Albany County voices led opposition to the bill during the House Judiciary hearing Friday. Lawmakers returned Monday, amending the bill and advancing it with a 8-1 vote.
What is missing from the entire focus on the percentage discussion is the premise of John Lott's work. He claims that murder and violence went down due to the relaxation of gun restrictions, which is a frankly laughable premise; however, that argument gets missed in this evaluation. When we get caught up arguing about a statistic based on a false premise then we as a society end up losing. The Bill is based on John Lott's "peer reviewed" statistics is built on a false premise making for a poor law. Every person advocating for this Bill used John Lott's work whether it came from his book or from his website Crime Prevention Research Center. John Lott's quest to prove his theory that more guns lowered murder begins with the Luby's massacre in 1991 where one victim lamented leaving her gun in the car because of a restriction on weapons. So instead of focusing on why the murderer went on a rampage, the solution was more guns.
Even Professor Mocsary, the head of National Firearms Research Center at UW, uses John Lott's work to bolster his arguments, which the trustees and the public failed to call him out, and in fact the trustees showed deference to his ludicrous premise.
When we are arguing about the percentages of shootings in gun free zones we have already lost because we have accepted the false premise that murders in America started to go down from their high point in 1990 due to more guns flooding America. The GOA and NRA are arguing to close the loop hole in making America safe is just one more law based on false data.
What is missing from the entire focus on the percentage discussion is the premise of John Lott's work. He claims that murder and violence went down due to the relaxation of gun restrictions, which is a frankly laughable premise; however, that argument gets missed in this evaluation. When we get caught up arguing about a statistic based on a false premise then we as a society end up losing. The Bill is based on John Lott's "peer reviewed" statistics is built on a false premise making for a poor law. Every person advocating for this Bill used John Lott's work whether it came from his book or from his website Crime Prevention Research Center. John Lott's quest to prove his theory that more guns lowered murder begins with the Luby's massacre in 1991 where one victim lamented leaving her gun in the car because of a restriction on weapons. So instead of focusing on why the murderer went on a rampage, the solution was more guns.
Mark Jones is lying when he says that these statistics are readily available on his website. I did the search https://www.gunowners.org/?s=%2294%25%22 and found the statistic in articles but no reference from whence it came. In fact I emailed Ken Chestek about the NRA representative's claim he made in his testimony and of course the reference is traced back to John Lott's erroneous work. https://crimeresearch.org/2025/01/updated-information-on-mass-public-shootings-from-1998-to-2024/
Even Professor Mocsary, the head of National Firearms Research Center at UW, uses John Lott's work to bolster his arguments, which the trustees and the public failed to call him out, and in fact the trustees showed deference to his ludicrous premise.
When we are arguing about the percentages of shootings in gun free zones we have already lost because we have accepted the false premise that murders in America started to go down from their high point in 1990 due to more guns flooding America. The GOA and NRA are arguing to close the loop hole in making America safe is just one more law based on false data.