Big meeting on Weds, need some research help

[son of the revolution]

Hey everyone, after a few months of wrangling, I finally have a meeting set up with the entire Editorial Board and certain news editors at the biggest and most influential paper in South Jersey (Courier Post) on Weds to take them to task over their chronic sloppy reporting on firearms related news.

One of the big items on my agenda is convincing them they've been printing misconceptions and or outright lies from the anti gun groups, politicians and CLEO's as etched in stone gospel when it comes to things like the " dangers" of HP's and the " god like skill " of LEO's as it pertains to citizen carry dangers.


Ive been doing some research in preparation and my Google Fu must be weak today so I could use some help. Im looking for three things with links or full cut and paste articles if you prefer so I can print them out and present them.

1) The study done by the Clinton Admin DOJ ( Ludwig ?) that confirmed that self defense use of firearms by citizens was quite common.

2) Any credible studies showing the tendency for overpenetration vis a vi FMJ vs HP. I did find ONE blurb from a NY Times article from '97 that supposedly documents several cases of this happening in NYPD involved shootings of suspects and innocents being hit by pass through FMJ rounds, but there seems to be at least some question as to its veracity. The more varied and credible the better.

3) Any official studies, preferably DOJ/NIJ studies proving the abysmal miss percentage of the alleged "professionals" involved in shootings vs citizens.
Im well aware of the one from Newsweek in the early 90's ( the oft quoted 11% vs 2% one ) and Im not in any way discounting its findings, but it is now almost twenty years old and not exactly " official " so something much more recent and unimpeachable would be preferred if it exists.

I plan on using this stuff to convince the press to start asking some serious questions about NJ Firearms Laws as they are written, in a post Heller and McDonald world. This year the entire Legislature is up for election and I plan on making some serious hay over the gun laws, even if I have to wage a one man campaign to try to show the CLEO's and politico's are either to ignorant to be involved in the law or have been intentionally lying.

ANY help would be greatly appreciated folks !!!!

[FNG19]

Here are some links. I didn't read them in depth, so they may not be useful to you. But, at first pass, it seems there might be some interesting info to mine.

NY Times study done in 2008 about NYPD Shootings.

RAND Corp study/eval of NYPD Firearms Training and Firearms-Discharge Review Process. This is long (147 pages). Again, there might be some useful information in there to mine. There's a Table Of Contents, too, so you can just skip to what you want to look at.

2007 NYT Piece about hit rates in shootings involving PDs around the country.

That should get you started.

[nycems22]

http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/peer.html

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-fa...5.1-screen.pdf

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-fa...5.1-screen.pdf

http://drpinna.com/drug-deaths-more-...m-deaths-15119

[streaker69]

This one might help too.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm

[TaePo]

Hague Convention Blurb

I believe that a lot of the concern regarding FMJ and HP ammo (in the US) is due to the internationally agreed upon Hague Convention by NATO members. Look to the bottom of the link for some general information.

Basically, HP not allowed in warfare. It causes too much pain and damage to the combatant and is 'unnecessary'. FMJ is allowed as it goes cleanly through the target. The problem is it may not stop the target and there is greater risk of collateral damage behind the target.

If I am firing full autos, I would put up with FMJ although I would be concerned about collateral damage. But if I find full auto necessary, I probably have more pressing surivor concerns.

For semi-autos or revolvers, I would prefer HP, myself.

Hope this helps or gets you pointed in the right direction for more info.
Be sure to let us know the outcome.

[donm]

I strongly suggest that you trace the info back to its source (DOJ, FBI, etc.) if possible. Giving them a url ending in something like "gunfacts.info" is like giving us one ending in "bradycampaign.org."

I think the bottom line on hollow points is that the antis have successfully confused them with "cop-killer" armor piercing bullets, which have always been illegal for handguns. Kind of like they've done with "assault weapons" and machine guns. I'm pretty sure you can find that a hollow point is less likely to penetrate a cop's vest.

[Yentl Marmelstein]

Basically, HP not allowed in warfare. It causes too much pain and damage to the combatant and is 'unnecessary'. FMJ is allowed as it goes cleanly through the target.

The reason FMJ is allowed is that it wounds more effectively than it kills.

Therefore, a wounded soldier requires two other soldiers to assist him, effectively taking out three....

OP: Find the book "More Guns, Less Crime"

[son of the revolution]

The reason FMJ is allowed is that it wounds more effectively than it kills.

Therefore, a wounded soldier requires two other soldiers to assist him, effectively taking out three....

OP: Find the book "More Guns, Less Crime"

I have every one of Lott's books already. The problem is that his research has been "questioned" enough by libs that anything associated with him is automatically going to be questioned, regardless of its veracity. This paper has a distinct left lean to it, hence the requirement that anything I provide them as evidence end in a .gov or even better, an Anti researcher that begrudgingly admits the truth. It leaves them no where to go in dismissing it out of hand.

[spooter66]

I have every one of Lott's books already. The problem is that his research has been "questioned" enough by libs that anything associated with him is automatically going to be questioned, regardless of its veracity. This paper has a distinct left lean to it, hence the requirement that anything I provide them as evidence end in a .gov or even better, an Anti researcher that begrudgingly admits the truth. It leaves them no where to go in dismissing it out of hand.

A lot of Lott's research material comes from the DOJ. While you may not want to use him his books (reference list's) can point you to the info you're looking for.

[anonymouse]

Wasn't there an article (within the past year or so) about the NYPDs track record for police shootings? I thought it was in the NY Post but I can't find it now