The president of the Crime Research Prevention Center, John Lott, told the Sun that citizens who use firearms in self-defense are required under law to demonstrate reasonable fear for their lives.
“Stand Your Ground laws require a reasonable person standard,” Mr. Lott said in a message. “A reasonable person must believe that there was a threat of death or serious injury.”
He added: “In the Yarl case, the young man was on the other side of the door and no threats were being made, no weapon was being shown … No reasonable person would conclude that there was a real threat there.” . . .
Matthew Rice, “‘Stand Your Ground’ Laws Face Renewed Scrutiny Amid Spree of Violence,” The New York Sun, April 21, 2023.
“Gun-free zones are ineffective and make our schools less safe. Since 1950, 94 percent of mass public shootings have occurred in places where citizens are banned from having guns,” Massie said in the release, citing an op-ed from pro-gun Crime Prevention Research Center. “Banks, churches, sports stadiums, and many of my colleagues in Congress are protected with firearms. Yet children inside the classroom are too frequently left vulnerable.” . . .
Ana Rocío Álvarez Bríñez, “Rep. Thomas Massie reintroduces bill to let governments allow guns in school zones,” Louisville Courier Journal, April 7, 2023.
Massie also said that shootings have never happened at “the hundreds of schools that allow staff to carry.” He cited a 2019 studyfrom researcher John Lott of the Crime Prevention Research Center that examined school shootings from 2000 to 2018. Lott’s work is often cited by gun control opponents to argue that restrictions aren’t a solution to curbing gun violence. . . .
Jayla Whitfield-Anderson, “Rep. Jamaal Bowman calls on Biden to take unilateral action on guns: “If it goes to the courts for a fight, so be it’,” Yahoo News!, April 12, 2023.
Oregon Senate Democrats disinvited economist and gun rights advocate John Lott from a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing based on criticism from anti-gun online publications.
Democratic State Sen. Floyd Prozanski “had read something from Media Matters attacking me and said I didn’t have the credentials to be an expert,” Lott told The Epoch Times.
Lott had been invited by Republican State Sen. John Linthicum to testify as an expert witness in an April 6 hearing on SB 348, which would increase the requirements of Ballot Measure 114, approved by voters in November 2022 but is now tied up in the courts.
Linthicum had asked Lott, who has extensive experience studying the effect of gun control laws on society, to explain how SB 348 would impact Oregonians. Lott said that, as he was on his way, he received a call from Linthicum telling him that Prozanski had decided not to allow Lott to testify.
Prozanski then called a witness from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) to testify for the Republicans. Lott said he had never had this happen before.
“Basically, the Democratic committee decided for the Republicans who their experts would be,” Lott said. . . .
Michael Clements, “Economist Disinvited From Committee Hearing by Oregon Senate Democrats,” Epoch Times, April 6, 2023.
In my opinion, John Lott is one of the strongest and most logical voices in the fight for gun owners’ civil rights.
Not surprisingly, the prohibitionists hate him for it, and constantly bad-mouth him. They like to claim his research has been debunked.
It’s a dirty debate trick, not to mention the height of narcissism, to claim that because you disagree with a person you have debunked him or her.
The only way I see the two syllables of that word as relevant to the discussion is this: when I hear someone badmouth John Lott, I want to answer, “Dat’s de bunk, punk.”
I urge you to take twenty minutes to listen to Professor Lott’s own take on it, here:
Massad Ayoob, “WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT JOHN LOTT,” Backwoods Home magazine, April 2, 2023.
Two of the most popular gun control proposals have little to no effect on gun crime and actually exacerbate the problem for the people they’re supposed to protect, according to economist, researcher, and author John Lott.
“Those are the people who are harmed,” Lott told seminar participants at the National Rifle Association’s Annual Meetings and Exhibits in Indianapolis.
Lott is considered an authority on guns and crime, having authored more than 100 peer-reviewed articles and 10 books on the subject. He led two seminars discussing the effectiveness of gun-free zones, red-flag laws, and other gun control measures.
He said the story of Nikki Goeser encapsulates the shortcomings of these laws.
Goeser is the author of “Stalked and Defenseless: How Gun Control Helped My Stalker Murder My Husband in Front of Me.” She’s also the executive director of the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC), of which Lott is the president. . . . [More available here]
Tyler Durden, “Gun-Free Zones, Red Flag Laws Only Make Gun Crime Worse: Economist,” Zero Hedge, April 18, 2023.
Gun rights advocate John Lott is saying the opposite of what Cruz said. It was a gun-free zone, so let’s not do anything about gun violence in the U.S. . . .
Conover Kennard, “GOPers Are Coming Up With The Dumbest Reasons To Oppose Gun Safety,” Crooks and Liars, April 12, 2023.
For a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing set for March 27, two Republican members of the committee—Sens. Dennis Linthicum and Kim Thatcher—asked Dr. John Lott, president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, to serve as their expert witness for the committee hearing.
Surprisingly, after making most of the 10-hour drive from his home in Missoula, Mont., to Salem, Ore., Lott was informed after midnight on the morning of the hearing, while he was still on his way, that Committee Chairman Floyd Prozanski (D) would not allow him to be the Republicans’ expert witness. Instead, Lott would have just two minutes to address the 64-page measure.
Undaunted, Lott drove on to the state capital and made very good use of his two minutes.
“There’s no serious cost-benefit analysis that I’ve seen of this law,” he told the committee members. “My concern is that the net effect is going to actually be harmful to people. If my research convinces me of anything, the people who benefit the most from owning guns are the most vulnerable people in our society. They tend to be the people who are most likely victims of violent crime, and overwhelmingly tend to be poor blacks who live in high-crime areas and people who are relatively weak physically, like women and the elderly.”
Because of that, Lott said, the cost to citizens to become licensed to own and carry a gun would be substantial and prohibitive.
“The cost of the permits here is $150, but that is only going to be part of the cost,” he said. “Looking at other states that have concealed-carry permit training requirements, my guess is the cost will be $200 or more for the training. So, you’re talking about $350 or more to get the permit to own a gun. If you add it with the recent increases in concealed-carry permits that you had last year, you’re talking about nearly $500 for somebody to be able to go and get a gun and carry it.
“Who do you think you’re stopping? You’re not stopping wealthy whites who may live in the suburbs. You’re going to be stopping the very people who need guns the most for protection—poor blacks who live in high-crime urban areas.”
Lott was promptly cut off after two minutes by Prozanski, who then chose to not allow any questioning by committee members. When another person set to testify before the committee asked if he could give Lott his two minutes, the committee chairman curtly refused.
“It’s kind of strange that the Democrats wouldn’t let the Republicans pick who they wanted to have as their ‘expert,’” Lott, who has testified many times before legislative committees, said later in an exclusive interview with America’s 1st Freedom. “They wouldn’t let anybody ask any questions of me, which is something very unusual. I haven’t seen that happen before.”
The shenanigans at the hearing made it quite obvious that the anti-gun lawmakers pushing the anti-gun measure only want one side of the issue to be heard—their side. While the NRA continues to fight the legislation, opponents face an uphill battle. Both the House and Senate are controlled by gun-control proponents, and Gov. Tina Kotek (D) is also a supporter of the measure.
Mark Chesnut, “This State Has Gone Gun-Control Crazy,” America’s 1st Freedom, Apirl 14, 2023.
According to economist, researcher, and author John Lott, two of the most popular gun control proposals have little to no impact on gun crime and exacerbate the problem for the people they are supposed to protect.
“Those are the people who are harmed,” Lott told seminar participants at the National Rifle Association’s Annual Meetings and Exhibits in Indianapolis.
Lott is considered an authority on guns and crime, having authored more than 100 peer-reviewed articles and ten books on the subject. He led two seminars discussing the effectiveness of gun-free zones, red-flag laws, and other gun control measures.
He said the story of Nikki Goeser encapsulates the shortcomings of these laws.
Goeser is the author of “Stalked and Defenseless: How Gun Control Helped My Stalker Murder My Husband in Front of Me.” She is also the executive director of the Crime Prevention Research Center, of which Lott is the president. . . .
Michael Clements, “Gun-Free Zones, Red Flag Laws Only Make Gun Crime Worse,” Conservative News Daliy,” April 16, 2023 KELLY MCKINNE,”Gun-Free Zones, Red Flag Laws Only Make Gun Crime Worse,” Denver Daily Chronicle, April 16, 2023..
Recently-updated research on mass shootings by the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) appears to explode a major—and evidently erroneous—claim by the gun prohibition lobby to justify their crusade to ban so-called “assault weapons.”
Turns out the majority of mass shootings in public places are committed with handguns, not semi-auto rifles, which have been mis-labeled “weapons of war” by anti-gun activists and Democrat politicians.
According to CPRC research, 56.4 percent of mass shootings involved handguns only, while 14.9 percent involved rifles only. Another 12.8 percent involved shooters armed with both handguns and rifles.
Shotguns were used exclusively in only 3.2 percent of mass shootings, such as the one at the Washington, D.C. Navy Yard in 2013. Killers used a combination of handguns and shotguns in 9.6 percent of mass shootings, the data says, and a tiny number—3.2 percent—were armed with all three types of firearms.
Of equal if not greater importance, CPRC research reveals that of all mass shootings from 1950 through March 27 of this year, only 6 percent occurred in places that were not identified as gun-free zones, while 94 percent did happen in “gun-free” zones.
CPRC further refined its data to show that between 1998 and March 27 of this year, 16 percent of mass shootings occurred in areas not identified as “gun-free,” while 84 percent did happen in such restricted zones. This would include the bank in Louisville where five people were killed earlier this week by a suspect who was an employee of the bank
“Importantly,” CPRC founder John Lott noted in a post quoted in a Fox News report, “the bank’s employee handbook makes it clear that carrying a permitted concealed handgun into the bank is a fireable offense. This employee would have known that the employees were banned from having guns. Why isn’t it newsworthy that time after time these mass murderers pick targets where their victims are defenseless?” . . .
Dave Workman, “Updated Research Debunks Major Claim About Semi-Auto Rifles,” Gun Magazine, April 14, 2023.
0 Comments