Brady Campaign Removes State Score Cards from Site

[71Commander]

http://www.examiner.com/x-2879-Aust...d14-Brady-Campaign-violating-US-copyright-law

Brady Campaign violating U.S. copyright law?


Update October 15, 2006, 7 PM Eastern:
Attempts to access the article in question are now met with a log-in window. Brady has blocked access for anybody not authorized to view the article, but the public can still access the 2007 and 2008 Brady scorecards in their "xshare" section.
The copied article remains available in the Google cache.



Previous articles examined the possibility that the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence may intentionally, or unwittingly, be aiding and abetting violent criminals via Brady’s push for “sensible” gun laws. Now there is evidence that the Brady Campaign may feel they are above federal law.

For example, one article examined Brady’s 2007 scorecard on state gun laws, and found that citizens living in Brady’s highest-scoring states–better according to Brady– experience reduced economic and personal freedom due to oppressive government regulation.

Another article examined the Brady Campaign 2007 scorecard, which showed that states with higher Brady scores–safer according to Brady–averaged higher murder and violent crime rates. (Safer for whom?)

Recently, we examined the Brady Campaign 2008 score card, which showed the same results as the study of the 2007 score card.

Almost immediately after this last article, readers reported that the link to Brady’s 2008 scorecard was dead. Searches performed since have indicated that all the Brady report cards dating back to 2001 (the first) have been removed from their site. (Is this because every year’s report card showed the same results as those found in 2008?)

Today’s search turned up a link at the Brady site that contains an article by this author, copied in toto.

U.S. copyright law grants the copyright holder “exclusive rights to do and authorize” reproduction and distribution of their registered works. Even under fair use, copyright law includes a set of criteria under which parts of copyrighted material may be used: Brady has obeyed only one of them: including the author’s name.

Brady copied this article from News With Views after the article was posted there on July 2, 2008. Towards the bottom of the page, after the endnotes, is this statement: “© 2008 Howard Nemerov - All Rights Reserved”.
Why should anybody listen to an organization that promotes legal policy, when they are unwilling to follow the law themselves?

Howard Nemerov, Brady Campaign to Define ‘Sensible Gun Laws’, downloaded from Brady site October 14, 2009. http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/clips/txt/2008-07-09-Brady_Campaign_Sensible_Gun.txt
More on the Brady Campaign

 

[W L Johnson]

They removed our "best places to avoid/best places to live" list?

 

[CoRoMo]

You have to realize that they simply can not allow facts to get in the way of their agenda; seriously.
If they had any stats that held water, they'd post them for all to see, but all they have is skewed data, assumption and conjecture, and they run with it.
When actual, factual truth is brought into the light, they scamper away like cockroaches and sweep that information under the rug.


It is so typical.

 

[BigMustard]

I've always been confused with the Brady Campaign. Are they aware that their numbers don't add up? Or are they just in denial? Basically, do they really think they are helping people and doing a good job? Or are they just uninformed close minded liberal morons?

 

[bdickens]

They know what they're doing.

 

[Bruno2]

I agree , why would they hide it if it doesnt hurt their arguement ?

 

[627PCFan]

They are switching tactics from mis-information, to denial of information (well crap information anyway)

 

[DoubleTapDrew]

Dang I looked forward to getting an F someday!
I bet the satellite that relays their scorecards has been shot down by one of those .50 cal terrors!

 

[ArmedBear]

That's too bad. The Brady Grade was a great resource.

When looking to relocate, it was one of the better criteria to use. Usually, gun rights correlate with other things, like other freedoms, low crime rates, etc.

If a state got a C- or lower, you knew it was worth looking at it further.

 

[Zoogster]

For example, one article examined Brady’s 2007 scorecard on state gun laws, and found that citizens living in Brady’s highest-scoring states–better according to Brady– experience reduced economic and personal freedom due to oppressive government regulation.

A rather interesting approach, tying gun laws in with overall economic freedoms. It makes a lot of sense too. States with the greatest number of firearm restrictions are often the most taxed and restricted overall.
The number of permits, licenses, inspections or other things required to exist as a citizen or operate a business on completely unrelated issues, also forms of taxation, tend to be less in locations with great firearm freedoms.
While those with limited firearm laws tend to be taxed far less, and with fewer legal hurdles.

Also the larger the government the more laws they tend to pass. So the largest state governments, that need to tax and burden thier citizens the most to fund thier existence also are likely to have passed the most firearm restrictions, along with other restrictions. They get more legislation passed and create more bureaucracies, which leads to lower liberties.

 

[Art Eatman]

Not a THR topic, particularly not in the Legal forum...