MADD: Moms Against Data and Deduction
------------------------------------------------------------------
Editor's note: In collaboration with the hard-hitting
Washington, D.C. newsweekly, Human Events, WorldNetDaily brings
you this exclusive column. You can subscribe to Human Events
through WND's on-line store.
By Ann Coulter
A few weeks ago, while taping a TV pilot hosted by John
Stossell, I found myself sitting between a housewife for gun
control and the incomparable Prof. John Lott, author of the
book, "More Guns, Less Crime."
During a break, the gun control advocate advised as how her
elderly mother had recently purchased a handgun. This
development horrified her because she said she "knew" a
criminal would wrest control of the gun and use it against her
mother someday.
Prof. Lott, who earned a Ph.D. in economics from UCLA, gamely
told the woman that she needn't worry, that his studies showed
that guns used defensively in crimes are turned against their
owners less than one percent of the time.
Lott's facts 'challenged'
As Lott has pointed out on similar occasions, the statistics are
these: "98 percent of the time when people use guns
defensively, simply brandishing a gun is sufficient to cause a
criminal to break off an attack. In less than 2 percent of the
time is the gun fired, and most of those -- about
three-quarters of those -- are warning shots."
The housewife retorted -- and I quote: "Well that's not my
opinion."
Somehow, the economics and law departments of UCLA, University
of Chicago, and Yale University had not prepared Prof. Lott for
dazzling logic like that: My opinion is different from the
facts.
Now we have an entire movement of babbling idiots demanding that
their opinions be accorded equal standing with facts on the
basis of their stunning achievement of having borne children.
Self-described "Moms" are using their exalted stations to march
on Washington and browbeat the nation into adopting gun control
laws that are not only unconstitutional (as if anyone cares
about that), but will inevitably lead to more violence against
the innocent.
But don't question their logic or facts -- they're moms.
Liberals use motherhood like an enfeebled child who hits his
siblings and then calls on his parents to protect him when they
retaliate. "Mom" demands our guns, but when you try to argue
the facts with her, she holds up a hand up to hush you: Talk to
the womb. Being a "Mom" means never having to say you're
sentient.
The Moms' web page begins the analysis with this observation:
"We, the mothers, know that life is the first inalienable right
promised by our Constitution." In point of fact, the
Constitution says nothing about an inalienable right to life or
anything else. It's the Declaration of Independence that
proclaims, "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all
Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator
with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,
Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." But these are "moms."
Don't tell them what the Constitution says. Their opinion is
"different."
Mom's startling discovery
The "Moms" have a flair for expressing their tenuous grasp of
the obvious with great fanfare. They say the march is dedicated
to "educating our children and our country about the
life-threatening danger of guns." Perhaps you were hoping for
some fact supporting the Moms' theory that the gun restrictions
they propose would reduce the "danger of guns." They have none.
There is none, and that's not even what they mean.
What they mean by "educating" citizens about the "danger of
guns" is that they plan to unveil their startling discovery
that -- hang on to your seats here -- guns can kill people! Uh,
yeah. We know that. That's why we like them. Guns wouldn't be
much help in the face of a dangerous predator if all they did
were to shoot a spray of flowers.
Teddy bears vs. guns
The organizers of the Million Mom March have been loudly
claiming that guns are the leading cause of accidental death
for children, after cars. Mom Gail Thorson, whose son was shot
and badly wounded by a lone gunman (in a state that
unfortunately does not permit citizens to carry concealed
handguns) proclaimed: "There are four categories of regulations
for teddy bears and none for guns." Ironic, huh?
Except that, it turns out, in the harsh light of facts, gun
accidents do not even come close to being the leading cause of
death for children. In fact, teddy bears and other toys
actually do kill more children every year than gun accidents
do. According to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission,
toys typically account for over 140,000 injuries and a minimum
of 22 deaths each year. (Teddy bears -- with their swallowable
button eyes, and strangling bow ties -- are a particular
menace.)
Meanwhile, gun accidents claimed the lives of 20 children under
the age of five in 1997 -- the latest year for which data is
available. To put that in perspective, more children under the
age of five die every year drowning in buckets. I didn't even
know it was possible to drown in a bucket. Clearly, what we
really need is a march on Washington to educate "children and
our country" about the life-threatening danger of buckets.
To pump up the numbers of children killed in gun accidents, gun
control advocates include "children" aged 15-19, which of
course, includes gang members, drug mules and common criminals.
But even including "children" who are old enough to be gang
members, guns still account for only 2 percent of all
accidental deaths. Here are some random comparisons of
accidental deaths for all "children" under the age of 20:
* Cars -- 8,113 deaths
* Drowning -- 1,269 deaths
* Smoke and fire -- 723 deaths
* Mechanical suffocation -- 529 deaths
* Guns -- 306 deaths
The Moms further informed the New York Times that guns "remain
the only consumer product that is not federally regulated by
the Consumer Product Safety Commission." Go out right now and
try to buy a gun and a teddy bear and see which you think is
easier. Moreover, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
can't even test all the toys on the market (of the
approximately 150,000 toys that come out on the market each
year, they test about 900) much less all products.
Gun-owners test guns, and they have been getting safer all the
time. Since 1945, the total supply of guns has more than
doubled, while the rate of fatal gun accidents has fallen by an
astounding two-thirds. There are roughly 240 million guns in
the country and the total number of non-fatal gun injuries is
about 2,000 per year. Toy injuries: over 140,000 a year. Guns:
2,000. Evidently, the government is not regulating teddy bears
tightly enough.
One of the Mom marchers was quoted in the New York Times as
saying: "There is no reason for anyone to own a handgun" -- in
contradistinction, apparently, to teddy bears and water
buckets. Alluding to the voting power of the stupid, she said,
"I hope the march will get women to find out which of their
legislators supports gun control. And then they need to vote
for them. I hope the NRA is terrified."
I wouldn't be losing much sleep over the Moms' electoral threat
if I were a legislator. The Moms may also have their own
"opinions" about what day the election is, an opinion different
from the facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Editor's note: In collaboration with the hard-hitting
Washington, D.C. newsweekly, Human Events, WorldNetDaily brings
you this exclusive column. You can subscribe to Human Events
through WND's on-line store.
By Ann Coulter
A few weeks ago, while taping a TV pilot hosted by John
Stossell, I found myself sitting between a housewife for gun
control and the incomparable Prof. John Lott, author of the
book, "More Guns, Less Crime."
During a break, the gun control advocate advised as how her
elderly mother had recently purchased a handgun. This
development horrified her because she said she "knew" a
criminal would wrest control of the gun and use it against her
mother someday.
Prof. Lott, who earned a Ph.D. in economics from UCLA, gamely
told the woman that she needn't worry, that his studies showed
that guns used defensively in crimes are turned against their
owners less than one percent of the time.
Lott's facts 'challenged'
As Lott has pointed out on similar occasions, the statistics are
these: "98 percent of the time when people use guns
defensively, simply brandishing a gun is sufficient to cause a
criminal to break off an attack. In less than 2 percent of the
time is the gun fired, and most of those -- about
three-quarters of those -- are warning shots."
The housewife retorted -- and I quote: "Well that's not my
opinion."
Somehow, the economics and law departments of UCLA, University
of Chicago, and Yale University had not prepared Prof. Lott for
dazzling logic like that: My opinion is different from the
facts.
Now we have an entire movement of babbling idiots demanding that
their opinions be accorded equal standing with facts on the
basis of their stunning achievement of having borne children.
Self-described "Moms" are using their exalted stations to march
on Washington and browbeat the nation into adopting gun control
laws that are not only unconstitutional (as if anyone cares
about that), but will inevitably lead to more violence against
the innocent.
But don't question their logic or facts -- they're moms.
Liberals use motherhood like an enfeebled child who hits his
siblings and then calls on his parents to protect him when they
retaliate. "Mom" demands our guns, but when you try to argue
the facts with her, she holds up a hand up to hush you: Talk to
the womb. Being a "Mom" means never having to say you're
sentient.
The Moms' web page begins the analysis with this observation:
"We, the mothers, know that life is the first inalienable right
promised by our Constitution." In point of fact, the
Constitution says nothing about an inalienable right to life or
anything else. It's the Declaration of Independence that
proclaims, "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all
Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator
with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,
Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." But these are "moms."
Don't tell them what the Constitution says. Their opinion is
"different."
Mom's startling discovery
The "Moms" have a flair for expressing their tenuous grasp of
the obvious with great fanfare. They say the march is dedicated
to "educating our children and our country about the
life-threatening danger of guns." Perhaps you were hoping for
some fact supporting the Moms' theory that the gun restrictions
they propose would reduce the "danger of guns." They have none.
There is none, and that's not even what they mean.
What they mean by "educating" citizens about the "danger of
guns" is that they plan to unveil their startling discovery
that -- hang on to your seats here -- guns can kill people! Uh,
yeah. We know that. That's why we like them. Guns wouldn't be
much help in the face of a dangerous predator if all they did
were to shoot a spray of flowers.
Teddy bears vs. guns
The organizers of the Million Mom March have been loudly
claiming that guns are the leading cause of accidental death
for children, after cars. Mom Gail Thorson, whose son was shot
and badly wounded by a lone gunman (in a state that
unfortunately does not permit citizens to carry concealed
handguns) proclaimed: "There are four categories of regulations
for teddy bears and none for guns." Ironic, huh?
Except that, it turns out, in the harsh light of facts, gun
accidents do not even come close to being the leading cause of
death for children. In fact, teddy bears and other toys
actually do kill more children every year than gun accidents
do. According to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission,
toys typically account for over 140,000 injuries and a minimum
of 22 deaths each year. (Teddy bears -- with their swallowable
button eyes, and strangling bow ties -- are a particular
menace.)
Meanwhile, gun accidents claimed the lives of 20 children under
the age of five in 1997 -- the latest year for which data is
available. To put that in perspective, more children under the
age of five die every year drowning in buckets. I didn't even
know it was possible to drown in a bucket. Clearly, what we
really need is a march on Washington to educate "children and
our country" about the life-threatening danger of buckets.
To pump up the numbers of children killed in gun accidents, gun
control advocates include "children" aged 15-19, which of
course, includes gang members, drug mules and common criminals.
But even including "children" who are old enough to be gang
members, guns still account for only 2 percent of all
accidental deaths. Here are some random comparisons of
accidental deaths for all "children" under the age of 20:
* Cars -- 8,113 deaths
* Drowning -- 1,269 deaths
* Smoke and fire -- 723 deaths
* Mechanical suffocation -- 529 deaths
* Guns -- 306 deaths
The Moms further informed the New York Times that guns "remain
the only consumer product that is not federally regulated by
the Consumer Product Safety Commission." Go out right now and
try to buy a gun and a teddy bear and see which you think is
easier. Moreover, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
can't even test all the toys on the market (of the
approximately 150,000 toys that come out on the market each
year, they test about 900) much less all products.
Gun-owners test guns, and they have been getting safer all the
time. Since 1945, the total supply of guns has more than
doubled, while the rate of fatal gun accidents has fallen by an
astounding two-thirds. There are roughly 240 million guns in
the country and the total number of non-fatal gun injuries is
about 2,000 per year. Toy injuries: over 140,000 a year. Guns:
2,000. Evidently, the government is not regulating teddy bears
tightly enough.
One of the Mom marchers was quoted in the New York Times as
saying: "There is no reason for anyone to own a handgun" -- in
contradistinction, apparently, to teddy bears and water
buckets. Alluding to the voting power of the stupid, she said,
"I hope the march will get women to find out which of their
legislators supports gun control. And then they need to vote
for them. I hope the NRA is terrified."
I wouldn't be losing much sleep over the Moms' electoral threat
if I were a legislator. The Moms may also have their own
"opinions" about what day the election is, an opinion different
from the facts.