Month: February 2017

How The Liberal Media Overstates Number of ‘Mass-Shootings’ By Factor of 10

Excerpt From: The Daily Caller. Written By: Andrew Follett.

A database regularly cited by liberal media outlets overstates the number of “mass shootings” by a factor of 10, according to analysis by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

The website “Mass Shooting Tracker” (MST) has been regularly used by news outlets, like The Washington Post and PBS, to claim “mass shootings” occur much more frequently than they actually do. MST uses an alternative definition of “mass shooting” that greatly overstates their frequency relative to the commonly-accepted definition used by law enforcement and academics.

MST openly acknowledges it uses the alternate definition to “punch a hole in the NRA argument.” NRA refers to the National Rifle Association, the country’s largest gun lobby.

MST’s defines a mass shooting as any shooting where four or more people are injured or killed, not counting the shooter. This isn’t an official definition taken from law enforcement or academia, but appears to be originally created by anti-gun activists on Reddit.

Law enforcement officials define a mass shooting as an event where four or more people are killed, not counting the shooter. This distinction is important, because MST data for January shows there are more than twice as many injuries in mass shootings as deaths, according to TheDCNF’s analysis.

Only 5 out of the 48 alleged mass shootings MST says occurred in January, 2017 — 10 percent — actually meet the law enforcement’s definition of “mass shooting” events.

Only 17 of those mass shootings — or, 35 percent — actually saw multiple people killed.

Only 29 of MST-defined mass shootings — or, about 60 percent — included any deaths at all.

Many of the shootings MST calls “mass murder” were actually grisly murder-suicides, gangland massacres, or robberies. A 2013 Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) inquiry found that only 160 “active shooter incidents” occurred between 2000 and 2013, when gang-related shootings were excluded.


2nd Amendment ‘Sanctuary Counties’ Are Becoming A Growing Trend

Excerpt From: KTVZ, News Channel 21. Written By: Eric Tegethoff.

A measure challenging gun regulations is popping up around the state. Since 2015, four counties have passed a measure known as the Second Amendment Preservation ordinance, and commissioners in Malheur, Union and Lake counties have heard the same measure in the past few weeks.

The ordinance is a reaction to the Oregon Firearms Safety Act, passed by the state Legislature in 2015, which requires background checks for transfers of firearms between private parties. These county ordinances allow sheriffs to ignore this law – which gun advocates see as unconstitutional.

But Ceasefire Oregon Executive Director Penny Okamoto said there’s a fatal flaw in the measure.

“There’s an Oregon firearms pre-emption law that states that counties, municipalities, cities actually can’t make certain laws regarding certain aspects of firearm sales, ownership, storage,” Okamoto said. “So these ordinances or resolutions really are largely very symbolic.”

The legality of this ordinance is still in question.

Rob Taylor of Coos County is one of the chief petitioners for the Second Amendment Preservation ordinance. He said he wants Oregon to have what he called “sanctuary counties” for the Second Amendment.

“The same way Oregon has become a sanctuary state for immigration,” he said.


It’s Time For The Feds To DEREGULATE Gun Suppressors

Excerpt From: The Hill. Written By: Gabriella Hoffman.

Thanks to President Trump’s election, there is renewed interest in promoting safe and responsible firearms use. That includes promoting gun safety in the form of hearing protection. Given precedent and Republican control of all branches of government, it’s incumbent upon Congress to pass the Hearing Protection Act to deregulate suppressors.

Suppressors are gunshot-muffling devices retrofitted for rifles, shotguns, and pistols. When a gun is fired, propellant gases travel from a small barrel chamber into open air. As pressure and temperature change, it results in the blast we commonly associate with guns. When a suppressor is attached to the barrel of a firearm, it allows the gasses contained there to have more space to dissipate and cool before being exposed to open air. Therefore, a suppressor will reduce gunshot noise to safe hearing levels below 140 decibels. This doesn’t mean forgoing hearing protection altogether. In turn, it will reduce gunshot noise by roughly 20 to 35 decibels—which is the equivalent of wearing earplugs or earmuffs.

The Hearing Protection Act has a good shot of passing in the 115th Congress. Why? Renewed interest in deregulating suppressors (also known as “silencers”) came last fall after Donald Trump, Jr. met with SilencerCo, a Utah-based company that manufactures silencers.

“It’s about safety,” Trump Jr. explained in a September video interview with SilencerCo’s founder. “It’s a health issue, frankly.”

Trump is absolutely correct. Suppressors are a hot commodity in the firearms industry. Over 900,000 were sold, per ATF estimates, as of February 2016. Gun owners and other firearms enthusiasts are very concerned about hearing protection. That’s why members of Congress have jumped on board to deregulate them.


Scroll to top