New Study Debunks NRA and Gun Nut Propaganda Against Gun Regulations

gun flagEven the mere mention of gun regulations, no matter how sensible they might be, is enough to send most gun fanatics into a fit of rage and irrational hysteria. In my dealings with topics of any kind, gun fanatics are easily some of the most ridiculous people I encounter. These are people who, despite the overwhelming evidence showing that countries with fewer guns have a fraction of our gun violence, still insist that the “solution” to the U.S. leading the modern world in gun violence is more guns.


These are also the same people who often like to say that a gun is no more dangerous than a spoon because a gun can’t shoot itself. Using that logic, a rocket-propelled grenade isn’t dangerous either. Of course, no sane person in this country would think that having over 300 million RPG’s floating around society would be a good thing.

Well, a new study from Johns Hopkins University debunks the commonly regurgitated gun fanatic propaganda that gun regulations won’t have any impact on gun violence.

According to this study, which looked at the 10 year period following the implementation of a handgun permit-to-purchase law in October 1995 in Connecticut, the state saw a 40 percent reduction in gun-related homicides:

Results. We estimated that the law was associated with a 40% reduction in Connecticut’s firearm homicide rates during the first 10 years that the law was in place. By contrast, there was no evidence for a reduction in nonfirearm homicides.

Conclusions. Consistent with prior research, this study demonstrated that Connecticut’s handgun permit-to-purchase law was associated with a subsequent reduction in homicide rates. As would be expected if the law drove the reduction, the policy’s effects were only evident for homicides committed with firearms. (Source)

The law mandated that state residents personally apply for a permit from the police before buying a handgun from any licensed dealer or private seller. It also raised the minimum handgun purchasing age from 18 to 21 and included mandatory safety training classes.

Now, I’m sure any gun fanatic who comes across this will try to find some way to dismiss this study. They’ll come up with some sarcastic comment about Sandy Hook happening in Connecticut (which has nothing to do with this) or they’ll use gun laws in Chicago, a city with an extremely high gun-related homicide rate, to “prove” that this study means nothing.


One big difference between this law and Chicago’s gun laws is that it’s a city vs. a state issue. To get around Chicago’s laws all someone has to do is leave the city limits. In Connecticut, you would have to leave the state to escape their laws, and that’s an entirely different situation.

But when you look at the findings, they’re hard to dispute. The state saw an obvious reduction in gun-related homicide rates following the passage of this gun law, whereas homicides committed in other ways remained the same. If the law had nothing to do with that reduction then homicide rates as a whole would have seen the same sort of reduction, not just those committed with guns.

Unfortunately, this study will have no impact on how gun fanatics feel about gun regulations. Because the fact is, it doesn’t matter how rational the information might be when you’re dealing with people who don’t have the ability to think rationally.



Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • strayaway

    (nationwide) “There were 11,101 firearm homicides in 2011, down by 39% from a high of 18,253 in 1993.” -from a Department of Justice report “Firearm violence, 1993-2011”

    Take your pick: Either the entire country was experiencing a similar decline in gun violence unrelated to CT’s law or CT’s law affected the entire country.

    • zuch

      They controlled for any effects in other states.

  • Erin Anderson

    Anti-gun Communists will not stop until they destroy our Second Amendment rights. Anti-gun Communists like Mike Bloomberg walk around with armed body guards but Bloomberg doesn’t think law abiding citizens shouldn’t own guns for personal protection.

    • zuch

      The fact that you think that anyone anti-gun must be a “Communist” shows that you are one of the people background checks were just made for. They’re coming to check your medicine cabinet as we speak….

      • Erin Anderson

        Go f-yourself, you tool.

      • webejustsayin

        anger problems much?

      • Erin Anderson

        No, just putting that liberal in his place.

      • webejustsayin

        btw, that’s a double negative up there, Erin: “Bloomberg DOESN’T think law abiding citizens SHOULDN’T own guns for personal protection.” Two negatives = a positive. (Knowing English helps.) So what you actually wrote is, Bloomberg does think law abiding citizens should own guns for personal protection. :::::sigh::::: Education would be a great place for you to start.

      • Erin Anderson

        When Bloomberg was major of NY he made it nearly impossible for a law abiding NY citizen to obtain a conceal carry permit. He pushed anti-gun legislation in NY. Bloomberg has a long history of attacking the Second amendment. He’s created anti-gun Communist organizations like ‘Everytown for Gun Control’ and the group ‘Mothers Demand Gun Control’. Bloomberg has a history of trying to control people. He enacted the unconstitutional ‘Stop and Frisk’ program that allowed cops to harass minorities in NY and he even tried to outlaw large soft drink purchases in that city. Bloomberg is a Communist scum bag but I guess that means you like him, right. While this Communist filth walks around with armed security guards he’s doing his best to restrict your rights to carry a gun for protection, which makes Bloomberg a hypocrite.

    • webejustsayin

      rofl. I’ll buy you a musket if you want to stand on the 2nd Amendment as it was originally intended. But WAKE UP! NOBODY – I repeat! – NOBODY WANTS TO TAKE AWAY YOUR F’ING GUNS. Unless you are a criminal, on the No Fly list, or an abuser. You don’t need an assault weapon for hunting. Assault weapons have ONE purpose: to kill human beings – lots of them – at one time. That’s the bottom line. You don’t get one just because you want one. Capisce?

      • Erin Anderson

        Liberals are pushing to make the sale of semi-automatic weapons illegal, so yes Liberals are trying to take way our F’ing guns. As for your no fly list, who determines who’s on that list and what are the qualifications. Where is the due process of the law? You can’t just put someone on a list and refuse them a constitutional right. If I say that Hillary Clinton shouldn’t be president, will I also be put on that list? Under Section 1 of the 14th amendment of the United States Constitution a person shall not be deprived of Life, Liberty or Property without Do Process of the Law!!! Restricting a U.S citizen their Second amendment rights because of a vague “No Fly List” is a direct violation of a citizens 14th amendment right!!! Go it? Do you understand now?!!!!! Liberals like yourself need to educate yourself about the U.S Constitution and stop listening to ignorant people like Barbara Boxer, Chuck Schumer, Mike Bloomberg, Richard Blumenthal and other brainless politicians who want to destroy our Constitutional rights. Wise up and educate yourself, moron.

      • webejustsayin

        Lovely. Just lovely. You are controlled by your FEARS. And when the other guy walks in and hits you FIRST with his/her semi-automatic and you go down for good, just remember: that’s what you wanted. With a temper and a mouth like yours, somebody’s gonna die, criminal or not. Welcome back to the Wild Wild West, folks. Everybody gets a gun, and everybody gets shot. Let me point out to you, dear fellow “moron”, that your bs “right” to own whatever weapon you want DEPRIVES ME of Liberty to walk around freely and without threat; it threatens MY life, and most likely MY property. (btw, why not just purchase a tank? That’s the surest protection – till somebody hits you with a bomb – no, wait a minute – that’s WAR. And that’s what you are headed for.) NOW BACK OFF MY FREEDOM.

      • Erin Anderson

        If you don’t like A.R 15 rifles, then don’t buy one. You as a consumer can send a message to the gun makers and the NRA that you disagree with the Second amendment by voting with your pocketbook. I personally vote with my pocketbook by buying a new guns and donating to the NRA every year in addition to the membership fees that I pay. After watching those moronic liberals with their fake sit-in, I’ve come to realize they’re just a bunch of failures who will never defeat the Second amendment. It’s time you and your liberal buddies realize you have failed and you will never succeed. Now go cry to your momma about the big bad gun people, because I’m sick of listening to you liberal’s whine and cry about your failure to destroy my rights. Take a hike, cry baby.

      • webejustsayin

        wow. Nice mouth. You sound like an egotistical maniac. And a narcissist, for sure. (Check the whining in your mirror.) We’ll be sending a HUGE message this fall. And oh btw, we’re already making progress. Later, toots.

      • Erin Anderson

        You’re “progress” looks like a major failure, sweetheart. Good luck with your plan on destroying the Second Amendment, you’ll need it. Idiot.

      • webejustsayin

        You are a perfect example for the article: “Even the mere mention of gun regulations, no matter how sensible they might be, is enough to send most gun fanatics into a fit of rage and irrational hysteria. In my dealings with topics of any kind, gun fanatics are easily some of the most ridiculous people I encounter. These are people who, despite the overwhelming evidence showing that countries with fewer guns have a fraction of our gun violence, still insist that the “solution” to the U.S. leading the modern world in gun violence is more guns.”

        READ. LISTEN. THINK.

      • Erin Anderson

        Taking away a U.S citizens 14th amendment right of due process of the law isn’t “sensible”, it’s illegal. And if the mere mention of taking away your rights doesn’t anger you, well then you’re a brainless zombie. You need to turn off the mindless television and learn to think for yourself, because once the government takes away your 1st, 2nd, 4th or 14th amendment rights away, you’ll never get it back. You need to value your freedom and stand up to anyone that threatens your Constitutional rights or you’ll end up like the citizens who were once ruled over by Hitler or Stalin. There is nothing more important in this world than your Constitutional rights, because without it you’re nothing more than a slave. As for other countries and their gun control, well I could care less about their anti-freedom policies because I live in the United States, a country who’s citizens value and protect the U.S Constitution and the rights it provides. Now, if you don’t like the Second amendment then you should move to a country that values gun control, but don’t you dare try to destroy my gun rights. Got it?

  • Charles Vincent

    Once again Allen and the left and the WAPO article are full of shit.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2015/06/14/fact-checking-one-of-the-worst-wapo-gun-control-stories-ever/

    • zuch

      You notice they didn’t actually do anything but sniff their noses and say, “not proven, ha-ha, gotcha”. Certainly no proof any other factors explain the results. And they ignored the fact that non-gun homicides didn’t fall….

  • tony

    your comment makes no sense. kinda hard to expect gun laws in Chicago to actually do anything when you can drive 15 minutes and get as many as you want.

    • webejustsayin

      exactly.

  • zuch

    You notice that lots of people have pointed out that Chicago is a city and guns are freely available right outside Chicago? Hell, you can take the “El” ad go buy yourself one.

  • webejustsayin

    Well, duh – they get their guns from Indiana – which has next to no gun safety regulations.