Gun Lobby Group Argues That More Access Is Needed To Gun Data

Gun violence prevention advocates, public health researchers and members of the media are the "usual suspects" pushing officials at different levels of government for information about firearms used in crime.

Unfortunately, these groups are frequently stymied by the Tiahrt restrictions, which place unnecessary limits on what government officials can say about such weapons. This secrecy helps keep the public in the dark about the nature of the illegal gun market, and makes it difficult for public officials to formulate policy to disrupt illegal gun trafficking and use.

Now, in the wake of the tragic shootings of four Oakland police officers in March, a California gun lobby organization known as Calguns finds itself also trying to get crime gun information about the weapons used in those murders. In their case, they want to oppose efforts to make high-capacity ammunition magazines harder to get in California rather than stop illegal gun sales, but their position is instructive.

Former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, "You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." Apart from their views about gun violence prevention, the effort by Calguns suggests that they too realize that the public needs to know the facts about guns involved in shootings and other crimes in order to adequately debate gun policy.

The question of public access to crime gun trace data is a little dry, and it may be difficult to keep the public's interest for very long. Still, if we want to do something about the 100,000 deaths and injuries from guns that occur every year in this country, we need to learn more about what guns are used in crime and where they come from.

It was because of these issues that candidate Barack Obama made a specific promise to repeal the Tiahrt Amendment during his 2008 campaign. His Administration has yet to do what he promised, however, and efforts to combat the illegal gun market - which fuels gun crime across America - are suffering because of it.

(Note to readers: This entry, along with past entries, has been co-posted on bradycampaign.org/blog and the Huffington Post.)

 

 

Comments

[djcrsn]

So Paul, I was wondering when you would post your usual rant about the Chicago gun case

[molonlabe]

Helmke, Henigan, Sugarmann to soil their drawers in 5, 4, 3, 2,...........

"Sept. 30 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to decide whether the constitutional right to bear arms, which already restricts federal gun-control laws, also applies to states and cities. The justices today said they will resolve a politically charged question they left open in 2008 when they declared in a 5-4 vote that the Constitution’s Second Amendment protects individual rights. The new case stems from a challenge by local residents to a handgun ban in Chicago. "

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=abn4vsFQjvu8

An all-out, fast and furious plea to emotionalism from the anti camp coming soon to a biased MSM outlet near you. h/t to Say Uncle.

[legaleagle 45]

molonlabe wrote: "An all-out, fast and furious plea to emotionalism from the anti camp coming soon to a biased MSM outlet near you. h/t to Say Uncle."

Except that they will not have the support from the left side of the dial as they did with Heller. The key here is the Privileges or Immunities" argument (Bloomberg got it wrong in describing it as the Privileges AND Immunities clause... which clause does not appear in the 14th Amendment, but does appear in Article IV, Section 2 of the Constituion... a distinction which is only important to constituional nerds.

[OdinsEye]

How does one go about submitting info for a amicus brief?

[legaleagle 45]

In case anyone is interested, SCOTUS granted cert in McDonald v. Chicago (08-1521). That is the incorporation case to determine whether the 2nd Amend applies to the states. Lead counsel for petitioners is Alan Gura, who also was lead counsel in Heller.

This will be the most important 2nd Amend case outside of Heller and will have far reaching effects.

[molonlabe]

Didn't mean to steal your thunder, eagle. But as you've probably noticed, engaging in any kind of "flowing" conversation/debate on these blogs lately has been excrutiatingly futile. I don't know what's up with the moderation, but at times, I feel like I'm trying on a Commodore 64.

[djcrsn]

I liked my Commodore--good computer--but I wonder if Paul has the integrity to stay on the sidelines since he has claimed in print that the extremes are off the table. The gun BAN in Chicago is certainly an extreme position, but I fully expect Paul and Shedances to do the usual dance supporting the Chicago laws

[legaleagle 45]

"Didn't mean to steal your thunder, eagle. "

No problem, my post was first anyway.... neener, neener.

[beatbox]

How come Paul never mentions the dozen ATF investigations Bloomberg potentialy jeopardized when this info was available.

[crustycrab]

If you want to save lives then get some folks in California to push for better access to government records on the make, model etc. of vehicles used in drunk driving deaths. The danger must be hidden in there somewhere and could be solved with some legislation modeled after California gun laws.

[OdinsEye]

What Calguns needs is not so much trace data as firearm details.

Calguns doesn't need to know who previously owned the firearm, where it was bought, the names of the officers involved in its recovery, etc. which have been exposed by making trace data completely public and have been misused by the gun control lobby.

Honestly, had the gun control lobby behaved more responsibly with the trace data back when they did have access, access would not have become restricted to researchers.

[Just4]

In the California the media and law enforcement agencies follow a specific play book when reporting a shooting. They start with “person shot with high powered rifle” then during updates move on to “person shot with Assault Weapon” and finish with “bullets sprayed from AK-47”. This is an overt attempt to sway the public against firearms because they’d like you to believe that some guns are more “evil” than others so that you will support some kind of ban which could lead to a complete prohibition. Those who care to follow up on these stories find out after the fact that there was no AK-47 involved, no “assault weapon” involved or even a “high powered rifle” involved. That is the case with the Oakland shootings and Calguns, who are staunch defenders of California gun rights, would like to put an end to this misleading practice.

[OdinsEye]

Yep.

Gun controller/media speak: "... a Tech-9 high power sub-machine gun".

Reality: " ... A TEC-9 semi-automatic 9 mm pistol".

Gun controller/media speak: " ... an extremely powerful AR-15 assualt rifle firing armor piercing bullets".

Reality: " .. a low power AR-15 semi-auto firing standard practice/plinking ammo".

[woodsman01]

What happened to real journalism? If you insist on misrepresenting information, go into politics.

[benEzra]

We do have a fair bit of information about the guns actually used in violent crimes (as opposed to, say, those merely traced because they were found in the closet of someone arrested for check fraud or pot possession).

Murder, by State and Type of Weapon, 2008 (FBI Uniform Crime Reports)
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/data/table_20.html

For example, we know that all rifles combined (including so-called "assault weapons," aka the most popular civilian rifles in America) accounted for for 3.0% of murders in 2007, and 2.6% in 2008. Out of 14,180 total murders, all styles of rifles combined were used in only 375 murders in 2008, down from 450 in 2007.

This is not obscure or arcane information; it just doesn't reinforce the MSM's demonization of rifles with handgrips and magazines that stick out, so the media doesn't cover it.

[OdinsEye]

I wonder if Paul has ever figured out why the Tiahrt amendment was proposed and passed to begin with?

[Gidster]

Since it did not ban all firearms, it did not interest him.....

[HST]

The American people willingly give away their 4th and 8th constitutional amendment rights for a false promise of security (by the government no less), but 2nd amendment -whoa!

Just ignore those words "well regulated miltia".

Facts, we don't need no stinkin' facts about guns cause that would lead to rational thinking on the subject. Hunters need automatic weapons, high capacity magazines and armor piercing bullets dontcha know?

[OdinsEye]

The right to keep and bear arms is not dependent on participation in a militia. The militia phrase tells an improtant reason why the right to arms should not be infringed, not why or when the right exists.

Full-auto firearms are very strictly controlled items. Armor piercing bullets are already restricted. The Second Amendment is not about hunting.

[Thirdpower]

"Facts, we don't need no stinkin' facts"

As you so eloquently prove w/ your lack thereof.

[Toonadude]

"Facts, we don't need no stinkin' facts"

Sounds like a discussion in the George W. Bush admin. ----- Bush, Cheney, Rummy, and Rove discussing whether to invade Iraq.

And go ahead and "skritch" away, Tirdpower ----- it's well established that Bush went by his "beliefs" and never let facts get in the way.

And the NRA never let that major flaw in Bush's character get in the way of its endorsements of Bush.

[Berettasskeeter]

Please, when you return to your high school sophomore history class tomorrow, ask your history teacher about the meaning of those words. You might also take advantage of your dad's computer, which you are currently using, to research the laws concerning automatic weapons and armor piercing ammunition.
Semper fi

[Ohio9]

Look who's talking. Someone who thinks that the second amendment is about hunting and that automatic weapons are easy to get clearly has no understanding of the facts.

[mike102]

Here's a fact for you, since you don't seem to have any yet.

Welcome to the 'Unorganized Militia', 'cause you're in it:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/usc_sec_10_00000311----000-.html

[OdinsEye]

""His Administration has yet to do what he promised,"

Because his own advisers looked into BC and VPCs claims regarding the amendment and found that BC and VPC were incorrect.

[Ohio9]

The gun control lobby never cared about facts. That's why they desperately try to keep the number of successful defensive gun uses by civilians hidden from the public. They don't really care about using gun trace data for fighting crime. That's because such data is useless for that measure, since only a limited number of crimes guns are submitted to the ATF for tracing, and such tracing sometimes involves guns that are found at crime scenes, but are later determined not to have been used in the crime.

The only thing they want access to the data for is so they can resume their effort to sue the gun manufacturers out of business with groundless lawsuits. That's what they were using the data for before it was restricted and why the restrictions were passed.

But if the gun banners really want to expose the public to the facts, they should start by admitting the FOP (America's largest police union) and the ATF both strongly SUPPORT the Tiahrt amendment and oppose its repeal:

http://www.fop.net/servlet/display/news_article?id=411&XSL=xsl_pages/public_news_individual.xsl

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1836341/posts

[Thirdpower]

"His Administration has yet to do what he promised,"

Shock.

"efforts to combat the illegal gun market - which fuels gun crime across America - are suffering because of it."

And the facts to support this claim? Is there a nationwide spike in crime? Or are the Brady's 'efforts to combat the illegal gun market' really efforts to limit the legal gun market?

[djcrsn]

Last time I checked, crime is going down, there was no spike in crime after the Clinton AWB expired--there is no case for 99% of what Paul is advocating for

[Gidster]

Paul is advocating the banning of all firearms. That is the ultimate goal here.

Responsible gun laws and actual enforcement!!!

[LindaCat]

This is from a few years back by Michael J. Sullivan, acting director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), U.S. Department of Justice

http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/22041

I don't recall any change in policy since then.

If there is a LEGITIMATE Law Enforcement purpose for the data - it will be provided. Otherwise forget it.