Is March for Change Being Honest with its Supporters?

Is March for Change/CAGV manipulating statistics to misrepresent the impact of the 2013 gun law as they call for their supporters to vote for Governor Malloy. A fair treatment of their statistics would suggest they are sloppy at best and disingenuous at worst.

March for Change, a program of CT Against Gun Violence (CAGV) sent out an email to supporters today that, to the uninitiated, sounds like Governor Malloy’s 2013 gun law (PA13-3) was something of a success. For those of us with a better understanding of the law, history and gun advocates’ cavalier approach to data and statistics, the email leaves us unconvinced.

The text of the email as distributed by March for Change is at bottom. Before I let you peruse that, I would like to pose the following questions for Meg, Nancy or their CAGV bosses to address if they are honest brokers in the gun control/rights debate.

How much of the Governor Malloy’s “results” that you list in your email are actually due to PA13-3? How much of these arrests, revoked permits or failed background checks would have happened under the old law irrespective of your and Malloy’s efforts?

How many of the quoted ”assault-weapon” arrests are actually due to provisions included in PA13-3? That is, how many arrests could have been made under the old laws due to the person in possession being disqualified from legal possession due to prior crime, lack of citizenship, restraining order, under age, etc.? How many occurred due to possession in a restricted area, improper transport, etc?

And can you please show the public the source of the “176 arrests for illegal possession of assault weapons”? My friends and I are fairly astute observers of the news and none of us can fathom how you come up with an average of 10 such arrests per month since PA13-3 became effective in April 2013. Seriously, show us the numbers.

Curiously (or not), we do not see you noting that there are now tens of thousands of people who legally owned newly defined “assault weapons” prior to 4/4/2013 but chose to not register them (defiance of the law) or the did not know their firearm had to be registered. You never seem to acknowledge the embarrassing failure of the registration requirement of PA13-3, something that was central to your case for “protecting the children” in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre.

Regarding “assault weapons”, how many of the “gun deaths” you note actually involved “assault weapons” but the current definition? Has the last 18 months been like in years past where one or two gun homicides per year were attributable to rifles?

Regarding pistol permits, you cleverly drop “including” before the list of causes that could lead to permit revocation, but how many were for the reasons newly introduced in PA13-3? How does the number you quote (btw, over what period?) compare to similar periods prior to implementation of PA13-3? Are you making a big deal out of a statistic that is just consistent with prior years’ revocations?

Similarly, how many of the failed background checks occurred in a similar period prior to the PA13-3 being implemented? How many of those failed checks that you cite were revoked due to technical issues regarding the application (very common every year)? How many because the person applying had a minor, non-violent legal infraction make them ineligible?

As always, you once again use “gun deaths” which includes suicides, homicides and accidental deaths. In the numbers you quote, what is the breakdown in these categories? Suicides which routinely comprise ~60% of all gun deaths in Connecticut, what impact do you claim PA13-3 had on those sad people who may have taken their own lives? Can you prove that PA13-3 prevented a single gun-suicide death?

Beyond that, assuming that there was little movement in the rate of suicides, how many of the reduced homicides are actually attributable to the actions of police? It was widely reportedin early 2014 that the reduction in homicides state-wide was due to more vigilant and more aggressive policing in the State’s problematic three big cities? Are you suggesting that preventative measures taken by the police have not been a major contributing factor to any homicide reduction? Can you show an actual reduction in gun homicides due to “assault weapons” from the one or two attributable to such firearms each year?

So Meg and Nancy, what say you? Are you honest advocates for change and are willing to address these critiques? Or, will you allow your under-informed supporters believe that PA13-3 had more impact on public safety than it really did?

----------

March for Change email to supporters, October 2, 2014:

ELECTION TIME: the gun issue, your single issue vote.

YOU PROMISED TO BE A SINGLE ISSUE VOTER.

Remember that promise you made in the days after the shooting at the Sandy Hook School? I was there in Hartford. I heard you.

It’s imperative you make good on this promise in the upcoming election and vote to re-elect Dannel Malloy for Governor.

Governor Malloy stood by us. He listed to us.

He was BRAVE

CT IS SAFER BECAUSE OF GOVERNOR MALLOY AND THE GUN BILL HE MADE A REALITY; SINCE SIGNING IT, THIS HAPPENED:

1. Connecticut police officers have made 176 arrests for illegal possession of assault weapons

2. More than 1,700 pistol permits have been revoked for reasons including drunk driving, mental health commitments, and protective and restraining orders in domestic violence situations

3. 210 people have failed background checks, keeping guns out of the hands of 210 potentially dangerous people.

4. In 2013 there were 72 gun deaths in CT, down from 115 in 2012; so far this year the number is 39

STAND WITH GOVERNOR MALLOY AS HE STOOD WITH US IN 2013.

YOU PROMISED.