Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: well whaddayaknow... more guns = less crime

  1. #1
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426

    well whaddayaknow... more guns = less crime

    .

    Another bit of research confirms what we already knew: restrictive gun laws do not reduce crime (and in fact appear to increase it).

    I haven't been able to find a copy of the article, so if anyone has access to this (paid) site & could post the PDF I'd really like to read it.


    http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/...4294#tabModule

    An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates

    Abstract:
    The purpose of the present study is to determine the effects of state-level assault weapons bans and concealed weapons laws on state-level murder rates.
    Using data for the period 1980 to 2009 and controlling for state and year fixed effects, the results of the present study suggest that states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murder rates than other states.
    It was also found that assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level.
    These results suggest that restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an increase in gun-related murders at the state level.






    .
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154

    Tightly held copyright as a business model

    Applied Economics Letters and Editor in Chief Mark P. Taylor of Taylor and Francis hold their copyright tightly as their business model. T&F own ~200 journals, all with paid access.

    I searched my collection of open access academic libraries without success. Welcome to the Open Access - OA - controversy.

    Dupuis, John. "Journal of Library Administration editorial board resigns over author rights". ScienceBlogs. ScienceBlogs LLC.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_access

    ETA: Snark - you should know all this as a highly degreed academic. Further, why is it not plagiarism to repost an article previously posted, as the article and links, http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...1887-Wild-West!
    Last edited by Nightmare; 01-03-2014 at 08:04 AM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Snark: Did you cw protect the previously posted post? No? Well, then all bets are off.

    The premise is flawed as is many studies that try to "prove" one thing or another about gun laws and their effectiveness. The study does not account for, and can not account for, criminal possession of a gat. The study must rely upon data collected by cops and those are known to be "inflated' from time to time, as budget needs dictate. Also, any study requires honesty by the respondents and objective interpretation of the data.

    But, as the OP clearly and correctly states, this ain't telling us what we don't already know. What I want to know is who paid for the study. If the tax payer, in any way shape or form, then why spend my money on something I, and the FBI too it seems, already know.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    The gov't loves crimes .... gives them reason to exist

  5. #5
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    No further studies are really needed, it's a long dead horse.

    Rifles account for only around 300 murders per year, "assault" rifles are just a fraction of that 300, so they're statistically meaningless, most murders with guns are done with handguns.

    Violence levels are determined by social, cultural, and economic factors. In the U.S., your chance of being murdered is about 0 if you avoid stupid people doing stupid things in stupid places. For example, don't hang around drug gangs, or inner city blacks in cities like Chicago or DC. Black on black crime accounts for most murders.

    Russia and Mexico and Brazil (off the top of my head) tightly limit legal access to guns, both have sky high murder rates. Japan basically bans guns, with a very low murder rate. Switzerland lets people have whatever they want, even machine guns that are in use by the swiss military, and they have a murder rate like Japan's. The evidence goes on and on.
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  6. #6
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Statistics are useless without delving into the root of the issues.

    I don't think more guns necessarily equals less crime, although it could contribute.

    What is useful is that crime has gone down despite more guns which is contrary the propaganda of the anti's.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  7. #7
    Antonioo
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Statistics are useless without delving into the root of the issues.

    I don't think more guns necessarily equals less crime, although it could contribute.

    What is useful is that crime has gone down despite more guns which is contrary the propaganda of the anti's.
    I defo dont think that more guns equals less crime.. its logic, if no one had guns, sure, people would still do crimes, but probably with less fatal outcomes I think. Now, when there are so many guns circulating in the US anything can happen, dont know if I trust these statistics.. I mean, one year it will look like it contributes, and one it wont.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154

    More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws, Third Edition

    Hmmpf. Here are links to the eponymous book, data, protocols, conclusion and e-mail links to the author.

    http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less...dp/0226493660/

    http://crimeresearch.org/

    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/A...m?per_id=16317

    http://www.johnlott.org/ - "Instructions for Obtaining John R. Lott's Raw Data"
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Marion County, Tennessee
    Posts
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by Antonioo View Post
    I defo dont think that more guns equals less crime.. its logic, if no one had guns, sure, people would still do crimes, but probably with less fatal outcomes I think. Now, when there are so many guns circulating in the US anything can happen, dont know if I trust these statistics.. I mean, one year it will look like it contributes, and one it wont.
    The "More Guns = Less Crime" title is a bit misleading, to my eyes.

    It should be "More Armed Citizens = More Guns = Less Crime."

    It could also be done without the middle section.
    I carry everywhere because crime doesn't make appointments.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Antonioo View Post
    I defo dont think that more guns equals less crime.. its logic, if no one had guns, sure, people would still do crimes, but probably with less fatal outcomes I think. Now, when there are so many guns circulating in the US anything can happen, dont know if I trust these statistics.. I mean, one year it will look like it contributes, and one it wont.
    Read the book of the same name as the thread title by John Lott. Reality does not "make sense" to everyone. It just is.

    Lott used economics techniques to evaluate the numbers and arrived logically at the conclusion that an armed citizenry is the biggest deterrent to crime.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  11. #11
    Regular Member mdak06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Manchester, New Hampshire
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Antonioo View Post
    I defo dont think that more guns equals less crime.. its logic, if no one had guns, sure, people would still do crimes, but probably with less fatal outcomes I think. Now, when there are so many guns circulating in the US anything can happen, dont know if I trust these statistics.. I mean, one year it will look like it contributes, and one it wont.
    More guns logically equals less crime because more guns makes people more equal, and therefore reduces the power of the bad guy.

    Guns allow people to defend themselves without having to come into direct contact with their attacker. This makes using a firearm for self-defense different from virtually all other forms of self-defense. It means that a person can stop their would-be attacker from a distance, and is therefore more likely to remain unharmed. This is in contrast with many other forms of self-defense (e.g. knives, stun guns, martial arts, etc.) that require the would-be victim to make direct contact with the attacker.

    Bad guys can't prey on weaker people nearly as easily if the weaker people are no longer weak. Obtaining a firearm and learning how to use it transforms people from "weak" to "not weak." That's why a gun is known as the "great equalizer." Whether you're tall or short, strong or weak, fat or thin, young or old, male or female, there's a gun that you can fire that will help you defend yourself from bad guys.

  12. #12
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Read the book of the same name as the thread title by John Lott. Reality does not "make sense" to everyone. It just is.

    Lott used economics techniques to evaluate the numbers and arrived logically at the conclusion that an armed citizenry is the biggest deterrent to crime.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>
    Yet other economist insist crime dropped drastically because of Roe vs Wade and they made a good argument. Freakonomics by Levitt and Dubner.

    I am sure Lott is correct in his assessment , even if he wasn't the important message to the anti's who won't believe how much logic is thrown at them is to point out that crime has gone down despite a dramatic increase in gun ownership.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Both analyses are likely valid. The problem is that one supports fundamental rights (self-defense). The other is anti-rights (the right to live). Economics can boost an argument for rights. It cannot reasonably defeat one.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  14. #14
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Both analyses are likely valid. The problem is that one supports fundamental rights (self-defense). The other is anti-rights (the right to live). Economics can boost an argument for rights. It cannot reasonably defeat one.

    <o>
    The authors of the one even made clear they are not making any moral judgments on their findings.

    Personally I am not sure when a life becomes a life, I don't believe it is at conception any more than the ovum or sperm is a life before they engage each other.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    A fetus is a unique member of the human species. An ovum or a sperm is not. The logical differentiation between when the matter is not a human being and when it is is at conception.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Lott's Freedomnomics was written largely against Levitt and Dubner. Other than that they are night and day and an insult to John Lott to compare them.

    8/09/2007 Steve Levitt's Correction Letter [jpg]
    http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2007/0...on-letter.html

    Lott is an academic. Levitt is a - well, something unpleasant.

    http://www.amazon.com/Freedomnomics-.../dp/B0097D7HES
    Last edited by Nightmare; 01-30-2014 at 08:47 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  17. #17
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,878
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Read the book of the same name as the thread title by John Lott. Reality does not "make sense" to everyone. It just is.

    Lott used economics techniques to evaluate the numbers and arrived logically at the conclusion that an armed citizenry is the biggest deterrent to crime.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>
    i'm sorry, but i truly believe you're interpretation of Mr. Lott's book is incorrect as his analysis of the given stats lends him to state numerous times in the third edition, "...shows a reduction of violent crime but property crime has increased."
    cite, pages 60, 63, 64,67, 76,178, etc.

    additionally, his book actually concerns conceal carry not open carry and the stats Mr. Lott uses are issued CC permits in a given locale against the reported crime stats and he draws empirical conclusions from them.

    i am a avid fan of Mr. Lott's research and writings as well as his efforts as a pro-gun advocate but i do want to make sure we compare apples with apples instead of drawing incorrect conclusions from his work(s)

    ipse
    Last edited by solus; 01-30-2014 at 09:18 PM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  18. #18
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    i'm sorry, but i truly believe you're interpretation of Mr. Lott's book is incorrect as his analysis of the given stats lends him to state numerous times in the third edition, "...shows a reduction of violent crime but property crime has increased."
    cite, pages 60, 63, 64,67, 76,178, etc.

    additionally, his book actually concerns conceal carry not open carry and the stats Mr. Lott uses are issued CC permits in a given locale against the reported crime stats and he draws empirical conclusions from them.

    i am a avid fan of Mr. Lott's research and writings as well as his efforts as a pro-gun advocate but i do want to make sure we compare apples with apples instead of drawing incorrect conclusions from his work(s)

    ipse
    +1
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  19. #19
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,614
    Quote Originally Posted by Antonioo View Post
    I defo dont think that more guns equals less crime.. its logic, if no one had guns, sure, people would still do crimes, but probably with less fatal outcomes I think. Now, when there are so many guns circulating in the US anything can happen, dont know if I trust these statistics.. I mean, one year it will look like it contributes, and one it wont.
    Old expression - When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.....just like in England and Australia. It is the user, not the tool, that determines good or evil.

    "Anything can happen" generically vague and meaningless. Gun owners tend to be the most responsible and law abiding demographic group committing less crime than LEOs.

    For a good look at the facts and myths regarding guns, read Gun Facts - Debunking Gun Control
    http://freedomnetwork.com/gun-facts-guy-smith/

    http://www.gunfacts.info/

    http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Gil223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Weber County Utah
    Posts
    1,428
    Quote Originally Posted by Antonioo View Post
    I defo dont think that more guns equals less crime.. its logic, if no one had guns, sure, people would still do crimes, but probably with less fatal outcomes I think. Now, when there are so many guns circulating in the US anything can happen, dont know if I trust these statistics.. I mean, one year it will look like it contributes, and one it wont.
    I see we're still flogging this long-deceased equine. There are virtually no handguns in England, but they average 347 stabbings daily. It has long been established that the states with the strictest firearms laws also have the highest murder rates per capita. Check the FBI stats. Pax...
    MOLON LABE
    COUNTRY FIRST
    Glocks ROCK!

  21. #21
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Gil223 View Post
    I see we're still flogging this long-deceased equine. There are virtually no handguns in England, but they average 347 stabbings daily. It has long been established that the states with the strictest firearms laws also have the highest murder rates per capita. Check the FBI stats. Pax...

    True but what is the demographics of those states too?
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  22. #22
    Regular Member DW98's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    267
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Old expression - When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.....just like in England and Australia. It is the user, not the tool, that determines good or evil.
    Guns aren't outlawed in Australia so to speak. We can still own rifles, shotguns and handguns (unlike the UK). I see your point though. The restrictions have not worked here, as shown in my thread in the International Section regarding snippets of crime reports from (mostly) my state.

    Keep up the good work and hold onto your rights.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Old expression - When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
    I just happened to have my quote sniffer script running. "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." (Anonymous American adage, as quoted in The Wayward Welfare State (1981) by Roger A. Freeman, p. 286)
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •