But the consequences of restrictive firearm laws are universal and without exception - it's just that some countries are in different stages along the same road to civilian disarmament. And we have yet to find a single "sensible" restrictive firearm law that:

1. Has reduced violent crime
2. Has prevented the acquisition of firearms by criminals 
3. Has aided police in apprehending violent criminals 
4. Has reduced overall suicide rates, or firearm-related accidental deaths (As we're sure you are aware, the Lott/Whitley paper on "safe-storage" laws documents the fact that these laws are lethal laws for those who obey them.)

What we HAVE seen result from "sensible", restrictive gun laws is:

1. Their subversion to facilitate the creation of government lists of lawful gun-owners, followed by - again and again, ad nauseum - confiscation using these lists 
2. The creation of a burgeoning black market in firearms 
3.  A reduced access to (especially self-defensive) firearms by law-abiding citizens

We've said some of this before in earlier conversations, and while we don't wish to sound like a broken record, each new article we research and write only serves to further validate every one of these observations.

Instead of finding unbiased scientists among the firearm-prohibitionists searching for truth, what we've found, instead, is intentional distortion, outright lying, and bait-and-switch tactics, the extent of which boggles the mind - a whole cadre of anti-gun "junk-scientists" resorting to lies and propaganda, because that's the only means of keeping their agenda alive.

And every one of them - Kellermann, Hemenway, Wintemute, Cook, Ludwig, and all the rest of their ilk - are full of "reasonable", "sensible" firearm proposals for America's politicians to enact.

We would venture to say that your own increasingly prolific writing on the firearm debate has provided you with similar validation of these observations.

Perhaps the most disturbing "accomplishment" of these laws (at least to us) is the transformation of the way children are introduced to firearms in America today. Instead of knowledge passing from parent to child, in a safe and responsible manner - as used to happen in the past - "sensible" gun laws now force many children to learn about guns from their peers, and on the street.

Yet, according to the U.S. DOJ's ongoing Rochester Study on Urban Delinquency and Substance Abuse - totally ignored by the mainstream media and most of this country's politicians - children who were introduced to firearms by their parents are the least violent of all groups studied.

Lastly, there's a great book (now out of print) written by former Chief Inspector of British Police, Colin Greenwood, entitled "Firearms Control: A Study of Armed Crime and Firearms Control in England and Wales". While Greenwood's book was published in 1972, his observations and conclusions are still right on the money (and perfectly borne out by current events in Great Britain on firearm-related crime). Here are some excerpted comments:

"[If the question is] 'How can we stop criminals from obtaining firearms?' From the evidence so far supplied, the answer appears to be that we cannot...Criminals have proved to us that firearms controls will not deny their small class of people access to firearms whenever they want them...Half a century of strict controls on pistols has ended, perversely, with a far greater use of this class of weapon in crime than ever before...one is forced to the rather startling conclusion that the use of firearms in crime was very much less when there were no controls of any sort and when anyone, convicted criminal or lunatic, could buy any type of firearm without restriction."

Greenwood concluded: "Indeed, it is possible to build up a sound case for abolishing or substantially reducing controls."

It's clear that Greenwood is one who doesn't believe in the concept of "sensible" gun laws. (BTW, Greenwood is still alive and well, and recently authored an article on "Britain's Handgun Ban" which appeared in the Australian Shooters Journal.)

If DSGL ever changes its name and abandons the premise of "sensible gun laws", we'd probably have a change of mind about becoming part of the group.

But at this point, we think that the ONLY kind of "sensible" gun law is one which repeals existing restrictive gun laws, and that's not what we think DSGL has in mind.

- Paul & Joanne

Articles by Doctors Gallant and Eisen can be found in many places.  A place to start would be National Review Online where they often co-author articles with Dave Kopel.