Wednesday, October 30, 2019

No, No and No

Their solution? Order police to strip away illegal weapons from the bad guys in ‘problem gun spots’. [More]
JPFO founder Aaron Zelman strongly opposed such edicts:


For one thing, sometimes the ones being stripped and destroyed were principled patriots engaged in civil disobedience for freedom. Those waving the flag for this have no say in how (and against whom) the undelegated power they're applauding will be applied.

For another, the numbers didn't pan out in practice as well as they did in subjective, incentivized reports.

"Gun control" does not work. For "gun rights leaders" to act like it does is self-undermining. For JPFO to be the amplifier is not something Aaron would have approved, and I'm saying that as politely as I can.

3 comments:

Henry said...

Plus, the author’s treatment of the Dickey Amendment is absolutely chaotic.

He treats the government not doing gun research as some sort of problem, but doesn’t explain why. I certainly see no ill effects of that vacation.

He links to a monograph that clearly states that the Dickey Amendment prohibited advocacy of gun control, NOT gun research, then bemoans researchers and bureaucrats misreading the law as a research prohibition. I frankly don’t see that their reading comprehension is my problem, or that the result was some sort of tragedy.

On top of this, it’s well known that the CDC under Obama did fund gun research in compliance with Dickey — the famous “buried” study reasserting that guns are used to prevent way more crimes than they are used to commit. So the premise is falsified. If the president understands the prohibition properly, it’s generally understood.

I too am aghast that JFPO gave these ramblings space.

Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger said...

David, that link is just taking me to the JPFO main page. Do you have another?

Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger said...

Ah. I take this is the &%#@&^

http://jpfo.org/articles-2019/solving-gun-violence-without-rights-sacrifice.htm