Recently, the anti-Second Amendment group, The Brady campaign to Prevent gun Violence, came out with another of their "scorecards" where they rank states according to how bad or good gun laws there are -- according to their anti-gun reckoning, of course. Upon its release, the MSM warmed up its anti-gun machine and began touting this "scorecard" as if it were gospel. Headlines blared how "good" a state was because it restricted guns or how "bad" it was if it ranked as a state with fewer restrictions on guns according to Brady. Of course, all this assumes straight out that this Brady organization "scorecard" is the correct view of guns, as if they are correct in their assessment. And their assessment is that guns are bad. Period.
I will feature two of those stories to show the point, here. One is from the Columbus Dispatch, Columbus, Ohio. The second is a story from the News-Times, Danbury, Connecticut. The first laments that its state ranks "low," in scores and the other happily touts that its state is "third-best."
The Ohio paper gives a headline with a dire warning that "Ohio scores low in gun-control study." We find the Columbus Dispatch leads with the news that Ohio scored only "13 points out of a possible 100" on the Brady scale. The paper laments that, "Ohio is not doing enough to protect its citizens against gun violence, according to an annual scorecard released Thursday by backers of the Brady gun-control law."
They also quote a gun-control advocate about the supposedly disappointing score.
Toby Hoover of the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence said Ohio has not passed key laws on mandatory background checks on all gun purchases and bulk purchases of handguns.
To their credit they give time to the pro-gun folks, but the headline and lead paragraph certainly informs the reader where they lean. With a headline that claims the Ohio score is "low" and the front half of the story filled with the anti-gun position, we get the drift.
And, that is the better story of the two.
The next one from the News-Times doesn't even give a single line to the other side of the issue.
With a sunny headline that proudly proclaims that, "State's gun laws ranked third-best in nation," the News-Times fills us in on all the good tidings of anti-Second Amendment info.
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence ranks Connecticut in third place among states with the toughest gun laws in the nation.
But, the paper feels slighted despite Connecticut's wonderful "rating" by noting that the Brady folks didn't take into account their newest, gun grabbing state law.
And while the Constitution State achieved 54 points out of a possible 100, a statewide organization says the Brady scorecard fails to give Connecticut credit for having a law no other state has to confiscate guns.
"Connecticut has a unique law on its books, a law that several other states are now considering," said Lisa Labella, co-executive director of Connecticut Against Gun Violence in Trumbull.
"The law allows police to apply for warrants to seize guns from the possession of people who pose a threat to themselves or others."
This long piece ends with this stern warning by Kaitlin Lesnick, a spokesman for Mayor Bill Finch of Bridgeport, CT.
"According to the Brady scorecard, Connecticut is doing well, but there is room for improvement. Strengthening neighborhood policing will help to control illegal guns."
Of course, in neither story are the words "Second Amendment" or "Constitution" to be found. As in every anti-gun story, the fact that we are talking about a Constitutional right is nowhere to be seen. It just isn't a concern that the issue happens to be an American first principle, one upon which the entire country was built.
These two stories were not alone, of course. There were many just like it across the country as news rooms scrambled to give all the exposure to the Brady group as they could to help advance their agenda.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Over My Dead Body
February 6, 2008 - 22:44 ET by Barker"To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them." - George Mason, Founding Father
Hillary " Have it your way
February 6, 2008 - 22:52 ET by SemperrightHillary " Have it your way Barker, Janet warm up that tank."
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference.
The MARINES don't have that problem."
President Ronald Reagan - 1985
Janet warm up that tank
February 6, 2008 - 23:11 ET by BarkerKaty bar the door.
Sure laugh now but when
February 6, 2008 - 23:15 ET by SemperrightSure laugh now but when Janet Reno kicks down your door in a skin tight under armor and hip boots what are you gonna do?
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference.
The MARINES don't have that problem."
President Ronald Reagan - 1985
You sir, are a very, very
February 6, 2008 - 23:21 ET by RESTLESS 1You sir, are a very, very sick man there Semperright. :)
Oh, and you made your point. Nobody is laughing after that mental image in your post. NOBODY.
Sorry everyone
February 6, 2008 - 23:22 ET by SemperrightI think I may have just cause more nightmares than Freddy Kruger
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference.
The MARINES don't have that problem."
President Ronald Reagan - 1985
Why aren't these people the ones shot in malls?
February 7, 2008 - 00:34 ET by HippopaulimusThese idiots are so full of Crap!
Connecticut's gun control laws backfired on these jerks, but look at them pat themselves on the back....
15 years ago, any law abiding citizen of CT could purchase a handgun and bring it home, or to the range, unloaded and locked in the trunk of the car. It was very difficult to get a carrier permit. You needed a good reason (own a business, late night deposits, security, etc...).
Then these fools changed the law so that you needed a conceal carry permit to even bring the gun home from the store, let alone out to the range. But, rather than cut down on gun usage, as they hoped, it forced the State to change it's policy and grant a conceal carry permit to whoever took the gun safety class and applied for a permit. No criminal record?, no further questions asked.
So, rather than decrease gun use, they greatly increased the amount of people here in CT who not only own , but also carry handguns. Several people I know, who never would have applied, or certainly been granted conceal carry permits under the old system, went right out and got thiers.
And still they continue to legislate...while ignoring the results of thier own ignorance...and applaud themselves to boot...
(sigh)...well, what do you expect from a State that keeps re-electing a worthless worm like Chris Dodd.... ("You're right Ned (Lamont), We do need change in Washington, and Joe Lieberman should step aside.....oh, wait,... Joe's been there 18 years, I've been there over 30!...you are talking about Joe, not me? Right Ned?... Ned?... NED?")
"Anti-second amendment
February 7, 2008 - 00:57 ET by rbosque"Anti-second amendment group..."?
"Our task of creating a
socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have
been totally disarmed." Sarah Brady
More like the "pro-communist group."
Hippo, What is wrong
February 7, 2008 - 01:43 ET by ZippyHippo,
What is wrong about a bunch of CPL carriers?
Are they law abiding?
Was there a background check?
Was there a Safety Class?
In MI, there is.
You make it, sound like, there is a bunch of criminals walking around with a firearms.
Maybe, that is the reason for so many CPL/CCWs.
MI has about 185,000. And growing.
Crime is down 13%. Also.
You Want A Statistic On Concealed Carry?
February 7, 2008 - 09:55 ET by OldSailor88Over 3 million citizens licensed to concealed carry didn't commit a crime yesterday.
Stultus est sicut stultus facit
Meanwhile...
February 7, 2008 - 10:19 ET by Warner Todd HustonMeanwhile, roughly 40 people a day die from auto accidents.
Where are the car-banners?
Does going over
February 7, 2008 - 22:34 ET by DEVILDOCMOMthe speed limit count? :) Other than that I didn't...and yes, I have a CCW. I just checked Arizona and we have a 6/100 rating, however, I am crushed, we are only 37th out of 50th.
Please try to read what was written
February 7, 2008 - 11:53 ET by HippopaulimusIf you read my post again, you'll see that my point was their stupid attempts at legislation backfired on them. But they are happy to ignore what already hasn't worked, because they refuse to think their actions through with any real-world applications.
I am very pro-gun, have a permit and own several firearms myself.
:^)
ps. Zippy, there are always a bunch of criminals walking around with guns...so, fight crime, shoot back!
"I'd rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6."
Hippo, That's cool. Just
February 7, 2008 - 13:00 ET by ZippyHippo,
That's cool. Just making sure. Sometimes, it's hard to read sarcasm.
I use it often.
Who said "the 2nd amendment protects the 1st."????
If the opposition (citizen)
February 7, 2008 - 02:12 ET by rbosqueIf the opposition (citizen) disarms, well and
good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves. Joseph Stalin
WHAT THEY REALLY WANT
February 7, 2008 - 07:30 ET by Der AlteLets cut the BS and get to the point. What the msm & brady bunch want is confiscation of all firearms and disarmament of the people. Only then can they redistribute wealth and create a "workers paradise". Wake up America!
Police State
February 7, 2008 - 10:29 ET by mattm"...Connecticut is doing well, .... Strengthening neighborhood policing will help to control illegal guns."
What blatant phonieness! If they are illegal, would you want to "control" them or eliminate them? And how are you going to 'police' this - checkpoints on every corner? House searches?
These Nazis want to destroy the 2nd Amendment, and to do that they are going to have to violate the 4th and the 5th Amendments.
Headlines blared how "good"
February 7, 2008 - 11:00 ET by sublight68Headlines blared how "good" a state was because it restricted guns or how "bad" it was if it ranked as a state with fewer restrictions on guns according to Brady.
But do increased restrictions on guns reduce gun violence, the Brady group's goal? From what I've seen, the opposite is often true.
Does anyone have data to cross-reference the Brady scorecard with actual numbers on gun incidents? I'll bet the the higher the Brady score, the greater the level of gun violence.
It's like Planned Parenthood's "report cards" on "prevention"
February 7, 2008 - 20:22 ET by GrannyGrump42Planned Parenthood Golden Gate issued a press release ironically titled, "Guttmacher Institute Rates California Number One in Preventing Unintended Pregnancies".
You'd think that to rate #1 in preventing unintended pregnancies, you'd have, well, the fewest unintended pregnancies. But California's abortion rate is #1 in the nation, not #50. Then how did California, with its astronomical abortion rate, manage to rate #1 in "preventing unintended pregnancies"? The study, Contraception Counts, rated states on service "availability, laws and policies, and public funding to determine which states make the greatest efforts at preventing unintended pregnancies."
So, based on the AGI's standards, the states that are best at "preventing unintended pregnancy" are 1. California, 2. Alaska, 3. South Carolina, 4. Alabama, and 5. New York. The lowest ranked states were: 51. Nebraska, 50. North Dakota, 49. Indiana, 48. Ohio, 47. Utah.
Let's look at how these states rank in abortion rates (abortions per 1,000 live births, a good measure of what proportion of pregnancies were intended versus unintended.) I use the CDC rankings because they're more recent, and also because they count abortions among residents, including those who travel out-of-state for their abortions:
California is -- #1. Alaska is #35. South Carolina #29. Alabama is #28. New York is #2. Average ranking: 19
So of the states that AGI thinks are best at preventing unintended pregnancy, none of them are even in the top ten as far as actually preventing abortions! And the two states with the highest abortion rates get ranked #1 and #5 at "preventing unintended pregnancy"!
Nebraska rates #42 in abortion rate, North Dakota #46, Indiana #38, Ohio #17, and Utah #49. So four of the states ranked "worst" at "preventing unintended pregnancy" were in the lowest 20 for abortion rates, three of them in the bottom 10, two of them in the bottom 5. Average ranking: 38
So, the worse the state is at "preventing unintended pregnancies," the lower the abortion rate. Tell me that makes any sense.
Would somebody please explain to me the logic that rates the state with the highest abortion rate the "best at preventing unintended pregnancies"?
Clearly, the AGI's idea of "success" is some strange, new usage of the word which I'd previously been unaware of, to paraphrase Arthur Dent. http://realchoice.blogspot.com/2006/04/how-agi-defines-success.html
WTH, Not to pick nits
February 7, 2008 - 11:35 ET by JoeBobWTH,
Not to pick nits (Ok, to pick nits), one of the articles used the word "Constitution" and you even quoted it:
"And while the Constitution State achieved 54 points out of a possible 100..."
Sad irony.
Without recognizing the ordinances of Heaven, it is impossible to be a superior man. - Confucious
Context, my friend, context.
February 7, 2008 - 11:58 ET by Warner Todd HustonContext, my friend, context. I saw that the "used" the word, but I was using Constitution to refer to the document and the rights and laws contained within. THEY were using it as a nickname of the state. So, in essence, they were not "mentioning" the word Constitution at all.
Nit acknowledged and dismissed.
Just once...
February 7, 2008 - 15:32 ET by JungusI would love to see this chart of their favorite gun control states juxtaposed next to a chart showing the most gun related murders / violence. You would think if they where right, they would love to show it themselves.
My guess is that it will show that gun control increases gun related crimes and thus makes a mockery of their ideals.
Jungus, there should be two
February 7, 2008 - 21:05 ET by MikeBJungus, there should be two charts: gun control rating vs. gun related murders and violence, and gun control rating vs. murder and violent crime rates of all types (guns, knives, bludgeons, strong-arm, etc.). And, perhaps a second set of charts: that of number of concealed carry permits vs. gun related crimes, and number of CCW permits vs. all violent crimes.
I don't think it will happen, because it will plainly show how ignorant (more probably, stupid) and obviously false the arguments of the Brady type groups are.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan