Welcome to Common Gunsense

I hope this blog will provoke some thoughtful reflection about the issue of guns and gun violence. I am passionate about the issue and would love to change some misperceptions and the culture of gun violence in America by sharing with readers words, photos, videos and clips from articles to promote common sense about gun issues. Many of you will agree with me- some will not. I am only one person but one among many who think it's time to do something about this national problem. The views expressed by me in this blog do not represent any group with which I am associated but are rather my own personal opinions and thoughts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Gun control lies?

You will notice on this blog that I provide many links to articles, charts, graphs, and opinions from as many sources as I can find. Some of them happen to be gun control groups or individuals, others do not. But I do always provide links. I am not a liar and have never actually been called a liar in my entire life until I started writing this blog. That is not who I am. I don't believe that anyone who knows me who would call me a liar. I find it unseemly, disingenuous and snarky of the guys on this blog to use the word liar to distract from the truth. Here are a few of the lies they are claiming about me and gun control groups. Remember now, I am just listing what people commenting on this blog claim are lies:
  1. from the Violence Policy Center- " "Assault weapons - just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearms - are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons - anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun - can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.""
  2. many perceived lies from one commenter:" "gunshow loophole" (there is no such thing; there is no separate rule that applies to gun shows)
    -Tiahrt Amendment restricts local law enforcement (it specifically does not do so; on the contrary)
    -Pistol grips to "spray fire from the hip" (yeesh)
    -Sugarman's use of the "scary" look of AR-15's to get the public to believe they are "machine guns"
    -"heat-seeking" rounds in .50 caliber rifles (OK, that one's just pure stupidity); or that these rifles are designed to "shoot down airplanes"
    -Traver (the President's appointment for BATFE) using full-auto AK-47's on TV advocating restricting "assault weapons," knowing that they are already banned. "
  3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRQqieimwLQ&feature=relate -No such thing as a heat-seeking bullet -- thats a lie."
  4. Paul helmke "we are not a gun ban organization"
    Video link- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6u8VO_ngJk&feature=player_detailpage#t=143s
    -Brady website quote
    POSITION: The Brady Campaign supports banning military-style semi-automatic assault weapons along with high-capacity ammunition magazines. These dangerous weapons have no sporting or civilian use. Their combat features are appropriate to military, not civilian, contexts. "
  5. from my "friend" Anthony ( who, by the way has been incessantly badgering me about why I am not writing this post as if he can tell me how to run my blog) " also in that last video Paul claims that real gun manufactures sell guns with orange painted tips. I can not post some thing that does not happen so I leave it up to you to show that he is correct with a picture from a gun manufacturer that sells a real firearm with a painted tip."
  6. a link to a video showing a lie: http://www.bradycampaign.org/media/press/view/1359 
  7. -" Assualt weapons; Prior the AWB, the nation was lied to that these were the weapons of choice of gangs and drug lords. Sarah Brady and others made this statement. Truth.was the DOJ said that was not the case and they were used in way less than one percent of the gun crimes. "
  8. MN. Paymar brings back from the dead his gunshow loophole bill. "experts"'say this is where criminals get their guns. Truth was spoken by a Ramsey County deputywho said they had never. Repeat NEVER traced a gun recovered and tied to a crime, back to a gun show sale. "
  9. Carry laws. "experts"' testified that the blood would run like a river in the streets if the carry law was passed. Truth is it's never happened."
  10. Carry laws. "experts"' testified that the blood would run like a river in the streets if the carry law was passed. Truth is it's never happened."
  11. Andrew Travers indicating that fully-automatic AK47's were easily available to the general public."
  12. Other claims were made that Rep. Carolyn McCarthy is lying in her bill to ban high capacity magazines and that what she, and those who support the bill want, is to send them all immediately to jail upon passage of the bill. I have already responded to that perceived lie in an earlier post.
So you can see that it would take a long reply to right the wrongs claimed here. In looking at them, I have not found any outright lies. What the "gun guys" want to believe is that I and the gun control organizations are purposely lying to the public so that our true agenda of banning their guns can be more easily carried out. Yes, there was an assault weapons ban from 1994-2004 that banned certain types of guns from manufacture and sale to keep them from getting into the market where they can be used by people who shouldn't have them. Of course, the ban on some guns was not meant to be a ban on all guns and didn't affect hunting or self defense uses. But to say that because an organization supported a ban on certain type of guns considered by most to be unnecessary and, yes, scary, is a gun banning organization is a stretch. A lie? Hardly.

No blood has not "run in the streets" since laws allowing people to carry guns in public have been passed in most states. I'm sure some on my side said that would happen. Was that a lie? Hardly. It was an exaggeration. The gun lobby also said that these laws would result in fewer gun deaths because of people being able to protect themselves. That did not happen either. A lie? Hmm- maybe an exaggeration. In fact, what happened is that in states with laxer gun laws and more gun ownership, gun deaths are higher. 

Is there such a thing as a "gun show loophole"? Is that a lie for me or gun control groups to say so? This one has been countered by me many times on this blog before. Of course there is a loophole in federal and many state laws allowing private sellers to sell their guns to anyone without a background check. Now to be more accurate, it could be called a private seller loophole but it is still a loophole in the law. I don't know how much more clear that one needs to be since it is a fact. To call it a lie is a lie. 

Heat seeking bullets or orange tipped guns? Much has been made of the first one though I was unaware of it being said at all. Is it a lie or just a mistake? As to orange tipped guns, they are apparently the airsoft type of guns used for sport and the tips are often colored orange to distinguish them from real guns. I'm not sure what the fuss is about that one since it is not a lie but a fact to talk about them as what they are.

I'm not sure what the fuss was about #6. It is a press release from the Brady Campaign about things that can be done about background checks to strengthen the system. Lies? No. Oh, and the "gun guys" hate the idea of appointing Andrew Travers to be our next Director of the ATF. Of course, they don't want a director and really don't want the ATF because it is inconvenient for them to have to abide by the rules. There are claims that the ATF is dishonest and sometimes goes after gun dealers in error. ( are these lies by the way?) As to Travers, he allegedly made a statement about AK47s being available to the general public that the gun lobby didn't like. Did he lie? " But the idea of an ATF director who hails from Chicago, a city without gun shops, and who has conflated black market automatic weapons with legal semi-automatic "assault-style" rifles is causing Second Amendment defenders to worry that President Obama intends to blast away at gun rights by force of bureaucracy, if not law." Also from the article: " The National Rifle Association and gun rights bloggers panned Traver's Nov. 17 nomination, saying his role as an adviser to an antigun-violence conference attended by Chicago Mayor Richard Daley proves that he's an "antigun zealot." Traver is also involved in the International Association of Chiefs of Police, which lobbies for tougher firearms laws to decrease urban gun violence." But does he lie? It's so easy to call someone a liar when you don't agree with them or their policies. But you really have to come up with something that shows that they really told a lie about the facts. That is not the case with Andrew Travers.

Let's see now, where were we? Oh yes, the Tiarht amendment. Does it restrict law enforcement? Is this a lie? Here is some fact checking about this one from http://protectpolice.org/facts. From the fact checking article: " However, the Tiarht Amendments continue to restrict what state and local law enforcement can do with trace date they have gathered."  Hmmm. Who's lying here?

Well Anthony, that's about it from me. I don't see any outright lies here. I see things you and others disagree with and I see some mistaken language or people saying things inartfully. But lies? Not so much. To call something you don't agree with a lie is easy. To try to counter something you don't agree with by providing an opposing argument based on facts is much harder. To just say, "You lie" ala Congressman Joe Wilson, and then smugly think you have scored a point is childish and vindictive but serves no purpose other than to score points with a base of folks who agree with you and instill fear using your own lies.  I am providing facts where I can and I am going to continue to do so. If you want to have a "discussion", let's have a discussion. Name calling, haranguing, badgering, rude comments, provocative and accusatory comments and just plain nonsensical comments are not working. Calling me and those with whom I work liars definitely doesn't work. Common sense is what I'm after and I will continue to work towards that. I won't be spending much time on my blog defending false accusations about lies unless you can find something that fits the definition of the word. 


And the last word on this post is about an actual lie coming from the gun rights side. This blog: http://gunbanner.wordpress.com/2011/04/07/gun-control-road-map/ is written by a gun guy or girl posing as a gun control advocate. I could tell right away that the language did not represent my side of the issue. Such deception and actual lying is childish at best. I kicked someone else off of my blog who bought the url to commongunsense.net just to make trouble and try to direct traffic to her/his own blog and deflect it from mine. People like that are not honest and not interested in any sort of sensible discussion of issues. I have no time for them. So please everyone, don't make any more comments about lying coming from my side. They are not happening. People who live in glass houses......

18 comments:

  1. As an FYI I merely asked when we could expect it. I though I had posted it and saw no reason for it not to be published and though maybe I did not send it. I wrote it again and prefaced it with the fact that I may have sent it already. I sometimes will write a post then get distracted and close the window. I in no way was telling you how to run your blog.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Violence Policy Center quote - "The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons" is not a lie, it is a public statement of an intent to deceive as a matter of determined policy.

    In other words, it is a declaration by the originator of the "assault weapons" lie that he knows it is a lie, and he knows that the people he is addressing know it is a lie, but that he believes it is a lie that will succeed in generating public support for their shared goals.

    It's not an accident, it's not a mistake, it's not ignorance. It is willful and intentional deceit.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Here is the lie that pushed me from the middle to more toward the NRA side:

    I supported the Assault Weapon Ban because most gun control groups and figures touted the 650 sporting rifles and shotguns that were specifically exempted by the law.

    But then those same gun control groups and figures support "renewal" bills that would have repealed that exempted gun list and would have banned guns that they had specifically promised to exempt.

    (Proof for the above is available upon request.)

    The result: Not only was there no AWB renewal, but they probably lost me and many other moderate gunowners from supporting any future gun ban.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jdege is quite correct. Also, another thing wasn't brought up.

    A few topics back, you posted a list of "features" that were on so-called "assault" weapons, with alleged descriptions of how they add to the lethality of the firearm.

    Someone on the thread pointed out that of the ten or so features that were described, only two could be considered any thing close to accurate.

    I've checked - that list goes back to the original ban, with no attempt to correct the list or apologise for the errors.

    Therefore, it's fair to state that such a list was not only a lie, it was a deliberate and shameful attempt to hoodwink viewers.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Of course, they don't want a director and really don't want the ATF because it is inconvenient for them to have to abide by the rules. There are claims that the ATF is dishonest and sometimes goes after gun dealers in error."

    What evidence do you have that us "gun guys" don't want a BATF director? We don't want Traver because of the reasons we have cited. Other than Traver I can't think of anyone the NRA has opposed for the position. Do you have links to show otherwise?

    ReplyDelete
  6. "As to orange tipped guns, they are apparently the airsoft type of guns used for sport and the tips are often colored orange to distinguish them from real guns."

    You are missing the point entirely. Helmke said that real gun manufacturers are making real guns with orange tips in order to make them look like toys.

    That is a lie.

    ReplyDelete
  7. please, Jay- would love to see proof.

    ReplyDelete
  8. President Bush's nominee for ATF director blocked by NRA supporters- http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Idaho+senators+block+Bush's+ATF+pick-a01611426731

    ReplyDelete
  9. orange tipped guns- http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2010/03/criminals-painting-orange-tips-on-real.html

    ReplyDelete
  10. Another lie is when Pete Shields, speaking on behalf of what is now the Brady Campaign, promised not to seek laws against long guns.

    Gun control advocates say: "That was years ago." So that means that promises by gun control advocates become void with the passage of time.

    We say: "Yes -- exactly!"

    ReplyDelete
  11. Joan,

    The link for orange tipped guns that you provided above clearly states that criminals are painting them orange in an attempt to confuse or fool police. Mr. Helmke, on the other hand, stated that firearm manufacturers were producing guns with orange tips - which is the lie to which Anon and the rest of us who have commented about this, are referring to.

    ReplyDelete
  12. BTW - the gunbanner blog is a parody site.

    You should have figured that out from:

    "As a violence policy advocate, it’s important to note that none of what I write is personal conjecture but instead comes from the study of statistics, polls, and opinion found through research of web sites on the Internet. It’s come to my attention that gun owners belong to the NRA and are Tea Party Insurrectionists Extremist Gunophile Fetishists. It’s also notable that they will often give up their families, careers, and even their life to have “Wild West” type shootouts over minor disputes such as parking spots or to compensate for some other shortcoming. Again, this is not personal conjecture but consensus among the public as verified in the Comments sections of several web sites."

    ReplyDelete
  13. We are of like mind and are peers.

    Join the Coalition!

    Everything I post is information that I’ve learned from the writings of gun control groups, their supporters, and supporting commenters. None of this is personal conjecture. A little searching will show this to be true. I’m doing my part to help spread the message.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Frankly, there is no need for the atf.

    Not that we don't see some need for firearms regulations somewhere, but the tobacco part the alcohol part and the explosives parts are all done by other agencies better and less politically.

    tobacco is managed by the USDA, the alcohol is managed by the FDA, and bombs are handled by the FBI. all that is left is guns, and frankly, the ATF can't manage that to save their jobs, so lets fire them all. 12 billion dollars a year savings off the deficit right there.

    This is not an anti gun control effort, its a budget effort. Disband the TSA while their at it. another 21 billion saved. Energy department, remember them, supposed to work tirelessly to lessen our dependence on foreign oil? Jimmy Carter's baby, 29 more billion wasted dollars.

    Lookie right there, nearly 60 BILLION saved a year.....Take the DEA and start having them tax weed and well, we got no deficit at all in a couple of years.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Get over yourself Jay. Pete Shields is dead. Things have changed. It's 2011.

    ReplyDelete
  16. In case you didn't notice, I did figure it out and I'm calling out the person who wrote it. It is meant to be seen as a sight to look like it is coming from my side of the issue. Dishonest comes to mind.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Dear anon- the name is Joan, not Jan and I love how you guys love to use my name over and over while attacking. It's a technique meant to intimidate. It's not working and your comments are so ridiculous as to not be published. Sorry.

    ReplyDelete