The Brady Campaign’s “No Gun Left Behind”
In
2007 the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence put out a report titled
"No Gun Left Behind: The Gun Lobby's Campaign to Push Guns into Colleges
and Schools." In keeping with the Brady Campaign’s usual refusal to
acknowledge that average Americans genuinely desire the means to defend
themselves, the report paints the push for concealed carry on college campuses
as some sort of grand conspiracy by a malevolent, all-powerful gun
lobby. The essay makes the typical, unsubstantiated, hypothetical arguments
against concealed carry on college campuses. It talks about drug and
alcohol use on college campuses, ignoring the fact that drugs and alcohol are
less prevalent on college campuses than at off-campus apartments and parties;
yet, newspapers aren’t filled with stories about CHL/CCW holders shooting
people at off-campus apartments or parties. It talks about suicide and
mental health issues, ignoring the fact that the Japanese suicide rate is more
than double the U.S. suicide rate, despite Japan's virtual prohibition on the
civilian ownership of firearms. This
fact alone suggests that access to firearms is not the determining factor in
whether or not a person will kill himself or herself. The report talks
about gun theft and accidental shootings, despite the fact that none of the eleven U.S. colleges
that currently allow concealed carry on campus have seen any resulting
accidental shootings or gun thefts (or suicides or drug/alcohol related problems).
The study completely ignores the successful history of concealed handgun
licensing laws in the U.S.
The essay concludes by claiming, "a climate of learning and free discussion and debate is not fostered when some of the people in classrooms have guns." Concealed carry hasn't prevented "free discussion and debate" in the Virginia state legislature, where it's allowed. It doesn't make people afraid to speak up in the offices of Texas government agencies, where it's allowed. And it hasn't prevented learning at the eleven U.S. colleges where it is currently allowed. Suggesting that the presence of legally concealed handguns will make people too frightened to function is completely ridiculous. How many people in the 40 “right-to-carry” states are afraid to watch a movie in a crowded 300-seat theater because, statistically speaking, three people in that theater are legally carrying concealed handguns? How many people in right-to-carry states are afraid to go to a mall because, statistically speaking, one shopper out of 100 is legally carrying a concealed handgun? Like most of the Brady Campaign's arguments, this one is baseless nonsense.
The first appendix of the Brady Campaign's essay is titled "Assorted Crimes and Misdeeds by CCW Licensees." The appendix contains 29 examples of why the Brady Campaign doesn't believe that concealed carry should be allowed ANYWHERE. Howard Nemerov researched two of the more dubious-sounding incidents and found that they were actually ruled to be justifiable self-defense shootings. He also found that the Brady Campaign’s report completely mischaracterizes the facts of both incidents. Of the remaining 27 incidents, seven are incidents in which a concealed handgun license (CHL)/concealed carry weapons permit (CCW) holder carried his or her concealed handgun into a place where concealed carry is prohibited by law, such as an airport or school parking lot. It can be assumed that many of these incidents (particularly the airport incidents) were accidental and posed no threat to anyone. Of the remaining twenty incidents, one involves a man who left his handgun in a bag of supplies taken to school by his son (no shots were fired, and nobody was injured), one involves a man whose CHL/CCW was seized for carrying a handgun while under the influence of alcohol, and one involves a man who threatened to commit suicide. Of the remaining 18 cases, one involves a threat made by an OFF-DUTY POLICE OFFICER, and AT LEAST one involves criminal activity by a person whose CHL/CCW was revoked years before. Of the sixteen cases which APPEAR to actually involve CHL/CCW holders who either committed violent crimes or endangered the public, two are accidental discharges (only one resulted in an injury; neither resulted in a fatality), two are incidents in which children found unsecured guns and accidentally shot themselves, and one is an incident in which a CHL/CCW holder accidentally shot and injured a bystander, while using his weapon in self-defense. In the Brady Campaign’s desperation to include a school shooting in the list, the report goes so far as to include an incident in which a student who shot and killed three professors at the University of Arizona School of Nursing reportedly told a classmate, about a year prior to the shooting, that he had obtained a CHL/CCW permit. There is no confirmation from the gunman’s close friends or family or from any government agency that he actually possessed a CHL/CCW, but apparently, unsubstantiated hearsay evidence is sufficient for the Brady Campaign's purposes.
When debating SCCC Media Coordinator W. Scott Lewis, on Fox News, Brady Campaign President Paul Helmke claimed, "There are stories every day where someone with a concealed carry permit is doing a shooting." If that is true, why wasn’t the Brady Campaign able to compile a more impressive list of assorted crimes and misdeeds by CCW licensees? SCCC does not deny that crimes are occasionally committed by concealed handgun license holders. Every segment of society has its bad apples. In 2007 a police officer in Wisconsin walked into a party and opened fire. Does that mean police officers shouldn't be allowed to carry guns? No, of course not. The fact of the matter is that concealed handgun license holders commit crimes at a VERY low rate--a rate lower than police officers in some states. Concealed carry is not leading to problems in the other places where it is allowed, and it will not lead to problems on college campuses.
Gun Control: Brady Anti-CCW Campaign Continues
By
Howard Nemerov (Nov 12, 07)
The Brady report is riddled with inaccuracies…
In May of 2007, the Brady Campaign published a report entitled “No Gun Left Behind: The Gun Lobby’s Campaign to Push Guns Into Colleges and Schools.” While there are a number of points to be explored in this report, the topic here is their allegation that getting a concealed carry license is too easy and therefore a threat to public safety:
“Over the last decade, the gun lobby has pushed hard in all 50 states to permit the carrying of concealed weapons by nearly everyone except convicted felons. These “shall-issue” carrying concealed weapons (CCW) laws require state authorities to issue CCW licenses to virtually anyone who applies, regardless of whether the applicant can demonstrate a need to carry a gun. As a result, millions of Americans are now licensed to carry concealed handguns in public.”
To bolster their claims, Brady’s report contains an appendix of stories where alleged CCW licensees broke the law. Of the two cases researched so far, both of these incidents have proven to be self-defense, while Brady insinuates both cases were murder. The first is fairly straightforward:
“Fort Lauderdale, Florida, January 1, 2006. Rogelio Monero [sic], 49, allegedly shot and killed Victor Manuel Villanueva, 17, during a New Year’s altercation as Moreno tried to stop a fight between Villanueva and a third party. Moreno was charged with manslaughter.”
A Fort Lauderdale Police Department press release corroborated the basic facts of the case, and also contained contact information within the department. A phone call to their Media Relations officer resulted in her statement that the case was ruled a “justifiable shooting.”
The second case is far more interesting. Brady writes:
“Vancouver, WA, October 3, 2006. Jon W. Loveless, unemployed for ten years, daily marijuana smoker, and father of two children – said that he shot “until my gun was empty” at Kenneth Eichorn [sic], because Eichorn [sic] had “a weird look” on his face. Loveless also claimed that Eichorn [sic] held a handgun, but the Eichorn [sic] family disputes the claim. Loveless was charged with one count of second-degree murder.”
The above reference was from an article allegedly published on October 3, 2006 by the Vancouver Columbian and entitled “Documents: Suspect Fired Gun ‘Until Empty’”. Searching the Columbian archives yielded five articles, none of which were dated October 3, 2006*.
One Columbian article places the “weird look” in context:
“Loveless told detectives from the Vancouver Police Department that he only shot Eichhorn after Eichhorn refused to drop his handgun and got a “weird look,” according to court documents. There were no other witnesses.”
A day later, another Columbian article noted:
“Loveless told detectives he thought it was going to be a friendly meeting to discuss a piece of radio equipment, but when he pulled his truck alongside Eichhorn’s truck he said Eichhorn had a gun pointed at him.
Loveless, who has a concealed weapons permit, said he retrieved his gun from his glove compartment and pointed it at Eichhorn.
“Loveless claims that he directed Eichhorn to drop the weapon but that Eichhorn “got a weird look” on his face,” Detective Jon Thompson wrote. “Believing that Eichhorn was about to fire his handgun, Loveless instead fired his handgun several times.”
Brady’s other inaccuracies include:
No mention of Loveless’s employment status or drug usage.
No archived Columbian article entitled “Suspect fired gun ‘until empty’”.
No quotes from Eichhorn’s family.
No evidence that Loveless shot his gun “until empty”, although the police report says he shot “several times”.
Research found no further articles for “Jon W. Loveless” or “Jon Loveless” or “Kenneth Eichhorn”, even in 2007. Nor was there any search results for “suspect fired gun”, which is part of the title of the article referenced by Brady and attributed to Columbian.
Brady begins with bombast and concludes with inept research in a futile effort to prove that concealed carry licensees are all criminals. Using hearsay to imply guilt and redacting vital details reveals Brady’s bias against self-defense and firearms ownership, but most disturbing is their bias against the truth.
Howard Nemerov is a columnist for Texas State Rifle Association’s TSRA Sportsman and “unofficial” investigative analyst for NRA News. He can be reached at Hnemerov[at]netvista[dot]net
*The Vancouver Columbian online archives now include the article in question.
