Last week I wrote about how it seems the media only want to write about guns in a negative context.

It didn't take long for them to prove my point.

Last Monday, a couple members of the American Public Health Association - a group that pushes gun control - were slightly injured in an accidental shooting in Indianapolis.

Seems some dolt had a loaded .32 caliber derringer in his shirt pocket while at the Planet Hollywood restaurant. He bent over to pick up some beads from another patron's broken necklace.

The gun fell out of his pocket, hit the floor and discharged. The round struck one woman in the hand and another in the arm. Both were treated at Methodist Hospital in Indianapolis and released.

According to the Associated Press wire story, "...the organization barely hesitated before deciding to make the incident a lobbying tool on the gun issue.

"Carole Zimmerman, spokeswoman for the Washington-based association, appealed to Dr. Mohammad Akhter, the executive director, soon after the Monday night shooting."

Twelve hours later, Akhter called a news conference to rebuke the incident and call for tighter gun restrictions and weapons safety laws.

'This incident has galvanized us once more to put before the American people that no place in this country is safe anymore,' he said.

No place. Really?

And on Thursday, across my desk fresh from the fax machine of Sarah Brady, chairman of Handgun Control Inc. and the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence, comes a news release.

If I'm getting one of these news releases in little ol' Warsaw, you can bet they faxed them all over this great land.

Seems the lout with the .32 had a permit to carry it. A CCW, as it is known in the gun world.

Lately, lots of states have been passing CCW laws, allowing citizens who pass a background check and supply fingerprints to carry a concealed weapon.

This is driving groups like HCI nuts because the last thing they want is a law-abiding citizen to be able to actually carry a gun.

In fact, right now, 30 states make CCW licenses available. That's up from only 11 in 1987.

So of course Brady seized the opportunity to criticize Indiana and any other place that has CCW availability.

"Even without CCW licensing, violence in American workplaces and stores has reached epidemic proportions," Brady says.

She then cites a batch of scare stats - 20 workers murdered and 18,000 assaulted each week, one in seven off those is killed by a co-worker or personal associate, murder the number one cause of death in workplaces in 16 states.

She cites all this as a reason to disallow CCWs. As if the psychos who come to work with a gun and shoot up the place first secured the proper permit.

If her stats aren't cooked, like they generally are, all she's doing is convincing me I better start carrying a gun to work to defend myself.

Then, she notes, "once again we see how the presence of loaded handguns - while providing a sense of "false security" for some - only serves to truly endanger the lives of other innocents. ... More guns simply ends up meaning more tragedy. A gun in the home, for example, statistically is shown to be 43 times more likely to kill someone the gun owner knows -Êa spouse, a child - than to kill an intruder in self-defense."

I frankly can't believe they still tout that 43 to 1 lie. That stat has been thoroughly and unquestionably refuted. It's completely invalid, yet HCI and others - the media included - keep preaching it as gospel.

In the past I have devoted an entire column to the inaccuracy of the 43 to 1 lie. But briefly, 37 of the 43 are suicides. Apparently owning a gun makes you suicidal. They counted it even if the homeowner's gun wasn't involved.

If someone broke in and shot you in your sleep while your gun was locked in safe in the basement, they counted it.

They only counted home defense where an intruder was killed. To them, the only measure of defense was how many dead people there were piled up in your living room.

If you scared someone off by brandishing a weapon, it didn't count.

The 43 to 1 stat is a lie. The study that created it was a joke.

Any CCW stats, you ask? In Florida, the media went wild when CCW was passed back in 1987. They foresaw shootouts all over the state, killing thousands.

From 1987 to 1994 (latest available), the homicide rates of the 10 largest Florida cities:

Jacksonville - down 34% Miami - down 8%; Tampa - down 1%; St. Petersburg - down 17%; Orlando - down 48%; Fort Lauderdale - down 38%; Tallahasee - up 3%; Hollywood - up 15%; Clearwater - down 21%; and Miami Beach - down 65%.

Not exactly the bloodbath the gun-haters predicted. But don't confuse them with facts. Their minds are made up.

Since the proliferation of states allowing CCWs and the passage of the Brady Bill, firearm sales increased dramatically. During that same time, fatal firearm accidents have steadily declined. Not exactly "more guns simply ends up meaning more tragedy."

Don't take my word for it. The National Center for Health Statistics and the National Safety Council say so. And according to the FBI, crime rates during those years also declined.

And how about those states with CCW laws? The FBI reports they have a 21% lower overall crime rate, 27% lower firearm violent crime rate, 28% lower homicide rate, 33% lower firearm homicide rate, 33% lower robbery rate, 35% lower firearm robbery rate, 15% lower aggravated assault rate, and an 18% lower firearm aggravated assault rate than states that don't have CCW.

So much for Brady's false sense of security. And if a gun "only serves to truly endanger" innocents, as she says, she needs to tell that to the more than 2 million people who successfully defend themselves with a firearm each year (that according to the U.S. Justice Department).

The facts are readily available.

Are guns dangerous? You bet. Are they deadly in the wrong hands? Of course. Do we need gun laws? Without question. And we have plenty.

I don't own a house full of guns and I don't care to. I've been to a shooting range once in the last 10 years. I haven't hunted once in the last 10 years.

But I believe the founders had a valid reason to include the second amendment in our Constitution.

And I just don't like being bombarded with anti-gun lies by an all-too-willing national media.

Don't kid yourself. People like Sarah Brady look at FBI stats and Justice Department stats.

They know the truth. They just choose to ignore it. [[In-content Ad]]