• GOA Victory in the U.S. Supreme Court!

    -- Decision is a win for private property and the Second Amendment Read More
  • Shaneen Allen Reminds Us Why We Need Concealed Carry Reciprocity

  • GOA Celebrates Mother’s Day this Weekend

    -- Have you signed up for the Gun Giveaway? Read More
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Legislative Action Center LINK

facebook_icontwitter_iconyoutube_icon

GOA News

  • Tele-Town Halls
  • Vets Disarmed
  • Anti-gun Hysteria
  • The Race Card
  • Bigot Game

GOA Sponsoring Tele-Town Halls with Presidential Candidates

First up, Sen. Ted Cruz

We don’t have to tell you how crucial the 2016 Presidential election is.

The constitutional rights that Americans enjoy have come under repeated attacks from a President who ignores the Constitution on a continual basis. Thankfully, there are several pro-gun candidates who are running for the Oval Office during this election cycle.

Read More

Don’t Say We Didn’t Warn You

The Daily Caller recently reported on a “shocking government program” where the Department of Veterans Affairs is disarming American vets by getting them put on the FBI’s background check list.

Read More

Ridiculous “Case” Against Pro-gun House Member Dismissed

(Washington, D.C.) – Rep. Buck (R-CO) is a strong, vocal defender of gun rights.  So is Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina.

Read More

GOA supported legislation would remove the race and ethnicity questions from the ATF Form 4473

Congressional Republicans are pushing a bill to block the feds from forcing gun buyers to disclose their race in applications, saying the government should be "color blind" when it comes to the Second Amendment.

Read More

The Bigot Game

It worked with Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act. It worked with Ferguson. It's being used to bludgeon hapless Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy into submission. And now it's being used to try to overcome Second Amendment opposition to the confirmation of Loretta Lynch.

Read More

Self-Defense Corner

  • Uber Driver
  • Sister Saves Brother
  • Shot and Jailed
  • Robber Becomes Victim
  • Son Stabs Mom

Uber driver in Chicago stops mass public shooting, compiling other cases where concealed handgun permit holders have stopped mass shootings

This past Friday, an Uber driver with a permitted concealed handgun stopped what likely would have been a mass public shooting. Police arrived on the scene quickly, but the Uber driver had still already taken care of the situation before they arrived. From Mitch Dudek in the Chicago Sun-Times:

Read More

Female Homeowner Shoots Alleged Intruder to Save Brother

At about 3:40 a.m. on March 30, a Detroit female homeowner retrieved her gun and ran downstairs, where she fired multiple shots and wounded one of two alleged intruders, leaving him in critical condition.

Read More

Homeowner Wins Gunfight Against Two Armed Robbers, One Shot, Both in Jail

A homeowner in Texas found himself in a gunfight with two armed burglars. The fight ended with one of the suspects shot and both suspects behind bars. The homeowner was not injured.
According to local media reports:

Read More

When Armed Robber Becomes Victim: Intended Victim is Armed and Ends Robbery Before It Even Starts

An armed robber found himself the victim after he made a fatal decision: attempting to rob a shop with an armed employee.

Read More

PD: Son stabs mother in north Phoenix car

A woman is in critical condition after she was stabbed by her son in north Phoenix.

Phoenix police said a woman and her 28-year-old son got into an argument in a vehicle near 51st Avenue and Cactus Road around 10:30 p.m. on Sunday.

Read More
by
Larry Pratt

Even though he may be the last human being on earth doing it, it's still not exactly a man-bites-dog story to learn that anti-gun junk-scientist Dr. Arthur Kellermann is defending anti-gun junk-historian Michael A. Bellesiles, author of Arming America: The Origins of A National Gun Culture (Knopf, 2000). If ever birds of the same feather have flocked together, it's these two characters.

When the Atlanta Journal And Constitution newspaper (12/18/01) wrote an editorial noting that Bellesiles "has been accused of shoddy and perhaps fabricated research," Kellermann wrote a letter-to-the-editor (12/27/01) saying "the case against Bellesiles is thin and clearly driven by individuals outraged that his book challenges long-cherished beliefs about guns in early American history." Kellerman, like Bellesiles, works at Emory University where he is Director of the Center for Injury Control and Professor of Emergency Medicine in the Department of Surgery at Emory's School of Medicine.

The evidence against Bellesiles is thin?! That's what the Doc says -- even though, in reality, this evidence is roughly as thick as the Empire State Building is high. And it's growing even higher as you read this.

When interviewed in mid-February, and asked if he still believes the evidence against Bellesiles is "thin", Kellermann says: "I think that there are -- you know, basically, what I said is what I said. But, basically, yes." He adds that anybody, whether an academic or not, "is innocent until proven guilty." Bellesiles, of course, has now been, for all practical purposes, proven guilty. But, Kellermann doesn't get it.

When asked if, for example, he's read James Lindgren's scholarly, detailed and well-documented demolition of Bellesiles' probate record data, Kellermann ignores the question saying only that he does not know Lindgren. He says: "I have enough familiarity with individuals' concerns about issues relating to firearms that I take anybody who goes to great lengths to go after another individual, particularly on the academic front -- I have to have some question about what their motivation is." Lindgren, of course, has been motivated only by a search for truth -- a possibility that seems not to have occurred to Kellermann.

When asked if he read the articles about Bellesiles in the Boston Globe, Kellermann interrupts saying, testily: "Well, I'll tell you what -- I don't use the Boston Globe as my source for a scholarly critique." He admits: "I'm not a historian or an expert in probate records." He says he does believe that Bellesiles has been "roundly assailed," deserves a review, that's where the issue is, and "I'm waiting for the jury."

Kellermann says his "basic thesis" is that Bellesiles has been "summarily judged" by the Atlanta Journal And Constitution newspaper that did not do its own independent assessment. But, Kellermann's focus is much too narrow. Bellesiles has been judged by numerous publications and scholars. Their judgment has been anything but a summary judgment. These critiques have been documented-in-detail. And they have been devastating.

Hmmmmm. Interesting point, this "review" business. And an interesting question. So, Kellermann is asked: So, would Emory really launch an official investigation of Bellesiles' work if the evidence against him is "thin?"

Kellermann: "I think that Emory, given the amount of heat that's been generated over this book, I think that Emory's review -- and, again, my understanding is that it was done at Professor Bellesiles' request."

Right. Like Bellesiles really wanted this investigation so much that he requested it. If Kellermann believes this, then, as the saying goes, we have a bridge in Brooklyn we'd like to sell him. As for the bit about "heat" being generated regarding Arming America, no, Doc, it's the light that's been shed on his shoddy scholarship that has caused this autopsy to be conducted.

At one point, Kellermann, amazingly, says, regarding the critiques of Bellesiles' work: "I suspend judgment one way or another." When reminded that he's said the evidence against Bellesiles is "thin," and this is a judgment, he says: "Okay." But, he's says he's said this based on what he has seen.

Eventually, Kellermann admits he did read the Boston Globe articles. So, what does he think about the Globe reporter discovering that Bellesiles had inserted the words "old" and "broken" into his characterization of certain old gun records in Vermont when these words were not in the original records? Long pause. He says he'd have to go back and re-read these articles. He doesn't remember this.

Finally, Kellermann is asked for some specifics. He said in his letter-to-the-editor that the case against Bellesiles is "clearly driven by individuals outraged that his book challenges long-cherished beliefs about guns in early American history." So, who, exactly, is he talking about?

Kellermann says, ducking the question: "I think there are people very happy to see Dr. Bellesiles trashed."

Q: "Like who?"

A: I don't feel that I have any need to share any particular individual's name."

Kellermann adds, pathetically, that the criticism of Bellesiles is "a cautionary note for anybody who wants to do any kind of work on this issue." But, this is pure, unadulterated hogwash. The criticisms of Bellesiles are "a cautionary note" for anybody who writes a lousy book full of lies and fabricated data!

Op-Ed Articles