Public Safety Project statement on the July 20, 2012 Aurora, Colorado Movie Theater Mass Murder

July 20, 2012

By Michael D. Robbins
Director, Public Safety Project
PublicSafetyProject.org
Info (at) PublicSafetyProject.org
310-322-7244

Copyright © 2012 by Michael D. Robbins

http://publicsafetyproject.org/blog/2012/07/20/statement-on-the-aurora-colorado-movie-theater-mass-murder/

http://publicsafetyproject.com/files/docs/2012-07-20-psp-statement-on-the-aurora-colorado-movie-theater-mass-murder.pdf

In this Statement:

Introduction
Political Opportunism
Gun Control Increases Violent Crime
Widespread Private Firearms Ownership Reduces Violence
The Worst Mass-Murders Did Not Involve Firearms
Recommendations for News Reporters Covering This and Other Mass Murders
Twenty-One Mechanisms by which Gun Control Increases Violent Crime

Introduction

We at the Public Safety Project extend are deepest heartfelt sympathy and condolences to the victims of the Aurora, Colorado movie theater mass murder, and to their families and friends.

Fortunately, such mass murders are unusual in the United States. However, when they do occur, it is often in a Helpless Victim Zone, euphemistically labeled a “Gun-Free Zone”, where there is a target-rich environment of helpless victims selectively disarmed by dangerous “gun control” laws and the politicians who enacted them. Had some theater patrons been armed with concealed handguns, they may have been able to stop or slow the murderer and save lives.

Such mass murders are often perpetrated by societal misfits who want to become famous. They know they will be rewarded and made famous by liberal politicians, news reporters, and public figures who sensationalize mass murders and exploit them to campaign for more dangerous and counter-productive firearm restrictions.

This happened in the case of Patrick Purdy, who murdered five school children, and wounded 29 other schoolchildren and one teacher, before committing suicide, on January 17, 1989 at Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, California. Liberal, soft-on-crime Democrat politicians including Senator Dianne Feinstein and Attorney General John Van de Kamp, advocacy journalists, and Handgun Control, Inc. all covered up the evidence of our broken-down criminal justice system that allowed Patrick Purdy to commit the mass-murder. They sensationalized and exploited those murders to promote the Roos-Roberti gun ban legislation (AB 357 and SB 292). In the process, they made Patrick Purdy famous.

Purdy had committed seven felonies, attacked a police officer, and kicked out a police car window. He was placed under a 72-hour psychiatric hold and evaluation. The evaluation report indicated that Purdy was both homicidal and suicidal, and was likely to murder multiple other people and then take his own life, which is exactly what he did. Purdy was repeatedly let off easy by liberal judges and prosecutors, and should have still been in prison for many years after the date he committed the mass-murder.

The subsequent investigation determined that Patrick Purdy committed the murders because he wanted to become famous, and the liberal politicians, news reporters, and public figures rewarded him with the fame that he wanted. This only encouraged more mass murders by societal misfits seeking fame.

Political Opportunism

Unfortunately, “usual suspect” politicians, lobbyists, and public figures have chosen to exploit this horrific crime to promote dangerous, counter-productive “gun control” laws that increase violent crime, even before all the bodies were removed, and long before most of the facts could be known.

These political opportunists include New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino, the Brady Campaign (formerly “Handgun Control, Inc.”), leftist Hollywood celebrities, and other public figures in or who support the Firearms Confiscation Lobby. Once again, they are campaigning for more dangerous and counter-productive firearm restrictions that target, punish, harass, and selectively disarm ordinary law-abiding citizens who have no intention of ever committing a violent crime.

Gun Control Increases Violent Crime (GCIVC)

The last thirty-five years of the most complete and accurate scientific criminological research shows that often, gun control increases violent crime, and it never reduces crime. Gun control laws cost thousands of lives each year, and endanger everyone, including those who choose not to own firearms.

This includes research by professors James D. Wright and Peter H. Rossi, professor Gary Kleck, professor John Lott, Jr., and others.

(Reference the Federal Wright-Rossi Report, 1981, commercially published as “Under the Gun: Weapons, Crime, and Violence in America” by Kathleen Daly, Peter H. Rossi and James D. Wright, January 1983; the Federal Wright-Rossi Felon Survey, commercially published as “Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms” by James D. Wright and Peter H. Rossi; “Point Blank: Guns and Violence in Ameica” by Gary Kleck, 1991, 2005; and “More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws”, Third Edition by John R. Lott, 2010.)

At least half of all American homes possess firearms, and it is mathematically certain that nearly all of them are used for lawful purposes and are not used in crimes.

There are about 2.5 million defensive uses of firearms in the U.S. each year, almost always without shooting the attacker. Mere possession and display is almost always an adequate defense.

Gun control shifts the balance of power to favor criminals over ordinary citizens. This is especially evident in mass murder shooting rampages, which are facilitated by the imbalance of power created by gun control laws and business policies that prevent self-defense with firearms. Shooting rampages may last from several minutes to more than a half hour, due to the imbalance of power an armed attacker has over unarmed citizens.

Gun control destroys the multiple crime control and deterrent effects of armed citizens. The crime control and deterrent effects of armed citizens equal or exceed those of the entire criminal justice system, including police, courts, and prisons, according to research by Professor Gary Kleck at Florida State University.

Gun control laws waste, squander, and misdirect limited criminal justice resources, including police, court, and prison resources, by targeting the wrong people. Gun control diverts attention away from real and effective crime control methods that have worked in the past and will work in the future.

And gun control is used as a smokescreen by liberal, soft-on-crime politicians, celebrities, and other public figures, to cover up their soft-on-crime records, and to divert attention away from their failure to support real and effective crime control laws. Most news organizations are willing and eager accomplices. All a liberal politician must do to instantly get lots of free positive national news publicity, that cannot be bought at any price, is publicly call for more restrictive gun control laws.

A more detailed list of twenty-one distinct mechanisms by which Gun Control Increases Violent Crime is provided at the end of this statement.

Widespread Private Firearms Ownership Reduces Violence

Firearms are used at least five times more often for self-defense by ordinary citizens than they are misused in all crimes, suicides, and accidents combined.

Therefore, a complete and accurate cost-versus-benefits analysis, rather than a one-sided analysis, shows that widespread firearms ownership by ordinary nonviolent citizens provides a great net benefit to society, and greatly reduces the overall violence rate. Private firearms ownership should be strongly encouraged rather than discouraged or prohibited.

Scientific research by Professor Gary Kleck found that defense with a firearm is significantly safer and more effective than any other method, including non-resistance.

Gun control laws that target, restrict, punish, and harass ordinary law-abiding citizens, who have no criminal intent, are both counter-productive and immoral. The right to self-defense, which necessarily includes the right to own firearms, the safest and most effective means of self-defense, is a basic Natural right of free people that is recognized by the Constitution.

The Worst Mass-Murders Did Not Involve Firearms

The worst mass-murders committed by civilians (rather than governments) did not involve firearms. That is why liberal, anti-gun politicians, lobbyists, and news reporters restrict their discussion to the worst shooting rampages. Far worse mass-murders are possible and have been committed without firearms in the U.S. and in other countries.

For example, Julio Gonzalez quickly murdered 87 people using one dollar worth of gasoline and two matches, when he set fire to the Happy Land Social Club nightclub in the Bronx, New York City, on March 25, 1990. He set the nightclub ablaze after he had an argument with his former girlfriend who worked there, and was ejected by the bouncer.

Gonzalez was found guilty of 87 counts of arson and 87 counts of murder on August 19, 1991. He was sentenced to the maximum of 25 years to life for each count (a total of 4,350 years). It was the most substantial prison term ever imposed in the state of New York. However, he will be eligible for parole after only 25 years, in March 2015, because New York law states that multiple murders occurring during one act will be served concurrently, rather than consecutively. (Source: Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Land_fire)

Thus, Gonzalez did not get a death penalty, and will be eligible for parole after serving less than 3.5 months for each of the 87 murders. That places an extremely small value on human life.

There are many worse mass-murder examples than the Happy Land Social Club fire. This example was used to illustrate how simple and easy it is to commit mass-murder without any special skills or equipment.

Recommendations for News Reporters Covering This and Other Mass Murders

Here are our recommendations for more responsible and ethical conduct by news reporters and editors in the aftermath of this horrific mass murder. These recommendations are also useful to news consumers to recognize media incompetence and bias.

We recommend that news reporters avoid sensationalizing the mass murder and making the murderer famous, to advance their careers or promote a “gun control” agenda. Making the murderer famous will encourage more mass murders in the future. This happened in the case of Patrick Purdy, who murdered school children on January 17, 1989 at Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, California, as described above.

We recommend that news reporters refrain from including the murderer(s) in the “victim count” or “death toll” if the murderer(s) are killed or kill themselves. Including the murderer(s) in the “victim count” or “death toll” is misleading and disrespectful to the murder victims, because it asserts a moral equivalence between the murderer(s) and the murder victims. State the number of murder victims, and then state separately that the murderer(s) were killed (not murdered) or killed themselves.

We recommend that if news reporters compare the Aurora, Colorado movie theater mass murder to other mass murders, they provide a more complete and competent comparison that includes all types of mass murders, as described above, rather than artificially narrowing the focus to “shooting rampages” to promote dangerous and counter-productive gun control laws.

We recommend that news reporters refrain from focusing attention on firearm and accessory technical details, which news reporters usually misunderstand and get wrong, and which are usually irrelevant to the factors that enabled the mass-murderer to commit the crime.

We recommend that news reporters refrain from insensitive and thoughtless lines of questioning, including questions such as “How do you feel now that your son is dead?” and “Do you forgive the killer?”

These are actual questions asked by TV news reporters when interviewing murder victims’ family members. The latter question about forgiveness demonstrates extreme ignorance, and it trivializes the murder. Murder is an unforgiveable crime, because only the murder victim can forgive the murderer, which is impossible once the murder victim is dead.

We recommend that news reporters and editors use the more accurate word “murderer” instead of “killer”, “shooter”, and “gunman”, which diminish the illegality and immorality of the murders. Likewise, we recommend use of the word “murders” instead of “killings” and “shootings”, and “murder” instead of “kill”, “shoot”, and “gun down.”

Too many misguided reporters and editors avoid using words such as “murder” to avoid being “judgmental.” That is sheer idiocy, and it is disrespectful to the murder victims.

Twenty-One Mechanisms by which Gun Control Increases Violent Crime (GCIVC)

July 20, 2012

By Michael D. Robbins
Director, Public Safety Project
PublicSafetyProject.org
Info (at) PublicSafetyProject.org
310-322-7244

Copyright © 2012 by Michael D. Robbins

The last thirty-five years of the most complete and accurate scientific criminological research shows that often, gun control increases violent crime, and it never reduces crime. Gun control laws cost thousands of lives each year, and endanger everyone, including those who choose not to own firearms.

There are many mechanisms by which gun control increases violent crime, including the following twenty-one mechanisms. These mechanisms include both general and specific effects. Although some of these mechanisms may appear to be similar or to overlap, I believe they are reasonably distinct mechanisms that merit individual entries in this list. Feel free to contact me with any additions or suggestions.

… Continue reading →