Wednesday, December 7, 2016

2 Juveniles arrested in Sevier County Tennessee Fire, Investigation Ongoing


TN Fire news conference 12/7/16 3pm ET:


The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation Director Mark Gwynand announced that 2 juveniles were arrested Wednesday morning in connection with the fires.  The Sevier County District 4th District Attorney General James Dunn said that because they are juveniles state law prevents them from releasing any information, including age and sex, on the 2 except that they are from TN but not Sevier County. There will be a detention hearing within 72 hours to determine if they are held with bond, without bond, or released pending trial. 

The investigation is still ongoing. Because they are juvenile and because the investigation is ongoing, Dunn would not give any other information except to say "everything is on the table" as far as charges and/or moving the case to adult court and responded "it's part of the investigation" to almost all questions, meaning they will not comment on any aspect of the investigation or about the suspects at this time.

Also in attendance was Great Smoky Mountains National Park Chief Ranger Steve Kloster.
Official Update for the Chimney Tops 2 and Cobbly Nob Fires for 2016-12-7
To date, there are 14 confirmed fatalities. Over 145 people sustained injuries. A total of 1753 structures have been damaged or destroyed. This number includes 1711 single family residences and 42 commercial properties.
Start Date: Nov 23 Size: 17,006 Containment: 64%
Start Date: Nov 28 Size: 819 Containment: 67%
To access Gatlinburg, it is important to follow check point protocols. There is only one check point access at East Parkway (Hwy. 321) at Glades Road and the Post Office. Be sure to bring valid forms of identification showing name and address of residence or business inside Gatlinburg. Officials will verify renters and lease holders, as needed. 
Closed Trails: Chimney Tops Trail, Road Prong Trail, Cove Mountain Trail, Gatlinburg Trail, Huskey Gap Trail, Sugarland Mountain Trail, Rough Creek Trail, Little River Trail, Cucumber Gap Trail, Jakes Creek Trail, Miry Ridge Trail, Goshen Prong Trail, Old Sugarlands Trail, Twin Creeks Trail, Bullhead 
Be vigilant while driving; emergency vehicles and personnel may be working in areas open to the public.


Incident Summary: The Chimney Tops 2 Fire was reported in Great Smoky Mountains National Park near Gatlinburg, TN on Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at approximately 5:20 pm. The wildfire began burning in a remote location (Chimney Tops) of the park in steep terrain with vertical cliffs and narrow rocky ridges making access to the wildfire area difficult for firefighting efforts. On Monday, November 28th, the exceptional drought conditions and extreme winds caused the wildfire to grow rapidly, causing numerous new wildfire starts from embers carried miles away and downed powerlines in and adjacent to Great Smoky Mountains National Park. The wildfire was determined to be human-caused and is currently under investigation.

Chimney Tops 2 fire did not increase in size yesterday and is estimated to be 17006 acres. Due to more accurate mapping, the Cobbly Nob fire is now estimated to be 819 acres, but there has been no actual growth in the fire size. Containment has increased to 64% on Chimney Tops 2 and is up to 67% on Cobbly Nob. Despite the rain, heat still exists within the fire perimeter. Smoke may be visible within the fire perimeter from time to time, and firefighters will continue to patrol and mop any hot spots that may be a threat to the containment lines or structures.
Today property owners, business owners, renters, and lease holders are being allowed to return to full-time occupancy beginning at 7:00 am through the East Parkway (Hwy. 321) entry point. A curfew will be in effect from 10:00 pm until 6:00 am both today and Thursday. Use caution when entering the burned area.

The City of Gatlinburg plans to reopen for business and to the general public on Friday, December 9 at 7:00 am. Major roadways are expected to be open, but some city roadways may remain closed to accommodate utility work.

Even though the fire is not 100% contained, the areas opening to the public have been deemed safe. The area will continue to be monitored and patrolled. Firefighters will continue to provide structure protection and will maintain a presence in these areas until the fire is 100% contained.

Though there is little or no active fire evident at this time, everyone should use caution when entering the burned area. Be prepared for other hazards that may be present on your property. These include, but are not limited to: hazards trees, footing, parking, collapse of structural material, and utilities. We will continue to mop up and patrol and provide for public and firefighter safety. For detailed information on safely returning to your property, please follow us on our Facebook, website, or call us (information above).

Chimney Tops 2
Cobbly Nob
Incident Resources: 18 hand crews, 35 engines, 3 helicopters, 1 dozers, 1 air attack, 593 total personnel

Weather: Low pressure continues tracking across the area as high pressure prepares to build into the area thru today. Rain showers yesterday resulted in 0.8 inches of rain in the fire area. The light intensity showers allowed much of the rain to soak into the soil instead of running off. High pressure will be over the region briefly today with a fast moving frontal boundary system that will cross the area tonight and Thursday morning. This system will allow much colder air into the fire area for Thursday night into Saturday.

Road and Trail Closure Status: The National Park is closed from the Gatlinburg Entrance to Smokemont near Oconaluftee (US 441, Newfound Gap) and Little River Road from Sugarlands Visitor Center to Townsend. The Gatlinburg By-Pass and Cliff Branch are also closed. The Spur between Pigeon Forge and Gatlinburg is open from Pigeon Forge to the Gatlinburg Welcome Center. There is no access to Wiley Oakley or Westgate from the Spur.



Sunday, November 6, 2016

Remembering Bella

(all these photos, and more, can be found on Rob's Instagram and Facebook pages.)
Here is a story of love and devotion between a terminally ill dog and the man, a marine veteran, who loved her and spent her last months taking her on the journey of a lifetime.

Here is the story of Rob and Bella.



Over a year ago, doctors gave Bella, diagnosed with terminal cancer, she had a leg amputated because of bone cancer and the cancer had spread to her lungs. She was given 3-6 months to live. Rob decided to take Bella with him on a trip to Chicago so he could spend as much time with her as to spend as much time with her as he could. It didn't stop there, next thing you know, they were an epic journey around the United States together.


As word spread, Rob and Bella became internet sensations. 

They were even featured by several news outlets.

Here's a story about them on CNN:
Man takes his dog, dying of cancer, on one last, epic road trip

and the Telegraph:
Man takes terminally ill dog on farewell cross-country road trip​

and even the today show
His dog was given months to live, so this man took her on a cross-country trip​

He gained thousands of followers on his instagram, facebook and twitter accounts.  People from around the world were following the journey of Rob and Bella.




Rob and Bella traveled the country







Thursday, October 27, 2016, Rob took Bella on a ride, not knowing it would be her last.


Video of Bella's last ride.  Click here

That night Bella's breathing became labored and, as Rob snuggled in next to Bella at the vet, he posted to his instagram followers that that the end was near.
Click here to read Rob's post
Sadly, Bella passed away Friday, October 28 with Rob by her side. Through the sheer force of Rob's love, Bella lived much longer than the vets thought.

On Friday, October 28, 2016 Rob posted this picture of Bella to his instagram/Facebook
Click here to see Rob's message
and wrote:


Goodbye my Love. Thank you for never abandoning me...never judging me...never giving up on me... Thank you...for Loving me with every beat of that beautiful heart. Now go, become one with all...dance in the wind, flow in the ocean, and give warmth to the hearts of all you've touched...for your Love is now eternal and immeasurable.
To my brother Mike, sister Charity and all my grandparents... give this girl some tummy rubs, would you? For all the spirits young and old who were brought to the other side far too soon due to some type of ailment or disease that took you before your time... welcome this girl as I'm sure she's greeting you with a wagging tail.



 R.I.P. sweet Bella.

Our thoughts and prayers are with Rob at this difficult time.

Fly Bella, Fly!



For more, you can visit Rob's

instagram page CLICK HERE,

his Facebook page, CLICK HERE



or his website, RK Life Illustrated, CLICK HERE







Tuesday, September 27, 2016

Monday, September 26, 2016

My Opinion of the Presidential Debate September 26, 2016 YMMV

Segment 1, the economy goes to Trump. His plan much more beneficial. Clinton's plan is disastrous and would put many out of business.

On to segment 2, prosperity/taxes. Segment 2: Nobody answered the question. Both fail.

Segment 3: Clinton loses, disconnected from reality and some really BAD ideas. She proved she's clueless about guns. A couple of good ideas. Addressing help for mental illness is great (except should be addressed state/locally not federally as outlined in the Constitution)
Trump, some good ideas but stop and frisk is a BAD idea, I agree with Hillary on that.
Both agreed on mental illness so they both get points for that.
Trump edges out Clinton only because of her less than stellar support of police.  Otherwise it would be a tie.

Segment 4: This question was poorly asked. Tie.

Cyber-security segment:
Hillary loses. She was so concerned she had an un-secure server and did not even defend it in her segment. She diverted the questions away from cyber security to ISIS to avoid the question.
Trump seems to have a better handle on cyber security than Clinton.

Segment on ISIS:
Trump is correct about getting out, many military leaders had advised against leaving Iraq.
Not so sure about taking the oil.
He's right about the Iran deal. NATO should be paying fair share and what they owe by contract and focus on terrorism. Could have spend his time on ISIS not defending "I did not support the was in Iraq"
Hillary wants to continue same failed policies.
Working with local law enforcement is a good idea.
Hillary flustered.

Last segment. Trump is right about Iran.  Trump takes a firmer stance with foreign countries than Clinton.  She has a women’s touch, which wouldn’t work with many of these countries, especially in the Middle East.  
Clinton is in denial about “putting a lid on nuclear Iran.”  She’s trying very hard, but what she outlined does not represent “standing up to bullies”. 
Hillary is running a more negative ad campaign than Trump and she didn’t deny.  FYI, Hillary, we live in a Republic, not a democracy.


Result: Tied.  Lester Holt asked good questions when he could get them in.  He lost control of the debate several times.

Update: Polls

People say you win or lose a debate in the first 30 minutes. That's probably the reason Trump won the debate in all but one of the polls I've seen. Though Hillary said she spent much time preparing, she appeared less prepared, less at ease and more flustered than Trump. Clinton has a greater disconnect to millennials than Trump. If she wants to win the next debate she'll need to get out of the gate faster and connect better to the millennials.
Trump Win: TIME, CBS, FOX, PIX, Heavy The Hill, Atlantic Patch, Drudge, The Right Scoop, The Hill, True New JerseyClinton Win: Orlando Sentinel

Wednesday, September 7, 2016

Why the People Who Agree with This Meme Are the Ones Hurting the Poverty-Stricken


The first thing those who agree meme are going to say is “how am I hurting the poverty-stricken?”  

To understand how, you must first go back and look at our government and our Constitution and understand how the government is supposed to work and why it is not working, why it is not only not helping the poverty-stricken but hurting them in so many ways.
Our founding fathers were some pretty bright men.  They put a lot of thought into our Constitution and to how the country would run best for everyone.  The Constitution was created specifically with checks and balances and to give the people a voice.  Unfortunately, the Constitution has been bastardized by using self-helping “interpretation” of the Constitution for their own purposes.  They do this by convincing people that what they are doing is helping the people and the people give them control. 

The Constitution gives equal power to the federal government and to the states.  The states are not subordinate to the federal government; they have equal power.  Those in the federal government who want control have duped the people into believing that the federal government is above and has more power than the states.  The Constitution says otherwise. 

The Constitution gives the federal government control over managing the country as a whole, such as making treaties and defense: “commonDefence and general Welfare of the United States.”  It does not give the federal government control over caring for the individual, that is left to the state, and as part of the state, communities and individuals.   “Thepowers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibitedby it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”  Keeping the needs of communities and individuals at state level keeps control in the hands of the people.

What happens when the federal government takes over control from the states is that the individual gets lost?  The federal government says: lets help the poverty-stricken and people say ‘yes, lets help the poverty stricken.’  The federal government sets up a generic program to “help the poverty-stricken.”  This generic program has to be broad and generic that it helps the most people with one program.  Unfortunately, doing it this way is costly and impossible to manage well.  It is wasteful and doesn’t best help the people it is purported to help.  What it does do is give control over the people’s lives to those in charge.

To understand how this is especially harmful, bad, and wasteful we must look at how things would be if the government was run as the forefathers had intended and outlined in the Constitution.
First the federal government would only take care of federal matters, in other words making treaties and the defense and care of the country, not the individual, as a whole. They would only need to tax just enough to maintain just those things.  Much less wasteful spending.
All other matters would fall on state and local governments.  In other words, in the hands of the people.  The people of the state and communities would be responsible for caring for their own.  It would be much easier to identify and to help, in individualized ways, the people who need help.  Local tax payers would have a vested interest in where there money goes and therefore there would be less waste and more help.  There would be more assistance for these people because your money wouldn’t go into some generic fund, it would go to help specific people in your community.  You could actually see where your money is going and who it is helping.  People would get back on their feet quicker because the tax payer would hold them responsible.  The tax payer would also be motivated to help them get off of assistance and on to their feet.  The tax payer would ensure people who don’t need the money don’t get the money and that the money is directed to where it is needed most.

So to those who agree with that meme, you are allowing a government who is not supposed to be managing caring for the poverty-stricken to mismanage it instead of insisting you do it yourselves.  It’s lazy and it’s wasteful.  Cutting wasteful spending ensures there is more money for the poverty-stricken.  This can best be done at the local level.


Don't be content with allowing those who don't need the money, your money, to steal it because you think it's some noble gesture to allow people to receive money they don't deserve because you are afraid someone who needs it won't get it.  That's idiotic.  If you really want to help the poverty-stricken, if you want to make sure not a single poverty-stricken family goes hungry, take back control from the federal government and make sure your tax dollars, your charity, your money goes where it needs to go.  You should have control over where your charity money goes.  You decide where it goes.  It will be directed to those who need it and there will be more of it going where it needs to go.  Don’t allow someone else to decide where your charity money goes.  

Monday, July 11, 2016

The Effect $15/min Wage Would Have on My Business

What would happen the day my business would be required to pay $15/hr to our employees?

In order for us to be able to pay our employees and pay our bills drastic changes would have to happen.

Three employees, out of 5 would immediately be laid off.  That is more than 1/2 of our work force. We love and need our employees and don't want to let them go, and they love working for and with us and don't want to go, but we would be forced to let them go because we can't afford to pay them $15/hr.

Over the years we have had to raise prices, small increases of a few cents here and there.  Even a few cents is difficult for many of our poorer customers.  We keep our prices just below or at the big box stores in order to be competitive.  We usually lose some customers with every price increase.  If the minimum wage increased, our prices would have to increase significantly, perhaps by as much as 25-50% in order to be able to pay our remaining staff wages and also for the increase in pricing that we will see from our vendors.  We see price increases every time they have increase in costs such as when gas prices go up or minimum wages go up.  We would no longer be able to compete with the big box stores who will be better able to absorb the increase in wages and inevitable loss of employees better than we will. Their prices will not increase, if at all, as much as ours will.  In case you didn't realize it, the costs to you, the consumer, will also increase.

Within a few weeks we will have lost the majority of our customers, our remaining staff will be exhausted and our store will close forever.



Sunday, June 12, 2016

The Problem with Guns

There is no problem with guns, there's a problem with people.  The problem with guns is that people are focused on guns and not the real problem, people. If gunsare to blame for heinous crimes, why have no guns been convicted of murder?  Simple, guns are inanimate objects, people are the ones committing heinous crimes.  These criminals and terrorists don't follow laws. They don't care if there are gun laws. If someone is going to commit murder, a crime that has the death penalty/life imprisonment, do you really think gun laws will deter them? Terrorists and insane people who want to hurt people will find a way.  If not guns, explosives, planes, cars, or other means to cause harm.  This is because it's not the weapon that is causing the death, it's the person intent on causing death.  The focus must be on preventing people from carrying out heinous crime, not preventing law abiding citizens from protecting themselves and loved ones from those out to hurt them.

The way to prevent these types of incidents isn't to regulate or ban guns, it's to to identify terrorists and to identify and treat those with mental illness who are a danger to themselves and others before they commit heinous acts. To reiterate, people are the problem, not their weapons of choice. Remember, no guns were involved in the 9-11 attacks.

Let's look at facts:

  • Gun control doesn't work.  None of the worst attacks would have been prevented by any form of gun control and likely it was gun laws which prevented people from being armed defending themselves and others.


  • People misuse the term "assault rifle." There is a specific type of rifle, fully automatic that is called an "assault rifle."  Fully automatic rifles are illegal for most people other than military or police and a few select people to possess.  None of the recent attacks involved fully automatic rifles. Media, either intentionally or because they are ignorant, mistakenly call rifles used in the recent crimes "assault rifles."  "AR' does not stand for 'assault rifle' or 'automatic rifle' it stands for ArmaLite rifle, the company that developed it.

In case you don't know what an assault rifle is and what it isn't, here is an explanation:






Some have included semi-automatic weapons that are capable of switching to automatic in the definition of "assault rifle" but they all have the characteristic of being able to fire automatically.  Guns that are strictly semi-automatic are not "assault rifles."  Some people also confuse "assault rifles" with "Assault Weapons" which is something completely different.

The best way to understand firearms, and I recommend this to anyone prior to commenting on gun control laws, is to go to a range, speak with the range master and fire different types of weapons.  

  • The government must do a better job identifying terrorists and prevent them from carrying out heinous acts. We must prevent terrorists from entering the country by improving vetting people who come into the country.  If you can't vet someone, they shouldn't be allowed to enter the country.  Government, FBI, law enforcement must also do a better job identifying terrorists who are in the country. 


  • It is impossible to prevent all attacks and to prevent terrorists from getting firearms (they get them in countries where firearms are banned).  

  • Terrorism and terrorist attacks are only going to get worse, we must be prepared.  We must be armed and trained to protect ourselves and our loved ones.


  •  Most importantly, the government should not make laws that make people incapable of protecting themselves. It is not feasible for police to be everywhere.  What is feasible and what would be the best way to protect ourselves, our families and our children is to be armed and trained.
  • School staff should be properly trained and armed like they do in Israel. We train teachers and staff how to perform first aid/CPR and use an AED to save kids, why not train them to use firearms? This is just another way to protect our precious children.

Israeli Elementary School


  • Firearms are a good defense against terrorism.  People in the nightclub in Orlando were sitting ducks, being murdered while waiting for police with guns to come and save them instead of being armed and saving themselves.




  • For those who say that terrorists and those with mental illness who are dangerous shouldn't be able to get firearms I say, no they shouldn't.  They shouldn't be on the streets where they can buy firearms, or knives or a piece of string.  Identifying them and getting them off the streets is where the focus must be.
Bill Whittle sums it up nicely:




For further information see my post: "Does Research and Statistics Support Gun Control?"

Revisiting "Does Research and Statistics Support Gun Control?"

Author’s note: I reached out to a respected expert on gun control statistics, Dr. Gary Kleck, professor of criminology at Florida State University.  He was kind enough to send me the chapter The Great American Gun Debate:What Research Has to Say  from The Criminal Justice System, 10th edition, Edited by George F. Cole and Marc G. Gertz. Wadsworth. (Published January 2012). [Note: this paper had been hacked at one point and nasty, unrelated stuff added, I'm working on a new link.]   He also sent me a copy of National Vital Statistics Reports Volume 60, Number 3  which is the final report for 2009 which he says “provides the most recent final mortality data, showing numbers of deaths from all causes, with separate counts for gun deaths.”

There is no problem with guns, there's a problem with people.  People are the ones committing heinous crimes.  These criminals and terrorists don't follow laws. They don't care if there are gun laws. If someone is going to commit murder, a crime that has the death penalty/life imprisonment, do you really think gun laws will deter them?  Terrorists and insane people who want to hurt people will find a way.  If not guns, explosives, planes, cars, or other means to cause harm.  This is because it's not the weapon that is causing the death, it's the person bent on causing death.

The way to prevent these types of incidents isn't to regulate or ban guns, it's to help identify and treat those with mental illness who are a danger to themselves and others and to identify terrorists before they commit heinous acts.  People are the problem, not their weapons of choice. Remember, no guns were involved in the 9-11 attacks.



1. Gun control doesn't work.  None of the worst attacks would have been prevented by any form of gun control and likely it was gun laws which prevented people from being armed defending themselves and others.

2. People misuse the term "assault rifle." There is a specific type of rifle, fully automatic that is called an "assault rifle."  Fully automatic rifles are illegal for most people other than military or police and a few select people to possess.  None of the recent attacks involved fully automatic rifles. Media, either intentionally or because they are ignorant, mistakenly call rifles used in the recent crimes "assault rifles."  "AR' does not stand for 'assault rifle' or 'automatic rifle' it stands for ArmaLite rifle, the company that developed it.
In case you don't know what an assault rifle is and what it isn't, here is an explanation:






Some have included semi-automatic weapons that are capable of switching to automatic in the definition of "assault rifle" but they all have the characteristic of being able to fire automatically.  Guns that are strictly semi-automatic are not "assault rifles."  Some people also confuse "assault rifles" with "Assault Weapons" which are something completely different.

3. Guns are not the problem, people are the problem

4. We must do a better job at preventing terrorism, preventing terrorists from entering the country by improving vetting people who come into the country.  We must also do a better job identifying terrorists who are in the country.

5. Most importantly, the government should not make laws that make people incapable of protecting themselves. It is not feasible for police to be everywhere.  What is feasible and what would be the best way to protect ourselves, our families and our children is to be armed and trained.  School staff should be properly trained and armed like they do in Israel.
Israeli Elementary School
We train teachers and staff how to perform first aid/CPR and use an AED to save kids, why not train them to use firearms? this is just another way to protect our precious children.

People in the nightclub in Orlando were sitting ducks, being murdered while waiting for police with guns to come and save them instead of being armed and saving themselves.




5. Identifying those with mental illness, especially those with the potential of causing harm must be improved.  The public school systems are failing our children. Schools don't know what to do with smart kids who don't fit the social 'norms' even though they are required, by law, under The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) , to identify and "provide early intervention, special education and related services to infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities." This includes not only those with physical disabilities, but also mental and emotional disabilities.  School systems are failing to do this.  "Mental health is still not adequately diagnosed or treated in the United States, and especially not among young people...not delivered in a very effective manner.”

In fact,  a Connecticut state review panel has concluded "Medical professionals and school staff missed multiple opportunities to help Adam Lanza with his severe emotional and psychiatric disorders."


So, what does research and statistics say about gun control?

What are the statistics of guns used for violence versus gun use for protection and

“Perhaps what is most striking about the patterns of gun ownership in the US is that ownership is generally highest in those groups where violence is lowest.” (Kleck 1997, Chapter 3).  “It is well known that guns are used in many violent crimes in the US. [However] The best available evidence indicates that guns are used by victims in self-protection considerably more often than crimes are committed by offenders using guns.  For example, victims used guns defensively about 2.0-2.5 million times in 1993, compared to fewer than 600,000 violent crimes committed by offenders with guns (Kleck and Gertz 1995).”


“Defensive gun use is effective in preventing injury to the victim and property loss.  Research based on interviews with large nationally representative samples of crime victims consistently indicates that those who use guns during crime incidents are less likely to be injured or lose property than those who either adopt other resistance strategies or do not resist at all. These effects are usually produced without shooting the gun or wounding a criminal -  only 24 per cent of gun defenders even fired the gun (including warning shots), only l6 per cent tried to shoot the perpetrator, and at most 8 per cent wounded the offender (evidence summarized in Kleck and Kates 2001, Chapter 7).”




“There is also evidence indicating that some criminals may be deterred from making some criminal attempts in the first place by the prospect of victim gun use against them. Criminals interviewed in prison indicate that they have refrained from committing crimes because they believed a potential victim might have a gun, and crime rates have dropped substantially after highly publicized instances of prospective victims arming themselves or being trained in gun use, or victims using guns against criminals. (research summarized in Kleck and Kates 2001, Chapter 7).”



Information I had not even considered, “that when criminal aggressors possess guns in a crime incident, they are substantially less likely to attack and injure their victims in the first place. At least nineteen studies have found that offenders possessing guns are less likely to injure their victims than offenders with other weapons or no weapons. The explanation appears to be that possession of a lethal weapon enables aggressors to intimidate victims without actually attacking them, in crimes where the offender’s goal is not to kill the victim.” Kleck 2011

Many gun control proponents state that having stricter gun control laws that restrict who can purchase guns will prevent criminals from obtaining guns.  Studies show that most criminals do not obtain their guns from a conventional retail dealer of guns. 


Eight four percent, of 943 felon handgun owners surveyed, 
did not purchase the gun from a conventional retailer.


Since many use death rates to defend their anti-gun agenda we must compare the mortality rates related to gunshot wounds as compared to mortality rates by other mechanisms.

Why do people focus more on gun injury related deaths? Why guns when more people have died from poisoning and motor vehicle accidents individually and followed closely by falls? There are restrictions on some types of poisons, but that didn’t prevent 41,592 deaths by poison in 2009. There are even less restrictions on motor vehicles which caused 34,485 deaths in 2009.Both of these cause more deaths than guns. All of these can be used by in the commission of murder.  It's about an anti-gun agenda, controlling the population through gun control has long been used by governments. Anti-gun advocates have believed the government's use of emotional brainwashing that guns are evil and kill people.  They use 'crime stats' to back up their position.  

Let's look at crime stats.

Choose your own crime stats:




According to: National Vital Statistics Reports Volume 60, Number 3 December 29, 2011Deaths: Final Data for 2009 (Table 18) in 2009, a total of 177,154 deaths were classified as injury related Four major mechanisms of injury in 2009— poisoning, motor-vehicle traffic, firearm, and fall— accounted for 75.1 percent of all injury deaths.


Mechanism
Number of Deaths 2009
Percentage
Poisoning
41,592
23.5%
Motor-vehicle traffic  
34,485
19.5%
Firearm
31,347
17.7 %
Fall
25,562
14.4 %




If you want to see more statistics, you can check out the Explore the Wallstreet Journal's interactive murder database of killings committed in the U.S. from 2000 to 2010 (h/t Adam Baldwin) where can limit your search by criteria.  For example: There were 28 drowning murders in 2009.   I'm not sure how accurate the interactive database is, the database  does not include Florida.  The CDC's 2009 vital statistics report, Table 18, says 41 drowning murders in 2009. If the interactive database is correct, 13 occurred in Florida.  That seems a little high to me, but it's possible. Still the interactive database lets you get a feel for the numbers and gives you the ability to compare different categories.

Why then are guns singled out as needing restriction or banned? Could it be, perhaps, a matter of politics? Though there are gun proponents and gun control advocates on both ends of the political spectrum, it seems as though it is mostly the liberals and progressives that want gun control and the conservatives and moderates that defend the second Amendment right to bear arms. That this topic has become entrenched in people’s political belief system, it is difficult, but not impossible, for people’s minds to be changed on the topic of gun control.

Research shows that gun control will not help prevent gun related crimes, nor will it prevent people from obtaining guns. In fact, stricter gun control would cause an increase in crime, increase gun related crime, and victim injury/death.
In response to the question:  What is the defense of those that would try to discredit this study?

Dr. Kleck responded: "I have thoroughly rebutted all of the criticisms of my and others' survey estimates of the frequency of defensive gun use in one convenient source, a chapter in the 2001 book Armed, by Gary Kleck and Don B. Kates."

Dr. Kleck stands by the data in the study. 

Thank you Dr. Kleck!



REFERENCES


Kleck, Gary. 1997. Targeting Guns: Firearms and their Control. N.Y.: Aldine de Gruyter.

Kleck, Gary, and Marc Gertz. 1995. “Armed resistance to crime: the prevalence and nature of self-defense with a gun.” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 86:150-187.

Kleck, Gary, and Don B. Kates.  2001.  Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control.  Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.