Keep and Bear Arms
Home Members Login/Join About Us News/Editorials Archives Take Action Your Voice Web Services Free Email
You are 1 of 965 active visitors Tuesday, September 26, 2023
Main Email List:

State Email Lists:
Click Here
Join/Renew Online
Join/Renew by Mail
Make a Donation
Magazine Subscriptions
KABA Memorial Fund
Advertise Here
Use KABA Free Email




Keep and Bear Arms - Vote In Our Polls
Do you oppose Biden's anti-gun executive orders?

Current results
Earlier poll results
4647 people voted



» U.S. Gun Laws
» AmeriPAC
» NoInternetTax
» Gun Show On The Net
» 2nd Amendment Show
» SEMPER FIrearms
» Colt Collectors Assoc.
» Personal Defense Solutions



Keep and Bear Arms


Archived Information

Top | Last 30 Days | Search | Add to Archives | Newsletter | Featured Item


by Dr. Paul Gallant

Open any newspaper today, and it's impossible to miss the latest fad: hauling America's gun makers into court. The plaintiffs are not suing for manufacturing defects - they're suing for the cost of "street violence caused by firearms".

But the goal is not to win these lawsuits - it's to bankrupt firearm manufacturers, as Philadelphia Mayor Ed Rendell all but admitted, in remarks reported by the Philadelphia Inquirer on December 31: "The sheer cost of defending these suits would be hard on the gun industry".

Dr. John Lott, professor at the University of Chicago's School of Law, noted that "every product has illegitimate uses and undesirable consequences", and many other products have a higher propensity to cause harm than firearms do. For example, the New Orleans lawsuit focuses on accidental deaths involving children. Yet, for children under the age of 5, the risk of drowning in a pool is 500 times the risk of accidental death from firearms.

Lott pointed out that "bogus lawsuits" like those brought recently by Chicago and New Orleans ignore the fact that "guns also prevent bad things, by making it easier for victims to defend themselves."

Easily concealable handguns are uniquely suited for personal protection. They're also the target of many of these frivolous lawsuits, and of gun-control advocates like Dr. Philip Cook.

Cook, professor of Public Policy Studies at Duke University, co-authored a 1997 U.S. Department of Justice publication on firearms in America. According to Cook, if self-defense with a firearm is rare, "one tactic for mitigating lethal violence is...government regulation of the production, exchange, and use of personal firearms." However, if self-defense with a gun happens often, "the social cost of restricting ownership and use may be substantial."

The research of Drs. Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, published in 1995, showed that self-defense with a gun is not a rare occurrence: ordinary, law-abiding Americans use guns defensively 2.5 million times, or more, each year. About 75% of these instances involve handguns. Furthermore, firearms provide the safest and most effective means of resisting violent criminal attack.

Defensive gun use covers a wide spectrum: a verbal threat to use a gun in response to the threat posed by a criminal, or body language implying the availability of - and willingness to use - lethal force in response to that threat. Firearm-prohibitionists often equate defensive gun use with criminal body count to minimize its importance, but most of the time a gun isn't even fired. While almost 11 million violent crimes were committed in the U.S. in 1993, the number of criminals killed each year by citizens, in lawful self-defense with a firearm, is under 3,000.

Kleck is a professor at Florida State University's School of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Kleck's impeccable methodology and neutrality in the firearm debate has forced most of America's firearm-prohibitionists to accept his conclusions. Philip Cook set out to prove Kleck wrong.

Fourteen studies preceded Cook's, showing estimates between 765,000 and 3.6 million instances of defensive gun use, annually. To his dismay, Cook found himself validating Kleck's findings. He solved that problem by dismissing all studies on defensive gun use as "unreliable" - including his own.

But Kleck's research contained a measure of the very social cost for which Cook professed concern: " many as 400,000 people a year use guns in situations where the defenders claim that they 'almost certainly' saved a life by doing so...If even one-tenth of these people are accurate in their stated perceptions, the number of lives saved by [would-be] victim use of guns would still exceed the total number of lives taken with guns."

That social cost - lives potentially lost by the absence of a firearm when needed most - is apparently of no real concern to Cook. Nor are the rapes that might be prevented, the injuries that might be avoided, the medical costs that might be saved, and the property that might be protected. For, after dumping his own research overboard because it confirmed what Kleck and Gertz had found - that guns save far more lives than they cost - Cook declared that, regardless of how often citizens actually use guns to defend themselves, it would still "only be of marginal relevance to the ongoing [firearm] debate...".

Now we know what firearm-prohibitionists like Cook and some of America's big-city mayors really care about most. It's not restricting firearm ownership in order to cut costs - human or monetary - as they'd like us to believe. Because whether their fellow citizens have the means to defend themselves is only "marginally relevant" to Philip Cook and his ilk. What is supremely relevant to them is politics above science: the politics of gun-control, at any cost.

Dr. Paul Gallant practices Optomtery in Wesley Hills, New York and is a research associate with the Independence Institute, a free-market think tank in Golden Colorado.


Printer Version

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground. THOMAS JEFFERSON

COPYRIGHT POLICY: The posting of copyrighted articles and other content, in whole or in part, is not allowed here. We have made an effort to educate our users about this policy and we are extremely serious about this. Users who are caught violating this rule will be warned and/or banned.
If you are the owner of content that you believe has been posted on this site without your permission, please contact our webmaster by following this link. Please include with your message: (1) the particulars of the infringement, including a description of the content, (2) a link to that content here and (3) information concerning where the content in question was originally posted/published. We will address your complaint as quickly as possible. Thank you.

NOTICE:  The information contained in this site is not to be considered as legal advice. In no way are Keep And Bear Arms .com or any of its agents responsible for the actions of our members or site visitors. Also, because this web site is a Free Speech Zone, opinions, ideas, beliefs, suggestions, practices and concepts throughout this site may or may not represent those of Keep And Bear Arms .com. All rights reserved. Articles that are original to this site may be redistributed provided they are left intact and a link to is given. Click here for Contact Information for representatives of is the leading provider of Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) and digital certificate solutions used by enterprises, Web sites, and consumers to conduct secure communications and transactions over the Internet and private networks., Inc. © 1999-2023, All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy