Armed

by Don B. Kates and Gary Kleck

Book Overview

The gun control debate is often obscured by strong emotions and unproven assumptions. According to conventional wisdom accidents with handguns account for a significant number of deaths among children, gun owners endanger themselves more than they ward off potential criminal assailants, and there is a widespread legal consensus that the Second Amendment does not support the individual right to bear arms. All of these assumptions, and many others,...

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1573928836
• ISBN13: 9781573928830
• Release Date: November 2001
• Publisher: Prometheus Books
• Length: 363 Pages
• Weight: 1.65 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.0" x 5.8" x 8.4"

Customer Reviews

Scholarly Research on Gun Control

Kleck is a professor at Florida State University, Kates is a partner of a national law firm. The 'Introduction' says they want to present the findings from scholarly journals to contradict the propaganda in the corporate media (p.14). Concealed handgun carry resulted in a reduction of violent crimes (p.17). This fact is censored from the corporate media, even though thousands of lives could be saved. The corporate media portrays gun owners as subhumans, but exempts the Rockefellers, the DuPonts, and the publisher of the 'New York Times' (p.18). This is just bigotry. The availability of guns does not cause murders; murderers mostly have criminal records (p.21). Most murders are drug-related. Gun Prohibition only disarms honest people, just as locks only bar honest people. Historians and scholars say the Second Amendment is an individual right, and this was well recognized prior to World War II. Chapter 2 tells of the propaganda campaign that uses various medical groups as pawns. Their studies ignore any facts that don't agree with their desired conclusion (p.33). These Gun Prohibitionists assert falsehoods, fabricate statistics, and falsify references, to forge evidence for their views (p.34). Page 38 gives examples where Dr. Tanay and Kr. Kellermann quote references which disprove their opinions! Such articles show intellectual confusion, ignorance of facts, omission of facts, and emotions that suggest a need for therapy (p.39). Freud said fear and loathing of guns is a sign of sexual immaturity and neuroticism (p.38). A neurosis is a mental disorder characterized by anxieties, compulsions, obsessions, or phobias. The criminological evidence refutes the claims of the medical advocates (p.51). The dishonesty of the "health advocates" on gun control is shown by their disregard of falling accidental gun deaths while the numbers of guns owned were rising (p.57). Are they using the idea of dying children just for its emotional impact (p.58)? The Gun Prohibitionists suppress facts, and falsify data and statistics, in order to prove their case (p.63). The CDC admitted to assuming a conclusion then creating evidence to prove it (p.69). This chapter documents the emotional anti-gun agenda in some medical and public health literature. They generally ignore the large amount of sociological and criminological research (p.83). Violence could be reduced when poverty is reduced. Chapter 3 explains why "gun control" proposals are aimed to prohibit the right to own firearms. Gun prohibitionists can't be trusted. Freud said the fear and loathing of firearms was sexual hysterics (p.109). Their strident advocacy of gun prohibition reflects their neuroses. Their emotional diatribes are the reason for their failures. Chapter 5 discusses distortion of gun issues in the mass media which provides most information to people. This information is shaped or biased to provide a conclusion by excluding certain information. This results from the policies of the "owners of me

My New Bible

I'm a gun owner and a gun rights advocate. I'm very fair-minded, consequently I've always wondered if my interest in gun ownership led me to be biased against gun control advocacy (i.e. "I like 'em, they don't. Therefore, they must be wrong."). Now that I've read "Armed" I no longer have any doubts that I've made the right choice on this topic. I found myself getting very angry with the medical society and the media while reading this book. This is the fifth and best book on this topic I've read. I only wish that everyone in a position of power, from government to the media, would read it. If you buy it and read it, maybe they will!

Good consolidation work

I can understand how the reader from Philadelphia can be frustrated with repeated arguments. If you are well read on the subject of firearms and its (non)relation to crime, you will not read much that is new in this volume. That being said, I think this book offers a great consolidation of arguments and discussions made in several other works. If I could only pick one book that I had to give someone to try to convince them of the many fallacies spread around the media and "scholarly" research papers, I would pick this book. Here you will find the legal and constitutional arguments. Here you will find the statistical discussions of anti-gun "scholarship." There are discussions about the motives and practices of the anti-gun crowd, the anti-control crowd, and the middle ground. You will find refutations for the vast majority of anti-gun arguments and the documentation to back it up and/or do the research for yourself.If you can only afford one book on gun control. Get this one.

Poor man's Point Blank

Considering the fact that "Point Blank" is out of print and the used book is generally in the $100 range, this is a very nice alternative.Generally a concise evaluation and explanation of studies dealing with Gun use and ownership. Kleck, a gun control advocate, reasonably evaluates data from studies to show that defensive gun use is beneficial and justifies the right to bear arms. Evaluations of other studies and commentaries also show the flaws of results reported and explains why they are flawed.Kates discussions of why the gun prohibitionists (specifically the AMA and News services as well as specific gun control advocacy groups) are not to be trusted. The willingness of these groups to distort and openly lie about data makes a person frightened that they are actually believed (especially our alleged "News" services). Discussions also point out gun control groups tactics and where they have won and lost in the past (as well as where some of thier wins back fired on them)(Pun intended).Phrasing is at times difficult and wordy. You have to read some statements several times to figure out what they are trying to say. Evaluation procedures are explained with details on error analysis for such studies and how even the error analysis is used in a distorted manner by gun control groups. All sources and source materials are listed ad nauseum.A Required reading for anyone that tries to argue the gun control topic. Definitely NOT an NRA supported study. Kleck is held in disfavor by the leadership of the NRA because of his pro-control standing.

Mandatory reading for all in the media!

I've read thousands of words, and watched hours of video over the years on the issues of firearms and gun control, and have helplessly gnashed my teeth at the plain lack of knowledge of the subject displayed by the vast majority of commentators and writers about guns, the gun culture, and the reality of the role guns play in American life. This book, "Armed", is an extraordinary piece of work that should be mandatory reading for EVERYONE in the media! None of them should be allowed to write or utter one more word on the issues of "gun violence", child mortality rates or gun ownership until they've read this and passed a written comprehension test on it! A superb book! Our organization will be passing out copies of this to all our local media personalities and editors just as soon as we can manage it.