Government Lies About Good Guys With Guns

The government is lying to us about the impact of good guys with guns.


Follow this link and get $25 in ammo.

Fountain Podcast App
Follow me on Fountain


Follow twitter @JeffDowdle
Follow me on Truth Social - @JeffDowdle

Convention of States Project
Presearch search engine sign up.
Brave Browser

Find our Representative
email me at jeff@livetoshoot.com
Follow me on Gettr
Follow me on Telegram
subscribe to my newsletter

Transcript

0:16

Well, welcome to the Live to Shoot podcast. My name is Jeff Dowell, and I've been a licensed farms dealer for the last 17 years. In this podcast, we talk about, everything related to the second amendment as well as anything else going on in the news or a sports story or anything else that I might find interesting. So welcome, welcome, welcome. So this week we had the presidential debate, which I'm not really going to talk about. I didn't watch it. I don't typically watch the debates because it's just better for my own mental health. But we did learn in this debate that Kamala Harris is a gun owner. Who wouldn't know? Who knew? You know? So You know, and it's because, again, the elite believe that they need to have those rights that others don't. Others don't. They will buy all the privately armed security that they need, but they do want to take your guns away. And while she continues to deny that she wants to take your guns away, she has already said many times, and it's, it's It's been documented that she supports a buyback program and she supports a mandatory buyback program. And when you say mandatory, another word for that is confiscation. I think she dances around it when people say she wants to confiscate her guns. No, she wants a mandatory buyback is what she wants. She doesn't want to confiscate them. She wants a mandatory buyback. She wants to give you something for those guns. She doesn't want to just take them. But what are they going to give us? I don't know. But, You know that is a, you know, what came out of the debate. Who won? Who lost? What's the results? I don't know. I don't think it moves the needle too much. But another story that came out this week was an article by John Lott. And If you don't know who John Lott is, he is an economist, a political commentator, but he's also a very huge gun rights advocate, writes a lot of articles. He's written several books one book called More Guns, Less Crime, the other one, The Bias Against Guns Freedonomics is, is another one, and he came out with an, an article in the Federalist saying that, you know, the government has been lying to us about the data around showing that good guys with guns save lives. Now, who would be surprised to know that, think the government has been lying to us about Anything, really. I mean especially David and especially the CDC. I mean, really, we, we love the CDC. They are, they, they keep us so safe. But yes, when it comes to, um, the, you know, the government has always been, you know, debunking this idea that good guys with guns can save lives. They believe that nobody should have guns, but John Lott wrote that the numbers do back it up. But the FBI have been fiddling with those numbers. This is from his article. It says, Meanwhile, the Centers for Disease Control, the CDC, under the Biden administration, has sought to suppress data proving that armed citizens help prevent crime by removing the estimates. It's estimates of defensive gun uses from its website. For almost a decade, the CDC referenced a 2013 National Academies of Science report noting that people use guns to stop crime anywhere from about 64, 000 to 3 million times a year. The decision was taken after a gun control activist, Mark Bryant, founder of the Gun Violence Archive, lobbied to remove the misinformation Regarding the CDC's defensive gun use estimates. Because they are cited by gun rights folks to stop gun control legislation. Soon after the CDC took those numbers and estimates down. And now they list, and list no numbers. And I mean, extreme bias, right? And we wonder why, you know, we can't trust the government. You know, what about all those different COVID numbers? But he goes on to say that you know, the CDC isn't the only one. He quotes, he talks about the FBI. He says the FBI has also shown itself to be susceptible to political pressure. Huh, surprising, the FBI defines an active shooter attack as occurring when an individual actively kills or attempts to kill people in a populated public area. This measure includes everything from just one person shot at, even if the target isn't hit, to a mass public shooting, it doesn't, it doesn't include however shootings involving other crimes such as robbery or fighting over drug turf. To compile this list, the FBI hired researchers at the Texas State Police departments, you know, don't record these cases. So the researchers relied on Google searches to find stories about these incidents. As such, the FBI relied, evidence relies on a data set that is actively hostile to the truth. Yeah, so Google. We're using Google to determine these numbers. He says, During 2020 and the beginning of 2021, I, John Lott, he worked as the Senior Advisor for Research and Statistics at the U. S. Department of Justice. He says, My job included evaluating the FBI's active shooting reports. During my time with the DOJ, I discovered that the FBI either missed or missed. or misidentified many cases of civilians using guns to stop attacks. It says, for instance, the FBI continues to report that armed citizens stopped only 14 of the 350 active shooter cases that identified in the 10 year period between 2014 and 2023. It says He said the Crime Prevention Research Center, which he runs, has found many more missed cases and is keeping an updated list. He says, as such, the CPRC is organization Numbers tell a much different story. Out of the 515 active shooter cases from two 2014 to two to two 20 2023, sorry. Armed citizens stopped 180, saving countless in his lives. Our numbers even include 27 cases where a law abiding citizen with a gun stopped an attacker before he could fire a shot. Overall, the CPRC estimates that law abiding citizens with guns have stopped over 35 percent of active shooting over the last decade and 39. 6 percent in the last 5 years. The figure is 8 times higher than the 4 percent estimate. the FBI. Now 35 percent not huge. I mean, you know, I, I think, you know, the numbers get much bigger when you talk about individuals protecting themselves with a firearm, whether just you know, using it as a deterrent or actually firing it but you know why you know one reason that these act these numbers are not as high on these what they consider active shooter or mass shooting incidents is because where do most of these events occur all right gun free zones And the good guys that have the guns also obey the law and they don't take their guns into gun free zones. So they don't have as much of an opportunity to protect innocent people because they are following the law. But these law buyers are the ones that, you know, Kamala and her regime want to take the guns away from. So, that's one reason I believe the stats might not be as high because they're happening, you know, at schools and places like that where People have, you know, in malls where they have, you know, you can't carry, usually typically say they won't, they'll have a postage that you can't conceal carry. But so those people that could defend you are not there because they're following the law. But if you look at this, the Appalachee high school shooting where a school resource officer Brought down the, the, the, the, perpetrator and didn't even kill him. Does show that arming and protecting our schools do work. Now, do we need, probably, we need more resource officers? Yes Do I believe we need to arm our teachers? Yes. I think we've got, as I said, I believe it was last week's process. Special cargo in those schools, our children. We need to protect them. We need to lock it down. We need to have you know, one resource officer for a high school. These large schools that are, can be our campuses in a lot of cases. Isn't sufficient. And so we need to either have more resource officers, which, you know, Kamala Harris, you know, she is very, you know, defund the police. She doesn't want the police to be protecting us. She doesn't want us to be able to protect ourselves. She really doesn't want us to be protected at all. She wants to have chaos, but I think what this does show is that, you know arming our citizens, providing more resource school resource officers can help protect our kids. And that's what we need to do. But we also need to know we can't trust the government. And this is just another case of that. And it everything that they continue to say, uh, is false. This Kamala, if you look at the, watch the debate, and I, I said I didn't watch it, but I've gotten highlights. You know, she lied, lied, lied. The moderators did not, you know, correct her. They, they fact checked President Trump over and over again, because the left wants to continue to lie to us. They think we're not smart enough to figure it out, but we are. Our eyes are open, and we can see. So. You need to keep spreading the truth, tell people they can't trust the numbers they see from the government about what how guns keep individuals safe. And we need to keep fighting for our, and protecting our guns. And again, we got to get out and spread the vote and get President Trump reelected. So get out there, vote and fight, fight, fight. I appreciate you listening and have a great rest of your week.