Governor's aide sends Maryland lawmakers inflated gun-death data

dZ

New member
By Margie Hyslop
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


ANNAPOLIS * Gov. Parris N.
Glendening's office forwarded
inaccurate information from Handgun
Control Inc. to state legislators,
doubling federal statistics on 1997 gun
deaths in Maryland.
A Glendening legislative staffer sent
inflated figures, apparently taken from
Handgun Control's Web site, to House
Ways and Means Committee Chairman
Sheila Hixson. They listed firearms
deaths in Maryland by victim's age and
type of shooting.
Handgun Control Inc.'s research
director, Douglas Weil, said staffers
used data from the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention's National
Center for Health Statistics to create the
chart.
But Handgun Control listed a total of
1,408 firearms deaths for Maryland *
almost double the 710 Maryland firearm
deaths that the CDC reported.
Mr. Weil said the erroneous
information was generated inadvertently
during turnover in Handgun Control's
research staff. Confusing notes left by a
researcher who hadn't finished
compiling the data caused some "double
counting," Mr. Weil said.
Glendening spokesman Mike Morrill
said the governor and his staff have
been saying that about 700 people die in
Maryland every year by firearms *
roughly the number reported by the
CDC, although they get their figures
from the Maryland State Police.
But a Glendening staffer, in a reply
to a committee request, supplied the
numbers, not knowing they were wrong,
from a source that "has been reliable"
and noted their origin * Handgun
Control Inc. * Mr. Morrill said.
He said the staffer did not know the
numbers Handgun Control had posted
were wrong until a reporter inquired
about the letter.
The staffer has now started to inform
committee members about the error, Mr.
Morrill said. Mr. Weil said the error
was made for several states.
"We don't know if one person pulled
that information off our Web site or
more," Mr. Weil said.
Handgun Control pulled the
erroneous information off its Web site
about an hour after Yale University
professor John Lott * a gun-rights
advocate * notified them of the
discrepancy on March 2, Mr. Weil said.
A check revealed the information had
been pulled from Handgun Control's
Web site, but the only message said the
page was temporarily unavailable.
No message appeared on the site
yesterday afternoon warning that
information posted earlier was
erroneous.
Although Mr. Weil said the
information was posted for no more than
two days before it was pulled March 2,
the letter Mr. Glendening's office sent to
the committee with the apparent Web
site attachments was dated Feb. 21 and
stamped received Feb. 23.
Delegate Carmen Amedori, Carroll
County Republican, said the public
needs to know about Handgun Control's
dissemination of false information since
the organization has done little to
correct the record.
"They should be ashamed," said Mrs.
Amedori who serves on the House
Judiciary Committee, which is
scheduled to hear legislation that would
legislate "childproof smart guns" this
week. "Kids are not piling up like cords
of wood."
Statistics the National Rifle
Association supplied yesterday in
response to a reporter's query matched
the CDC's data for 1997 firearm deaths
in Maryland. Suzin Schneider
contributed to this report.
 
Busted... Now lets see how much coverage this gets. I will bet that the average American forgets the issue, if they even hear of it at all, within three days.
 
Let's see if this makes a difference in Glendening's try to circumvent the Senate Judiciary Committee on his "smart gun" bill.
 
As another poster mentioned, isn't it strange that these "honest errors" always run in the direction of making the toll of gun related injuries and or deaths appear WORSE than it actually is.

Reminds me of the game that waiters in Paris resturants used to play. There would often be a "small error" in the check. When mentioned, this "error" would always be corrected, but the funny thing about these "errors" was that they were ALWAYS in favor of the house, and never in favor of the customer. Does anyone else see the obvious parallel?
 
it also points out who's agenda is being served. Would the State take data from Greenpeace on seal hunting?

dZ
 
Back
Top