Recently,
the Supreme Court ruled that a resident of Washington D.C. has a Constitutional
right to own a firearm for self-defense in the home.[1]
Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence,
declared: “Our fight to enact sensible gun laws will be undiminished
by the Supreme Court’s decision in the Heller case.”[2]
But
what exactly qualifies as “sensible,” according to Helmke?
We must travel back to the year 2001 to answer this question.
For
many years, the Brady Campaign released an annual “report card,”
grading each state on its level of “sensible” gun laws.
States with higher grades (e.g. “A”) were obviously more
“sensible,” according to Brady; states rated “F”
were apparently considered “non-sensible.”[3]
The
first interesting detail in the 2001 version of this report card is
that Washington, D.C. is missing. This is also true for Brady’s
2002-2004 reports.[4]
This is a curious omission because the Brady Campaign is on record as
supporting the D.C. ban on functioning firearms––Helmke
said “we [Brady Campaign] disagree with the Supreme Court’s
ruling”[5]––and
it seems reasonable that their report card would be an excellent opportunity
to highlight D.C.’s success, since surely a total firearms ban
rates an “A.”
Also
in 2001, the North Carolina State Center for Health Statistics, as part
of their Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), asked respondents
from all over the country the following question: “Are any firearms
now kept in or around your home? Include those kept in a garage, outdoor
storage area, car, truck, or other motor vehicle.”[6]
Results
from this survey were collated with Brady’s 2001 grades. After
sorting by gun ownership levels, states were divided roughly into quartiles:
under 30% gun ownership rates (12 states); 30-40% (14 states); 40-50%
(15 states); and over 50% ownership rates (10 states). There is a clear
correlation between low levels of gun ownership and higher Brady grades:
Only the first quartile of states, incidentally with the lowest levels
of gun ownership (average 16.5%), were rated well by Brady, averaging
a grade of B+. Quartiles 2-4 had average grades of D+, D+, and D-, respectively.
This indicates that Brady’s definition of “sensible”
gun laws equates with laws which restrict or prohibit gun ownership.
Unfortunately
for Brady, there is another correlation which demands attention. Each
year, the Federal Bureau of Investigation releases their annual Uniform
Crime Report, reporting on major violent and property crimes committed
around the country. Included in their crime tabulations is a Table 4,
which compares the current year’s crime rates to the previous
year’s. This enables the FBI to report on updated data for the
previous year’s, reflecting corrections and late entries from
participating law enforcement agencies from across the country. As a
result, Table 4 in the 2002 Uniform Crime Report has more accurate
crime data for the year 2001.[7]
Brady’s
favored group––with the B+ average grade––had
a average violent crime rate of 610.0 in 2001.
Violent crime levels dropped sharply in quartiles 2-4: 424.5, 410.7,
and 319.6, respectively.[8]
Brady makes much
of the relationship between guns and crime, particularly firearms deaths.
Helmke states:
Our
weak or non-existent gun laws contribute to the thousands of senseless
gun deaths and injuries in this country that occur each year.[9]
However,
Brady’s B+ group had an average homicide rate of 7.6. As gun ownership
levels increased, murder rates decreased: 4.9 for quartiles 2 and 3,
and 4.2 for quartile 4 (the states with over 50% gun ownership rates).
Not
only do Brady’s “best” states have low levels of gun
ownership, but they averaged relatively high levels of violent crime
and murder. More interesting is that in 2001, 10 of 12 states in the
B+ quartile were not Right-to-Carry (RTC), while all 10 states in quartile
4 were RTC.
In
practical terms, Brady’s criteria for “sensible gun laws”
translates into less civilian gun ownership and an inability for law-abiding
citizens to protect themselves against violent criminals, flying in
the face of the Supreme Court ruling that concluded:
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.[10]
What’s
sensible about higher violent crime rates?
Endnotes:
1
- See District
of Columbia et al. v. Heller, No 07-290, Supreme Court of the United
States, Syllabus. 2
-Statement
Of Brady President Paul Helmke On Supreme Court Second Amendment
Ruling, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, June 26, 2008. 3
- See The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 2001
Report Card, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, January 22,
2002. 4
- See The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 2002
Report Card, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, January 2,
2003.
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 2003
Report Card, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, January 9,
2004.
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 2004
Report Card, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, January 12,
2005. 5
- Statement Of Brady President Paul Helmke On Supreme Court
Second Amendment Ruling. 6
- North Carolina State
Center for Health Statistics, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance
System, BRFSS Survey Results 2001 for Nationwide: Firearms. For further
discussion of this survey, see Is Philadelphia’s
Violence Due to Firearms Availability? 7
- Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime
in the United States, 2002, Table 4 - Index of Crime by Region,
Geographic Division, and State, 2001-2002, pages 68-77. 8
- Discussion of correlations between Brady grades and crime
rates based upon Excel workbook compiled from Brady Report Card, BRFSS
Survey Results 2001, and FBI Uniform Crime Report. Email request for
workbook. 9
-Statement Of Brady President Paul Helmke On Supreme Court
Second Amendment Ruling. 10
- District of Columbia et al. v. Heller, page 1.
Howard
Nemerov is a “recovering” gun control supporter. He began
to research the issue of gun control on his own, and what he found transformed
his perspective. Now he writes to help gun owners become better emissaries
when talking about gun rights, and to help undecided people understand
the underlying principles of the right to self-defense.
Howard
is a contributor for the Texas State Rifle Association’s “TSRA
Sportsman” and appears frequently on NRA News as an Analyst At Large,
talking about gun control and its threat to our way of life and liberty.
His new book is “Four
Hundred Years of Gun Control: Why Isn’t It Working?”
Where the emphasis has been on rhetoric and legislation, this book includes
extensive data analysis from neutral and even pro-gun-control sources
to determine if the rhetoric is true, and if the laws have worked...after
Four Hundred Years.
Unfortunately for
Brady, there is another correlation which demands attention. Each year,
the Federal Bureau of Investigation releases their annual Uniform
Crime Report, reporting on major violent and property crimes committed
around the country.