a425couple
2019-07-01 20:32:40 UTC
from
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/john-r-lott-jr-and-andrew-pollack-dems-and-gun-control-they-want-it-whether-it-works-or-not
John R. Lott, Jr. and Andrew Pollack: Dems and gun control -- they want
it whether it works or not
John R. Lott By John R. Lott | Fox News
The two Democratic presidential debates last week in Miami were marked
by calls to remember Florida’s Parkland High School shooting, which
occurred only 50 miles away from where the debate took place. The
Democrats agreed on two solutions to stop these attacks: impose
background checks on private transfers of guns, and ban “military-style”
“weapons of war.”
Even when the questions weren’t about gun control, candidates still
found ways to bring up the topic.
Many Democrats have a hard time believing that their opponents want to
save lives. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., claimed during the debate,
“It’s the greed of the NRA and the gun manufacturers that make any
progress impossible.” Congressman Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., argued, “The
NRA is taking orders from the gun manufacturers, that’s the problem.”
WHO WERE THE WINNERS, LOSERS OF THE SECOND DEMOCRATIC DEBATE?
But it isn’t a question of who is getting paid off by gun makers. Some
people think that banning guns makes people safer, just as others
sincerely believe that such bans will disarm and endanger law-abiding
citizens.
Many terrorist types want to kill as many people as possible, and are
drawn to gun-free zones where regular citizens are prohibited from being
able to protect themselves.
One of the authors here, Andrew Pollack, experienced first-hand the
disastrous consequences of gun-free zones. His daughter died in the
Parkland massacre.
While all the candidates endorsed full health care coverage for illegal
immigrants, none talked about providing funds to help cover mental
illness for Americans. Gun control was their only solution.
Despite focusing on Parkland, none of the candidates addressed the issue
of school safety, aside from pushing gun control. No one mentioned the
unsafe environment created by leniency, given by both liberal educators
and the police, to troubled youth. While all the candidates endorsed
full health care coverage for illegal immigrants, none talked about
providing funds to help cover mental illness for Americans. Gun control
was their only solution.
It would have been great if one of the debate moderators had asked a
tough question on guns. For example, could background checks on private
gun transfers have stopped Parkland or any other mass public shooting?
The answer, unfortunately, is that such a law wouldn’t have prevented a
single attack in this century.
As to assault weapon bans, banning “military-style” guns won’t come
close to stopping these attacks. Apparently, all of the Democrats in
Thursday’s debate want to buy back and destroy every gun that they
consider to be an assault weapon.
Killers fired handguns in 80 percent of the mass public shootings since
1998. In 54 percent of attacks, handguns were the only weapons used. By
contrast, semi-automatic rifles were used exclusively in just 13 percent
of cases. And given the various definitions of what constitutes an
assault weapon, not all of these rifles would qualify.
Here was Bernie Sanders’, I-Vt., definition on Thursday night: “Assault
weapons are weapons from the military.” But many rifles bear only a
superficial resemblance to military weapons. The oft-maligned AR-15
looks like the M-16, which began being used by the U.S. military in the
Vietnam War, but as a semi-automatic, it only fires one bullet per pull
of the trigger. It isn’t a machine gun.
No self-respecting military in the world uses semi-automatic weapons.
South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg knows that, but he’d rather
give people the impression that military weapons are pervasive. “As
someone who trained on weapons of war, I can tell you that there are
weapons that have absolutely no place in American cities or
neighborhoods ever,” he said on Thursday night.
The vast majority of firearms in the United States are semi-automatics,
and are very useful for protecting people and saving lives. Single-shot
rifles that require reloading may not do people much good when they are
facing multiple criminals. Or, for that matter, if the first shot misses
or fails to stop an attacker. People trying to protect themselves and
their families might not have the luxury of time to reload their guns.
Former Vice President Joe Biden also pushed “smart guns,” a suggestion
not offered by other Democrats. “No gun should be able to be sold unless
your biometric measure could pull that trigger,” he told viewers. But
this technology is no more reliable than your smartphone’s fingerprint
reader. These guns can be jammed if they rely on radio signals, and the
technology is limited only to small-caliber handguns because sensitive
electronics can be damaged by the gun’s recoil. The technology is also
extremely expensive, adding about $900 to the price of a gun. Biden’s
proposed measure would ensure that only the wealthy can own guns.
People like us who disagree with gun control advocates aren’t motivated
by greed. We have kids, too, and we also want them to be safe. We
recognize that the police won’t be there all the time, and that people
sometimes have to be able to defend themselves. Democrats would be more
effective debaters if they weren’t constantly demonizing half the country.
Andrew Pollack was the father of Meadow Pollack who died at the Stoneman
Douglas High School shooting and he can be followed on Twitter at
@AndrewPollackFL
John R. Lott, Jr. is a columnist for FoxNews.com. He is an economist and
was formerly chief economist at the United States Sentencing Commission.
Lott is also a leading expert on guns and op-eds on that issue are done
in conjunction with the Crime Prevention Research Center. He is the
author of nine books including "More Guns, Less Crime." His latest book
is "The War on Guns: Arming Yourself Against Gun Control Lies (August 1,
2016). Follow him on Twitter @johnrlottjr.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/john-r-lott-jr-and-andrew-pollack-dems-and-gun-control-they-want-it-whether-it-works-or-not
John R. Lott, Jr. and Andrew Pollack: Dems and gun control -- they want
it whether it works or not
John R. Lott By John R. Lott | Fox News
The two Democratic presidential debates last week in Miami were marked
by calls to remember Florida’s Parkland High School shooting, which
occurred only 50 miles away from where the debate took place. The
Democrats agreed on two solutions to stop these attacks: impose
background checks on private transfers of guns, and ban “military-style”
“weapons of war.”
Even when the questions weren’t about gun control, candidates still
found ways to bring up the topic.
Many Democrats have a hard time believing that their opponents want to
save lives. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., claimed during the debate,
“It’s the greed of the NRA and the gun manufacturers that make any
progress impossible.” Congressman Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., argued, “The
NRA is taking orders from the gun manufacturers, that’s the problem.”
WHO WERE THE WINNERS, LOSERS OF THE SECOND DEMOCRATIC DEBATE?
But it isn’t a question of who is getting paid off by gun makers. Some
people think that banning guns makes people safer, just as others
sincerely believe that such bans will disarm and endanger law-abiding
citizens.
Many terrorist types want to kill as many people as possible, and are
drawn to gun-free zones where regular citizens are prohibited from being
able to protect themselves.
One of the authors here, Andrew Pollack, experienced first-hand the
disastrous consequences of gun-free zones. His daughter died in the
Parkland massacre.
While all the candidates endorsed full health care coverage for illegal
immigrants, none talked about providing funds to help cover mental
illness for Americans. Gun control was their only solution.
Despite focusing on Parkland, none of the candidates addressed the issue
of school safety, aside from pushing gun control. No one mentioned the
unsafe environment created by leniency, given by both liberal educators
and the police, to troubled youth. While all the candidates endorsed
full health care coverage for illegal immigrants, none talked about
providing funds to help cover mental illness for Americans. Gun control
was their only solution.
It would have been great if one of the debate moderators had asked a
tough question on guns. For example, could background checks on private
gun transfers have stopped Parkland or any other mass public shooting?
The answer, unfortunately, is that such a law wouldn’t have prevented a
single attack in this century.
As to assault weapon bans, banning “military-style” guns won’t come
close to stopping these attacks. Apparently, all of the Democrats in
Thursday’s debate want to buy back and destroy every gun that they
consider to be an assault weapon.
Killers fired handguns in 80 percent of the mass public shootings since
1998. In 54 percent of attacks, handguns were the only weapons used. By
contrast, semi-automatic rifles were used exclusively in just 13 percent
of cases. And given the various definitions of what constitutes an
assault weapon, not all of these rifles would qualify.
Here was Bernie Sanders’, I-Vt., definition on Thursday night: “Assault
weapons are weapons from the military.” But many rifles bear only a
superficial resemblance to military weapons. The oft-maligned AR-15
looks like the M-16, which began being used by the U.S. military in the
Vietnam War, but as a semi-automatic, it only fires one bullet per pull
of the trigger. It isn’t a machine gun.
No self-respecting military in the world uses semi-automatic weapons.
South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg knows that, but he’d rather
give people the impression that military weapons are pervasive. “As
someone who trained on weapons of war, I can tell you that there are
weapons that have absolutely no place in American cities or
neighborhoods ever,” he said on Thursday night.
The vast majority of firearms in the United States are semi-automatics,
and are very useful for protecting people and saving lives. Single-shot
rifles that require reloading may not do people much good when they are
facing multiple criminals. Or, for that matter, if the first shot misses
or fails to stop an attacker. People trying to protect themselves and
their families might not have the luxury of time to reload their guns.
Former Vice President Joe Biden also pushed “smart guns,” a suggestion
not offered by other Democrats. “No gun should be able to be sold unless
your biometric measure could pull that trigger,” he told viewers. But
this technology is no more reliable than your smartphone’s fingerprint
reader. These guns can be jammed if they rely on radio signals, and the
technology is limited only to small-caliber handguns because sensitive
electronics can be damaged by the gun’s recoil. The technology is also
extremely expensive, adding about $900 to the price of a gun. Biden’s
proposed measure would ensure that only the wealthy can own guns.
People like us who disagree with gun control advocates aren’t motivated
by greed. We have kids, too, and we also want them to be safe. We
recognize that the police won’t be there all the time, and that people
sometimes have to be able to defend themselves. Democrats would be more
effective debaters if they weren’t constantly demonizing half the country.
Andrew Pollack was the father of Meadow Pollack who died at the Stoneman
Douglas High School shooting and he can be followed on Twitter at
@AndrewPollackFL
John R. Lott, Jr. is a columnist for FoxNews.com. He is an economist and
was formerly chief economist at the United States Sentencing Commission.
Lott is also a leading expert on guns and op-eds on that issue are done
in conjunction with the Crime Prevention Research Center. He is the
author of nine books including "More Guns, Less Crime." His latest book
is "The War on Guns: Arming Yourself Against Gun Control Lies (August 1,
2016). Follow him on Twitter @johnrlottjr.