthony I am really tired of hearing the rhetoric in the MSM about this and no one even talks about how throughout history they have disarmed the public only to eventually slaughter them. This can be seen time and time again without fail.

    - O

  4. Sherry says:

    Loving the Infographic you made

  5. Tionico says:

    I have seen almost all of these statistics before, but never yet tossed together to tell this powerful a story. We have a couple NASTY gun ban bills in our state's Marble Zoo, and I plan to bring this article to my state rep when I talk to him about these things. LIttle hope he'll listen, but at least he will have been gob-smacked with the truth to ponder. Our State Senators are in lockstep with the kinyun, Peligrosi, Fine Stein, and their ilk. No hope there. MAYBE our US Rep.. but doubtful. Worth a shot. Thanks for herding up the numbers for us. The REAL cruncher here is the total number of firearms deaths per year, compared with the total number of lives saved. A factor of, what, maybe fifty times as many saved? And that number, the 1 million, is the lowest of the "scientific" numbers for lives saved I've seen. Some are over two mill…. but not quite as unassailable.

  6. bill derberg says:

    Overall firearm deaths (2009 FBI): 9,146

    Anyone have a breakdown of this under the following criteria:
    1) How many of these deaths were suicide?
    2) How many of these deaths were by the police?
    3) How many of these were in self-defense?

  7. Sharon Pleasants says:

    Best overall article I’ve ever read on why gun control is not about guns, but about control. This is a gold mine of information that I will include in my talking points when dealing with sheeple who have bought into the anti-gun rhetoric. I’m printing this one “just in case” the Internet censorship begins sooner rather than later.

    • Glad you found it useful and informative, Sharon. It took many hours of research to compile the data from numerous sources as I could not find a cumulative piece on this subject bringing together all the pieces of the puzzle.

  8. Turd Furgeson says:

    An excellent article. Learned many things beyond current knowledge. This will be very useful for conversations with the gun ban crowd. Especially the gov. owned.

    However like Bill D., I would be interested in how the numbers come out with the additional breakout of how many gov. uniformed thugs of all ilk(local, state, fed) show. Including their suicide, accidental (sic), and unprovoked numbers stack up.

  9. @ Bill Derberg

    As to the number of suicide firearm deaths, the 9,146 wouldn't have included them, as in general, depending on the year, deaths from guns, according to the CDC, is about 30,000 a year, give or takes. Of those, approximately 20,000 are suicides, which usually leaves the number of 10,000 or so for actual murders using guns.

  10. John Redman says:

    I am left wanting for the listing of deaths from medical malpractice/prescription poison, a position, if listed, high on the list. Hmmmmmm?

    • This would top the list when combining adverse drug reactions, medical errors, and so on at roughly 783,000. I considered including this though the varying estimations in the deaths vary, as many are not widely reported. It could easily surpass several million in reality.

    • Tucci78 says:

      “…listing of deaths from medical malpractice/prescription poison….”

      The popular misconception is that medical malpractice commonly results in death when, in fact, proven (and settled-out-of-court) cases of alleged medical malpractice tend overwhelmingly not to cause mortality, and medical malfeasance (the willful injury of a patient by a practitioner) is even rarer.

      Medical malpractice is defined as dereliction of one’s professional duty to the patient, and does not include therapeutic misadventure which takes place in the course of providing diagnosis and treatment according to recognized standards of care.

      Nothing is without risk, including getting your car repaired or your water heater replaced. How does anybody conceive that the complex job of assessing and addressing life-threatening pathology should be utterly without risk?

      And, yeah, I’m a medical doctor. If you’re not sick and tired of this ATLA propaganda, it’s probably because you don’t know enough about the realities yet.

      • ECSYSTEM says:

        First of all I would like to thank Anthony for such an informative article. Secondly, regarding his comment on medical malpractice/prescription poison comments these are not accurate. The best estimate is approximately 100,000 deaths in 2012 due to preventable medical errors. This number is 9-10 times higher than gun related deaths however, STATS can and are manipulated heavily. These numbers are offset by the uncountable patients that are saved by modern medicine each year. As Anthony and presumably John Redman are healthy young adults it is quite easy for them to ignore all that modern medicine has done for society as a whole but when Grim is at your door you will likely recant your position.

        Some would argue that we should ban the AMA, as if the AMA is responsible for all preventable medical errors?? I would like to stress that I am not defending the AMA, merely providing an example of how these numbers can be misconstrued and used to draw inaccurate conclusions.

  11. DeLash says:

    I'm for total disarmament….of all government employees!

  12. Alan Nevling says:

    Good article! Those who would defend the right to keep and bear arms should avoid the ambiguous term "gun control" (e.g., controlling a gun is easier with both hands), when they really mean "victim disarmament."

  13. Carol says:

    This article is amazing. How refreshing to read an article that does not play to emotions, but rather, uses statistics. It makes it difficult for the government to argue with their own numbers.
    I join Bill Derberg (above) in wanting to know how many of the gun deaths are attributable to law enforcement and self-defense. Are those 2 categories included in the overall firearms deaths? It would be very interesting if those numbers could be found. If they are included in the overall deaths by firearms and can be removed, the resulting number could be eye-popping. I am in hopes that someone will find the answer.
    Thank you, Anthony, for an excellent article.

  14. Ming Bucibe says:

    ~ 200 million murdered by socialist governments in the 20th century

    see r j rummel death by democide and others on his webside
    and various JPFO publications

    Ming Bucibei

  15. doc holliday says:

    "therapeutic misadventure"…lovely euphemism (at least from one side of the experience). "Medicine" is cartelized – under color of law, as usual. That's "the reality". And, with very few exceptions, made guys (those within the cartel) are the last people who have anything straight to say about their hustles. Cognitive dissonance & conflict of interest: you are recused.

  16. MetaCynic says:

    Ben Swann recently also made an eyeopening statistical presentation on You Tube on the issue of gun control. A few more statistics can be added to Anthony's excellent article.

    Britain's violent crime rate is almost 5 times that of the U.S. In fact Britain's violent crime rate is greater than that of South Africa! The U.S. has by far the highest rate of gun ownership in the world, about 900 guns per 1,000 inhabitants. A distant number two is Yemen at about 500/1000. According to all the anti gun hysteria generated by the gun grabbing political class and its allies in the media, one is led to believe that the U.S. also has the world's highest firearms homicide rate. Not true. The U.S. ranks 28th.

  17. Cheldric Moneypenny says:

    OK – data on a graph ARE statistics – what I meant to say is they are not causal information…. :-/

    • doc holliday says:

      good points. further, if stats were convincing (to most people), lots of things would be different. instead, its more often "my stats, right or wrong".
      the net bottom line, & ace in hole, is right to self-defense, particularly from the organized criminal caste, is not subject to anything, let alone consequential, utilitarian (from some other guy's perspective) arguments. there's nothing to "prove".

    • Tannim says:

      He never said they were causal. I think you may be reading between lines that which is not there.

  18. Cheldric Moneypenny says:

    First – let me state that I am a gun owner, a gun user, and an advocate of the 2nd Amendment.

    I'd like to ask a few questions and examine the "statistics" (Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics) shown in the article.

    The Chicago gun ban occurs in 1982. For the next 5 years – the "murders by handguns" is below the level when the gun ban went into effect. 1987/88 – there is a sudden surge in hand gun deaths. There is no causal information given in this graph to indicate that the hand gun ban had anything to do with the spike in deaths 5 years after it went into law. What this tells me is – *something* happened in 1987/88. What was it? How about some data (data on a graph are not statistics) on gang activity, turf wars, the economy, how the Bulls were doing during the same time. If one of those is up – do we draw a corollary between the data sets? Based on what?

    Texas graph. The Texas graph shows a steep decline in homicides starting in 1991 which is three years before the "right to carry" law comes on the books. The slope of the steep decline does not appear to be affected by the law over the next 2-3 years. The graph then is nearly identical with the US average going forward – only deviating by 2% – which isn't what I would call statistically significant. In fact, one could argue based on the graph from 1995 on, the right to carry law in Texas changes nothing when compared to the rest of the country.

    I applaud your article and your fight for the 2nd Amendment. But – please don't jump the gun when looking at "statistics" and remember when viewing statistics Correlation does not imply Causation. Proving causation is a completely different exercise.

  19. “”Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it.” – Ayn Rand

    Just sayin’ … the way I’ve put it, emotion and disinformation trumps logic. Nevertheless, this is the best exposition I have yet found and I thank you.

  20. John Little says:

    Sorry, but around the world people live a lot safer because of logical gun control. The US has a major gun problem. Solving gun violence with more guns is like a drunk saying that four more shots of tequila will sober him right up. The world is way past this issue, what is holding up America?

    • Pachistima says:

      Wrong – the US has a crime problem. The US also has the Second Amendment guaranteeing the right of the people to own and carry guns. States with "shall issue" concealed carry gun laws have experienced a reduction in violent crime, compared to states without such laws.

    • freewil says:

      the only 'gun problem' America has is the 2nd Amendment should have made gun ownership a requirement! The Powers that are in office now need to be brought up on charges of High Treason and be punished appropriately(HUNG BY NECK TIL' THEY BE DEAD,DEAD,DEAD)

  21. ron thompson says:

    "A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don't have one, you'll probably never need one again".

  22. Hugh Counsell says:

    According to official statistics published in the House of Commons there were 200 homicides in Britain during the year ended June 30 2012 caused by knives. Given that the population of the US is approximately six times larger than Britain then it would be reasonable to expect the figure here to be in the region of 1200 homicides arising from the use of knives. Yet the number is far, far higher! I suggest that the author checks his facts before making incorrect and misleading statements.

  23. mingbucibei says:

    see r j rummel's website give comprehensive data
    see r j rummel's website give comprehensive data
    http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/
    http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/

    12+ on line PDFs

    Ming Bucibei

  24. Johnny R says:

    Anthony, this is an excellent article and you did a fine job. But I may point out some inaccurate information.
    You state in your last paragraph " … the rights provided by the second amendment …" Our rights do not come from the constitution, but from God. They are merely affirmed by the constitution.

    Hope this helps.

  25. John says:

    As some have pointed out, some of your statistics are either wrong or misleading. Insinuating causation in the Texas right to carry law, while overall murder rates were already falling across the nation is misleading. But you also erroneously stated that the FBI "Overall weapons deaths (2009 FBI): 13,636". That is wrong. That 13,636 number is the FBI statistic for Total Murder Victims. As someone pointed out earlier, you didn't factor in firearm deaths for 2009 for suicide (18,735), accidents (554), interventions and unknown (365). And claiming that an armed civilian could have stopped the Aurora Theater shooting goes against logic. Law enforcement officials claim that if another person would have shot back at the shooter, more innocent lives likely would have been taken.

  26. Charles Pergiel says:

    I seldom see any statistics that I like. Whenever we are talking about death, there are a couple of things I would like to know. First is the death rate. How many people out of a 1,000, on average, die every year? Second is how many of those deaths were premature? If a 90 year old man dies of a heart attack does that have the same impact as a 30 year old man dying of the same thing? After you have established these two things, then we can talk about whether any particular cause of death is having a disproportionate effect.

  27. louande says:

    There is one and only one reason the government wants to ban assault rifles and do background checks on people that want to buy guns: eventual confiscation, the quicker the better. They know riots are coming to US cities due to the government's mismanagement of the economy. When the world rids itself of the US dollar, the very next day the riots will start. The riots will be different from those we witnessed on TV in Greece. In Greece, people threw rocks, bottles with kerosene in them, etc. at the government authorities. Here in the US it won't be rocks or bottles. People will take to the streets and use their arms to get rid of the oppressive government. This is the real reason why those in power want our guns. It has nothing to do with school shootings, nothing to do with hunting, etc.

  28. Roger D. says:

    Our northern neighbor has strict gun laws and would have made a nice comparative study, yet was avoided.
    Perhaps the Canadian experience did not justify the author's thesis.

  29. David G. says:

    In the first part of the Declaration of Independence,it states very clearly that we have the Right and Duty to throw off such Government and to secure new guards for our future security.They do not care about the second amendment or the fourth amendment as well,because the act they just passed as Cyber Security.

  30. KC says:

    Just some thoughts:
    I fail to see, as one person stated, that guns used in suicide should be counted. Japan, where civilian gun ownership is completely banned, has a gun suicide rate something like 1/50th of that in the US, but the overall suicide rate is almost twice that in the US. Further, males in Japan are twice as likely to succeed in a suicide attempt as females, just as it is here. Firearm accessibility has nothing to do with the suicide rate.
    I agree as one commenter noted, that the Texas murder rate was already trending down before right-to-carry was ratified, but gun control advocates have repeatedly stated right-to-carry would lead to the “Wild West in the streets” which clearly has not taken place. Further, in a poll of over 15,000 police officers, when asked what would most reduce mass shootings, the most popular response (28%) was that more permissive concealed carry policies would lead to less mass shootings, while only 0.9% felt assault weapons and magazine bans would.

  31. Maple says:

    Fabulous. I agree.

  32. These may indeed be desperate times, they feel very ashamed of being in debt and what to get out bad credit personal loans of debt as quickly as possible.

    They depended on their fat pay checks at the end of the week.

  33. Greg Gabriel says:

    Nice article but needs improvement; it’s time for this debate to move up to the next level. You need to compare guns to like-items that kill. For instance, fast food is not banned or controlled, but is responsible for 3/4 of your top US Killers. Alcohol related traffic deaths; compare that to gun deaths and then ask the question why isn’t alcohol not only banned but actually promoted!

  34. Chris T. says:

    Big error needs correction:
    the way the Chicago ban data is portrayed.

    You state:
    “Following the handgun ban in Chicago, crime increased by 40%”
    This is repeated in the infographic as well.

    But, that is not correct, based upon that chart.

    That chart shows the PROPORTION of murders committed with handguns.
    That is completely different, the numbers could have gond from 40 to 90% EVEN with a DECREASE in murders.

    Not disagreeing overall with this articel, it’s very informative indeed.
    BUT: when these articles contain errors like this, it makes them so much easier to attack by the opposition.

    Please correct, even at this late date.
    Thanks!

  35. Kelli says:

    Great compilation of facts and statistics. It would have been great to hear about the racist foundations of gun control. Once the 14th was passed there was an immediate push to not allow for the newly free black people to become armed. An armed society is a truly free society and the history of gun control was fundamentally racist with the underpinnings of control in opposition of of the federal governments actions to free the slaves.

  36. barbarian says:

    testing comment system

  37. Excellent article.Keep posting such kind of info on your site.

    Im really impressed by it.
    Hi there, You’ve done an excellent job. I will certainly digg it and in my
    view recommend to my friends. I am sure they’ll be benefited from this site.

  38. Richard says:

    Wow, those are very interesting statistics and this article was well put together to show how little death is caused by rifles. http://bestiwbholster.net/

  39. Dean says:

    Glad someone out there is paying attention. Gun control is a hot topic these days, and many don't realize how quickly our freedoms erode in the name of "safety". Thanks for taking the time to do such thorough research. Btw, I'm in the market for a Glock 19 holster. Let me know if you come across one you like.

  40. David says:

    How many individuals out of a 1,000, on regular, die every year? Second is how many of those fatalities were premature? If a 90 season old man passes away of cardiac arrest does that have the same impact as a 30 season old man passing away of the same thing? After you have recognized these two factors, then we can discuss whether any particular cause of loss of life is having a extraordinary impact.
    dentist internet marketing

  41. Jhon says:

    I seldom see any statistics that I like. Whenever we are talking about death, there are a couple of things I would like to know. First is the death rate. How many people out of a 1,000, on average, die every year? Second is how many of those deaths were premature. mcallen dentist

  42. Sweet blog! I found it while browsing on Yahoo News.
    Do you have any tips on how to get listed in Yahoo News?

    I’ve been trying for a while but I never seem to get there!
    Many thanks

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *