Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: [t--o--h] at [shell.portal.com] (Todd Tolhurst)
Subject: Gary Kleck Article
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1993 18:52:06 GMT

The Sunday Republican, Waterbury, Connecticut
August 22, 1992 pg. 1A2

Scholar's book blows gun control arguments out of the water

By Michael Browning
Knight-Ridder Newspapers

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. -- Gary Kleck never set out to become the
academic darling of the National Rifle Association.  That is a
wholly unlooked-for byproduct of his research on guns in America

     "I am treated as a hero by people with whom I have
absolutely nothing in common," said the slender professor of
criminology at Florida State University.  "I'm a stereotypical
liberal.  I belong to the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union),
Common Cause, several environmental grouper.  I am a paying
member of the Democratic Party."

     But Kleck, 42, is also the author of a controversial book,
"Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America," whose conclusions
challenge much of the accepted wisdom about gun use and abuse in
the United States, as well as undermining many of the strongest
arguments for gun control.

     Through 512 pages of statistical research, tables and
footnotes, Kleck makes the case that guns are twice as likely to
be used defensively as aggressively; that they thwart crime far
more often than they abet it; that their availability has little
or no impact on provoking violence; they are far more likely to
be owned by law-abiding citizens than by criminals; that banning
certain classes of guns, such as handguns or automatic weapons,
is futile; and that guns serve a useful purpose in protecting a
large, non-violent majority of "victims" from a violent minority
of criminals.

     Kleck favors gun control but says most current schemes for
gun control are silly, unrealistic and unworkable, given the fact
that there are about 200 million guns in the United States now,
and that 45 percent of all American households have one or more
of them.

     Instead of targeting certain types of guns -- handguns,
"Saturday Night Specials," assault rifles and so on -- and
attempting to drive them out of circulation, Kleck says we should
target certain types of people -- those with criminals records,
those who are mentally disturbed, those with a high potential for
violence -- and deny then all guns, any type of gun, long or
short, fast or slow, by means of rigorous background checks and
stiff penalties for obtaining weapons illegally.

     "I regard the NRA's knee-jerk response to gun-control
proposals -- get tough on criminals, build more jails -- as even
dumber than the gun-control lobby's agenda.  It is like the NRA
is playing poker with the gun control lobby and saying `I'll call
your stupidity and raise you one.'"

     His controversial book costs $60 and scarcely 10,000 copies
have been printed for the scholar and library market, so it isn't
likely to reach a mass audience.

     His book has stirred a lively debate in some academic
circles.  His opponents say Kleck's research looks impressive,
but some of it is based on flimsy foundations and flawed surveys,
and that he has therefore leaped to conclusions.

     In fact, Kleck says he was somewhat surprised at the results
of his research.

     "Before I undertook this study I had all the normal
preconceptions.  I was a pro-control academic.  I believed
instinctively that people should not have guns," he says.

     "Bit I learned that those reactions were based on very
shallow research.  no one really knew much about this question
until the mid-1970s.

     "Gradually I came to see that the best available evidence
did not support the case that is usually made for gun control;
that guns automatically lead to violence.

     "I learned that the subgroups of the population who owned
the most guns -- the old and the wealthy -- demonstrated the
least violence; while the subgroups of the population who were
least likely to own guns, the young and the poor, tended to be
the most violent."

     Here again, Kleck draws fire from his critics: "He tends to
break the whole population down into two neat categories: Victims
and aggressors," McDowall said.  "I think in many assaults it is
very difficult to tell who is the victim and who is the
aggressor."

     Kleck's most controversial funding, the one that has most
endeared him to the NRA, is this: The number of times guns are
used defensively is probably twice as great as the number of
times they are used criminally.

     "All my statistics indicate that there are at least 600,000
cases a year of guns being used criminally, both reported and
unreported cases.  But: The number of instances in which guns are
used defensively is on the order of 1.2 million times a year."

     Here again, however, Kleck's critics have attacked his
research.  "The National Crime Survey, a survey conducted by the
government, indicated that guns are used defensively only 60-
65,000 times each year," McDowall said.  "There is a huge
discrepancy between Kleck's figures and these figures."

     Kleck defends his research as sound.  "We called up 4,977
households scattered throughout the 48 contiguous states.  The
telephone numbers were randomly generated by a computer.  We took
all responses in confidence, and made sure that the times when a
gun was used was against a person, not against a rattlesnake or
some animal.  We were measuring cases of guns being used against
people who were committing criminal acts," he said.

     "I just point out that if you are a victim with a gun you
are likely to be successful in defending yourself from a criminal
attack.  You are less likely to get hurt if you have a gun.  That
is not my opinion.  That is a statistical fact."
--
Todd Tolhurst, WA1M   \\   "Those who would sacrifice essential liberty
Waterbury, CT          \\   for a little temporary safety deserve neither
[t--o--h] at [shell.portal.com]  \\  liberty nor safety."  - Benjamin Franklin