Monday, May 30, 2022

Why Does Boston Buy Natural Gas from Russia?

The environmental organizations have full veto power 
on all energy projects through the legal system.


Europe is vulnerable and needs our natural gas; prices are absurdly high and going higher. Yet, everyone in the oil and gas industry is afraid to invest any money, even if they have financing available. Who wants to start a 10- to 20-year natural gas project, whether its a gas field, pipeline, or LNG (liquified natural gas) terminal, when the current administration is saying it will shut you down in 10 years?

Youve got six years, eight years, no more than 10 years or so,” says climate envoy John KerryNo one should make it easy for the [natural] gas interests to be building out 30- or 40-year infrastructure.”

In the meantime, India has relaxed its environmental regulations and plans to double its use of coal. China has cut coal import tariffs to zero to ensure energy security and lower costs.

The United States has an abundance of coal and natural gas. Yet, natural gas is actually imported, at great cost, to Bostons LNG facility from Russia, Canada, and the Caribbean due to the lack of pipeline capacity. In late January natural gas from the Algonquin City Gate Hub (near Boston) sold for over $20 per million BTUs, and more than $23 on the futures market. Natural gas from nearby Pennsylvania cost just $4 in January.

Plenty of cheap natural gas is available in West Virginia and Pennsylvania, a few hundred miles away; and pipelines to supply New England are mostly built, but have been shut down by environmental lawsuits and regulatory hurdles. Because of the regional dearth of natural gas pipelines, and its high price, many in New England are burning oil for heat and electric power plants, and burned more coal in 2021 than in 2020.

One of the many ironies is that carbon dioxide emissions—the bogeyman of radical environmentalists—have decreased where there is sufficient natural gasto replace coal. But any additional gas for New England, as noted, must come from foreign sources.

Why not ship gas from LNG facilities in Louisiana or Texas? Because the 100-year-old Jones Act requires that ships built, owned, and operated by U.S. citizens transport the gas between U.S. ports—and there simply arent any. As a result, people in New England pay sky-high prices for natural gas and electricity. In 2020, Connecticut had the dubious distinction of paying the highest price for electricity in the continental United States, and Massachusetts was not far behind. Pennsylvania and West Virginia paid about half their rate.

The $6.2 billion Mountain Valley Pipeline that was to transport natural gas to Virginia from West Virginia was 90 percent constructed and would have helped reduce Russian imports. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals tossed the federal governments approval of the projects 3.5-mile route through the Jefferson National Forest. The ruling makes no sense. The pipeline is buried; people wouldnt even know it was there.

Likewise, the Atlantic Coast Pipeline was canceled due to lawsuits over crossing the Appalachian Trail. The PennEast natural gas pipeline from Pennsylvania to New Jersey was also canceled due to permitting problems related to wetlands in New Jersey. Of course, TransCanadas (TC Energy) Keystone XL pipeline project was killed by Joe Biden’s order on his first day in office.

Given the real threat of lawsuits, I doubt any major oil, gas, or coal projects will be initiated, regardless of rising prices. No one wants to invest in or begin a project that courts or regulators appear likely to stop.

Large projects are unlikely to go forward until the oil and gas companies get some sort of emergency declaration from the federal government to protect them from incessant lawsuits, speed up permitting, and allow projects to go to completion. The environmental non-governmental organizations have full veto power on all projects now through the legal system. They clearly dont care how much you pay for energy or where you are forced to buy it.

When it comes to relaxing regulations to allow the use of effective energy sources, India and China have the right idea.



X22, On the Fringe, and more- May 30

 



Hope you all had a peaceful day. Here's tonight's news:


Beware of Fake Polls and Paid Endorsements

They are not authentic nor do they reflect reality.


Most probably remember the absurd ABC/Washington Post poll a few days before the 2020 elections showing Joe Biden winning Wisconsin by 17 points. A few days later, Biden was declared to have won the state, though by just over 20,000 votes total, or 0.63 percent. 

This figure, of course, discounts lingering questions about Mark Zuckerberg’s Center for Technology and Civic Life’s work in retirement homes, among other irregularities. In other words, the ABC/Washington Post pollsters were either terrible at polling, which is quite possible. Or (and?) perhaps something else was at play: polls being used as more of a psyop intended to suppress Republican turnout. 

Indeed, fake polls masquerading as reality are actually meant to project an illusion perceived as reality to influence and manipulate behavior. 

Fast forward to 2022. 

Lest you think the whole “polls as tools of manipulation” phenomenon is only the province of Democrats, I give you Remington Research Group, an outfit owned by the Axiom consulting firm which is owned by Jeff Roe, the favorite consultant of neocons and warmongers. 

There is a dynamic taking place this spring in GOP primaries in which Remington shows Roe candidates winning when, in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Take for example the recent Ohio primary where Donald Trump endorsed J. D. Vance over Roe’s candidate, Josh Mandel. The day before Trump endorsed Vance, Remington, probably sensing the Trump endorsement coming against Roe’s candidate, released a memo and poll showing that the Trump endorsement would do nothing for Vance and he would still be in fourth place even after the endorsement. 

The endorsement came the next day, however, and though independent polls showed Vance down by six points before the endorsement, roughly three weeks later, Vance would win by more than eight points. Remington’s “polls” were not a reflection of reality at all. What’s concerning is that some suspect Remington’s numbers (read Roe’s numbers) influenced donors and the Club for Growth to invest even more millions of dollars in Ohio when, in fact, the race was really over. 

The same fake poll dynamic is happening in Arizona, Missouri, and other places where Jeff Roe has candidates: Remington puts out polls in an attempt to manipulate instead of reflect reality in hopes of getting more spending on behalf of a candidate or to get an endorsement, specifically Trump’s. Remington “polls” in both Missouri and Arizona naturally show Roe candidates in the lead. 

Yet realistic polls demonstrate that other candidates are actually in the lead, sometimes by nearly double digits as is the case in Missouri. In May, Remington put out a poll showing Eric Schmitt, Roe’s candidate, at 29 percent, followed by Vicki Hartzler at 23 percent and Eric Greitens at 21 percent. Last week, an independent poll put out by KMOV-TV/SurveyUSA painted a wildly different picture: Greitens at 26 percent, Schmitt at 17 percent and Hartzler at 11 percent. This pattern of behavior has become so apparent that anyone pushing a Remington poll has to be either deeply ignorant or deeply dishonest. Or both. Indeed, I prefer to call them dishonest ignoramuses.

But there is also another dynamic taking place in the GOP primaries, designed to give yet another false impression. Take for example the case of Jim Lamon in the Arizona GOP Senate primary. In December 2021, Lamon received the American Conservative Union PAC endorsement, with a glowing statement from ACU Chairman Matt Schlapp about how Lamon is the right person for the job, etc. 

But there’s more to it than meets the eye. In October 2021, according to Federal Elections Commission disclosures, the Lamon campaign paid a $20,000 communications consulting fee to Schlapp’s consulting firm, Cove Strategies. It was not the only payment; there are now monthly payments of $20,000 from Lamon to Cove Strategies. 

Now far be it from me to suggest that the ACU endorsement came with a quid pro quo consulting fee directed to Schlapp, but it sure seems that way. As I like to say, if it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, guess what: it’s probably a damn duck. So beware of fake polls and paid endorsements: they are not authentic nor do they reflect reality. 



Here It Comes: The Only Question Is How Big the Red Tsunami Will Be


Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

What does the state of the midterms look like at this point? We’ve been predicting a red wave, but have the Democrats trying to jack up the base over the abortion issue changed the outlook and helped their prospects? We’d previously reported right after the SCOTUS leak broke about the likely overturning of Roe v. Wade that there hadn’t yet been any move toward the Democrats. Has that changed?

Not so much.

According to PJ Media, Cook Political Report just moved 10 of 12 races toward the Republicans.

“As the parties navigate primaries and begin polling and placing fall ad buys, Republicans’ House advantage looks as robust as ever,” writes David Wasserman. For independent voters, inflation has become such a dominant concern that neither a Supreme Court ruling on Roe v. Wade nor January 6 hearings are likely to drastically alter the midterms’ trajectory, and multiple district-level surveys show Democratic incumbents in perilous shape against unknown GOP challengers.”

The only changes in those races that don’t favor the GOP are Young Kim’s race in California — Cook only downgraded that contest from “Likely R” to “Lean R,” which means she can still pull off the win — and Lauren Underwood’s race in Illinois, which Cook shifted from “Lean D” to “Likely D.”

Cook is predicting a pick-up of 20-35 seats.

Wasserman said that even in the districts that Biden won by 10 to 15 points, Democrats are in danger because of how bad Biden’s approval is.

I think that their estimates are conservative, particularly if we consider how horrible Biden’s approval is and how bad inflation is, both of which are at historically bad levels. Add that on top of the normal historical shift to the party that doesn’t have the White House in the midterms and 35 seats seems low, but as I said, Cook is likely being careful and probably not going out on a limb so you can likely make book on at least this, all things remaining equal. While things can change, Biden’s approval just seems to keep getting worse all the time.

Right now, the Senate is locked and if even one seat shifts, that’s a big gain for the Republicans and that just might happen in Georgia, for example, with more people coming out for Herschel Walker in the primary than Raphael Warnock, and the Republicans coming out in far greater numbers than Democrats, even considering a percentage of crossover votes playing political games. Nevada and Arizona are also swing states where a wave could readily tip to the Republicans.



The Death Of My Beloved Aunt Three Days After J&J Vaccine

 I just found out about three weeks ago my aunt had died last August. There were some personal family feud issues that are typical sometimes among family members when there's some stake involved. It caused a complete shut down of communications between members of the family that ultimately led to one of them being notified by an insurance company she had left them a life insurance policy and they had spent months looking for her. It's sad these things happen but she wanted to live in her house until she died so to allow her to stay there in peace until one day she passed the decision was made somewhere along the line to cut off communication among family members. That meant all phone calls went unanswered including mine.

I understand why she'd want to live in such a beautiful environment until her last remaining days. I had often wondered where I got my penchants for flowers and gardening and she was quite the gardener. She grew beautiful flowers and was a avid organic gardener. It's a long story how it came to be that I didn't even know I had a aunt on my dad's side the family, actually two of them. As children they basically, after their mothers death had a rough time that seen them being given to their mothers twin sister which shortly thereafter found my dad taking off for parts unknown. He was only nine at the time but back in those days where families in the backwoods of Virginia struggling to survive one of them taking off was just one less mouth to feed more so than an urgent need to locate a missing child. They reconnected a few years later for awhile but become disconnected again for quite a few years. My aunt started placing ads in newspapers trying to find him and a friend of his came across her ad. I was in my mid twenties at that time and the first time I'd ever met her.

She lived on a acre of land with her than husband Don. Numerous visits over the years led to meeting a lot of cousins I never knew. There was never a bad moment ever had among all those visits, totally unlike my moms side the family who had, and may I note my dad also, indulged in to many spirits that often times led to the bad side of themselves springing forth. There was never any alcohol involved and those were some of the most positive times spent enjoying family gatherings. Not that they didn't have problems as a family, as the above mentioned entailed but sibling rivalry was kept at bay among themselves and didn't involved being part of family gatherings. You'd hear the stories later on in detail depending upon who you spent time engaging with later on but there was always that one true thing, when family gathered together it was a time to enjoy and cherish those moments.

Which is what led me up to yesterday. I just did what they were all scared to do and go find out what happened to her after we couldn't find her placed for burial next to her husband Don. Everyone wants closure, everyone wants to go pay their last respects to their loved ones. Even though he never returned my phone calls either I never had any reason to fear him. Actually he was great to be around, great sense of humor that could keep you on a roll for hours. I just decided enough of this crap and I am going to go find out where she is. He came out of the house with his hands all propped up on his hips and I basically just told him relax I don't have a bone in this fight and you know the times we've ever spent together were filled with fun and laughter. We've never had a problem. He relaxed as I was explaining while trying to hold back tears that I just wanted to find closure and I can't do that if I don't know where she is. He said she decided she wanted to be buried next to her mother in Indiana. She didn't much know her mother and it took her most her life to find her. She had died of TB and was sent off to live on back than what was called a TB farm. She spent years researching old TB farms before she finally found her. He hadn't taken her to Indiana yet, her ashes were in the house. Still that's on them to come together on where she finally lays to rest, I was just there to find closure of my own and be able to tell one of her daughters where she was at.

He told me they all decided to get the vaccine. They decided to get the J&J vaccine because it was one shot and done. My aunt, who was 97 at the time, had high blood pressure issues for years. The day after the shot he said she was like in a trance, she just stood at the kitchen sink staring out the window. He said she appeared rather incoherent. The next day they found her laying in bed in a trance unable to communicate or move. They took her to the hospital where she died the next day. He said they told him she died of a neurological disorder that led to a stroke. I said so she died as a result of the vaccine. Him and his son both agreed the vaccine, in their opinion, killed her but debated the vaccines were harmful to everyone because they themselves got the shot and were double boosted. None the less that led to a long debate over the issue of the vaccines with him saying that there are always going to be people who die when new vaccines come out and me telling him not like these vaccines do. He called bull crap on what most I had to say but what are you going to do with people whose main source of news is the nightly news. Which apparently he must not have been watching much because if he had he'd seen this report which was in July of last year, she got her shot in August:

The Food and Drug Administration is adding a warning label to the Johnson & Johnson Covid-19 vaccine following reports of 100 cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome in vaccine recipients.

Ninety-five of those cases were serious enough to require hospitalization, and one person died, the FDA said in a statement Monday. Guillain-Barré syndrome damages nerve cells and can cause muscle weakness. In rare cases, it can cause paralysis.

The cases, which are now under investigation by the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "have largely been reported about two weeks after vaccination and mostly in males, many aged 50 years and older," the CDC said in a statement.

The warning was added to provide information on the "observed increased risk" of the syndrome, the FDA said, but added that more research is needed to determine whether vaccination was the definitive cause. The agency noted that the benefits of Covid-19 vaccination clearly outweigh the risks.

Johnson & Johnson said in a statement that the company had been in contact with the FDA "and other regulators about rare cases of the neurological disorder," adding that the number of reports are only slightly higher than the number that would normally be expected, regardless of whether an individual had been vaccinated.

"The chance of having this occur is very low," the company said.

If confirmed, the 100 cases would represent a tiny fraction — less than 0.001 percent — of the more than 12.8 million Johnson & Johnson doses that have been administered in the United States.

Guillain-Barré syndrome is rare, affecting an estimated 3,000 to 6,000 people each year in the U.S, typically following a viral or bacterial infection, according to the CDC. It has also been linked to other vaccines, including certain seasonal flu vaccines and a vaccine to prevent shingles.

Most people recover fully; however, permanent nerve damage and paralysis are possible. People over age 50 are most at risk. 

The FDA's warning label will be included in the fact sheets provided to vaccine recipients.

Those who have received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine should contact a doctor if they develop weakness or tingling sensations, especially in the arms or legs, as well as any sudden problems walking, speaking, chewing or swallowing, the FDA said.  https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/cdc-fda-investigating-possible-j-j-vaccine-link-rare-neurological-n1273748

Someone needs to explain exactly how it is that a otherwise healthy 97 year old woman who got up each day, went out to fill all her bird feeders that two days after getting a covid shot lays helpless in her bed and dies on the third day. Someone needs to explain how they blame this neurological disorder on Guillain-Barré if it supposedly takes two weeks to develop such a illness, it's obviously a flat out lie because she was paralyzed within forty eight hours of getting the vaccine. My cousin said they called it a neurological disorder that led to a stroke. Which blood clotting was also called out early on with the J&J vaccine but than cleared according to the article. Someone also needs to explain how they can get away with calling these cases "small" relative to the number of shots given if a doctor isn't even investigating the fact she was paralyzed and died almost immediately after getting the vaccine, reporting these incidences and just label the death as attributed definitively to something other than the vaccine. If there's no correlation check than they really don't know and it will never be found out. Making such a statement is a fallacy.

IMG_1248.JPG

Fully knowing the risk, the media coverage given, the bottles labeled with a warning, just how is it that she was even allowed this particular vaccine? Many people just don't understand when I speak of having to protect the most vulnerable among us. She was one of them. She's a prime example. She was a steward of American patriotism, every year she went to the national cemetery to pay her respects to those who served in our military. After my dad died we often went along with her as he ended up being laid to rest in the national cemetery. He never got to serve because he was injured in training, which is a whole different story of how that came about, but if she wasn't going to attend the whole memorial day service, which was lengthy, we'd opt to go along. It's a beautiful tribute to our service members no doubt, I went with her once, it's all the politicians who show up that make it a dragged out ceremony. They do the salute and fly over and it's beautifully decorated with flags on all the graves. She was a committed patriot and proud of the country we live in, she wholeheartedly trusted in our government for them to only turn around and kill her. It's the ultimate betrayal not just by our government but the medical professionals who fear retaliation for asking the questions, who fear telling people the real truth and who fear writing the real cause of these people deaths which enables them to keep the truth hidden.


IMG_1234.JPG

I found my closure. As tears streamed down my face I cut flowers from her yard like she did every years and went over to the cemetery for her and laid them on my dads grave. This was the best tribute I could give her. For all of those out there saying well she was ninety seven and lived her life I have only one thing left to say and that is exactly who are you to make that determination for her. Who exactly is it that has a right to withhold vital life threatening information from a vulnerable population who grew up in a era of trust toward our government. You better start asking the question because one day you will be just as vulnerable as she was. I know if it hadn't been for that vaccine she'd lived to be one hundred years old still getting up early every day going out to take care of all the wildlife that surrounded her. Sometimes it's the small pleasures in life worth keeping yourself looking forward to another day.

Progressives Have a New Term to Smear Everyone They Don’t Like


Jeff Charles reporting for RedState 

Aren’t you excited? The far-left has been hard at work trying to come up with a new way to demonize conservatives and anyone else who disagrees with their politics. Perhaps terms like “racist,” “homophobic,” and “sexist” have become too hackneyed even for progressives. Now, they just might be ready to introduce a new favorite smear, the way Steve Jobs used to present Apple’s latest iPhone.

So what’s the new word, you ask?

Here’s your answer: Christofascist.

That’s right, folks. If you’re reading this, you’re likely a conservative/libertarian type, so this article is to let you know that to progressives, you are a Christofascist seeking to assert your religious morals on the rest of the nation — whether they like it or not.

Leftists have begun using this word far more often lately. It started near the beginning of May. Now, progressives on social media are throwing around the word like candy spilling from a beaten pinata. Here are just a few examples:

You know what’s even more interesting? Google searches for “Christofascism” jumped at the beginning of May. Here’s a chart from Google Trends showing that searches for the word surged between May 1 and 7.

Google Trend search results for the keyword “Christofascism.” Source: Screenshot, Google Trend

So, what earth-shattering event happened between those two dates?

You guessed it. Politico published its story about the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion indicated it will probably overturn Roe v. Wade, when the justices issue their ruling before the end of June.

The revelation had the pro-abortion crowd all in a tizzy at the prospect of fewer dead babies. The far-left has typically labeled pro-lifers as theocrats seeking to install a Christian fascist government to force everyone to adhere to the tenets of Christianity. It is why female pro-abortion activists dress up as characters from “The Handmaid’s Tale.” They are literally trying to convince the rest of the country that these wicked Christofascists are trying to gain enough power to oppress them.

Just look at how Salon’s Chris Hedges tries to fearmonger about the ominous rise of the Christofascists. He writes:

The Christian fascists have coalesced in cult-like fashion around Donald Trump. They are bankrolled by the most retrograde forces of capitalism. The capitalists permit the stupidities of the Christian fascists and their self-destructive social and cultural wars.

But that’s not all. Hedges also warns us that these religious zealots are set on starting holy wars:

The war industry loves the Christian fascists who turn every conflict from Iraq to Ukraine into a holy crusade to crush the latest iteration of Satan. The Christian fascists believe military power, and the “manly” virtues that come with it, are blessed by God, Jesus and the Virgin Mary. No military budget is too big. No war waged by America is evil.

But it gets even worse, dear reader. Apparently, the United States Supreme Court is made up of these purveyors of theocratic thought. Hedges writes:

These Christian fascists make up perhaps 30% of the electorate, roughly equivalent to the percentage of Americans who believe abortion is murder. They are organized, committed to a vision, however perverse, and awash in money. John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, mediocre jurists and Federalist Society ideologues who carry the banner of Christian fascism, control the Supreme Court.

Oh, the horror!

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that this is nothing more than mindless alarmism intended to manipulate people into believing those who disagree with progressive politics is equivalent to a Christian version of the Taliban. This isn’t the first time leftists have used this particular trope. The term “Christofascist” has been in existence since 1970. But it appears now, they intend to push this thing as far as they can go.

So, you can expect to have this particular epithet thrown at you whenever you express pro-life, or other forbidden viewpoints, dear reader. Indeed, I expect it to become a regular part of the progressives’ rotation when it comes to labels for their political opposition once the Supreme Court hands down its decision about Roe.

But, as I always say, we must remember the people making these accusations don’t actually believe them for the most part. They know there is no massive Christian fascist movement seeking to take power and then oppress women. But this type of thing is their bread and butter, right? What else would we possibly expect from these people?



Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

 


Article by John Malcolm and Amy Swearer in The Heritage Foundation


Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

 

In the wake of the tragic murder of 17 innocent students and teachers at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, students, educators, politicians, and activists are searching for solutions to prevent future school shootings.

As emotions morph from grief to anger to resolve, it is vitally important to supply facts so that policymakers and professionals can fashion solutions based on objective data rather than well-intended but misguided emotional fixes.

Are there ways to reduce gun violence and school shootings? Yes, but only after objectively assessing the facts and working collaboratively to fashion commonsense solutions.

Here are eight stubborn facts to keep in mind about gun violence in America:

  1. Violent crime is down and has been on the decline for decades.
  2. The principal public safety concerns with respect to guns are suicides and illegally owned handguns, not mass shootings.
  3. A small number of factors significantly increase the likelihood that a person will be a victim of a gun-related homicide.
  4. Gun-related murders are carried out by a predictable pool of people.
  5. Higher rates of gun ownership are not associated with higher rates of violent crime.
  6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.
  7. Legally owned firearms are used for lawful purposes much more often than they are used to commit crimes or suicide.
  8. Concealed carry permit holders are not the problem, but they may be part of the solution.

Each of these facts is firmly based on empirical data. Here’s a deeper look.

1. America is relatively safe, and the trend is toward becoming safer.

  • According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, violent crime has been declining steadily since the early 1990s.
  • The 2011 homicide rate was almost half of the rate in 1991, and according to Pew Research, the 2013 gun-related death rate was half of the rate in 1993.
  • The number of non-fatal firearm crimes committed in 2011 was one-sixth the number committed in 1993.
  • In the past few years, there have been minor increases in certain types of violent crimes, mainly in large metropolitan areas. However, these increases are nowhere near those seen in the 1990s and are largely related to gang activity.
  • It should be remembered that it takes at least three to five years of data to show true trend lines. It appears that the collective homicide toll for America’s 50 largest cities decreased modestly in 2017 after two consecutive years of increases.

2. The principal public safety concerns are suicides and illegally owned handguns.

  • According to the Pew Research Center, almost two-thirds of America’s annual gun deaths are suicides. Since 1981, when the Centers for Disease Control began publishing data, gun suicides have outnumbered gun homicides. In 2010 alone, 19,392 Americans used guns to kill themselves.
  • Most gun-related crimes are carried out with illegally owned firearms—as much as 80 percent according to some estimates.
  • The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports prove that the overwhelming majority of gun-related homicides are perpetrated with handguns, with rifles of any kind accounting for less than 3 percent of gun-related homicides. In 2013, 5,782 murders were committed by killers who used a handgun, compared to 285 committed by killers who used a rifle. The same holds true for 2012 (6,404 to 298); 2011 (6,251 to 332); 2010 (6,115 to 367); and 2009 (6,501 to 351).
  • More people are stabbed to death every year than are murdered with rifles.
  • A person is more likely to be bludgeoned to death with a blunt object or beaten to death with hands and feet than to be murdered with a rifle.

3. A small number of factors significantly increase the likelihood that a person will be a victim of a gun-related homicide.

  • Where do you live? Murders in the United States are very concentrated. According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, over 50 percent of murders occur in 2 percent of the nation’s 3,142 counties. Moreover, gun-related homicides are heavily concentrated in certain neighborhoods within those counties: 54 percent of U.S. counties had zero murders in 2014.
  • Who is your partner? According to a recent scholarly article in the Hastings Law Journal, people recently or currently involved in an abusive intimate relationship are much more likely to be victims of gun-related homicide than is the rest of the population, especially if the abuser possesses firearms.
  • Are you in a gang? According to the Department of Justice’s National Gang Center, particularly in urban areas, significant percentages of gun-related homicides (15 percent to 33 percent) are linked with gang and drug activity. Gang-related homicides are more likely to involve firearms than non-gang-related homicides are.
  • Are you a male between 15 and 34? The majority of standard gun murder victims are men between the ages of 15 and 34. Although black men make up roughly 7 percent of the population, they account for almost two-thirds of gun murder victims every year.
  • Women and children are more likely to be the victims of mass shootings and homicide-suicide shootings than they are to be the victims of a “typical” gun-related homicide.

4. The perpetration of gun-related murders is often carried out by predictable people.

5. Higher rates of gun ownership are not associated with higher rates of violent crime.

  • Switzerland and Israel have much higher gun ownership rates than the United States but experience far fewer homicides and have much lower violent crime rates than many European nations with strict gun control laws.
    • While some will argue that the guns carried by Swiss and Israeli citizens are technically “owned” by the government in most cases, this does little to negate the fact that many citizens in those countries have ready access to firearms.
  • Canada is ranked 12th in the world for the number of civilian-owned guns per capita and reports one of the world’s lower homicide rates—but even then, some provinces have higher homicide rates than U.S. states with less restrictive laws and higher rates of gun ownership have.
  • Although many gun control advocates have noted that “right-to-carry” states tend to experience slight increases in violent crime, other studies have noted the opposite effect.
  • Higher rates of concealed carry permit holders are even more strongly associated with reduction in violent crime than are “right-to-carry” states. The probable reason for this is that “right-to-carry” studies often include “open carry” states, which have not been shown to correlate with more people actually carrying or even owning firearms. Rates of concealed carry permit holders are better indicators of the number of people who actually possess and carry firearms within a given population.
  • Further, as with most correlations, there are many other factors that can account for increases in concealed carry permits—including the fact that people who live in already dangerous neighborhoods seek out means of self-defense. The Huffington Post noted that the rate of concealed carry permit requests in Chicago has soared in recent years after the city loosened restrictions, in large part, according to the Chicago Tribune, because law-abiding residents are increasingly worried about rising rates of violent crime in the city.
  • The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
  • Similarly, the rate of gun ownership is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but urban areas experience higher murder rates.

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

  • The Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun-control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.
  • The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.
  • Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”
  • Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.
  • Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
  • According to research compiled by John Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.
  • Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.
  • It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

7. Legally owned firearms are used for lawful purposes much more often than they are used to commit crimes or suicide.

  • In 2013, President Barack Obama ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to assess existing research on gun violence. The report, compiled by the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council, found (among other things) that firearms are used defensively hundreds of thousands of times every year.
  • According to the CDC, “self-defense can be an important crime deterrent.” Recent CDC reports acknowledge that studies directly assessing the effect of actual defensive uses of guns have found “consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”
  • Semi-automatic rifles (such as the AR-15) are commonly used as self-defense weapons in the homes of law-abiding citizens because they are easier to control than handguns, are more versatile than handguns, and offer the advantage of up to 30 rounds of protection. Even Vox has published stories defending the use of the AR-15.
  • AR-15s have been used to save lives on many occasions, including:
    • Oswego, Illinois (2018) — A man with an AR-15 intervened to stop a neighbor’s knife attack and cited the larger weapon’s “intimidation factor” as a reason why the attacker dropped the knife.
    • Catawba County, North Carolina (2018) — A 17-year-old successfully fought off three armed attackers with his AR-15.
    • Houston, Texas (2017) — A homeowner survived a drive-by shooting by defending himself with his AR-15.
    • Broken Arrow, Oklahoma (2017) — A homeowner’s son killed three would-be burglars with an AR-15 (the man was later deemed to have acted in justifiable self-defense).
    • Ferguson, Missouri (2014) — African-American men protected a white man’s store from rioters by standing outside armed with AR-15s.
    • Texas (2013) — A 15-year-old boy used an AR-15 during a home invasion to save both his life and that of his 12-year-old sister.
    • Rochester, New York (2013) — Home intruders fled after facing an AR-15.

8. Concealed carry permit holders are not the problem, but they may be part of the solution.

 

https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/here-are-8-stubborn-facts-gun-violence-america 


 


Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage