So the Brady Campaign has released their State Scorecards for this year. Have a look at the press conference.
Right off the bat “Gun Death” is the magic metric. Furthermore they somehow claim that states like New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts are somehow the safest states.
First up its a cherry picked lie, just about all the the ultra-gun-friendly states that are the sea of Red on their map are vastly safer than the top ranked Brady states. To further hide their sinister tracks they use the metric “Gun Death”, because All the stories in the “Gun Death?” Files don’t count in their eyes, and they consider the person cornered in an alley by a gang member with a knife or a pipe, is vastly safer than say hanging out at my Uncle’s house in Maine where you can hear the locals shooting at the sandpit, or in their backyards, and the local cops are only concerned with petty crime, juvenile mischief, and traffic.
Their lie is dying, but don’t let it go unchallenged. Whenever you hear somebody say “Gun Death” call them on it!
Further Rebuttal here by Cam Edwards of NRA News….oh and when you watch the above video note what it looks like behind the camera.
Well speaking for myself, I would much rather be killed by a club, prison shank, or horde of blood thirsty zombies than a gun. Guns are SO evil 🙂
You can keep speaking for yourself, bub! 😉
I’d rather be sitting in an Adirondack chair sipping beer and smoking a find cigar.
Odd, I followed the vid to youtube where I found out that “reasoned discourseTM” had already broken out over there! Comments are off! Now how are we going to politely tell Paul that his data is BS?
Yeah that’s Brady SOP, no comments, no feedback.
Paul Knows he’s a liar, he’s well compensated for his soul!
Sorry- could watch 32 seconds of it before I wanted to stab my computer to death…
That’s okay, stabbing it does not count as a “gun death” so it is fine!
So, the Brady Bunch is saying that if they can get a long list of restrictions in place the number of “gun deaths” will go down. But, notice that there are still plenty of gun deaths in the supreme example of California with a score of 80. If it got to a score of 100 would there be no gun deaths? Sorry, they still would be there. So, then they will have to come out with a HUGE list of additional gun restrictions, and they absolutely must be universally adopted so there are no “soft” states, and then we get to the state of nirvana of absolutely no “gun deaths” (their goal)…right?
Wrong! We’ll be like the current Great Britain in that crime goes up! Murders and rapes still occur, sometimes even with the use of guns by the criminals! Except in this situation, the average decent citizen is at the tender mercies of the criminals. Now that is a dark future I wish to avoid.
I regularly rant about this since I am now educated on the topic, but really we are concerned over details when someone needs to shoot the elephant in the room. Namely, there should be very, very, few laws, if any, regarding firearm ownership. The Second Amendment is plainly written and its intent is crystal clear to those who bother to read the words of the Founding Fathers. Those who wish to restrict my access to firearms are in error, legally and morally.
So long as you don’t use a gun its OK!
Of course they only pay attention to “gun deaths” – if they were to pay attention to all murders (perish the thought), they would see that their “scorecard” is precisely meaningless.
Color me surprised…
Yep that’s been the general consensus. Gun Control, as well as “Gun Death” are meaningless when it comes to the bottom line we’re all concerned about, which is safely living our daily lives. Those who preach the gun control rhetoric essentially are saying they only care about restricting guns and gun owners, and aren’t concerned with public safety or violent crime.
Indeed really if we could make a graph showing the % of the population involved in street gangs and/or the drug and prostitution black market suddenly there would be quite the correlation.
The graphs posted show that what the Bradies score on are not relevant.