Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 15:01:03 -0500 From: [E--rS--r] at [aol.com] To: [firearms alert] at [shell.portal.com], [talk politics guns] at [cs.utexas.edu], Subject: Doctors Treat Congressman's Unfounded Fears with Facts Message-ID: <[960221150102 227786290] at [emout04.mail.aol.com]> Press Release Doctors for Integrity in Policy Research, Inc Edgar A. Suter MD, National Chair 5201 Norris Canyon Road #220 San Ramon CA 94526 USA e-mail [E--rS--r] at [aol.com] For Immediate Release February 21, 1996 Doctors Treat Congressman's Unfounded Fears with Facts Like a child who fears monsters under the bed at night, Congressman Schumer has an irrational fear of guns (but not of the related publicity from which he benefits). Most recently, his fears have led him to attack the First Amendment rights of gun manufacturers to advertise their products. He, allied with the anti-self-defense lobby, has asked the Federal Trade Commission to prevent truthful advertising about the enormous protective benefits of guns. Since the Federal Trade Commission participated in Rep. Schumer's press conference, we wonder about the FTC's objectivity and whether the FTC will be used as the Centers for Disease Control's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (CDC-NCIPC) has used tax money to prostitute science in service of a political goal.[1,2] Fortunately there is a cure --- a large dose of truth. There are fourteen studies[3] that show guns are used 1 to 2.5 million times each year for protection. Guns are used to save lives, prevent injuries, avert medical costs (because lives are saved and injuries are prevented), and protect property. The most recent and most comprehensive of these studies, Kleck & Gertz' National Self-Defense Survey, leans towards 2.5 million annual defensive gun uses.[4] Rep. Schumer ignores or defames these studies, but he is not in good company. Marvin E. Wolfgang, one of America's most renowned criminologists, states "...I would eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the police. I hate guns..."[5 at 188] yet he says of the Kleck and Gertz study: "The Kleck and Gertz study impresses me for the caution the authors exercise and the elaborate nuances they examine methodologically. I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology. They have tried earnestly to meet all objections in advance and have done exceedingly well."[5 at 192] Rep. Schumer has turned his back on this mountain of data and focused on a single irrelevant study, the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) that doesn't even directly ask a single question about the protective use of guns to pretend that guns are not useful for protection. Wolfgang notes that the NCVS does not undercut studies such as Kleck & Gertz' National Self-Defense Survey.5 [at 188] The NCVS, which claims about 60,000 to 80,000 protective gun uses annually, is designed to study crime victimization, not protection. The NCVS asks no questions about the use of guns for protection. Of all the studies, NCVS is the only one that is not anonymous, so respondents may not be so forthcoming. The design of the NCVS also leads to dramatic undercounts of some of the most important crimes inviting the protective uses of guns --- domestic violence and rape. Even gun prohibitionists recognize that the NCVS may identify less than one-twelfth of spousal assault and one-thirty-third of rapes.[6] With all these strikes against it, is it any wonder that the NCVS finds less than one-sixteenth to one-fortieth of the protective uses of guns found in every one of the fourteen other studies? Guns save lives, prevent injuries, avert medical costs, and protect property as many as 2.5 million times annually. Americans use guns to protect themselves, their families, and their livelihoods. These are savings with which we can live . [1] Kates D, Schaffer HE, Lattimer JK, Murray GB, and Cassem EW. "Guns and Public Health: Epidemic of Violence or Pandemic of Propaganda?" Tennessee Law Review. Spring 1995; 62(3): 513-596. [2] Suter EA Waters WC 4th Murray GB Hopkins CB Asiaf J Moore JB Fackler M Cowan DN Eckenhoff RG Singer TR et al. "Violence in America - Effective solutions." J Med Assoc Ga June 1995; 84(6):253-263. [3] Field Institute, Tabulations of the Findings of a Study of Handgun Ownership and Access Among a Cross Section of the California Adult Public (1976); Bordua et al. Illinois Law Enforcement Commission, Patterns of Firearms Ownership, Regulation and Use in Illinois (1979); Cambridge Reports, Inc. An Analysis of Public Attitudes Towards Handgun Control (1978); DMI (Decision/Making/Information), Attitudes of the American Electorate Toward Gun Control (1979) [two studies]; Peter D. Hart Research Associates, Inc. Violence in America Survey (1981); The Ohio Statistical Analysis Center, Ohio Citizen Attitudes Concerning Crime and Criminal Justice (1982); H. Quinley memorandum reporting results from Time/CNN opinion poll of gun owners (February 6, 1990) [available on DIALOG Public Opinion online]; Gary Mauser, Firearms and Self-Defense: The Canadian Case, presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Society of Criminology (October 28, 1993); Gallup poll (1991); Gallup poll (1993); LA Times poll (1994); Tarrance poll (1994); and Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun, Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Vol. 86(1) 1995, 150-187. [4] Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun." Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Vol. 86(1) 1995, 150-187. [5] Marvin Wolfgang. "A Tribute to a View I have Opposed." Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Vol. 86(1) 1995, 188-192. [6] Colin Loftin & Ellen J. MacKenzie. Building National Estimates of Violent Victimization 21-23 (April 1-4,1990) (unpublished background paper prepared for the Symposium on the Understanding and Control of Violent Behavior, sponsored by the National Research Council).