• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Journal of Interpersonal Violence - New study concludes firearm ownership does not cause crime

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

**The new study makes similar conclusions as did the Kates and Centerwall Studies**


Key findings:

[align=left]1. Gun control does not affect criminal use of guns.[/align] [align=left]2. Gun crimes are committed with illegally owned guns[/align] [align=left]3. Socio economic factors explain levels of violent conduct in societies[/align] [align=left]--[/align] [align=left]Firearm Homicide in Australia, Canada,[/align] [align=left]and New Zealand:[/align]
[align=left]What Can We Learn From Long-Term International Comparisons?[/align]


[align=left]Samara McPhedran1, Jeanine Baker, and Pooja Singh[/align]Journal of Interpersonal Violence XX(X) 1 –12

© The Author(s) 2010Reprints and permission:

http://www.
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0886260510362893



SNIP
[align=left]It is pertinent to note that the level of legislative restriction surrounding[/align] [align=left]firearms ownership differs between the three countries. For example, Canada[/align] [align=left]and New Zealand permit the ownership and use of the types of firearms that[/align] [align=left]are banned in Australia. In addition, Canada, like Australia, mandates registration[/align] [align=left]of all firearms whereas New Zealand, unlike Canada and Australia, does not[/align] [align=left]require registration of all firearms.
[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left]However, these differences do not appear[/align] [align=left]to be reflected in the long-term declines in homicide rates, suggesting the[/align] [align=left]need to consider other explanations for the trends.[/align]
[align=left]Existing literature highlights relationships between social disadvantage[/align] [align=left]and crime (Jones-Webb & Wall, 2008; Phillips, 2002; Wilson, 1987), and[/align] [align=left]there is a degree of empirical support for the hypothesis that homicide rates are[/align] [align=left]associated with economic indices such as unemployment
[/align] [align=left](Bellair & Roscigno, 2000; Krivo & Peterson, 2004; Lee & Slack, 2008).[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left] Although a great deal of[/align] [align=left]study in this field comes from the United States and may not be wholly[/align] [align=left]applicable to other countries, Australian research, too, has found associations[/align] [align=left]between male youth unemployment and rates of lethal violence
[/align] [align=left] (Narayan & Smyth, 2004).[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left] In the current context, it is worthwhile considering socioeconomic[/align] [align=left]correlates of crime in relation to the three countries of interest.[/align] [align=left]There are a range of socioeconomic indicators on which New Zealand has[/align] [align=left]varied from Australia and Canada over the past years, and some of these may[/align] [align=left]offer insight into the apparent differences in firearm homicide trends between[/align] [align=left]countries. Of particular note is that unemployment rates in Australia, New[/align] [align=left]Zealand, and Canada have consistently differed.
[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left]According to Labor Force[/align] [align=left]Survey results from each country, after passing through the economic downturn[/align] [align=left]of the early 1990s and experiencing unemployment rates in the order of 10%,[/align] [align=left]all three countries have experienced declining rates of unemployment.[/align]

[align=left]However, unemployment rates in New Zealand have consistently been[/align] [align=left]lower than Australian unemployment rates, which have in turn been lower than[/align] [align=left]Canadian unemployment rates (ABS, 2008; Statistics Canada, 2008; Statistics[/align] [align=left]New Zealand, 2008). It should be noted that these figures do not differentiate[/align] [align=left]between short- and long-term unemployment. Future work will assess potential[/align] [align=left]relationships between unemployment and homicide rates in more detail. It will[/align] [align=left]also examine whether trends in nonfirearm homicide, as well as firearm[/align] [align=left]homicide, have differed between the three countries.[/align]
McPhedran et al. 7

[align=left]The relationship of economic variables to the incidence of violent crime merits[/align] [align=left]further scrutiny. Although the three countries in this study have experienced[/align] [align=left]similar levels of economic growth as indexed by measures such as gross domestic[/align] [align=left]product (GDP), their comparative experiences of socioeconomic disadvantage[/align] [align=left]have not been explored. Although overall economic stability and growth may have[/align] [align=left]contributed to the observed declines in firearm homicides in each country, it is[/align] [align=left]increasingly recognized that there are inequalities in the distribution of wealth[/align] [align=left]within individual countries, evidenced by the elevated risk of social disadvantage[/align] [align=left]faced by certain groups in the community (e.g., unemployed young people, persons[/align] [align=left]with substance abuse or mental health issues). In this regard, broad measures such[/align] [align=left]as GDP may not provide a suitably nuanced reflection of social well-being and/or[/align] [align=left]injury mortality
[/align][align=left](Nasrullah, Laflamme, & Khan, 2008).[/align]

[align=left]The majority of firearms used to commit homicide in Canada and Australia[/align] [align=left]are not legally owned. More than 80% of firearm homicides in Canada[/align] [align=left](Dauvergne & De Socio, 2008) and more than 90% of firearm homicides in[/align] [align=left]Australia (Davies & Mouzos, 2007; Mouzos & Houliaris, 2006) are committed[/align] [align=left]by persons using illicitly owned firearms. Data on the licensing status of[/align] [align=left]homicide offenders could not be obtained for New Zealand; however, the[/align] [align=left]Australian and Canadian observations may indicate dissociation between firearm[/align] [align=left]violence and legislative approaches to firearms ownership, whereby legislative[/align] [align=left]reform does not influence the population of individuals who commit firearm[/align] [align=left]violence.
[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left]Thus, broader changes in social policy and crime prevention policies[/align] [align=left]may explain the declines in firearm homicide.[/align]
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
imported post

Got a link to the study? Or to the abstract publication?

stay safe.

skidmark



Oh! BTW - whodathunkit?:lol:
 

simmonsjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,661
Location
Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
imported post

Unfortunately this study means as much as the other studies that reached similar conclusions: Nothing.

Why? We already know this. It has been proven before. It was the answer any true logic reasoning brought about before there was evidence.

Anti's don't care about truths or facts or reality. It is 'religious' for them. It's all about how they 'feel' about guns.

Trying to disprove the anti's over and over only adds validity to their absurd assertions.
 

MamaLiberty

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
894
Location
Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
imported post

Not really. What they cannot tolerate is the fact that an armed populace is not under their control.

The name of their "religion"? Power.
Which is actually the same sickness most criminals (unofficial and otherwise) have. Subconsciously, they really do understand one another. Some of them are simply more willing than others to act out their fantasies of domination and control.

The rest simply want something for nothing. They want everyone to be helpless because they are too cowardly to do anything except be helpless. The sneak thief, as opposed to the armed robber.
 

Basic Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
129
Location
, ,
imported post

...however, the Australian and Canadian observations may indicate dissociation between firearm violence and legislative approaches to firearms ownership, whereby legislative reform does not influence the population of individuals who commit firearm violence.


Who'd a thunk it?

Maybe we should have an international study to test the theory - just a theory mind you - that birds are not deterred by fences.
 

MamaLiberty

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
894
Location
Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
imported post

Maybe we should have an international study to test the theory - just a theory mind you - that birds are not deterred by fences.

Well, the obvious conclusion by power damaged minds is to build higher fences, of course. :banghead:
 
Top