Shocker! ‘Vaccine’ prevents gun violence

 Exclusive: Dr. Lee Hieb illustrates how science of inoculation works

Lee-Heib-M_D__avatarFrom, by Dr. Le Hieb, 01/07/13 – In recent years, some physicians and physician groups have proposed that “gun  violence” be considered a disease – that we should analyze these public mass  shootings as we would a disease and, using that paradigm, search for a cure.

Of course their cure is always disarmament of all citizens, not just  criminals. But the same docs want more “evidence-based medicine,” and the  evidence points to a very different approach.

concealedgunIn the late 18th century, a London physician, Edward Jenner, learned from  local dairymen that dairy maids who got cowpox never contracted the more fatal  smallpox.
He speculated that cowpox somehow prevented smallpox and tested this  theory by taking germs from the cowpox lesions and inoculating unexposed  persons. These people were shown to survive smallpox outbreaks unscathed and  thus was born the science of immunology and the process of controlling the  deadly disease of smallpox. This is real science – observation, testing and  practice – no politics involved.

If we observe gun violence as a “disease,” one thing is strikingly clear – this disease never strikes people known to be or potentially armed! It may be  true that the recent Connecticut shooter was mentally ill, but he was not so  crazy as to take on a police station. Neither he, nor any of the other similar  shooters, decide to shoot up gun stores or NRA conventioneers. They may be  crazy, but apparently not that crazy.

No, they invariably pick gun-free zones for their mayhem. And when confronted  with an armed counterforce, they either surrender or shoot themselves. They do  not wage gun battles against other armed people.

So, using the logic of Edward Jenner, the inoculation to prevent the disease  of gun violence is putting guns into the hands of potential victims. So thinking  like Edward Jenner, lets see what happens when we do just that – arm citizens by  permitting concealed carrying of firearms.

Dr. Jacob Deakins, in an excellent review of the subject, “Guns, Truth,  Medicine and the Constitution,” points out that both the U.S. National Academy  of Sciences in 2004 and the Center for Disease Control in 2003 failed to find  any written evidence that gun control reduced violent crime, suicides or gun  violence.

Dr. Deakins goes on to cite John Lott Jr., who reviewed the FBI’s yearly  crime statistics for all 3,054 U.S. counties over 18 years (1977-1994). This  constitutes the largest national survey of gun ownership and state police  documentation in illegal gun use.

Lott concludes:

  • While neither state waiting periods nor the federal Brady Law is associated  with a reduction in crime rates, adopting concealed-carry gun laws cut death  rates from public multiple shootings by 69 percent.
  • Allowing people to carry concealed weapons deters violent crime – without  any apparent increase in accidental death. If states without right-to-carry laws  had adopted them in 1992, about 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes and 60,000 aggravated  assaults would have been avoided annually.
  • Children 14 to 15 years of age are 14.5 times more likely to die from  automobile injuries, five times more likely to die from drowning or fire and  burns and three times more likely to die from bicycle accidents than they are to  die from gun accidents.
  • When concealed-carry laws went into effect in a given county, murders fell  by 8 percent, rapes by 5 percent and aggravated assaults by 7 percent.
  • For each additional year concealed-carry laws are in effect, the murder rate  declines by 3 percent, robberies by more than 2 percent and rape by 1  percent.

It is generally conceded that immunization of some percentage of a population  confers decreased risk of disease on the entire group, not just those immunized – the so-called “herd immunity.” So too, allowing people voluntarily to carry  concealed weapons confers some protection on those not carrying – because  criminals and crazies never know if the person they confront will be armed.

Recently in New York State, a newspaper published a who’s who of registered  gun owners in two counties, giving out names and addresses. Part of the ensuing  hue and cry came, not from those listed, but from people not on the list who had  just been “outed” as being unarmed. They felt they had been put at risk by this  information. So too every no-gun sticker on every hospital or school door puts  occupants of the building at risk.

Edward Jenner wasn’t the first person to invent vaccination – he was the  first to fine tune it and sell the idea to the masses. More people have died as  the result of smallpox than from all the wars combined, but now no one dies  thanks to appropriate medical action.

How many unarmed populations will be genocidally murdered, how many shootings  will take place in gun-free zones before we get the point, take appropriate  action and allow weapons to be carried by those at risk and/or their  defenders?


%d bloggers like this: