According to Ace, the Brady’s have their state score cards out for the year 2007. You can find the 2007 rankings here. I notice they are no longer using grades, but are instead scoring and ranking. I’m guessing probably because so many states scored so poorly, all those Ds and Fs were an embarrassment to their effectiveness.
Pennsylvania is listed 26 out of 100 points, and has a state ranking of 10. I am highly disappointed in this! Surely we can do worse. I am honestly embarrassed by this high score. Clearly the Brady’s aren’t evaluating concealed carry laws, or we’d surely have scored lower.
California ranks as number one, with New Jersey following up behind. Ahead of Pennsylvania are CT, MA, MD, NY, RI, HI, and IL. Delaware is ranked 11, and tied with Michigan. Congratulations to Oklahoma and Kentucky for coming in dead last. Now we all know where the bar is.
UPDATE: The Tennesseans are rubbing it in: “SEVEN points, bitches! w00t!” Yeah, yeah. I can carry in restaurants, parks, forests, and universities so :P
With this new “scorecard” release, the Brady Campaign’s tactics and strategies of deception moves to new heights…perhaps in part to counter what they fear may be a “bad” ruling that might emerge from the Supreme Court.
Get this…what they have done is to change the way they “score” states on their gun control laws. By doing this, they have just raised the bar on what they consider “reasonable restrictions.” These new scores “allows” them to emphatically state: [b]”Our gun laws are so weak that, in most states, there are few or no laws to prevent gun violence,” says Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.[/b]
That’s right, they are saying that “in most states” there are few or NO laws to prevent gun violence. Talk about loading the deck!
These people are the definition of lies and deceit. This downright deception MUST be addressed in a serious and meaningful way…
Sadly, I’m stuck in Kalifornistan.
But I’m still gonna to continue to give ’em hell.
8 points! I’m wondering where the six points for “guns in public” comes from; because there are very few prohibited places that a CCW holder can’t take his piece in Indiana.
Oregon came in at 18 out of 100 points and a “T-14” ranking.
Not really sure what T-14 means but I do know that 18 ot of 100 is a clear and resounding “F”.
YAY!
Anyone need a laugh? This is from the linked article…
For continuing insight and comment on the gun issue, read Paul
Helmke’s blog at http://www.bradycampaign.org/blog/. Visit the Brady Campaign website at http://www.bradycampaign.org.
Contact: Peter Hamm, 202-898-0792, phamm@bradymail.org
SOURCE Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
My first thought was that this give us a list of things to get fixed here in PA, but after a quick reading of it I don’t see many of the areas where I would like improvement listed, such as the deletion of the illegal PSP “database” or the removal of the requirement for a LTCF/CCW from any state to carry in an automobile. However, private sales of handguns requiring a PICS check is listed, and I wouldn’t mind getting that addressed.
Perhaps the Fox headline should read:
New Brady Scorecard Shows Most [strike]States[/strike] Brady Campaign Members Lack Common Sense [strike]Gun Restrictions[/strike]
Seriously, if Pennsylvania is ten, it just shows how much they’ve lowered the bar.
Sebastian, you hit the nail on the head.
This new scorecard is PRIMARILY to lower the bar….to mould public perception into thinking that there are effectively no regulations on firearms.
This is simply yet another campaign driven by politically motivated deceit.
T-14 means you’re tied for 14th place with a bunch of other states. I am so proud of being tied for 32nd that I may cry.
w00t! TN got seven points, tying us for 35th place!
SEVEN points, bitches! w00t!
It’s strangly bizarre that Delaware is ranked lower than Pennsylvania. Delaware is a may issue state and requires that all people applying for permit purchase an ad in their local paper announcing their application for Concealed Carry Permit. After all that, they have to appear before a local judge who decides whether or not they are worthy of a permit.
IMO, Pennsylvania should be a little lower on the list. If only we could get rid of the back door handgun licensing.
They have added a bunch of silly stuff … a blatent attempt to get states to score higher.
But they have also given us a laundry list of things to repeal …
7 points for Tam. 18 for Kaveman. 8 for Ahab.
Why must you mock me?
Why? WHY?
Oh, the horror! Oh, the humanity!
*beats self about the head and neck*
(I gotta cut back on the coffee…)
I see Indiana came in at #8 — not perfect, but respectable. That number will drop when all those gun bills pass the general assembly.
Like I said to Ace, we can directly attribute our NumeroUno to Arnold Shwarrzenncrat and his .50 BMG ban, the lead-ammo ban, and the microcephallic foolery of micro-stamping…
Anybody who Arnold supports (even McCain) can be reliably viewed as dangerous to the 2nd.
It’s strangly bizarre that Delaware is ranked lower than Pennsylvania. Delaware is a may issue state and requires that all people applying for permit purchase an ad in their local paper announcing their application for Concealed Carry Permit. After all that, they have to appear before a local judge who decides whether or not they are worthy of a permit.
Delaware’s regulations on sales are fewer than Pennsylvania’s. Other than the carry issue, Delaware’s gun laws are pretty good.
Woohoo! 6 points out of 100! Think I’ll hit the range and celebrate.
6=T-37, hopefully we can lower the score.
In response to Tam’s ever so lady like comments……
w00t! LA got FOUR points, tying us for 44th place!
FOUR points, bitches! w00t!
btw I am pretty sure that a big part of the reason for this ranking is our concealed carry laws. specifcally rule 141 which was passed after Kartina when the democratic congressmen were made to feel unsafe by some of their constituants….. my favorite part is section 20 part c
” A person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be shal have no duty to retreat before using dealdly force as provided for in this section, and MAY STAND HIS OR HER GROUND AND MEET FORCE WITH FORCE.”
now you just know that has to get all the Brady’s panties in bunch.
I don’t think that’s true. Support for any candidate can be for a lot of reasons, not just anti-gun reasons.
That’s me, a gentle blossom…
Huh, the Brady’s say that NJ has a law to ban “large capacity magazines”. However, NJ’s law allows for magazines that hold 15 rounds. Does this mean that the Brady’s no longer support a 10 round maximum?
Hawaii also seems to count as a “Yes” for magazine restrictions, except theirs is limited to pistol magazines.
They still give a letter grade to the District of Columbia, though. Maybe they just copied it from previous rankings.
Ace, we only hit you because we love you.
I’d love for somebody to take that scorecard and do a direct comparision with violent crime rates in each state. Then shove it right down the collective throats of the brady bunch.
It makes more sense now, #1 for gun violence is California.
Darren:
I did a crude test. As these variables don’t likely comply with the assumptions of parametric statistics, I ran a Spearman Rank correlation on the Brady scores versus overall violent per-capita state crime rate (available here):
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004912.html
The correlation was positive and significant at an alpha level of 0.04952.
This means that a high Brady ranking correlates positively and significantly with overall violent per-capita crime rate.
I wasn’t able to include the District of Columbia, as the Brady’s conveniently did not score the District. Surely it would have scored VERY high on their ranking system, as DC has a de-facto ban on all functional firearms. Incidentally, the per-capita DC rate was about twice the rate of the next violent state.
So based on this non-parametric statistical tests, the more Brady-supported gun control a state has, the higher it’s level of violent crime.
Is California still #1 for gang violence?
California might well sweep the entire range of “violence” categories. What an honor for them.
[quote]Ace, we only hit you because we love you.[/quote]
And all the hits are double-taps to center mass.
Niiiice.
I ran spearman on the variables with SPSS, and got a correlation coefficient of 0.05, not high, but a two-tailed sig of 0.733, which isn’t statistically significant. And is there some reason brady and infoplease can’t use standard state abbreviations?
They’re wrong about pre-emption in Indiana. State Law specifically forbids communities from passing gun control legislation. And while they whined about 18 year-olds being able to get CHLs, and no exams or courses required, I guess the lifetime CHL passed under their radar. They didn’t mention it.
Oh. Sorry. I ran the correlation on the total violent crimes and not the brady rank, but brady points. That may account for the differences.
Rightwing:
Sorry…you are correct. I reported the correlation coefficient as the alpha level. There is no correlation between brady rank and violent crime rates (the ones from infoplease).
Yeah, I figured that’s maybe what happened. But you wouldn’t expect to see a correlation with the data aggregated by state, would you? Pennsylvania’s crime rate is inflated by the presence of Pittsburgh, Phildadelphia, and to a lesser extent, Harrisburg, for example. A state crime rate really doesn’t tell you much.
Agreed. Doing it on the selected cities might be better….you could really go wild with the possibilities.
Yes, the Illinois rate is about 543 per 100,000. But of course it’s concentrated in Chicago, and then only in rather particular neighborhoods. Probably not unlike Philly’s overall influence on the PA “state” crime rate.
If you analyzed Chicago’s per capita rate separately from non-Chicago Illinois per capita rate, you would see where the difference was.