This article in the Washington Post as amazing as the previous post about an op/ed piece in the NYT.
   Again, a medium that many believe to be staunchly anti-gun reports fairly on the plight of a Connecticut man whose gun collection was confiscated because he gave voice to his inner turmoil.
    This was NOT a case of a deeply troubled and potentially violent person (like the Parkland, Fla., shooter) whose views and stated objectives should indeed be investigated. And bear in mind that the man whose guns were seized had gone through the honest effort to register them.
   Even more frightening to me are President Trump's flip-flops on the Second Amendment.  He weaves a confusing view on gun policy, even going so far as to say it's better to seize guns now and let courts decide later whether the action was warranted. 
    The president has retracted some of his other statements that shocked his fellow Republicans and the NRA. But I have yet to see a clarification of this disturbing pronouncement.

  - Dr. Gatling

    This article is one of those "even a blind hog can find an acorn sometime" happenings. I applaud Bob Leonard for writing it and The New  York Times for publishing it.  
    "Why Gun Culture Is So Strong in Rural America" is remarkable on several fronts. First of all, it's a a fair examination of the subject. Second, it's published in a newspaper considered by many to be strongly anti-gun. Third, it is written by a real member of the media.
    I spent many years as a mainstream media reporter and can assure you that I was never instructed what to write or even received a hint of an anti-gun agenda.  Yes, reporters may have a personal feeling on a subject. But they should never display that bias in their work. 
   In many cases, the tone of an article is captured by a headline that usually is written by somebody else whose job is to attract readers. In other cases, the reporter may be ignorant of the facts and must rely on what his sources say. And if that source happens to have a bias, then that may be reflected in the story. A good reporter should realize the bias and seek opposing comment..
   Finally, as much as I appreciate the work the NRA does in protecting the Second Amendment, the association's inflammatory rhetoric too often polarizes people with little room to consider that there may actually be truth in The New York Times.

​  - Dr. Gatling
     

    I saw this analysis when it was published a year ago but forgot to post it.

    You’ve heard of the Terrible Twos. But did you know about the Deadly Threes?
    
    According to an analysis by The Associated Press and the USA TODAY Network, “Deaths and injuries spike for children under age 5, with 3-year-olds the most common shooters and victims among young children. Nearly 90 3-year-olds were killed or injured in the shootings, the vast majority of which were self-inflicted.”

    The investigation covered more than 1,000 incidents spanning two and a-half years ending last year. “In all, those shootings claimed the lives of more than 320 minors and more than 30 adults,” the report said.

    The report does not delve into the causes of the accidental shootings other than the obvious: a child should not have had access to a readily-dischargeible firearm.

    In Texas, the gun owner can be charged with a Class C misdemeanor if a child younger than 17 gains access to a readily dischargeable firearm. That’s a gun that is loaded and not secured in any way such as in a safe or by a trigger lock. If the child kills or injures somebody with the gun, the charge increases to a Class A misdemeanor.

    Gun owners must balance their ease of access to the weapon with the proper security preventing unauthorized persons – not just children – from gaining control of the weapon. It’s a basic responsibility of gun ownership.

    Excuses such as, “I didn’t know the gun was loaded” pale in the light of evidence showing the gun was in easy reach of a three-year-old.

    Education programs like the NRA’s effective “Eddie Eagle” program teach kids what to do when they encounter firearms: “STOP! Don't Touch. Run Away. Tell a Grown-up.” 

    This valuable safety program helps augment the security efforts by responsible gun owners to prevent accidental shootings.

    But what if the custodian of the gun really does not know if it is loaded. Or even that it is hidden in the closet or bedside drawer.

    When the gun is no longer wanted, maintained or secured properly, the time has come to get rid of it.
If the custodian is comfortable handling the gun, it may be taken to a store for sale or given to friends or relatives who will accept the ownership responsibility.

But if the custodian is not comfortable in touching the gun or does not know anybody to take it, please contact Gatling Gun Rescue™ and we will either find it a new home or help the parts repair other guns. The service is free, confidential and complies with all state and federal laws.
 
  - Dr. Gatling 

    I recently received a frantic email warning that Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas had partnered with some notorious Democrat colleagues to sponsor a gun-control bill, S.2135.  The NRA may be able to find something wrong with this bill, but it looks pretty good to me and it may go a long way toward making gun haters feel better.

    I asked Sen. Cornyn to explain the bill, and he responded thusly:

    Like every Texan, I want to prevent violent crime, and I believe this begins with fully enforcing existing gun laws. The federal government has not adequately enforced the 2007 NICS Improvement Amendments Act (P. L. 110-180), a law that is supported by organizations ranging from the National Rifle Association to the Brady Campaign. Passed unanimously by Congress, this law requires states to submit criminal history and mental health records of individuals who are adjudicated as a danger to themselves or others in order to prevent them from legally purchasing firearms. This includes felons, domestic violence perpetrators, and other dangerous individuals.
    To prevent these individuals from illegally purchasing firearms, dealers are required to run an FBI background check on all individuals who attempt to purchase a firearm. This system, known as the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), relies on the sharing of records by federal agencies and state governments to ensure that individuals who are prohibited from possessing a firearm are not able to obtain them illegally.
    Unfortunately, federal agencies and state governments often fail to upload relevant information to NICS—allowing dangerous individuals and violent criminals to obtain firearms. This failure to share information had tragic consequences in multiple mass-violence events. This failure to share information had tragic consequences in multiple mass-violence events, including Blacksburg, Virginia (2007); Charleston, South Carolina (2015); and Sutherland Springs, Texas (2017). In each of these cases, a dangerous individual who was prohibited from purchasing firearms was able to pass a NICS Background Check despite criminal or mental health records that were not uploaded to the system.
    To this end, I introduced the bipartisan Fix NICS Act (S. 2135) on November 15, 2017 to help prevent future tragedies and ensure the integrity of our criminal background check system. S. 2135 would require federal agencies and states to produce NICS implementation plans focused on uploading all information to the background check system showing that a person is prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms under current law—including measures to verify the accuracy of records.       Federal agencies will be held accountable if they fail to upload relevant records to the background check system through public reporting and prohibiting bonus pay for political appointees. S. 2135 would reward states who comply with NICS implementation plans through federal grant preferences and incentives. Also, this legislation would create a Domestic Abuse and Violence Prevention Initiative to ensure that a felon or domestic abuser is excluded from purchasing firearms.
    I also believe improving mental health is another way to prevent violent crime. On August 5, 2015, I introduced the Mental Health and Safe Communities Act of 2015 (S. 2002), which was later included in the 21st Century Cures Act of 2016, and was signed into law last year (P.L. 114-255). This legislation enhances the ability of local communities to identify and treat potentially dangerous, mentally-ill individuals. The law also includes reforms to increase the use of treatment-based alternatives for mentally-ill offenders, and improve crisis response and prevention by state and local law enforcement officials. The bill was endorsed by a diverse group of organizations, including the National Alliance on Mental Illness and the National Association of Police Organizations.
    This is the debate we should be having—a debate that focuses on the root causes of mass violence, fully enforcing current law, and addressing improvements for mental health care in America. We can tackle these problems without curtailing Second Amendment rights, and I will continue to push for effective solutions that protect communities while preserving our constitutional liberties.

    The only thing in the text of the bill that bothers me is that federal agency supervisors would be punished for non-compliance by having their payroll bonuses withheld!? What? They now get a bonus for complying? Sheesh.

    I can see how Cornyn's cohorts upset some gun owners. If Cornyn really wanted to do some good, he could push for national reciprocity of state carry permits. Now THAT'S a bill I could back!

​ - Dr. Gatling

A study published Nov. 14, 2016, in the Journal of the American Medical Association Internal Medicine is purported to show that increased restrictions on firearm sales lead to fewer gun homicides.
Another study published by JAMA Intern Med. discussed the effect of Florida’s stand-your-ground law.
The studies were widely reported, including in Popular Science, which took a somewhat slanted approach:

“In this week’s obvious news, laws that allow people to kill other people with guns have led to more people killing other people with guns. According to two new research papers, stricter firearm laws are associated with fewer firearm homicides, and the implementation of Florida’s stand-your-ground law was associated with increased firearm homicides.” (Emphasis mine)

Wow. I’m astounded by this statement and would like to know where in the United States the laws allow people to kill other people with guns.

Getting back to the study, doctors and scientists from Harvard Medical School, Boston Children's Hospital and Texas Children's Hospital in Houston evaluated peer-reviewed articles from 1970 to 2016.

Thus this study is not actually new research. In fact, it is simply an analysis of old research. JAMA did not provide a public text listing the research examined. I, for one, would like to know whether some of the data came from agenda-based organizations, agencies, or researchers.

The stated objective was: “To evaluate the association between firearm laws and preventing firearm homicides in the United States.” Yet the researchers intermingled the terms “injury” and “homicide,” saying, “Firearm homicide is a leading cause of injury death in the United States …”

FYI, the Centers for Disease Control publishes mortality statistics, with the most recent being for 2014:

• All Injury Deaths per 100,000 population: 62.6
  
• All Poisoning Deaths per 100,000 population: 15.4
  
• All Motor Vehicle Traffic Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.7
  

• All Firearm Deaths (injuries plus homicides) per 100,000 population: 10.6
  

• All Firearm Deaths from Homicides per 100,000 population: 3.4.
  

The laws examined in the JAMA study were in five categories:

• Curbing gun trafficking
• Strengthening background checks
  
• Improving child safety
  
• Banning military-style assault [sic] weapons
  
• Restricting firearms in public places and leniency in carrying guns
  

(Yes, I know that there is no such thing as an assault weapon, but apparently either the docs did not know or did not care. But more later on this single point!)

The study concluded: “The strength of firearm legislation in general, and laws related to strengthening background checks and permit-to-purchase in particular, is associated with decreased firearm homicide rates.” Again, it is not clear whether accidental firearm injuries were included in the analysis.

There is little doubt that the background checking system is highly flawed and many proposals to “improve” gun control focus on this aspect. One key problem has been in the reporting chain of local agencies providing information to the FBI NICS. This is one of those enforce-existing-laws issues.

Another “problem” has been the so-called “gun show loophole” allowing sellers without Federal Firearms Licenses may provide cash-and-carry service without record-keeping. I’m not going into this now, but I would like to note that some states require an FFL dealer to be involved in ALL private gun sales and conduct the NICS check. This requirement could quickly be converted into a registration database if the FBI was not required – as it is now – to purge data.

As for a permit to purchase a firearm, the study did not specify whether this applied to just handgun sales or to all gun sales. Chicago, for example, requires a permit and yet has an out-of-control gun violence problem. Chicago also has universal gun registration.

The study also concluded, “Specific laws directed at firearm trafficking, improving child safety, or the banning of military-style assault weapons were not associated with changes in firearm homicide rates. The evidence for laws restricting guns in public places and leniency in gun carrying was mixed.”

Please allow me to repeat, for emphasis, “ … THE BANNING OF MILITARY-STYLE ASSAULT [sic] WEAPONS WERE [was] NOT ASSOCIATED WITH CHANGES IN FIREARM HOMICIDE RATES.”

Any lawmaker still inclined toward a ban please take note.

I’m disappointed, but not surprised, that it is hard to legislate child safety. Gatling Gun Rescue(tm) exists to help remove the threat posed by improperly-stored firearms that are no longer wanted or properly maintained. PLEASE contact a relative or friend who is familiar with guns and willing to assume the responsibility of ownership. Otherwise, we will be glad to help.

Finally, I realize that federal funding is not available for firearms studies. But, if this study is any indication, I see no harm in collecting incident data (but not names and serial numbers!)  

• Dr. Gatling
  

 
Study Citation:
Lee LK, Fleegler EW, Farrell C, Avakame E, Srinivasan S, Hemenway D, Monuteaux MC. Firearm Laws and Firearm HomicidesA Systematic Review. JAMA Intern Med. Published online November 14, 2016. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7051

I apologize for my long absence from the blog, but I have been busy protecting the Second Amendment.

Unfortunately, fighting that battle took time away from Gatling's primary mission -- helping to ensure safety by rescuing and repurposing firearms that are unwanted or improperly stored.

Now that there is nothing more I can do on the political front, Gatling is back in business.

Thanks for your support!

- Dr. Gatling

When Horace Smith and Daniel B. Wesson formed their partnership in 1852, they began a legacy that fortunately will continue.

And although the holding company that owns the firearms company is planning a name change, company Vice President Liz Smith told me on Nov. 8,  “The name change we announced yesterday pertains only to the holding corporation, a corporation that began in 2002 and now owns Smith & Wesson Corp., as well as Crimson Trace Corp. and Battenfeld Technologies, Inc. ‘’

Smith added, “ It is only that holding corporation that we will name American Outdoor Brands, a name that we believe represents our broad and growing array of brands and companies in the shooting, hunting and outdoor enthusiast markets. “

I have owned, carried and shot several S&W handguns and am extremely partial to the little J-Frame. But the Smith & Wesson line has expanded greatly, now comprising many excellent semi-automatic pistols and rifles.
 
So news that a long-trusted brand will endure is certainly welcome in these uncertain times.

• Dr. Gatling
  

 I'm not going to comment about this conundrum
other  than to note that in order to obtain a license to drive, applicants in all 50  states must be able to demonstrate their ability to drive. 

If Iowans are concerned about this, their licensing program should include  live fire proficiency. 

Texans must fire 50 rounds at three distances and score 70%. Until this year, shooting was also required to renew a concealed handgun license.

 - Dr. Gatling

People love lists. Best, worst, biggest, smallest, whatever. They can make you think  and maybe have a discussion. 

You  may know that Cabela’s stores include gun libraries so you can buy guns, ammo  and good reading matter. I like the idea. Robert Heinlein said, “An armed  society is a polite society,” but he may also have agreed that an educated
society is more likely to be armed. 

I’ve been collecting and shooting guns for a long time. And I’ve been reading about  them even longer. I thrilled to the story of how Sam Colt invented and marketed  his revolver; a story I didn’t think would be topped until Gaston Glock came
along.

So, for what it’s worth, here is my list of the 10 best gun books. Please bear in  mind that I am not a hunter or a soldier, so my list leans toward the technical  or historical side of the genre. I’m also influenced by a book’s literary content as well as its informational content.

9. (tie) Brownell’s catalog and Numrich Gun Parts Corporation catalogs. New  parts or used parts, these catalogs are rich in parts and pictures to help  with any firearm repair project.

8. Glock: The Rise of America's Gun. By Paul M. Barrett. More about marketing  than mechanics, this well-researched chronicles how Glock turned upside down  common conceptions about how guns should look and work.

7. Blue Book of Gun Values. By S.P. Fjestad. Now in its 34th edition.  Expanding on Chapel’s lead, until the Internet, this was the only way for gun  buyers and sellers made sure each was getting a fair deal.

6. Dixie Gun Works Catalog. Before Val Forgett’s Navy Arms made replica black  powder guns available to shoot, you had to make do with the originals, often  restored to working order with parts from Dixie or firing round balls cast from  Turner Kirkland’s innovative molds machined from hair straighteners. An  essential, entertaining resource. Let’s see what we have here …

5. Small Arms of the World: A basic manual of military small arms. By W.H.B.  Smith. An excellent history followed by a massive guide of how to load, fire and  fieldstrip military small arms anywhere in the world. What’s not to like?

4. A History of the Colt Revolver. By Charles T. Havens and Frank A. Belden.  The history of how a Yankee inventor’s dream – a gun that fired more than one  shot before reloading -- became reality. Photos plus patents  and advertising. 

3. The Gun Collector’s Handbook of Values. Author Charles Edward Chapel said that  every time you buy a gun, you should buy a book about it. I subscribed to that  theory; thus I’m now sharing what I’ve learned. From 1940 through the mid-70s,  this was THE book to consult on gun values.

2. Hatcher's Notebook: A Standard Reference Book for Shooters, Gunsmiths,  Ballisticians, Historians, Hunters, and Collectors. By Julian S. Hatcher,  retired U.S. Army major general, technical editor for The American Rifleman, and  director of the National Rifle Association from 1922-1946.

 1. Sixguns. By Elmer Keith. Ned Buntline and Zane Gray may have written about  the Wild West, but, as Keith puts it in his autobiography, “Hell, I Was There!”  Sixguns is not a textbook or armorer’s manual. It’s a social history of why we  have a gun culture; good, bad or otherwise.

And a special #1 for Best Book Series about guns to Stephen Hunter. Former  Marine sniper Bob Lee Swagger, introduced in Point of Impact and his daddy,  Arkansas State Trooper Earl Swagger, star in novels in which the plot and action  focus on tough men and their guns. What makes them best is that Hunter knows his  guns and gets the details right.



 

I  haven’t had much time to blog lately, but this case is just too disturbing to  ignore.

By now you’ve probably seen the stories about how police in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, fatally shot Monroe Isadore:
http://pbcommercial.com/sections/news/local/107-year-old-man-killed-officer-involved-shooting.html

Now  while I’m sure investigators will determine whether Mr. Isadore needed to be  shot, several things jump out at me.

First,  he’s 107 years old. According to the Census Bureau, in 2010 there were just over  4,000 Americans older than 104. That's a pretty small and distinguished crowd. Local media probably started writing about his  birthdays when he made the century mark. 

Second,  he was shot to death in his bedroom. He had retreated there and returned fire when police gassed him and broke into the room. He had no hostages, just his handgun. The report does not say how long he lived there, but he apparently felt safe in his room.

Third, look at the timeline. From the time Pine Bluff responded to a disturbance call to  the time Mr. Isadore was killed, is just three hours. In another hour, he may have taken a nap or offered to swap the gun for a bowl of pudding. 
 
Incidents like this get a lot more attention because of the Internet. But I’d also like to  see it get a lot more discussion.

RIP, Monroe. You saw a lot of changes in your time, but probably never expected to be gunned down in your bedroom.

-  Dr. Gatling