Gun ownership grows as crime rates drop

[Scott_J]

 

 

The number of privately owned guns in the USA rises by about 5 million a year, according to BAFTE. Then number of guns owned by Americans is approaching 300 million.

The FBI report for 2003 stated that the nation’s violent crime rate declined for the 12th straight year, to a 27 year low. In comparison, the Bureau of Justice reported in September that its annual crime victim survey reached a 30 year low in 2003.

The FBI noted that 27% of violent crimes involved firearms. The other 73% involved other types of weapons or bare hands. Criminologist Gary Kleck’s survey in the 1990s showed that violent crime victims who used a gun to resist were less likely to be attacked or to suffer an injury that those who used other means of self-protection or those who did not resist at all.

Murder rates, which have fluctuated slightly from 1999-2003, are now lower than any time since the mid-1960s. The robbery and aggravated assault rates are lower than any time since 1968 and 1984.

Right-to-Carry states fared better than the rest of the country in 2003. On the whole, their total violent crime, murder and robbery rates were 6%, 2% and 23% lower than the states and the District of Columbia where carrying a firearm for protection is prohibited or severely restricted.

As usual, most of the states with the lowest crime rates are those with the least “gun control”, including the Rocky Mountain region, and Main, New Hampshire and Vermont in the NE. The District of Columbia and Maryland, which have gun bans and other restrictions on gun ownership and purchase have the distinction of having the highest murder, and robbery rates.

Violent crime continues to rise in the “utopia” of Great Britain despite of a complete ban on handguns, most rifles and many shotguns. The broad ban went into effect in 1997 and was heralded by the British government as a cure for violent crime.

Crime rates in England have skyrocketed since the enactment of the ban. According to John Lott of the American Enterprise Institute the violent crime rate has risen 69 % since 1996, with robberies rising 45% and murders rising 54%. Recent information released shows the trend is continuing. Reports released in October 2004 show that in the 2nd quarter violent rose 11%.

The English experience is further proof that gun bans don’t reduce crime. What they do is create ready victims for criminals.

Amen

[Alpinfox]

A bunch of statistics supposedly supporting the thesis that gun ownership is inversely proportional to violent crime

 

Post hoc, ergo proctor hoc - It means "after this, therefore because of this". It's a classic logical fallacy.

 

Those are interesting statistics, but there are a lot of other possible causes for the decrease in violent crime including more/better trained police, increased incarceration times, a better economy, etc.

 

I support the 2nd Amendment, but I don't believe that having a gun in the house makes you safer. I believe the statistic that a family/individual with a gun in the house is XX times more likely to be injured by that gun than any intruder's gun is still true.

[cj001f]

The real question is do more people own guns, not do the same people own more guns. You conveniently avoid that.

[Lionel_Hutz]

remember, if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will accidentally shoot their children!

[Jim]

In 1998, researchers at Emory University examined fatal and nonfatal shootings in and around homes in Memphis, Seattle, and Galveston. For every time a gun in the home was used to shoot an intruder, the researchers recorded four unintended shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides. Other findings suggest that having a gun in the house nearly triples the risk that someone in the family will be killed with a gun.

 

The risk of suicide is particularly high among gun owners. In a 1999 study in The New England Journal of Medicine, Garen Wintemute, MD, MPH, and his colleagues at the University of California, Davis, found that during the first year after the purchase of a handgun, suicide was the leading cause of death among the purchasers—accounting for 24.5% of all deaths and an astonishing 51.9% of deaths among women aged 21 to 44. During the first week after the purchase of a handgun, the rate of suicide by means of a gun among the purchasers was 57 times as high as the adjusted rate in the general population. What’s more, handgun purchasers remained at increased risk for suicide by firearm over the study period of six years.

 

I read an interesting article in the NY Times the other day. Researchers (sorry don't have the link) determined that you are more likely to die a violent-related death in RURAL areas of the country compared to URBAN areas. The leading cause of violent death in both areas was gunshots. The difference was that in RURAL areas the primary method was suicide!!!

[Winter]

Well that's obviously a well thought out article from someone who is interested only in the validity of statistial analysis and not any predetermined policy position.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

A bunch of statistics supposedly supporting the thesis that gun ownership is inversely proportional to violent crime

 

Post hoc, ergo proctor hoc - It means "after this, therefore because of this". It's a classic logical fallacy.

 

Those are interesting statistics, but there are a lot of other possible causes for the decrease in violent crime including more/better trained police, increased incarceration times, a better economy, etc.

 

My guess is it's due to the large number of criminals who are incarcerated - an argument that has been out there for some time to explain the declining rates of violent crime in recent years. Which reminds me of the oft-cited statistic (from lefties) about the US having the highest rate of imprisonment (up there with Russia and China), and how this is supposedly a baaaaaaad thing, indicative of some horrible flaw in our society.

 

Everyone likes to manipulate the numbers for their agenda.

Lies, damn lies, and statistics indeed.

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

Right, the flaw being that our society, or at least the policymakers as influenced by the prison-industrial complex (incedentally, DFA typoed that as "prison=industrial" the first time...coincidence? Nah ...), seems to value punishment over rehabilitation. Nice intersection of iron-fisted puritan pseudomorality and the time-honored corporate tradition of placing profits before people.

[cj001f]

Which reminds me of the oft-cited statistic (from lefties) about the US having the highest rate of imprisonment (up there with Russia and China), and how this is supposedly a baaaaaaad thing, indicative of some horrible flaw in our society.

Paying $31k a year for someone who contributes nothing to society is a good thing? Recidivism is a good thing? 60% of California prison inmates will be back in prison within 3 years. What, exactly is good about having a large prison population? They get out at some point, and have to be reintegrated into society, or they've just gone to criminal college

[EWolfe]

Well that's obviously a well thought out article from someone who is interested only in the validity of statistial analysis and not any predetermined policy position.

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Which reminds me of the oft-cited statistic (from lefties) about the US having the highest rate of imprisonment (up there with Russia and China), and how this is supposedly a baaaaaaad thing, indicative of some horrible flaw in our society.

Paying $31k a year for someone who contributes nothing to society is a good thing? Recidivism is a good thing? 60% of California prison inmates will be back in prison within 3 years. What, exactly is good about having a large prison population? They get out at some point, and have to be reintegrated into society, or they've just gone to criminal college

 

Better in prison than on the steets committing more crimes. Duh.

[catbirdseat]

There are lots of junkies out there with $200 a day heroin habits. The money for the drugs has to come from somewhere. Do the math. That's approximately $70,000 per year they have to steal (or drugs they must sell). Given that, maybe $31,000/yr is a deal.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

There are lots of junkies out there with $200 a day heroin habits. The money for the drugs has to come from somewhere. Do the math. That's approximately $70,000 per year they have to steal (or drugs they must sell). Given that, maybe $31,000/yr is a deal.

 

Yes, but then they are committing crimes other than simply using drugs.

[cj001f]

Better in prison than on the steets committing more crimes. Duh.

Get better at trolling.

[JoshK]

Whats up Sisu. I would agree that the two being inversely proportional is not evidence of guns preventing crime but a coincidence. Crime rates have been lowering for years, as you noted, but most attribute it to societal changes.

 

As usual, most of the states with the lowest crime rates are those with the least “gun control”, including the Rocky Mountain region, and Main, New Hampshire and Vermont in the NE. The District of Columbia and Maryland, which have gun bans and other restrictions on gun ownership and purchase have the distinction of having the highest murder, and robbery rates

 

This is due simply to population and demographic factors and isn't even remotely related to gun control or the lack thereof. The rocky mountain region is, relatively to other areas, sparsely populated. DC and Maryland (at least the maryland suburbs of DC were I would imagine most of the crime occurs) are heavily populated cities where crime rates are obviously going to be much higher anyway, along with poverty, drugs, etc.

 

With that said, I have recently decided that I care less and less about fighting guns. There are so many more issues that the republican party, in general, is backwards on and frankly gun control is one I care least about. The bad economic policies, silly fiscal policies, pro-business emphasis, lack of environmental protection, "family values" farce, and a long list of others matter a lot more to me. I guess you have to pick your battles and when I realized this it just really made me care a lot less about gun control. I would rather just try to play nice with the NRA and other gun lobbies to come to some sort of reasonable compromise and assure then no further attemps to restrict gun ownership. For example, i think safety controls to protect kids and banning completely insane assault weapons is good. If we could get this I would really have no problem with other guns.

 

-josh

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Better in prison than on the steets committing more crimes. Duh.

Get better at trolling.

 

If you think I am merely trolling, then you've proven yourself over and over again to be a sucker, since you so often feel compelled to respond to my comments.

[cj001f]

Woohoo! $150k down the shitter!

 

Man gets 6 years for stealing malt liquor

A Watsonville man who robbed a liquor store of a 40-ounce beer was sentenced Friday to six years in prison.

 

Manual Suarez, 22, was convicted of the May 7 holdup of LuLu’s Fiesta Liquor & Deli on Freedom Boulevard after being caught on videotape and after police found a handgun and other evidence in his home.

 

Police said the store clerk was so frightened when Suarez pointed the gun at her that she ran out of the store, which spooked Suarez and he ran out, too, with only the beer.

 

He had admitted to second-degree robbery and an allegation of using a gun, getting three years for each. Robbery is a strike under California’s three strikes law and a serious and violent felony, meaning Suarez will not be eligible for parole until he serves 85 percent of the sentence.

 

Prosecutor Paul Marigonda said Suarez had a minor record.