Tag Archives: NRA

Video Games and Violence

The latest scapegoat promulgated by the NRA, gun manufacturers, and talking heads like Joe Scarborough for the unrelenting gun carnage taking place in this country––3,000 gun deaths since Newtown––is to blame the video game industry rather than the proliferation and easy access to guns.

But is there ANY evidence linking video games and gun violence?

The simple answer to that question is, “No.”

Some research and aggression studies have shown that playing violent video games can stir hostile urges and mildly aggressive behavior in the short term. And children who develop a gaming habit can become slightly more aggressive — as measured by clashes with peers, for instance — at least over a period of a year or two.

However, there is no definitive research indicating that playing violent video games over longer periods increases the likelihood that a person will commit a violent crime like murder, rape, or assault, much less a massacre.

If violent video games actually caused people to commit violent acts, then we would expect to see those violent acts in Japan, England, France and the rest of Europe. After all, don’t the youth of those countries play violent video games? Of course they do. But the youth and gangs in those countries are not killing each other in the streets. I wonder why?

Interestingly, as reported by Science Daily, according to a study by University of California sociology professor Augustine J. Kposowa in the February issue of the journal of Social Psychiatry & Psychiatric Epidemiology, states with the highest rates of gun ownership — for example, Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Alabama, and West Virginia — also tend to have the highest suicide rates.

“Kposowa is the first to use a nationally representative sample to examine the effect of firearm availability on suicide odds. Previous studies that associated firearm availability to suicide were limited to one or two counties. His study also demonstrated that individual behavior is influenced not only by personal characteristics but also by social structural or contextual attributes. That is, what happens at the state level can influence the personal actions of those living within that state.”

If we’re going to have a serious debate on gun violence, then let’s quit introducing red herrings and unsupported facts that distract from solving the real problem at hand.

Gun Myths

One of the ongoing myths in the gun debate is that more and more households in the U.S. are rushing out to purchase firearms, fearing that President Obama and Congress are planning to “take away our guns” in the near future. But the latest General Social Survey, a public opinion survey conducted every two years since in 1973, shows just the opposite is happening.

The household gun ownership rate has actually fallen from an average of 50% in the 1970s to 34% in 2012, continuing a downward trend that began in the 1980s.

So what about all the headlines and data claiming that gun sales are skyrocketing?

Researchers believe that increased gun sales have been limited primarily to current gun owners.

The downward trend in household gun ownership coincides with the decline of hunting and a significant drop in violent crime. According to the 2012 survey, only 25% of men said they hunted, compared to 40% of men in 1977. Urbanization also has contributed to the decline. Only 17% of the population now lives in rural areas, which traditionally have the highest gun ownership, compared to 27% in the 1970s.

The rate has dropped in cities and the suburbs as well, and in households with and without children, households that attend church and those who don’t, and for those who say they are happy and for those who say they are not. In other words, the decline in gun ownership is broad based.

The survey might help explain recent polling data that show the majority of households support closing the gun show loophole by requiring universal mandatory background checks, banning the sale of semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines, and prohibiting high-risk individuals from having guns, including those with mental illnesses, those convicted of a serious crime as a juvenile, and those who violate a domestic-violence restraining order.

Whether Congress is willing to listen to the will of the people or to the gun lobby remains to be seen. But the significant decline in gun ownership should coincide with a significant decline in the power and influence of the NRA.

Wayne’s World

In the fantasy world where NRA CEO and shill for the gun manufacturers, Wayne LaPierre, lives, the US is just one natural disaster away from a complete societal meltdown in which armed gangs roam the streets and chaos reigns. The only way to save our country, according LaPierre, and ourselves, is to buy as many semi-automatics with high capacity magazines as possible.

Then, when the “government” decides to confiscate all guns, we’ll flee with our wives and children to the hills where we’ll conduct some Red Dawn guerilla war in which we defeat the whole military industrial complex, that, for inexplicable reasons, have all decided to support a president and congress that has voted to abolish the second amendment.

In the meantime, we, the majority of the people who don’t believe Armageddon is in our future and who support common sense changes, cannot make ANY change to current gun laws. In fact, LaPierre believes we should continue to loosen laws to make it even easier for “law abiding citizens” to own and to carry firearms.

One of the tenets of the NRA’s arguments for loosening gun controls is that thousands of gun permit holders have used their weapons in self-defense. However, an investigative report from the Star Tribune in Minnesota shows that claim, like many the NRA makes, is completely false. Since 2003 only 5 instances of justifiable use of firearms by a permit holder have been reported. Three other cases were documented, but not reported. The FBI reported an average of 250 justifiable homicides per year from 2006-2010, an average of 5 per state, or well in line with what Minnesota has reported.

On the flip side, the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension reports show that permit holders have been convicted of 124 crimes using a firearm during that same period of time. Nineteen of those cases were assaults, ten were for carrying under the influence, six were for drug-related crimes, and one was a homicide.

For those of us who believe Armageddon is not in our future, or that the “government” has no intention of taking away our guns, this Star Tribune report undermines the arguments of those who live in the alternate universe known as Wayne’s World, and for those who believe more guns make us safer.

The Hypocrisy of The NRA

We constantly hear from the National Rifle Association that we don’t need more gun laws. We just need to enforce the laws we have. The federal agency primarily responsible for enforcing gun laws is the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. So what has the NRA done to help the AFT enforce current gun laws?

In 2004, a Republican congressman and friend of the NRA from Kansas, Todd Tiahrt, added an amendment to a bill regarding the ATF. Until that point, data had been kept on the history of guns used in murders and shootings, which allowed police and policymakers to trace them back to corrupt dealerships and other holes in the system. The rule change written by the NRA and known as the Tiahrt amendment, made this data much harder to acquire. It also forced the justice department to destroy within 24 hours the records of any gun buyer whose background check was approved. The overall impact of the amendment made it much harder for police to clamp down on illegally distributed guns.

Thanks to Wisconsin Republican senator James Sensenbrenner’s provision in the Patriot Act reauthorization in 2006––supported by the NRA––the director of the ATF now has to be confirmed by the senate instead of merely being appointed by the President. The ATF has been without a director ever since. Sensenbrenner was given the NRA’s Defender of Freedom Award that same year.

The NRA has made several attempts to usher through Congress an “ATF reform bill” that would make it much harder – some say virtually impossible – to revoke the gun-selling licenses of crooked dealers. If passed, the ATF would have to prove the dealer’s state of mind, in terms of his or her premeditated intention to break the law.

The NRA backed legislation prohibiting AFT agents from inspecting a firearms dealer more than once a year. They’ve fought against the creation of a federal registry to track gun sales and backed legislation from releasing information from its firearms trace database. The NRA opposes legislation that would close the gun show loophole requiring background checks for all gun sales. They’ve even opposed measures that would allow background checks to block terror suspects from buying guns.

If there were any doubts as to the NRA’s feelings toward the AFT, it can be summed up in the words of its Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre. “If I were to select a jack-booted group of fascists who were perhaps as large a danger to American society as I could pick today, I would pick the ATF. They are a shame and a disgrace to our country.”

So much for the NRA’s contention that we just need to, “fully enforce existing federal gun laws.”

Gun Rights Tipping Point?

In the wake of the carnage in Newtown, Connecticut and the predictable handwringing from politicians that follows, I’m hearing something from the NRA that I hadn’t heard after all the previous mass shootings in this country––silence.

The NRA has issued none of their well-rehearsed and meaningless statements designed to shut down any reasonable debate on sensible gun legislation. You’ve heard them all before. “It’s too early to talk about gun legislation,” or “Guns aren’t the problem, people are,” or “There are plenty of laws on the books to keep guns away from criminals. We just have to enforce them,” or “No amount of legislation can prevent these tragedies from happening.” Perhaps––and I say this with a great deal of pessimism––perhaps the country has finally had enough of the slogans and insanity.

Congress can start by reinstating the assault-weapons ban. The ban expired in September of 2004. When the AWB was in effect, it was illegal to manufacture any firearm that met the law’s definition of an assault weapon or large capacity ammunition-feeding device, except for export or for sale to a government or law enforcement agency. The law also banned possession of illegally imported or manufactured firearms, but did not ban possession or sale of pre-existing ‘assault weapons’ or previously factory standard magazines that were legally redefined as large capacity ammunition feeding devices.

Next, Congress can close the gun show loophole. To date, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) has prevented nearly 1.8 million criminals and other prohibited purchasers from buying guns. Unfortunately, current federal law requires criminal background checks only for guns sold through licensed firearm dealers, which account for just 60% of all gun sales in the United States. A loophole in the law allows individuals not “engaged in the business” of selling firearms to sell guns without a license—and without processing any paperwork. That means that forty percent of guns sold in the United States change hands without a background check.

The law also has a deterrent effect—prohibited purchasers are less likely to try to buy guns when they know comprehensive background check requirements are in place. In fact, Adam Lanza tried to purchase an assault weapon prior to the shootings, but had to wait for a background check. So, he used his mother’s assault weapon instead.

This brings us to one more step the country––and parents––can take. Nancy Lanza should never have had guns in her home knowing that her son had emotional and behavioral problems. It was the height of irresponsibility. She paid for it with her life, as did twenty-six others.

A survey by Mother Jones found that at least 38 of 61 mass shootings in the past three decades “displayed signs of mental health problems prior to the killings.” A recent article in Reuters points out that two-thirds of the states have cut mental health funding. Mentally unstable individuals, along with convicted felons, have forfeited the right to own a firearm. We need to make it more difficult for them to obtain weapons.

These are all sensible steps that can be taken. No, they will not prevent another tragedy from happening. But by taking these steps, we may finally tip the balance in our favor.

The Futility of The Gun Debate

As politicians from both sides of the aisle mourn the loss of lives in the latest mass shooting, we hear little about the need for a policy change. Neither President Obama nor candidate Mitt Romney dared to mention the words “gun control” as they expressed sorrow for the victims––such is their fear of upsetting the NRA, the most powerful lobby in Washington.

It’s a familiar scenario. After every incident, politicians wring their hands and offer condolences to the victims and their families. Then, after the funerals, life returns to “normal” as we wait for the next mass shooting. Let’s face it; no matter how many die due to gun violence, the citizens of this country have apparently accepted these rampages and the deaths of hundreds of innocent people as the price we have to pay for having the loosest gun laws in the industrialized world.

The shooter, James Holmes, easily acquired a military-style semi-automatic assault rifle, a shotgun, and two Glocks at local gun stores within two months. He was able to purchase 6,000 rounds of ammunition over the Internet. Yes, you heard that right, 6,000 rounds. He also bought an urban assault vest, two magazine holders, and a knife from an online supplier of tactical gear for police and military personnel. The owner was reported as saying that his company processes thousands of orders each day, and there was nothing unusual in the one that Holmes placed.

Gallup polls over the last two decades show the percentage of Americans who favor making gun control laws “more strict” fell from 78 percent in 1990 to 44 percent in 2010. Revenue to the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence has declined while the NRA’s donations have increased.

According to a recent Reuter’s poll, while only 32 percent of households owned a gun in 2010, the majority of Americans support the right to use deadly force to protect themselves, and two of every three respondents had a favorable view of the NRA.

Congress hasn’t approved any major new gun laws since 1994, and a ban on certain semiautomatic rifles expired in 2004. Some states have loosened gun laws to allow gun owners to carry concealed weapons or adopted “Stand Your Ground” self-defense laws.

So while the NRA and its supporters may have won the debate, the country as a whole has lost. And no matter how many condolences and excuses are offered to the victims and their families, the NRA has blood on its hands, as does anyone who votes for politicians who support the organization and this country’s lax gun policies.

The Gun Show Loophole

The Associated Press reported today that guns used in shootings at the Pentagon in March and a Las Vegas courthouse in January both came from Memphis where they were once in police custody. The guns were sold to license gun dealers and then fell into the hands of men who purchased them in Nevada. John Patrick Bedell, who was prohibited from buying a gun because of mental illness, bought a Ruger at a gun show in Las Vegas that did not require background checks. While one can certainly question the thinking that allows police departments to put more guns in the market, the question we really should ask is why we continue to allow unregulated sales at gun shows? The answer to that question is the NRA.

The AP report comes on the heels of the NRA’s latest fear campaign in which they called a Minnesota House bill that would have forced private sales at gun shows to go through background checks, “a dangerous piece of legislation.” They claimed it was “a stepping stone for gun control advocates seeking to ban all private sales, even among family and friends.” The House bill never got out of committee.

The NRA website states that only 0.7 percent of guns involved in crime are purchased at gun shows.  The information comes from a 2001 Department of Justice survey given to criminals in prison. The DOJ never attempted to verify the firearms reported in the survey or trace them to determine their chain of possession from original retail sale to the time they were transferred to the inmates surveyed. But let’s assume that the criminals told the truth and the survey was accurate, an admittedly dubious assumption at best. 0.7 percent sounds pretty small, but is it? According to Bureau of Justice statistics about 582,000 of reported murders, robberies, and aggravated assaults in 1993 were committed with firearms. If we use the percentage from the survey, then nearly 41,000 of the murders, robberies and aggravated assaults committed in 1993 were committed with handguns purchased at guns shows. Stolen guns account for only about 10% to 15% of guns used in crimes.

An ATF gun show investigation found that felons were associated with selling or purchasing firearms in 46 percent of the gun show investigations. Firearms that were illegally diverted at or through gun shows were recovered in subsequent crimes, including homicide and robbery, in more than a third of the gun show investigations. Only 60-70% of firearms sales in the United States are transacted through federally licensed firearm dealers. The rest are sold in the secondary market, which includes gun shows and private sales. The AFT reported that only 8% of the nation’s 124,000 retail gun dealers sell the majority of handguns that are used in crimes. They conclude that these licensed retailers are part of a block of rogue entrepreneurs tempted by the big profits of gun trafficking.

25 percent of all adults, and 40 percent of American households, own at least one firearm. Despite NRA arguments to the contrary, no one is trying to take handguns away from these individuals. But this country does have a huge problem. In 2005, 75% of the 10,100 homicides committed using firearms in the United States were committed using handguns. Homicide rates in the United States are two to four times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it. Rates of gun-related homicides are greatest in southern and western states where gun laws are generally the most lax.

While cracking down on corrupt dealers is a priority for the ATF, more states should join the 17 that currently have some form of background check for purchases at gun shows. And more politicians need to quit being afraid of the NRA and to use some common sense when it comes to closing the gun show loophole.