If you recall a few days ago I defended Joan Peterson (aka japete) against a charge of lying. I still believe I was correct; the best explanation for the available data on that topic was that it was a mental defect rather than a willful lie.
Today I present evidence that she is willingly and knowingly lying about something else.
If you read her blog you will find many instances where she claims or implies she and her organizations don’t wish to ban firearms. Here are some examples:
- And then there have been those who have accused me and the people with whom I work of banning guns when they know it isn’t true and couldn’t realistically happen.
- Do you believe that I and people with whom I work intend to ban your guns?
- Whenever I write about real people and suggest that we can do something to prevent real people from being shot to death or injured, I have been attacked for lying, trying to ban guns, for being naive, for providing “anecdotes”, for not knowing what I am writing about, for being a shill, etc. No wonder President Obama backs away. It is not easy to fight against this kind of false reasoning and name calling. Bullying and harassing I call it.
- “A general theme also seems to be that japete’s side wants to ban guns. Come on folks – we’re talking the banning of LEGALLY PROHIBITED PERSONS ONLY from obtaining guns. What’s so hard about that to understand? Probably 99.99% of all firearms are mfg’d and sold lawfully (not sure how straw buyers affect that percentage). Otherwise it is the “law abiding” gun owner, and the secondary market which is the source of crime guns.” Duh. This is a no-brainer, folks. Thanks for this comment.
- banning guns is “off the table”;
Also note that Ms. Peterson acknowledges she is on the Brady Campaign board of directors.
I have often given the Brady Campaign a pass in regards to errors and old material on their website. I know I have lots of out of date material on my websites and I have changed my mind about things but not bother to take down the old position. With all the material from the Brady Campaign saying “total bans are off the table” you might take that to mean they are interested in banning firearms anymore. This is not true.
You need to watch their wording very carefully to notice that since the Heller decision they say they are not advocating a “total ban on handguns”. One must presume that a partial ban would be quite agreeable with them. And one can be certain they are still in favor of an “assault weapon” ban:
Boxer supports California’s ban on assault weapons and the revival of a similar law at the federal level. Fiorina has criticized the federal law’s definition of assault weapons as “extremely arbitrary” and emphasizes other ways of combating gun crimes, none of which is a substitute for a ban. She also believes that travelers on the federal government’s no-fly list should be allowed to own firearms.
We couldn’t agree more with the Times on this one.
And from their position web page on “assault weapons” linked to in the previous quote:
POSITION: The Brady Campaign supports banning military-style semi-automatic assault weapons along with high-capacity ammunition magazines. These dangerous weapons have no sporting or civilian use. Their combat features are appropriate to military, not civilian, contexts.
PROBLEM: The federal Assault Weapons Ban expired in the fall of 2004.
THE THREAT: Allowing easy access to highly lethal, military-style weapons by dangerous people, like terrorists and felons, threatens the safety of our police officers, families and communities.
URGENCY: Since the ban expired, police chiefs across the country report increases in assault weapons used in crime and used against them.
SOLUTION: Congress must pass strong, effective legislation to ban all military-style semi-automatic assault weapons along with high capacity ammunition magazines. In the short-term, more states must pass their own laws to ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines.
As a board member Ms. Peterson had to know of the Brady Campaign position on “assault weapons”. I therefore have to apologize for being critical of all the bloggers and commenters who said Joan Peterson was lying.