Only 52 Gun Murders in England and Wales

In his recent fist-shaking rant, our friend Paul writes:

To understand how complacent we've become with a death toll that shocks the rest of the industrialized world, consider that England and Wales suffered just 52 gun murders total in the last reported year, according to the UK's Home Office. Yet here in America, mass shootings alone accounted for 57 firearm homicides in less than a month between March 10 and April 7.

Paul even gives the link to the UK Home Office report and, lo and behold, we can verify the "52 gun murders" statistic right there on page 74.

Egads! Paul's right?!?!?

Well...sorta.

Yes, the UK Home Office statistic reads:

Firearms were used in 52 homicides, i.e. the offence resulted in a fatal injury.

But if you also look at Tables 3.07 and 3.08 on page 84, you'll also see the following figures:

• Total Firearm Offences: 9,803
• Serious Injuries: 403
• Slight Injuries: 2,762
• Total Injuries: 3,217
• Threats: 5,036

Yes, there were 52 murders.

But over 9,000 incidences of criminal firearm use with more than 3,000 resulting in some sort of injury (slight, serious, and fatal).

Paints a different picture now, don't it.

You also have to keep in mind that the reported figures come from two sources: the British Crime Survey (BCS) and police recording statistics.

The BCS is a face-to-face survey that, according to the report's introduction,

does not aim to provide a total count of crime, but to provide robust trends over time for the crime types it covers. (emphasis mine)

Police recorded crime stats

do not include crimes that have not been reported to the police or incidents that the police decide not to record. (emphasis mine)

Further, the introduction notes that

"It is estimated that around 42 per cent of all BCS crime is reported to the police although this varies for individual offence types.

So essentially, that figure of 9,000+ may not even be all reported crime in the UK.

And right there, folks, we see yet another example of the Brady Bunch's statistical sleight of hand.

"Over here!" says the Brady Bunch. "Look at only 52 murders in the UK! Less than America. See? Their gun control works! See?!? Only 52! And in one year. Oh--um, don't pay any attention to the other firearm injuries which didn't result in death. That's not important. 52! Ooooh! Look! It sparkles!"

Lousy bastards.

Back Door Banning?

I must be late to the party because this is news to me.

Any one else out there watching this one?

Guns and Wishful Thinking: A Deadly Combination

If you haven't read Brillianter's blog, you should have a look. Great, thought-provoking posts.

Here's one I ran across, talking about firearms as talismans.

Can be nicely illustrated by this Oleg Volk pic. (I'm linking to the pic cuz I don't think it'll fit in this space).

The article Brillianter refers to was published in February. It's now late April.

I wonder if the author has actually gotten some training with the gun. Or if she, as Brillianter notes, has relegated it to the status of "good luck charm for the nightstand - in a masculine
color."

I found her email. I'm going to ask her.

The Truth About the Assault Weapons Ban, Part Deux

I find it interesting that the Brady Bunch talk up the AW Ban as if it were a mandate from on high. To hear them gush about its importance makes one think that before the ban, our nation was a lawless country and that once the ban was put in place, there was no more "assault weapon" crime.

If you follow that train of logic, then why did Columbine take place? Harris and Klebold were reported to have used "assault weapons."

But according to the Brady Bunch, the AW Ban should have effectively prevented that.

Right?

RIGHT?!?

So I ask:

IF THERE WAS

AN ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN,

WHY DID COLUMBINE

TAKE PLACE???

Idiot on Parade

These are the kinds of morons that give the rest of us law-abiding, safety-conscious gun owners a bad name in the eyes of the general public.

Of course, it doesn't help that the media kisses anti-gunner butt so you know this kind of story is big news on their radar.

Chaps my hide, I tell ya...

Scorecard Discrepancy? Unpossible!

Remember the Brady Bunch State Scorecards?

Kalifornia scored a whopping 79 points out of 100. Which meant it was the state with the toughest gun laws.

Look out gun violence! Kalifornia is tough! Grrrr.

Yet if you look at WISQARS data for 2005, you'll see that of the 1,972 deaths by firearms between the ages of 00-19, those age 15-19 who were killed by firearms totalled 361...from California.

Which shows, as the Brady Bunch point out, that California's tough gun laws work at reducing violence.

Well done!

(Note: "Unpossible" is an Uncle-ism)

Number Crunching the Brady Bunch

I randomly grabbed one of the Brady Bunch's "Fact Sheets" (if it could be called that) and took a look at the "facts" presented.

This one was titled "Children & Guns: A Lethal Combination."

The first line read: "In 2005, eight young people aged 19 and under were killed a day by a firearm in the United States." Source for that line comes from from the WISQARS Injury Mortality Reports.

So I ran the report. My values were:
2005, United States, Violence-related deaths with a Firearm, All races, Both sexes

I got the following figure: Age 00-19: 2,815

Do the math: 2,815 total deaths/365 days = 7.7123287 per day = approx. 8 per day.

Just like the Brady Campaign says.

But when I set WISQARS to
2005, United States All races, both sexes
then
Homicide with firearm

I got: Age 00-19: 1,972

Do the math: 1,972 total deaths/365 days = 5.4027397 per day = approx. 5 per day.

Now the value that gave the "8 per day" came from all the following codes

• W32–W34, Accidental discharge of firearms
• X72–X74, Intentional self-harm (suicide) by discharge of firearms
• X93–X95, Assault(homicide) by discharge of firearms
• Y22–Y24, Discharge of firearms,undetermined intent
  
• Y35.0, Legal intervention involving firearm discharge

The value that gave the "5 per day" comes from only the following code

• X93–X95, Assault(homicide) by discharge of firearms

When you hear the words "killed by a firearm" the first thing that usually comes to mind is a homicide. Not suicide, accidental discharge, or anything else.

I know that's what comes to my mind when I hear "killed by a firearm."

So the numbers of "8 killed per day" is slightly misleading.

There's also a bit of misdirection going on here. You're meant only to look at the total number of deaths and the "number per day" and accept it. Period. No questions asked.

But there are questions: Under what circumstances did those deaths take place? Random murder? Gang-related murder?

See, there's a big difference between 5 or 8 kids killed per day by a random gunman and those killed in gang-related incidents.

In either case, even though a firearm was involved, the problem isn't the weapon, it's the perpetrator (the gunman or the gang).

Oddly, the number one cause of death in the United States for those ages 1-19 is motor vehicle accidents.

Once again:

Motor vehicle accidents.
Number one cause of death ages 1-19.

Firearm homicide comes in second for ages 15-19, third for ages 1-14 (which disagrees with bullet point number three in the "Fact Sheet.")

Once again, the Brady Bunch expects no one to question them.

See, that's the dangerous bit.

And we haven't even pointed out that the 2005 FBI Uniform Crime Reports gives a completely different number to firearm homicides ages 00-19.

The Truth About the "Assault Weapons" Ban

Do this...

Go to the Brady Campaign's site. Choose the "Facts" tab, then select "Assault Weapons and Other Military-Style Weapons" on the sidebar to the right.

Scroll down to the selection "Click here to read The Top 10 NRA Myths About Assault Weapons" and click the link.

You'll see the following page :




















If you click the link that reads "click here to see the evidence" about the ban dramatically reducing the "incident of assault weapons traced to crime" you'll come to this page (as of 7:51PST 4/23/09):

















Wow, huh. The evidence speaks loudly doesn't it.

*snort*

Which Gunnie Are You?

Not a quiz. More of a checklist, I guess.

I think I fall under the "Shooter" description. Not much posting on fora or hanging out at gun shops but I do read gun magazines (and gun blogs). Mostly Combat Handguns and American Handgunner.

(h/t: Sebastian)

Comply and Die

They all tell you the same thing: "Do what you're told and you won't get hurt."

Tell that to this Chicagoan when

The robber took belongings from the two, police said, before shooting the man in his chest.

Well "experts"--he did what he was told. He wasn't supposed to get hurt, according to you.

But the robbert shot him in the chest.

Did you get that part?

The robber shot him in the frickin' chest!

"Do what you're told and you won't get hurt."

A deadly lie.

Don't believe it. Fight back, because your life depends on it.

Unless you feel your life means nothing.

If that's the case, then just sit back and (possibly) die.

(h/t: Thirdpower)

PSH on Campus

Sounds like free speech is becoming endangered if you advocate gun rights. Particularly on college campuses.

When a Central Connecticut State University senior fulfilled a communications-class assignment by giving a presentation on why students and professors should be allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus, his professor reported him to the police, who called him in for questioning. Professor Paula Anderson, questioned by a reporter from the school paper, was unrepentant: The student was a "perceived risk" and she had a "responsibility to protect the well-being of our students."

The Nanny State at work on campus.

A crock of shit, if you ask me.

The Church of G.O.D. (Gun Owning Disciples)

Come join the fold, brothers and sisters.

I'll let the post speak for itself.

More Buyback Follies

Here's one out of Pasadena, CA.

Started about half an hour ago.

(sigh) When will these people learn that these things don't work?

It's like bashing your head against a brick wall and expecting the wall to come down.

Idiots.

Guns Cause Mexican Swine Flu

Is it just a matter of time before the Brady Bunch blames the swine flu outbreak in Mexico on guns coming in from the U.S.?

Given their history of misleading the public and the mass media, I wouldn't be surprised to hear some sort of spin of that nature from Paulie and his cronies.

Dueling Op-Eds

Two from the San Francisco Chronicle. One piece pleads for "sane gun control" (as if the term really exists-HA!) while the other understands the real cause.

Mizel's piece reads just like every other op-ed written by an anti-gun sock puppet.

Translation: "I am naive."

Hickman's, however, gets to the heart of the matter:

Yet what new gun law stops desperate people from committing horrific crimes?

and

Making more laws when tragedy strikes is not the answer.

Glad to hear a voice of reason rather than PSH.

PSH. Yes, I'm talking to you, Mizel.

Inviting Criminals

Contra Costa County has given an open invitation to criminals everywhere.

Oh sure, you'll get arrested. But prosecuted? Heck no.

Head over to WalMart. Five-finger discounts for everybody!

Good job, Contra Costa.

Morons.

To my fellow armed citizens in the area--go to DefCon 2.

Back In The Saddle

Yes, friends and neighbors.

After taking some time to take care of Life Things, I have decided to return to this fun-filled little spot on the Intarw3bz.

With a slight change.

See, my hang-up--and the primary reason I closed the blog doors--was that I'd been trying to commit to a set schedule of posting. 'Cuz all the "pros" recommend posting on a set schedule. Daily, thrice weekly, twice weekly, once a week, etc.

Nope. Not having it.

TMR will resume, but under my schedule. I will post as often as I can. It may turn out to be a lot. It may turn out to be infrequent.

We'll see.

Now...let's get back to busting some anti-gunner chops.