This page is still being
developed (updated May 09). It is a resource page I (Larry
Fox) developed
for personal research and, as such, contains links to data and analyses
I wish to investigate. I intend to research the
effects of gun ownership and control in Australia, Canada, Great
Britain, South Africa and Switzerland. Please contact me (thefox@foxven.com) if you
know of good online resources.
These are links to authoritative resources for information and
data related to firearms
(including ownership, self defense, concealed handgun use,
victimization, crime rates, mortality rates).
Mortality data use an international system supported by U.N.
World Health Organization. ICD-10 (International Statistical
Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems), categories
related to firearms: W32-W34, X72-X74, X93-X95, Y22-Y24
Latest additions identified with [New]
U.S. Bill of
Rights, Second Amendment
Second Amendment text (copied from official National
Archives web site)
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a
free
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed."
The U.S. Supreme Courtruled
on 26 Jun 2008: “The Second Amendment
protects an individual right to
possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use
that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within
the home.”
Court Rulings and Legal Interpretations of Second Amendment
Report
of the Subcommittee on the Constitution Senate Subcommittee report,
Feb 1982, "The Right to Keep and Bear Arms" -- historical investigation
of founders' intent for 2nd amendment, meaning of "militia" &
relevant Supreme Court decisions. 22 pages.
General thoughts & opinions regarding Second Amendment (some
items original, some borrowed from other writings)
Key phrase, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,"
clearly refers to "the people"
rather than governments or agencies
The First Amendment clearly refers to "the right of the people peaceably to assemble . .
. ."
The Fourth Amendment refers to "The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers and effects . . . ."
The Tenth Amendment clearly distinguishes between the United
States, the States and the people
"The people" refers
to individual citizens as well as groups of individuals, either formal
or informal.
To claim that "the people"
refers only to a group and not
individuals would mean the First Amendment protects only the right of
groups of people and not individuals to petition the government; no
more personal letters to your Congressman. Likewise, the Fourth
Amendment would only protect groups of people and
not individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures.
Conclusion: "The people"
refers to individual citizens as
well as groups of citizens, never governments or agencies; to claim
otherwise is to distort the very clear language of the Bill of Rights.
"The people"
(individuals as well as groups of citizens) are recipients of rights,
not governments or agencies. Consider the Ninth Amendment: "The
enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
Historical records show the phrase, "for the common defense,"
was suggested but soundly rejected as a qualifier for "the right to
keep and bear arms." Such language would have severely restricted the
use of private firearms, but the proposal was rejected and individual
liberty was preserved.
Key phrase, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the
security of a free State"
The text clearly shows relationship between Militia and
State. A search of the Constitution
and Bill
of Rights clearly shows the word "State" (singular form) never
refers to the United States or nation as a whole; rather, to one of the
several states. Another search shows militias were formed by the
individual states and were called upon by the federal government only
for the common defense.
Historical records show that militias consisted of inividual
citizens (specifically adult white males, in most cases) who responded
as needed and provided their own firearms.
Constitution
of the State of Virginia, Article I, Section 13: "That a well
regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms,
is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore,
the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
"That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen
of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age
of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is
herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in
the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company,
within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve
months after the passing of this Act."
"That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall,
within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or
firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a
knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty
four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each
cartridge to contain a proper quantity of power and ball; or with a
good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and power-horn, twenty balls suited
to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a power [sic] of power; and
shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to
exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days
to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack."
Op/Ed, Richmond Times-Dispatch, 27 Nov 2007 ("Listen to
Reason: The Bill of Rights Is a Package Deal")
"But historical evidence shows the militia was, and still
is, nearly the whole of the adult populace. (Even D.C.'s own militia
ordinance reads that way.) Now consider a parallel construction -- the
statement, 'A well-fed marching band being necessary to the amusement
of a free state, the right of the people to grow and eat crops shall
not be infringed.' Gun-control advocates would say that sentence means
only the marching band can grow food. But that is clearly not what it
means."
Even if the Second Amendment were only to allow the
establishment of militias, the wording still supports private ownership
of arms.
Key word, "keep"
This refers to ownership and in no way implies a collective
right, as in state or private militias.
Does changing technology make the Second Amendment obsolete?
The citizens who fought the occupying British forces used
their personal weapons, the latest technology of the day and equivalent
to that of the occupying soldiers' muskets.
Does changing technology (radio, TV, satellites, cell phones,
the Internet) make the rest of the Bill of Rights obsolete?
Or does changing technology simply affect the way individuals
practice their rights as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights and elsewhere
in the Constitution?
"Number of gun dealers falls sharply" (Richmond VA
Times-Dispatch, 25 Mar 06, quoted from Minneapolis-St. Paul Star)
excerpts
The number of gun dealers in the United States has plummeted
78% in the past 10 years as thousands of home-based dealers surrendered
their federal licenses. . . . But what looks like welcome news to gun
opponents might just have driven gun sales off the books, as fewer
personal gun sales are logged, vetted and tracked by ATF. . . . Once
more numerous than gas stations, people who held the government's most
basic gun-dealer license totaled nearly a quarter-million in 1994. Last
year, the number fell to fewer than 55,000 . . . . According to the
ATF, the number of guns in the U.S. was at an all-time high last year,
with an estimated 223 million firearms. Experts say sales continue to
increase in commercial gun stores.
Excerpts: "A new study suggests the use of handguns in crime
rose by 40% in the two years after the weapons were banned. . . . This
research, commissioned by the Countryside Alliance's Campaign for
Shooting, has concluded that existing laws are targeting legitimate
users of firearms rather than criminals. . . . Examples of illegally
manufactured guns include screwdrivers being adapted to fire off one
round."
Sky
News: London gun crime up 90% (Dec 01) [invalid link]
Excerpts: "Revenge killings among drug gangs have fueled an
explosion in gun murders in Britain. According to latest figures the
number of gun murders in London has leapt by 90% this year. . . . At
least two people a day are now robbed at gunpoint in London."
Excerpts: "While Britain has some of the toughest firearms
laws in the world, the recent spate of gun murders in London has
highlighted a disturbing growth in armed crime. . . . Between April and
November 2001, the number of murders in the Metropolitan Police area
committed with a firearm soared by almost 90% over the same period a
year earlier. Armed street robberies rose, in the same period . . . an
increase of 53%. . . . Although all privately-owned handguns in Britain
are now officially illegal, the tightened rules seem to have had little
impact in the criminal underworld."
Excerpts: "People illegally owning or using firearms will
face a minimum five-year prison sentence, the UK Home Secretary David
Blunkett has said. . . . Blunkett said: 'While we already have some of
the toughest gun laws in the world, there has been an unacceptable
increase in the flagrant use of guns in crime across the country. . . .
Evidence from the Street Crime Initiative has shown that the problem of
possession of handguns lies predominantly with young people who carry
weapons for self-protection or as a means of gaining respect or
revenge, often related to dealing in or the use of drugs. . . . Figures
set to be released by the Home Office are to show that gun crime has
doubled since Labour won power in 1997. . . . A total handgun ban was
rejected by parliament but legislation was brought in to ban guns above
.22 caliber and to restrict smaller caliber weapons to secure gun
clubs. . . . [Britain's leading police officer wrote in a British
tabloid,] 'This culture of mindless violence, which has sprung partly
from the increasing influence of Jamaican and American culture and the
glorification of gang warfare, must be stopped.'"
Sky
News: Violent Crime on Rise (Apr 05) [invalid link]
Excerpts: "Violent crime recorded by police rose 9% in the
final three months of 2004 . . . . Firearms offences rose 10% to 11,082
in the year to December compared with 2003." (Offenses in several
categories fell during the same period.)
Excerpts: U.K. Accident & Emergency Medicine "doctors are
calling for a ban on long pointed kitchen knives to reduce deaths from
stabbing. . . A team from West Middlesex University Hospital said
violent crime is on the increase -- and kitchen knives are used in as
many as half of all stabbings. . . The researchers said there was no
reason for long pointed knives to be publicly available at all. . .
They consulted 10 top chefs from around the UK, and found such knives
have little practical value in the kitchen. . . The researchers say
legislation to ban the sale of long pointed knives would be a key step
in the fight against violent crime."
New York Times News Service (newspaper), British doctors lobby
for knife-control laws (27 May 05)
Excerpts: "Doctors who authored an editorial in the latest
issue of the British Medical Journal have called for knife reform. The
editorial, 'Reducing knife crime: We need to ban the sale of long,
pointed kitchen knives,' notes that the knives are being used to stab
people . . . . The authors of the essay call for laws requiring knife
manufacturers to redesign their wares with rounded, blunt tips."
My opinion: People who advocate such bans are in denial. The
problem is failure to address human nature, not the presence of an
object someone might use to harm another. What's next? Banning rocks,
automobiles and water? Fists?
Brazilians reject gun ban (24 Oct 05, Associated Press).
Brazilians rejected a proposal yesterday to ban guns, striking down the
bid to stem one of the world's highest firearm murder rates. "While
supporters argued that gun control was the best way to stanch the
violence, opponents played on Brazilians' fears that the police can't
protect them. . . . With more than 92 percent of the votes in a
national referendum counted, 64 percent of Brazilians were opposed to
the ban, while 36 percent backed it. . . . The proposal would have
prohibited the sale of firearms and ammunition except for police, the
military, some guards, gun collectors and sports shooters. It would
complement a 2003 disarmament law that sharply restricts who can
legally purchase firearms and carry guns in the street."
Note: The Brazilians were right that "the police can't protect
them." Not only is it impossible for police to protect all the
citizens, it isn't their job.
"Firing line safe" (heavy metal free primers & totally
encapsulated lead core projectiles to greatly reduce lead powder during
firing)(note: "low recoil" failed NJ Criminal Justice guidelines
because did not have recoil comparable to service ammo)
Why not zero tolerance for automobiles? Compare mortality rates
due to firearms and vehicular accidents. We could reduce the national
speed limit to 35 mph to reduce deaths and save fuel, but virtually
no one would find this acceptable. Our unwillingness to eliminate
everything that might kill someone shows the issue really is not loss
of a single life as much as it is personal preferences. Some people
don't like guns, so they wish to eliminate them for everyone. There are
things I do not tolerate, but would you be willing to live your life by
my preferences? No? Then please do not ask me to live mine by yours.
Gun control
Under gun control laws, law-abiding citizens become helpless
victims.
Criminals don't obey gun control laws.
Gun control is about control, not guns.
Those who prefer England's gun control and higher crime rates are
free to emigrate.
N.Y. Mayor Bloomberg should be arrested along with the people he
hired to break the law making straw purchases of firearms.
"Any law that makes self defense illegal or impractical is an
illegitimate law, because such a law ultimately subjects people
to the
criminal element." (Larry Pratt, Gun Owners of America)
If guns cause crime, then keyboards cause misspelled words,
matches cause arson and kitchen utensils cause obesity.
I don't shoot to kill; I shoot to save life.
Assault is a behavior, not a device.
Self defense is both a right and a personal responsibility.
Regarding self defense: When seconds count, the police are only
minutes away.
Free people can own and use guns; subjects and slaves cannot.