The False New York Times Gun Narrative

Gregory Kielma • July 30, 2023

NY Times Recycles Debunked Study to Weaponize Anti-Gun Lies, Push More Disarmament Agitprop

NY Times Recycles Debunked Study to Weaponize Anti-Gun Lies, Push More Disarmament Agitprop
By
TTAG Contributor
July 29, 2023
By Salam Fatohi

Anti-gun activists are getting so desperate that they are relying on incorrect methodology to spread their own gun control agenda in their battle against the firearm industry. Put simply: junk science will always be junk science. Regardless of whether the ‘scientist’ believes it or not.

Recently, The New York Times posted an article asserting that it is 2.7 times more likely that a homicide will occur in your home if you have a firearm. That claim comes from the 1993 Arthur Kellermann study, “Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home,” a study that is overflowing with falsehoods and biases. Kellerman’s study is bad enough that it’s been debunked before.

Biased Research Leads to Biased Findings

There are numerous falsehoods made by Kellermann to unpack here. So, let’s start at the top.

First, in the 1993 referenced study, Kellermann et al. break rule number one when creating an ethical scientific study: engaging in selection bias. The ‘controlled’ population in this study came from a cherry-picked population of reported burglaries in a single county, thus creating a biased population and variables.

Kellermann’s team also used data where the guns were brought to the victim’s home and not owned by the victim. It seems that Kellermann et al. already had their ‘conclusion’ settled before the “study” even began.

Further, Kellermann et al. don’t seem to know the difference between the general population and the population the study selected to fit its needs. As noted by Dr. Pat Baranello in a letter to the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, Kellermann et al.’s findings do not represent the actions of responsible people.

Of course, a cherry-picked population encompassed by individuals with criminal records, aggressive behaviors, and homicidal tendencies are going to be more dangerous with a gun in hand than the average responsible, law-abiding gun owner. But in this false reality created by Kellermann et al., the two populations are one and the same.

Expanding on the biased-selected population by Kellermann et al. comes the question of whether this population is conclusive of the general population of gun owners in America. Many gun owners will deny owning a firearm. As noted in a law review article, many gun owners are hesitant to reveal that they own and possess a firearm. In cases where guns were not found by the investigative body, there is a chance that the family of the deceased could have entered the crime scene and searched for a firearm on their own. Therefore, the assertion that it is 2.7 times more likely to have a fatality in the house if you have a gun is based on the “truthfulness of the interviewees.”

These significant problems further the question even more as to whether Kellermann et al.’s biased chosen population is in any way representative of the general gun owning population at all. If Kellermann wasn’t so hypocritical, he would prefer that his own wife have a “.38 special in her hand” in case of an attack against her life so she could resist the attacker.

Kellermann’s Fraudulent Representation

Unsurprisingly, this isn’t the first time Kellermann has tried to use his own biases against firearms to assert a fraudulent “scientific” claim. In an article written in The New England Journal of Medicine, Kellermann and his coauthor mis-cited a book written by James Wright, Peter Rossi, and Kathleen Daly, Under the Gun.

Kellermann and his coauthor tried to assert that, “restricting access to handguns could substantially reduce our annual rate of homicide.” However, in their book, the original authors did exactly the opposite. With reference to that particular notion, as a Forbes article notes while debunking Kellermann’s multiple false claims, the authors actually said, “There is no persuasive evidence that supports that view.”

In another push of his own biased “science,” Kellermann again tried to assert a claim in the New England Journal of Medicine in which he said, “limiting access to firearms could prevent many suicides.” The referenced study actually concludes that individuals who are suicidal and do not have access to a firearm will still find another way to commit suicide.

Kellerman’s bogus 1993 study that asserted it’s 2.7 times more likely to have a fatality in the house if you have a gun has long been a point of ridicule, but that hasn’t stopped the lie from being repeated. The erroneous gun ownership study was one factor that led to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) being barred from advocating for widespread gun control.

Utilizing taxpayer dollars to advocate for gun control is abhorrent and illegal due to the 1996 Dickey Amendment. Unfortunately, the clearly one-sided research with pre-determined conclusions is still being misused today, including, unsurprisingly, by The New York Times.

Responsible Gun Ownership

Safe and secure firearm storage in the home is a pillar effort of the firearm industry under the Real Solutions. Safer Communities. initiative. One of the programs, Project ChildSafe, partners with local law enforcement agencies in every state and five U.S. territories to distribute free firearm safety kits, including a gun cable locking device, no questions asked, to anyone who requests one. The effort is meant to keep firearms in the home away from children and those who shouldn’t have access or perhaps are going through mental health difficulties.

To date, the firearm industry has distributed more than 40 million of these free firearm safety kits, and when coupled with the gun locks that are included by manufacturers with every firearm sold at retail, the total rises to more than 100 million free gun locks.

These firearm safety initiatives led by the firearm industry have had a real positive impact. Since data was first recorded in 1903, unintentional firearm deaths and accidents have trended down and recently hit the lowest levels on record.

Since the flawed 1993 Kellermann study that was included by The New York Times to make a false claim, things have changed. There have now been 47 months in a row of one million or more firearm purchases at retail, according to NSSF FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)-adjusted data. What’s more, the number of first-time gun owners has skyrocketed in recent years, including more than 8 million first-time gun buyers between 2020-2021.

With many still skeptical and refusing to tell random survey phone callers whether they own a gun in the household, the 2.7 figure used by The New York Times becomes even more laughable.

One thing remains abundantly clear — instead of concentrating on real solutions, the media continues to perpetuate anti-gun propaganda that supports their gun control agenda.
 
Salam Fatohi is the Director of Research for the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

By Gregory Kielma March 31, 2025
GOA Suing ATF Over Gag Order On Secret Surveillance Documents With no action on the topic more than two months into the Trump Administration, Gun Owners of America (GOA) has announced it has filed a lawsuit against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) over a gag order placed on its attorneys in the matter of secret surveillance documents gained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. GOA filed the action on March 12, a year and a half after a protective order was placed on GOA lawyers to not release the information, which the gun-rights group says is still pertinent today. According to a report at ammoland.com, the order was issued after GOA filed a 2021 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking “records about a secret government surveillance program which unlawfully and unconstitutionally monitors and records the firearm purchases of American citizens who are perfectly eligible to purchase and possess firearms.” The ATF eventually gave the documents to GOA, then tried to force the group to return all the documents and destroy any copies made of them. When GOA refused, ATF asked the court for a protective order to keep the organization from releasing the documents. Since that order has been in effect, GOA has not released the documents but now is asking the court to allow it to release the papers. “Relying on the asserted ‘implied power’ of courts ‘to issue a temporary protective order for inadvertently produced FOIA materials,’ this Court granted Defendant’s requests, issuing first an order to ‘sequester’ and subsequently a protective order that ‘plaintiffs and their counsel’ ‘shall sequester’ and ‘shall not disseminate, disclose, or use for any purpose those records or the content of those records,’” the brief states. “Thus, for the past 17 months, Plaintiffs—members of the press—have been prohibited from printing the news, while Plaintiffs’ lawyers have been prohibited from communicating with their clients, advocating for their clients’ interests, or even accessing portions of their own attorney work product.” As GOA also pointed out in their brief, if the documents were classified, they still would not be entitled to a “sweeping protective order.” Only portions of the papers affecting national security would be eligible for protection via a protective order. Ultimately, it’s a shame that GOA must continue fighting in court a questionable decision resulting from President Joe Biden’s weaponized ATF now that the new administration is in place. With the change of administration, ATF should back off of all such actions but seems to be reluctant to do so. In fact, earlier this month we reported how Biden holdovers at the ATF are attempting to stall litigation on the ATF’s “engaged in the business” Final Rule by filing a motion asking for a stay. In response, GOA, Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) and the states of Texas, Louisiana, Utah and Mississippi filed an opposition to the DOJ’s motion, arguing that a stay in the ruling could harm gun owners across the nation. Lately, some in the gun-rights community have been questioning the Trump Administration’s dedication to protecting the right to keep and bear arms in light of Trump only addressing guns once, in an executive order, in his first two months in office. In that order, he instructed new Attorney General Pam Bondi to “examine all orders, regulations, guidance, plans, international agreements, and other actions of executive departments and agencies (agencies) to assess any ongoing infringements of the Second Amendment rights.” The deadline for that report passed last week and at the time of this writing, Bondi still had not submitted a report.
By Gregory Kielma March 31, 2025
Jessica Abner Bondi on the Death of Former U.S. Attorney Jessica Aber Saturday, March 22, 2025 Office of Public Affairs Attorney General Pamela Bondi made the following statement regarding the death of former U.S. Attorney Jessica Aber: “The loss of Jessica Aber, former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, is deeply tragic. Our hearts and prayers go out to her family and friends during this profoundly difficult time.” Cause of death: Epilepsy Updated March 31, 2025
By Gregory Kielma March 31, 2025
Why are suppressors for guns legal and common in many European countries, but heavily regulated in the United States? From a Reader of The Blog Mainly because of ill Informed people like this: Silencers are not designed for hearing protection. Silencers were designed to allow people to commit murder and get away with it. -Heather Martens, executive director of Protect Minnesota: Working to End Gun Violence. Gun modifiers are attachments to a firearm that make firearms more deadly. There are several types of modifiers on the market – some of which are legal and some of which are illegal. Among these modifiers are auto sears and switches, bump stocks, silencers, and stabilizing braces. -Brady United
By Gregory Kielma March 31, 2025
Why would you want to take a concealed carry gun everywhere you go? From A Reader of My Blog I was assaulted while working unarmed in a convenience store. He was wearing brass knuckles. I had a fractured skull and 256 stitches in the face. It took a week to catch him. He had 15 years of time to think. I received numerous threats. I armed myself and let it be known. The crap stopped. Eight years later I am walking back from the post office. I was jumped by 2 thugs. One tried to sweep my legs, the other tried to hit me in the back of the head while yelling “knockout!” I put them both down. One staggered away. The other tried again. I stuck my 9 mm in his eye and asked him if he wanted to die. He started to stammer and cry. He was unarmed. I let him stumble away. Not so tough now. All of these punks were about 20. In both cases it took the cops more than 20 minutes to arrive. The cops rarely prevent crime. They usually deal with the aftermath. If I am not allowed to defend myself, I will be a victim. Never again!
By Gregory Kielma March 31, 2025
Buying guns in the USA - Is it true in the USA, people can just go into a store and buy a gun anytime they want? From A Reader of The Blog Pretty much… although you do have to pass a background check. But I’ll tell you what’s even funnier. I live in Tennessee, where a LOT of people own a LOT of guns, but in the ten years I’ve lived here I haven’t SEEN many people carrying guns. Most police officers have a holstered gun on their belt; and I see plenty of guns at the gun range, or in the gun store, or in the hands of hunters; and most of my neighbors probably have guns in their houses… but I rarely see people walking around the street carrying a gun. I can’t recall EVER seeing someone walking down my street carrying a rifle or shotgun, even though it would be perfectly legal to do so, and I can’t remember the last time I noticed a civilian with a gun in a holster. Now there is a good chance that I might not notice if someone was carrying a concealed handgun… but my point is that we DO NOT go around with gun-belts, and six guns, and those impressive bandoliers of cartridges strung over our shoulders… like you see in old movies. It just plain isn’t a big deal. (And, after all, your car is much bigger than any bullet and is equally capable of killing a bunch of people if you aim it at them, but you probably don’t worry that “people can just go into a dealership and buy a car” … and you don’t even have to pass a background check to do that.)
By Gregory Kielma March 28, 2025
Robert Leider Named ATF Assistant Director And Chief Counsel March 21, 2025 Robert Leider, Associate Professor at Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University, has taken over as the ATF’s Assistant Director and Chief Counsel. This comes less than a month after the Trump administration issued walking papers to Pamela Hicks and showed her the door. The timing of the move couldn’t be better, as gun owners are losing patience with the process while watching other issues precede the Second Amendment and holdover idiots like U.S. Attorney Michael Simpson stating that suppressors fall outside the constitutional right to bear arms. Notably, Attorney General Pam Bondi has become somewhat of a polarizing figure, as her history on gun rights is not sterling, and she is past due with her report regarding the President’s executive order on the Second Amendment. AG Bondi and President Trump, however, have indicated a new leaf on the subject, and regardless of the snags we’ve experienced, it is tempting to see appointments like Kash Patel to ATF Director and hires like Robert Leider as incremental steps in the right direction. So, who is Rober Leider, and why should his new position within the ATF inspire a glimmer of hope for gun owners? Leider has earned his fair share of education with an undergraduate degree from George Washington University, a PhD from Georgetown, his J.D. from Yale, and he has clerked for the United States Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals. While this sounds impressive, it may also sound like he is well-versed in swamp culture, so we must examine his personal history to answer this question. As Washington Gun Law President and legal expert William Kirk points out, Leider is “well on record as a public author of being a staunch, staunch supporter of the Second Amendment.” In a recent video on his YouTube channel, Kirk talks about a late 2024 journal written by Leider entitled Analysis: Gun-Rights Advocates Would Benefit More From ATF Reform Than the Agency’s Elimination. This is an important issue as many gun owners, me included, have become understandably jaded by the agency and may not be seeing the forest through the trees on the matter. “These people were targeting gun owners– not going to happen under this administration. And we’re looking to hire really great people,” said Pam Bondi. This is a people problem, and as hard as it may be to hear, after years of abuse inflicted upon the Second Amendment community, a reformed ATF can serve Americans in a manner consistent with the Constitution. The agency can make defending our inalienable rights their number one priority. While I admit this is still a dream, I’d concede its possibility. I would invite an ATF that ceased all criminalization of Constitutionally protected activities and turned its focus to investigating and prosecuting violations of our rights federally, state by state, and municipality by municipality. To this effect, Robert Leider has an extensive written record of his duty to and reverence for the United States Constitution and the Second Amendment. I encourage reading his written work, including the following suggested entries, if knowing him better interests you. The Individual Right To Bear Arms For Common Defense The General Right to Bear Arms The Modern Militia Legal experts and pro-Second Amendment organizations like Gun Owners of America have responded to the announcement with excitement, not only for Leider but also for AG Pam Bondi’s decision to bring him aboard. Could this signal a more complex chess game being played at the highest levels as pieces are moved into place one by one, with the goal being to restore the Second Amendment? Maybe, but only time will tell. My reluctance to pop corks, however, comes from knowing that while these measures may be effective at stopping some of the bleeding, we will need Congress to right laws previously put in place that violate the Constitution, a task outside the unilateral authority of a regulatory agency. Coming to that point is a much steeper climb for the Second Amendment community, and setting up assurances that the same rights will not be violated again with political ebb and flow is a challenge. If I were in charge of meeting that challenge head-on, hiring someone like Robert Leider might be at the top of my to-do list. He is now in a position to make a difference, not only in ongoing ATF litigation but also in future actions against those who remain in defiance of American gun rights. So, don’t perceive my reluctance to raise the roof negatively. Understand it as well-tempered optimism while we remind leaders of their commitments and the loyalty and reward that accompany kept promises.
By Gregory Kielma March 28, 2025
GOA Suing ATF Over Gag Order On Secret Surveillance Documents Mark Chesnut With no action on the topic more than two months into the Trump Administration, Gun Owners of America (GOA) has announced it has filed a lawsuit against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) over a gag order placed on its attorneys in the matter of secret surveillance documents gained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. GOA filed the action on March 12, a year and a half after a protective order was placed on GOA lawyers to not release the information, which the gun-rights group says is still pertinent today. According to a report at ammoland.com, the order was issued after GOA filed a 2021 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking “records about a secret government surveillance program which unlawfully and unconstitutionally monitors and records the firearm purchases of American citizens who are perfectly eligible to purchase and possess firearms.” The ATF eventually gave the documents to GOA, then tried to force the group to return all the documents and destroy any copies made of them. When GOA refused, ATF asked the court for a protective order to keep the organization from releasing the documents. Since that order has been in effect, GOA has not released the documents, but now is asking the court to allow it to release the papers. “Relying on the asserted ‘implied power’ of courts ‘to issue a temporary protective order for inadvertently produced FOIA materials,’ this Court granted Defendant’s requests, issuing first an order to ‘sequester’ and subsequently a protective order that ‘plaintiffs and their counsel’ ‘shall sequester’ and ‘shall not disseminate, disclose, or use for any purpose those records or the content of those records,’” the brief states. “Thus, for the past 17 months, Plaintiffs—members of the press—have been prohibited from printing the news, while Plaintiffs’ lawyers have been prohibited from communicating with their clients, advocating for their clients’ interests, or even accessing portions of their own attorney work product.” As GOA also pointed out in their brief, if the documents were classified, they still would not be entitled to a “sweeping protective order.” Only portions of the papers affecting national security would be eligible for protection via a protective order. Ultimately, it’s a shame that GOA must continue fighting in court a questionable decision resulting from President Joe Biden’s weaponized ATF now that the new administration is in place. With the change of administration, ATF should back off of all such actions but seems to be reluctant to do so. In fact, earlier this month we reported how Biden holdovers at the ATF are attempting to stall litigation on the ATF’s “engaged in the business” Final Rule by filing a motion asking for a stay. In response, GOA, Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) and the states of Texas, Louisiana, Utah and Mississippi filed an opposition to the DOJ’s motion, arguing that a stay in the ruling could harm gun owners across the nation. Lately, some in the gun-rights community have been questioning the Trump Administration’s dedication to protecting the right to keep and bear arms in light of Trump only addressing guns once, in an executive order, in his first two months in office. In that order, he instructed new Attorney General Pam Bondi to “examine all orders, regulations, guidance, plans, international agreements, and other actions of executive departments and agencies (agencies) to assess any ongoing infringements of the Second Amendment rights.” The deadline for that report passed last week and at the time of this writing, Bondi still had not submitted a report.
By Gregory Kielma March 28, 2025
Orlando Man Indicted For Unlawful Possession Of A Machinegun Conversion Device Thursday, March 27, 2025 U.S. Attorney's Office, Middle District of Florida Says FFL and Firearms instructor Gregg Kielma...Don't do it....save your family and possible your life from incarceration...Please don't ask me for anything illegal... Please, you will leave me no choice other than to contact the ATF. Please do not put me as a legal FFL who goes by the rules in this position..... Orlando, Florida – Acting United States Attorney Sara C. Sweeney announces the unsealing of an indictment charging Jaquarius McDonald (24, Orlando) with unlawful possession of a machinegun conversion device. If convicted, McDonald faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in federal prison. According to the indictment, on January 1, 2025, McDonald knowingly possessed a machinegun which was not registered to him in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. An indictment is merely a formal charge that a defendant has committed one or more violations of federal criminal law, and every defendant is presumed innocent unless, and until, proven guilty. This case was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the Orlando Police Department. It will be prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Kaley Austin-Aronson. This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN). Updated March 27, 2025
By Gregory Kielma March 28, 2025
Vicksburg Man Convicted of Falsifying Firearms Documents, Aggravated Identity Theft, and Obstruction of Justice Friday, March 28, 2025 U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of Mississippi JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI – A federal jury convicted Zaid Khalaf, 42, of Vicksburg, Mississippi, a former Federal Firearms Licensee (“FFL”) on Thursday, March 27, 2025, for two counts of falsifying records, two counts of aggravated identity theft, and one count of obstruction of justice. The convictions followed a two-day trial. According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, Khalaf was a Federal Firearms Licensee at a gun shop in Vicksburg, Mississippi since 2022. On April 24, 2024, an ATF firearms compliance inspection found that Khalaf falsified multiple firearms transaction records. Khalaf used the identities including social security numbers of two of his previous customers to forge firearm transaction records in their names. Khalaf presented the forged documents to the ATF investigator during the inspection. It is against federal law to falsify ATF records and to use the identities and private information of citizens without their consent. Khalaf is no longer a Federal Firearms Licensee. Khalaf is scheduled to be sentenced on July 22 and faces a mandatory minimum of two years in prison for aggravated identity theft consecutive with any other term of imprisonment imposed. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. Acting U.S. Attorney Patrick A. Lemon of the Southern District of Mississippi; and Special Agent in Charge Joshua Jackson of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives made the announcement. Updated March 28, 2025
By Gregory Kielma March 28, 2025
BRADENTON — After five years on the run, Demetrius Gabriel was convicted of first-degree murder for a 2017 shooting at Spot 26 nightclub off Cortez Rd. in Bradenton. The trial was held at the Manatee County Courthouse March 24-26. He was sentenced to Life in prison without parole. For reasons that are still unknown, the defendant waited near the front door for the victim to enter. He stood near the front door, watching for some time, and when the victim started to enter, he drew a gun from his waistband, walked up to the victim, and shot him in the face. After the victim fell to the floor, the defendant walked calmly out of the club, still holding the murder weapon. Most of the incident was captured on surveillance video, but the identity of the shooter was still unknown. Ultimately, police were able to identify a possible suspect but needed to confirm his identity through fingerprints that Gabriel left on a cup he was drinking from at the bar. An arrest warrant was issued, but the defendant remained on the run for nearly 5 years while using another identity. Gabriel was ultimately found after he was arrested in Miami on unrelated charges for using this false identity. The defendant was released from Federal prison less than 2 years before this shooting and was still on probation at the time.The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.
Show More
Share by: