Video: 5 facts about guns, schools, and violence

posted at 10:01 am on January 10, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Say, anyone interested in actual facts about guns, violence, and schools?  If so, Reason’s Nick Gillespie and Amanda Winkler have five key points about the actual status of school safety and the impact of guns on American society.  The truth is that violent crime and mass shootings have declined since the 1990s, even with events like Newtown and Aurora.  Schools are safer now than in decades.  However, those data points don’t lend themselves to hysterics hopng to panic people into bad legislation that won’t solve the problems they supposedly address:

1. Violent crime – including violent crime using guns – has dropped massively over the past 20 years.

The violent crime rate - which includes murder, rape, and beatings – is half of what it was in the early 1990s. And the violent crime rate involving the use of weapons has also declined at a similar pace.

2. Mass shootings have not increased in recent years.

Despite terrifying events like Sandy Hook or last summer’s theater shooting in Aurora, Colorado, mass shootings are not becoming more frequent. “There is no pattern, there is no increase,” says criminologist James Allen Fox of Northeastern University, who studies the issue. Other data shows that mass killings peaked in 1929.

3. Schools are getting safer.

Across the board, schools are less dangerous than they used be. Over the past 20 years, the rate of theft per 1,000 students dropped from 101 to 18. For violent crime, the victimization rate per 1,000 students dropped from 53 to 14.

4. There Are More Guns in Circulation Than Ever Before.

Over the past 20 years, virtually every state in the country has liberalized gunownership rules and many states have expanded concealed carry laws that allow more people to carry weapons in more places. There around 300 million guns in the United States and at least one gun in about 45 percent of all households. Yet the rate of gun-related crime continues to drop.

5. “Assault Weapons Bans” Are Generally Ineffective.

While many people are calling for reinstating the federal ban on assault weapons – an arbitrary category of guns that has no clear definition – research shows it would have no effect on crime and violence. “Should it be renewed,” concludes a definitive study, “the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.”

We have a violence-glorification problem, but that’s not something a law can fix or a government stamp out — nor should we wish to live in a society where it’s tried.  We need to start pushing back in the culture against the glorification of violence and death, not with legislation, but by defending values of life in the public arena.  We do not hide behind failed legal approaches (ask Chicago and Washington DC how well gun bans worked for them) as an avoidance measure to deal with issues of mental illness and the degradation of values in our society.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Say, anyone interested in actual facts about guns, violence, and schools?

That rules out the trolls who will flock to comment.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 10:04 AM

Things that are more likely to kill a person than my gun…
-Being a U.S. Ambassador for obozo.
-Driving with Ted Kennedy.
-Living in a city run by democrats.
-A botched abortion.
-A successful abortion.
-Crossing the street.
-Socialized medicine.

Flange on January 10, 2013 at 10:05 AM

This is not really about gun control…this is about control. Gun owners are preparing…

d1carter on January 10, 2013 at 10:05 AM

an avoidance measure to deal with issues of mental illness and the degradation of values in our society

Exactly!

We are a kinder, gentler, compassionate and PROGRESSIVE nation today! We no longer warehouse the mentally ill in facilities. If they can find shelter (freeway underpass); if they can find food (restaurant dumpster); if they can find clothing (Goodwill donation bin) – then they must be freed of those evil asylums!

Which goes a long way in explaining why we now warehouse the mentally ill in our county jails and state prisons.

GarandFan on January 10, 2013 at 10:08 AM

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 10:04 AM

But you know they are going to anyway. Never let the facts get in the way of an emotional driven power grab.

TturnP on January 10, 2013 at 10:08 AM

This is not really about gun control…this is about control. Gun owners are preparing…

d1carter on January 10, 2013 at 10:05 AM

Control Kills People – gun and otherwise.

Chip on January 10, 2013 at 10:09 AM

We have a violence-glorification poor parenting problem, but that’s not something a law can fix or a government stamp out — nor should we wish to live in a society where it’s tried.

Kataklysmic on January 10, 2013 at 10:10 AM

Giving dangerous, crazy people free reign in society is the problem.

blink on January 10, 2013 at 10:06 AM

Yeah, they vote themselves money stolen from other people.

Chip on January 10, 2013 at 10:11 AM

You want a fact, here’s a fact. All it takes is the change of one single word in the Obamacare Act and you get this. Time for a Mandatory Federal Firearms Law, Enter the Affordable Firearms Act.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 10:11 AM

Flange on January 10, 2013 at 10:05 AM

And everybody’s favorite: being struck by lightning.

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 10:11 AM

…don’t let facts get in the way of an agenda!… TASK FORCE!…
…meanwhile…for decades…there is no spending problem, the private sector is doing fine and there is no employment problem in this country!

KOOLAID2 on January 10, 2013 at 10:12 AM

Raging Against Self Defense:
A psychiatrist Examines The Anti-Gun Mentality

http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/ragingagainstselfdefense.htm


“You don’t need to have a gun; the police will protect you.”

“If people carry guns, there will be murders over parking spaces and neighborhood basketball games.”

How often have you heard these statements from misguided advocates of victim disarmament, or even woefully uninformed relatives and neighbors? Why do people cling so tightly to these beliefs, in the face of incontrovertible evidence that they are wrong? Why do they get so furiously angry when gun owners point out that their arguments are factually and logically incorrect?

How can you communicate with these people who seem to be out of touch with reality and rational thought? One approach to help you deal with anti-gun people is to understand their psychological processes.

Once you understand why these people behave so irrationally, you can communicate more effectively with them.

Colbyjack on January 10, 2013 at 10:14 AM

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 10:04 AM

But you know they are going to anyway. Never let the facts get in the way of an emotional driven power grab.

TturnP on January 10, 2013 at 10:08 AM

Nor let facts get in the way of being willfully ignorant. Ann Coulter has an excellent piece on this matter of crime vs. firearms. It’s on her site and copied at National Review Online.

My view is that if gun crime is so pervasive that guns need to be taken away, then I demand right to protect me and mine until all the illegal gums held by criminals need to be taken away first. Which, naturally will reduce gun crime and neutralize any further reason to want to take them from the law-abiding.

The gun-grabbers haven’t cleaned up DC–our own national capitol is as dangerous a place to live as Baghdad. Then again, in Baghdad you can have a gun. In DC, you can’t unless you’re a criminal or gangsta. The government won’t care about you until you get caught.

Liberalism at its finest!

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 10:16 AM

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 10:11 AM

Not everyone. All males between 18 and 65 should be required to not only own, but take private firearms training courses i.e. well regulated. It is necessary.

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 10:16 AM

Deaf Ears.

Bmore on January 10, 2013 at 10:18 AM

You want a fact, here’s a fact. All it takes is the change of one single word in the Obamacare Act and you get this. Time for a Mandatory Federal Firearms Law, Enter the Affordable Firearms Act.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 10:11 AM

Abortion is the only ‘right’ that receives taxpayer funds.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Stop with the facts! You’re killing me here. These people aren’t interested in facts, emotions fuel their positions. Nothing but emotion.

totherightofthem on January 10, 2013 at 10:21 AM

Liberals have no use for facts.
Now feelings, that’s something else.

gwelf on January 10, 2013 at 10:22 AM

Colbyjack on January 10, 2013 at 10:14 AM

Wow, that’s a great article, thanks for posting it…

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 10:23 AM

How often have you heard these statements from misguided advocates of victim disarmament, or even woefully uninformed relatives and neighbors? Why do people cling so tightly to these beliefs, in the face of incontrovertible evidence that they are wrong? Why do they get so furiously angry when gun owners point out that their arguments are factually and logically incorrect?

How can you communicate with these people who seem to be out of touch with reality and rational thought? One approach to help you deal with anti-gun people is to understand their psychological processes.

Once you understand why these people behave so irrationally, you can communicate more effectively with them.

Colbyjack on January 10, 2013 at 10:14 AM

No, you can’t. What you’ve described is the typical problem of trying to debate with a liberal. Their arguments are based on feelings, not on facts. More importantly, in their mind, they think the other person’s use of *facts* is equally based on *feelings*. They can’t separate the two concepts.

gregbert on January 10, 2013 at 10:27 AM

Stop with the facts! You’re killing me here. These people aren’t interested in facts, emotions fuel their positions. Nothing but emotion.

totherightofthem on January 10, 2013 at 10:21 AM

I wouldn’t call it emotion. They want, they covet. Liberals are the most heartless group I have ever known. For evidence I submit how they argue every possible solution except for the one they demand. No armed guards in schools; no training and certification for teachers to concealed-carry; no CCW at all; no getting tough on crime for once and cleaning out bad neighborhoods; getting rid of police first when budget cuts are needed; etc.

Liberals aren’t emotional in a normal healthy sense. They’re petulant children who want the whole jar of cookies instead of just having one. If they have any feelings at all, those are greed and anger. Really, have any of you met a truly happy liberal?

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 10:28 AM

Pro-gun people are talking to pro-gun people about this. Obama and his myrmidons are talking to the low-information law abiding general populace that sees guns as bad. Another marketing campaign being squandered by Republicans. These are all opportunities to refine the public opinion generating machinery that defeats socialists who masquerade under the banner “progressive”.

It is a law abiding citizens right to choose to own or not own arms, NOT the governments choice to limit what and how many.

Do we live in a violent society? Our packed urban centers controlled by Democrats certainly are. Where are the talking heads showing the Democrats made it that way in Chicago and other urban areas?

MarkT on January 10, 2013 at 10:28 AM

speaking about high powered weaponary check out this recent tweet from The Donald

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump

I hope @billmaher comes through with his $5 million offer, which I fully accepted, or I will be forced to sue him. All goes to charity!

KABOOOM!!!!!

renalin on January 10, 2013 at 10:28 AM

Say, anyone interested in actual facts about guns, violence, and schools?

That rules out the trolls who will flock to comment.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 10:04 AM

Also rules out elected Democrats (including supposed “gun rights supporters” like Senator Joe Manchin, et. al.) …

RedPepper on January 10, 2013 at 10:29 AM

As I commented in the Headlines, I understand that the left’s talking heads have replaced the words “gun control” with “gun safety.”

How delightfully Orwellian.

Gird your loins, people.

UltimateBob on January 10, 2013 at 10:30 AM

It’s called “Reason TV” for a reason …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lyunRYMenY

Nick Gillespie is spot-on as usual.
Imagine how many people in this country would be educated instead of indoctrinated.
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 10, 2013 at 10:31 AM

“We have criminals we have to contend with” Joshua Boston

We actually have a Constitutional obligation too contend with criminals.

Speakup on January 10, 2013 at 10:33 AM

Interesting. With such a lovely culture as this. I see no need for guns. Its not like we need to have the ability to protect ourselves from certain factions of society or anything. Right?

Bmore on January 10, 2013 at 10:34 AM

Hot gas should have a permanent link on the front page to the excellent resource Gun Facts Dot Info.

CorporatePiggy on January 10, 2013 at 10:35 AM

3. Schools are getting safer.

GREAT! Gun free zones must work then.

Time to scrap the NRA’s insanity around armed guards and teachers in every school.

cornfedbubba on January 10, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Too bad that there’s not an alternative mainstream media channel that would show something like this. Great that we see it on blogs, but right wing blogs have a narrow audience.

beatcanvas on January 10, 2013 at 10:38 AM

This is not really about gun control…this is about control. Gun owners are preparing…

d1carter on January 10, 2013 at 10:05 AM

The Stalinists are coming out of the woodwork rather obviously over this, and that might be noteworthy in that more and more people are becoming aware of their true intentions.

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 10:39 AM

cornfedbubba on January 10, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Starting with Sideell Friends.

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 10:39 AM

We need to start pushing back in the culture against the glorification of violence and death, not with legislation, but by defending values of life in the public arena.

How’s that worked out with the abortion debate? Pushing back last October didn’t do a damn thing to convince stupid women that somebody was looking to ban abortions and regulate their vajayjay. Hobby Lobby’s owners, the real members of the RCC, and others are faced with financial fines and/or eternal damnation if they don’t obey state-sanctioned murder.

In short, I’m not saying that we shouldn’t be “pushing back” but how do you do that in a society that cares more about Honey Boo Boo than religious tolerance or the protection of life?

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 10:39 AM

My view is that if gun crime is so pervasive that guns need to be taken away, then I demand right to protect me and mine until all the illegal gums held by criminals need to be taken away first. Which, naturally will reduce gun crime and neutralize any further reason to want to take them from the law-abiding.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 10:16 AM

That is an excellent point!

I am soo borrowing that..

{if you don’t mind that is}

Colbyjack on January 10, 2013 at 10:41 AM

Colbyjack on January 10, 2013 at 10:41 AM

Help yourself! :)

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 10:45 AM

BTW: more people die from falls in bathtubs than from rifle fire. We need to ban bathing! The porcelain-coated tubs are particularly bad; call them ‘assault tubs’!

michaelo on January 10, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Colbyjack on January 10, 2013 at 10:14 AM

Colby. Thanks for the link. It is interesting to me particularly because I was having a phone conversation with my dad last night and as happens often the topic turned to politics. We discussed how terribly stressed and aggressive liberals/progressives get when one tries to debate their ideology based on facts that contradict their position. I guess when an ideology is emotioned based a pathologic emotional response is what happens when that ideology is threatened.

DaveDief on January 10, 2013 at 10:47 AM

GREAT! Gun free zones must work then.

cornfedbubba on January 10, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Bless your heart – you have a great way of displaying your special kind of stupidity.

Galt2009 on January 10, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Affordable Firearms Act

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 10:11 AM

100% :)

No, you can’t. What you’ve described is the typical problem of trying to debate with a liberal. Their arguments are based on feelings, not on facts. More importantly, in their mind, they think the other person’s use of *facts* is equally based on *feelings*. They can’t separate the two concepts.

gregbert on January 10, 2013 at 10:27 AM

I feel like you aren’t making any sense.

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Thanks to Pravda and Izvestia, the low information voters don’t know this and will continue to be lead by the nose ring into approving gun control measures that are designed to hurt law abiding citizens and won’t do anything about the problems.

Another irony, Pravda is telling Americans not to give up their guns. It sounds like the Russian version of Pravda has more sense than ours. Of course they only have communists over there, we have Democrats and LIberals here.

bflat879 on January 10, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Not everyone. All males people between 18 and 65 should be required to not only own, but take private firearms training courses i.e. well regulated. It is necessary.

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 10:16 AM

Not trying to pull a sexist punch, but don’t forget us women, who have just as much right to self-defense as men do.

I took my first NRA Gun Safety class last year and I plan on taking more. By way of background, I was starting at point zero in knowing anything about guns or having any experience with them, but I agree — it is necessary, and I consider these classes to be a long overdue addition to my continuing education.

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 10:53 AM

Flange on January 10, 2013 at 10:05 AM

You could also add:

Your neighbor’s swimming pool.
The hammer in your garage.
New Yorkers waiting for a train.
An inner city cop’s handgun.

ROCnPhilly on January 10, 2013 at 10:53 AM

gregbert on January 10, 2013 at 10:27 AM

Also, I remember David Letterman told Bill O’Reilly that O’Reilly was too smart for him to argue with, but still, “I have the feeling about 60% of what you say is crap.”

Can’t find the right link. :) Got a little sick sifting for it.

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 10:55 AM

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 10:53 AM

I understand, and that issue occurred to me. But in general women as infantry just don’t cut it, they don’t have the upper body strength. But it’s not all about the infantry and maybe you’re right.

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 10:57 AM

Another irony, Pravda is telling Americans not to give up their guns. It sounds like the Russian version of Pravda has more sense than ours. Of course they only have communists over there, we have Democrats and Liberals here.

bflat879 on January 10, 2013 at 10:51 AM

LOL … Sadly.
The Яooskees know all to well what happens when a despotic “government” takes over.
Imagine how many Ukranians, et al., would have survived.
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 10, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Another irony, Pravda is telling Americans not to give up their guns. It sounds like the Russian version of Pravda has more sense than ours. Of course they only have communists over there, we have Democrats and LIberals here.

bflat879 on January 10, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Ironic indeed, had you told Pravda’s editorial staff in 1956 right after Nikita claimed that Communism would bury the United States that in 2013 Pravda would be the conservative champion of Capitalism and the American media complex a Fifth Column Treasonous Marxist propaganda Organ they undoubtedly would have called you insane.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:02 AM

Will we ever be able to outlaw the “Democrat” party like the Nazi party is outlawed in Germany?

Nutstuyu on January 10, 2013 at 11:05 AM

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 10:53 AM

I understand, and that issue occurred to me. But in general women as infantry just don’t cut it, they don’t have the upper body strength. But it’s not all about the infantry and maybe you’re right.

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 10:57 AM

I wasn’t going to respond to your comment because, well quite honestly, I found it to be sexist. I have a 12 year old niece who would be rather offended by that comment, and she can put 5 rounds in a 3 inch grouping at 250 yards.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:07 AM

Liberals aren’t emotional in a normal healthy sense. They’re petulant children who want the whole jar of cookies instead of just having one. If they have any feelings at all, those are greed and anger. Really, have any of you met a truly happy liberal?

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 10:28 AM

Agreed. They rely upon the emotions of the immature to appeal to their equally immature base. They can’t think their way out of a wet paper bag so they fall back on things such as “it’s not fair!”, “but, but, but. . . children!” and the like.

totherightofthem on January 10, 2013 at 11:13 AM

GREAT! Gun free zones must work then.

Time to scrap the NRA’s insanity around armed guards and teachers in every school.

cornfedbubba on January 10, 2013 at 10:36 AM

That gun free zone worked like a charm in Connecticut. And that theater in Colorado too.

gwelf on January 10, 2013 at 11:13 AM

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 10:57 AM

Yes, that is true. I wasn’t thinking necessarily of an infantry. You’re right on that score — there are some things men can do better than women, especially in terms of physical upper body strength.

I got my first taste of my relative lack of same when our instructor taught us to fire a selection of .45 revolvers and semi-autos, and I consider myself to be in pretty good shape physically (or so I thought). The recoil really surprised me until I got used to it.

Maybe it’s all the war movies I’ve watched (unusual for a female, I know. LOL), but I’m almost always inspired by the snipers and that’s what I’d want to train for. :)

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 11:13 AM

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 10:57 AM

I wasn’t going to respond to your comment because, well quite honestly, I found it to be sexist. I have a 12 year old niece who would be rather offended by that comment, and she can put 5 rounds in a 3 inch grouping at 250 yards.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:07 AM

I wasn’t either, because I found it to be problematic, though not sexist.

He’s right about Infantry.

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 11:13 AM

Maybe it’s all the war movies I’ve watched (unusual for a female, I know. LOL), but I’m almost always inspired by the snipers and that’s what I’d want to train for. :)

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 11:13 AM

My take would have been the opposite of his. Fenris was taking a well-ordered militia angle. But I’ve said every woman should have “gun safety” built into, say, “health” classes in Jr. and High. If anyone should be packing around our civilization, it’s the chicks.

(Generally speaking.)

Female visual acuity > male, we should point out, while we’re talking sniper. :)

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 11:17 AM

I got my first taste of my relative lack of same when our instructor taught us to fire a selection of .45 revolvers and semi-autos, and I consider myself to be in pretty good shape physically (or so I thought). The recoil really surprised me until I got used to it.

Maybe it’s all the war movies I’ve watched (unusual for a female, I know. LOL), but I’m almost always inspired by the snipers and that’s what I’d want to train for. :)

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 11:13 AM

News flash, that recoil comes just as much a surprise to men as it does to women, until you get used to it. Like I said above, I have a niece who can put 5 rounds in a 3 inch grouping at 250 yards, she’s been shooting since she was 8 years old and is 12 now.

While men may on average have greater upper body strength than women that upper body strength difference means little when it comes to firing your average rifle after a year or so of practice.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:19 AM

cornfedbubba on January 10, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Scared of boomstick.

CurtZHP on January 10, 2013 at 11:19 AM

My take would have been the opposite of his. Fenris was taking a well-ordered militia angle. But I’ve said every woman should have “gun safety” built into, say, “health” classes in Jr. and High. If anyone should be packing around our civilization, it’s the chicks.

(Generally speaking.)

I’m certainly with you on that!

Female visual acuity > male, we should point out, while we’re talking sniper. :)

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 11:17 AM

Didn’t know that, but I’m glad you pointed it out. :)

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 11:22 AM

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:07 AM

I wasn’t either, because I found it to be problematic, though not sexist.

He’s right about Infantry.

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 11:13 AM

The problem is, that we weren’t talking about modern infantry, we were talking about citizens, average everyday citizens. Militia’s aren’t infantries, they are average everyday citizens who defend their own communities, huge huge difference.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:23 AM

News flash, that recoil comes just as much a surprise to men as it does to women, until you get used to it. Like I said above, I have a niece who can put 5 rounds in a 3 inch grouping at 250 yards, she’s been shooting since she was 8 years old and is 12 now.

While men may on average have greater upper body strength than women that upper body strength difference means little when it comes to firing your average rifle after a year or so of practice.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:19 AM

Now that you mention it, my hubby was taken aback by the recoil as well when a buddy of his invited him to a range a couple years ago. Knowing my hubby, though, I’m positive it’s a matter of him being able to admit that to me, but around other guys, well, there’s the whole macho image to maintain. LOL

And yes, practice makes absolutely perfect.

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 11:27 AM

The problem is, that we weren’t talking about modern infantry, we were talking about citizens, average everyday citizens. Militia’s aren’t infantries, they are average everyday citizens who defend their own communities, huge huge difference.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Well, all right, but I can see the groove his mind was in. I didn’t think it was that big a deal. I’m not trying to insult your niece. :) The infantry thing is it’s own thing, and I’ve fought that hill, and I just wanted to make sure I got a flag on it this time too. I don’t really care about the rest of it.

Maybe he’s a misogynist. *shrug*

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 11:29 AM

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 11:27 AM

I had never fired a handgun when I bought my .45 years ago. My friends took me to a range, one have a 9mm and the other a .38. They had me fire their guns before letting me shoot mine, to get used to the recoil. The differences were noticeable, with training and prior expectation being key to accuracy and overall safety.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 11:35 AM

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:19 AM

Now that you mention it, my hubby was taken aback by the recoil as well when a buddy of his invited him to a range a couple years ago. Knowing my hubby, though, I’m positive it’s a matter of him being able to admit that to me, but around other guys, well, there’s the whole macho image to maintain. LOL

And yes, practice makes absolutely perfect.

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 11:27 AM

We go to the range 4 or 5 times a year, my brothers father in law has a 30.06 that he likes to shoot, I’m good with it out to about 300 yards, but honestly don’t care for shooting it, after 15 or 20 rounds it leave a bruise on my shoulder that leaves my shoulder sore for days. I’ll stick to my .223 thank you, as it doesn’t leave me bruised or sore afterwards.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:44 AM

I always like blog posts that tease with a chart, then talk about some video in the story.

Freddy on January 10, 2013 at 11:44 AM

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:23 AM

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 11:29 AM

If the gubmint and libtards weren’t constantly demonizing them, one answer to this is the Boy and Girl Scouts. I’ve never heard of any gun training in Girl Scouts, but my boys both learned to shoot and break down and clean a rifle in Boy Scouts. Girl Scouts should also teach basic gun use and safety, if they don’t already. My oldest was the first in his troop to meet all requirements within a 1 week summer camp to earn his rifle merit badge. That camp had a retired Marine Gunny Sgt running the rifle range – kind of an @sshole, but strict on safety and (mostly) pushed the kids in the right way.

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 11:44 AM

I had never fired a handgun when I bought my .45 years ago. My friends took me to a range, one have a 9mm and the other a .38. They had me fire their guns before letting me shoot mine, to get used to the recoil. The differences were noticeable, with training and prior expectation being key to accuracy and overall safety.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 11:35 AM

Now that’s what good friends are for! At the gun safety course I took, we all started out with .22s, which I took to right away and managed to shoot a good grouping, according to my instructor. Previous to this, I had never fired any handgun either.

Then we worked our way up to the higher calibers, the .38s, the 9mms and so on, until we got to the .45. Yep, the differences were noticeable and the main thing it taught me was that I need a hell of a lot more training and acclamation.

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 11:52 AM

With Congress’ approval rating at rock bottom, it’s not about gun control with the Dems – it’s about positioning yourself favorably for the 2014 and 2016 elections by getting something done no matter how lame it turns out to be.

Bob in VA on January 10, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Time to scrap the NRA’s insanity around armed guards and teachers in every school.

cornfedbubba on January 10, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Drinking your breakfast is never a good idea.

I know it happened before you were born, but when Democrat Bill Clinton was pResident, he had a program called Cops in Schools. And he increased it right after the Columbine shootings.

H

Del Dolemonte on January 10, 2013 at 11:55 AM

If the gubmint and libtards weren’t
dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Effing liberals, back in the 70′s my high school had a gun club that met at the High School, but practiced at the United States Naval Rifle Range at the Mira Mar Naval Station. My Junior High School actually set up an Archery Range right on the school property. You know how many accidents caused bodily harm during that time? ZERO.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:56 AM

‘Toons of the Day: We’re Gonna Need A 12 Step Programme Just For Him

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Hi, Barack! :)

(Joke will make no sense if you’ve never seen “a meeting.” :)

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 11:56 AM

We have a violence-glorification problem…

Ed, come on. That declaration is no more scientifically sound than “We have a gun problem”. That is your OPINION and nothing more. Even IF you could cite studies showing movie / TV violence going up, there is nothing that says there is any correlation with actual violence which Reason.com just showed is plummeting, nor any evidence that TV / movie / video game violence has any cause and effect relationship with any violence, let alone mass shootings.

Most times it doesn’t. For instance, the Columbine shooting was a result of one of the kids that was a full on sociopath.

Don’t make declarations like that unless you have facts and evidence to back it up.

deadrody on January 10, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Effing liberals, back in the 70′s my high school had a gun club that met at the High School, but practiced at the United States Naval Rifle Range at the Mira Mar Naval Station. My Junior High School actually set up an Archery Range right on the school property. You know how many accidents caused bodily harm during that time? ZERO.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:56 AM

I learned to land a B-52. Seriously. :) Simulated. Perk of the 8th. Won an award, actually. That I earned.

I can’t remember that first grade (not 1st :) where they passed out the BB guns and showed us basic, basic, basic etiquette. I was pretty low to the ground, though.

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 12:00 PM

*”Hunter safety” was the umbrella.

(Not the B-52 simulator. :)

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 12:01 PM

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 11:44 AM

That makes a tremendous amount of sense, especially for the Girl Scouts. However, I can attest from my own experiences as a Girl Scout in the late 60s and early 70s that the main things that were emphasized were 1.) crafts, and 2.) selling cookies. Especially selling cookies.

There wasn’t much emphasis even on camping, unless a so-called “day camp” counted, which consisted of busing our groups of city and suburban girls to a rural camp site each morning and returning us to our homes in the evening.

And now, of course, I try to avoid giving any money to the Girl Scouts at all, as I learned here and on other conservative sites that it’s been overrun by rabid feminists. I have a friend who is a leader of a local troop and I’m not sure she realizes it, the way she hawks cookies for them every year.

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 12:05 PM

We are a kinder, gentler, compassionate and PROGRESSIVE nation today! We no longer warehouse the mentally ill in facilities. If they can find shelter (freeway underpass); if they can find food (restaurant dumpster); if they can find clothing (Goodwill donation bin) – then they must be freed of those evil asylums!

GarandFan on January 10, 2013 at 10:08 AM

They can find employment (as a US Congress Critter or other government worker).

Also, I remember David Letterman told Bill O’Reilly that O’Reilly was too smart for him to argue with, but still, “I have the feeling about 60% of what you say is crap.”

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 10:55 AM

As we know, everything with liberals is about feelings.

ghostwalker1 on January 10, 2013 at 12:06 PM

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 12:00 PM

I don’t recall any gun programs in school when I was a kid, but my Dad bought me BB guns and then a Marlin bolt action .22 and taught me how to handle and clean it and shoot. My parents bought me the .22 mainly to pick off the woodchucks eating up our garden. I used to shoot them right in the yard off a major street to the beaches in our town (Maine). My friends and I also used to roam around the woods nearby picking off squirrels. Nobody ever got accidently shot, no property damaged, nobody hurt – and nobody ever called the cops. On the other hand, a few years back my kid and some friend were out in the open space behind our house with BB guns wearing camo – and someone called the cops on them. I think that was shortly after Columbine.

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 12:12 PM

I wasn’t going to respond to your comment because, well quite honestly, I found it to be sexist. I have a 12 year old niece who would be rather offended by that comment, and she can put 5 rounds in a 3 inch grouping at 250 yards.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 11:07 AM

If acknowledging the reality that men and women are different and have different capabilities then call me sexist. Usually I agree with you, here I think you’ve fallen into the liberal feelings trap.

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 12:12 PM

As we know, everything with liberals is about THEIR feelings.

ghostwalker1 on January 10, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Added my own touch there, being a cynic and all. Everyone else’s don’t count to them.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Time to scrap the NRA’s insanity around armed guards and teachers in every school.

cornfedbubba on January 10, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Rewind just 13 years, though, and many of these lawmakers were cheering a proposal that bears a remarkable resemblance to the one set forth by the NRA: President Clinton’s “COPS in Schools” program.

In October 1998, Clinton announced the $60 million grant program, which was housed in the Department of Justice’s Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS). “This initiative provides communities with a new tool to tackle crime and violence in our schools,” he said. According to the Justice Department, the program was intended to help police officers “engage in community policing in and around primary and secondary schools,” and the government spent over $753 million to hire more than 6,500 school police officers before the COPS in Schools program was cut in 2005.

In the wake of the April 1999 shootings at Columbine High School, Clinton intensified his efforts in behalf of the program and used the first anniversary of the Columbine shooting to announce additional funding. In his weekly radio address on April 16, 2000, Clinton said, “In our national struggle against youth violence, we must not fail our children.” He continued, “Already, [COPS in Schools] has placed 2,200 officers in more than 1,000 communities across our nation, where they are heightening school safety as well as coaching sports and acting as mentors and mediators for kids in need.”

Several of those who are now critical of the NRA’s plan expressed their support for Clinton’s program and benefited from it. Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco district was one of the first to receive funding through the program: $3.25 million for 26 new police officers, to be exact. As a whole, California, also home of Dianne Feinstein, received $5.6 million in grants from the COPS in Schools program in 1999 alone.

Touting the grants set to be distributed to several New York state school districts in 2004, Senator Chuck Schumer acknowledged that “we live in a different world now than we did 20, 30, or even three years ago” and said that the new realities are forcing parents to think constantly about the safety of their children. “Getting more police officers on school grounds will go a long way toward making sure our kids stay out of harm’s way.”

Cops in Schools: Pelosi, Schumer, and other Dems were for it before they were against it.

Cops in schools: Top Democrats were for it before they were against it

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Hiya!

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 12:14 PM

And now, of course, I try to avoid giving any money to the Girl Scouts at all, as I learned here and on other conservative sites that it’s been overrun by rabid feminists. I have a friend who is a leader of a local troop and I’m not sure she realizes it, the way she hawks cookies for them every year.

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Too bad the real Girl Scouts aren’t more like Vin Diesel’s version (Fireflies?) in The Pacifier…..

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 12:14 PM

White House petition asks Obama to shun gun-control executive orders
http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/09/white-house-petition-asks-obama-to-skip-gun-control-executive-orders/

Colbyjack on January 10, 2013 at 12:14 PM

Maybe he’s a misogynist. *shrug*

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 11:29 AM

And maybe you’re a liberal. *shrug*

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM

2nd amendment is not about hunting or crime! It ensures our right to defend ourselves and our country from despots and tyrants with more than clubs and pitchforks.

Then again, you all know this.

I’m going to the local supply store to acquire more clubs and pitchforks this weekend.

freedomfirst on January 10, 2013 at 12:18 PM

And maybe you’re a liberal. *shrug*

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM

I defended you, jack wagon.

And there, I was saying I didn’t know you and couldn’t vouch for anything other than what you said about infantry.

No good deed . . .

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 12:23 PM

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 12:14 PM

Heh … yeah, that would be refreshing to see.

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 12:28 PM

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Okay, I overreacted, you did defend me, and later too. I apologize.

I don’t know where the mysogynist thing came from though. I guess I do, the liberals have us so cowed that any reference to a difference between men and women leads to instant defensiveness. We must proclaim, and loudly, that men and women are exactly alike and can do exactly everything the same. It’s just not true.

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 12:29 PM

NRA Membership Explodes After Newtown: More Than 100K New Members In Last 18 Days…
http://weaselzippers.us/2013/01/10/nra-membership-explodes-after-newtown-more-than-100k-in-last-18-days/

Colbyjack on January 10, 2013 at 12:29 PM

I’m going to the local supply store to acquire more clubs and pitchforks this weekend.

freedomfirst on January 10, 2013 at 12:18 PM

Walmart is having a sale on torches. Don’t forget those.

Flange on January 10, 2013 at 12:31 PM

Okay, I overreacted, you did defend me, and later too. I apologize.

Then I retract my jack wagon characterization and accept.

We must proclaim, and loudly, that men and women are exactly alike and can do exactly everything the same. It’s just not true.

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Strange structure there, but — agreed. Boys and girls are happily different.

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Colbyjack on January 10, 2013 at 12:29 PM

The NRA should say, “We’re here to tell you, with 100,000 new members and still growing, we’re not going to compromise and support any new unconstitutional regulations you want to impose. We’re also going to fight to remove the most insane ones already in place. And another thing: We demand David Gregory be charged for violating the DC law about that magazine. Thank you and have a nice day.”

Then the NRA people walk out.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 12:35 PM

The NRA should say, “We’re here to tell you, with 100,000 new members and still growing, we’re not going to compromise and support any new unconstitutional regulations you want to impose. We’re also going to fight to remove the most insane ones already in place. And another thing: We demand David Gregory be charged for violating the DC law about that magazine. Thank you and have a nice day.”

Then the NRA people walk out.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 12:35 PM

^^^^THIS!^^^^^

PatriotGal2257 on January 10, 2013 at 12:41 PM

I’m going to the local supply store to acquire more clubs and pitchforks this weekend.

freedomfirst on January 10, 2013 at 12:18 PM

If they make ammo hard enough to get, my AR and shotgun basically become nothing but clubs. Maybe I do want that bayonet lug on them afterall….

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 12:46 PM

blockquote>Strange structure there, but — agreed. Boys and girls are happily different.

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 12:34 PM
not that there’s anything wrong with that….

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 12:49 PM

It’s just not true.

Fenris on January 10, 2013 at 12:29 PM

And you are absolutely right, there are differences, but it appears that you are over reacting to the liberal position by over asserting that there are differences. I go to a shooting range 4 or 5 times a year, their are dozens of women who go there with us.

Believe me when I tell you this, the ability to shoot a hand gun or rifle isn’t one of those differences between men and women. The conversation was never about professional military infantry or the physical requirement involved in invading a foreign country. It was and is about average American citizens being legally required to own a firearm.

You attempted to exclude half of America’s population based purely on their sex. Take a good look at Israel’s IDF. They recognize that their are physiological differences between men and women, but require both men and women to serve and both do with distinction, they just do not expect men and women to be interchangeable.

Switzerland is the same way and achieves nearly identical results as Israel. Women can shoot and they can fight. They may be at a disadvantage when it comes to carrying a 90 pound back pack 50 miles a day, but unless you are deploying hundreds of miles from your home, that isn’t a really big issue. Which is why the Israeli and Swiss women integrate so well in their defense forces.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 12:50 PM

Comment pages: 1 2