Gun Control Reduces Crime? Not According the Harvard Law.

[Risky Thicket]

INTRODUCTION

International evidence and comparisons have long been offeredas proof of the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and thatfewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths.1 Unfortunately, suchdiscussions are all too often been afflicted by misconceptions andfactual error and focus on comparisons that are unrepresentative.It may be useful to begin with a few examples. There is a compound assertion that (a) guns are uniquely available in the UnitedStates compared with other modern developed nations, which iswhy (b) the United States has by far the highest murder rate.Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated, statement(b) is, in fact, false and statement (a) is substantially so.

Source

 

[LaMidRighter]

I want to say I heard about this on a radio program. I knew Harvard did a study that said this but not sure if it's the same one. I knew Harvard was doing a study that was leaning this way but didn't know whether it was concluded or not. It's not surprising though, just about all law enforcement data lines up with this over decades.

 

[Risky Thicket]

I think it is worth the time and trouble to read. The study supports what many other have said and what many of us believe.

Violent crime, including rape, had significant increases in the UK while at the same time in the US there were significant decreases. Interesting stuff and excellent supportive data and information. Unfortunately gun grabbers won't read the study and won't accept the data.

 

[LaMidRighter]

I think it is worth the time and trouble to read. The study supports what many other have said and what many of us believe.

Violent crime, including rape, had significant increases in the UK while at the same time in the US there were significant decreases. Interesting stuff and excellent supportive data and information. Unfortunately gun grabbers won't read the study and won't accept the data.

I still have yet to get a decent rebuttal against something I've noticed going on U.S. historical crime data. The most interesting spikes in crime came from times of some sort of unrest, the worst violence in U.S. history fell in certain decades:
1) 1920s- early 1940s - Prohibition, gangland wars, Great Depression
2) 1960s-mid 1980s - Race riots, war protests, economic recession of the late 60s/early 70s to continue until around the mid-80s.

In the post-war boom of the 1940s through the 1950s crime was almost nil. And after the recovery of the 80s/90s there was a significant ebb in violent crimes in all catagories.

 

[VoteRight]

This isn't a study. It's a review of other studies with conclusions.

Did anyone bother to look at the sources at the bottom of each page? The vast majority of the sources are pre-2000. Have you looked at the data from the FBI on violent crime statistics...

Between 1992 and 2011 almost every column has decreased significantly! Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, for example, has dropped by over 60%:
FBI — Table 1

Nothing new in this review. And please... it's not a study! It's not research. It's "we read some mostly out-dated-old stuff, and here's what we've concluded!"

 

[Texmex]

This isn't a study. It's a review of other studies with conclusions.

Did anyone bother to look at the sources at the bottom of each page? The vast majority of the sources are pre-2000. Have you looked at the data from the FBI on violent crime statistics...

Between 1992 and 2011 almost every column has decreased significantly! Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, for example, has dropped by over 60%:
FBI — Table 1

Nothing new in this review. And please... it's not a study! It's not research. It's "we read some mostly out-dated-old stuff, and here's what we've concluded!"

Studies are like expert witnesses in a trail. You can find one to tell you anything you want to hear. Common sense however says that the populace being armed will reduce serious crime, especially toward those who carry firearms.

 

[Wiseone]

I've said it a million times, there's a million and one things besides gun availability that affect crime, violence, death, etc. If you want to look at solely guns and nothing else you'll just find yourself running in circles, for example:

If you look at it by state, generally states with the least restrictive gun control laws have more homicides both by gun and not by gun than states with strict gun laws.

But if you look say cities you'll find that they have higher homicide rates than rural counties in general but cities have stricter gun laws than most rural counties.

There's more to it than just weapons, take your heads out of the sands.

 

[Wiseone]

Studies are like expert witnesses in a trail. You can find one to tell you anything you want to hear. Common sense however says that the populace being armed will reduce serious crime, especially toward those who carry firearms.

You don't need facts because you go with your gut? That's compelling.

 

[Texmex]

You don't need facts because you go with your gut? That's compelling.

Liberals must not have any common sense.

 

[CalGun]

Here is another pertinent collegiate study from a vast right wing conspirator: Univ. of Hawaii (please note sarcasm)
20th Century Democide

262,000,000 dead in the last 200 - 225 years at the hands of government.

ooops my bad only the last 113 years.

 

[jamesrage]

Source


[/FONT]

I can't say I am surprised.People who commit crimes are not going to choose to obey a law when it is not convenient for them to do so.

 

[Jerry]

Source


[/FONT]

I think I already have this one in a pe-written response....

WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE MURDER AND SUICIDE? A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AND SOME DOMESTIC EVIDENCE
Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy


View attachment 67129742


Guns are just one among numerous available deadly instruments. Thus, banning guns cannot reduce the amount of suicides. Such measures only reduce the number of suicides by firearms. Suicides committed in other ways increase to make up the difference. People do not commit suicide because they have guns available. They kill themselves for reasons they deem sufficient, and in the absence of firearms they just kill themselves in some other way.

 

[Wiseone]

Liberals must not have any common sense.

Sorry bud but the facts are more compelling than your gut feeling.

 

[Texmex]

Sorry bud but the facts are more compelling than your gut feeling.

Since when do liberals care about facts? :lamo

 

[Andalublue]

I think it is worth the time and trouble to read. The study supports what many other have said and what many of us believe.

Violent crime, including rape, had significant increases in the UK while at the same time in the US there were significant decreases. Interesting stuff and excellent supportive data and information. Unfortunately gun grabbers won't read the study and won't accept the data.

There's one thing you have to bear in mind when trying to draw comparisons between countries on crime stats. And that is: definitions of different crimes differ. In the UK a 'violent crime' has a far, far wider definition than it does in the US. In the US a violent crime:

In the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.

In the UK however all those categories are counted plus:

Violent crime as measured by the British Crime Survey includes:

* assault with minor injury;
* assault with no injury;
* wounding; and
* robbery.

I have seen those arguments talking about UK violent crime being much higher than US figures. This explains why.
If you were to add these categories to the US stats I think you'd see a very, very different picture.

 

[Wiseone]

Since when do liberals care about facts? :lamo

Nice red herring, and says the guy who responded to facts by telling us what his gut told him.

 

[CalGun]

I see you don't have anything to offer - on topic - so attack those who note the facts and agree with them right?

Nice red herring, and says the guy who responded to facts by telling us what his gut told him.

 

[joko104]

Such studies assume all deaths are equal and assume we must not allow people to prevent being victims of crime. Such studies and the conclusion take the position of better 1,000 women raped than one rapist killed.

I have posted the DOJ stats many times and it used to be my signature that firearms prevent 500,000 home invasions and 1,000,000 non-drug related felonies PER YEAR.

 

[Wiseone]

I see you don't have anything to offer - on topic - so attack those who note the facts and agree with them right?

I spelled it out in my first post, the guy I've been talking to has offered no facts.

 

[Texmex]

I spelled it out in my first post, the guy I've been talking to has offered no facts.

Common sense is often more usable than facts, especially when these supposed facts are derived at by studies.

The thing is you have tipped your hand concerning your desire for guns to be controlled by government. Common sense says that we shouldn't trust government that far. It's like believing what a car salesman says about the cars he's selling.

 

[Wiseone]

Common sense is often more usable than facts, especially when these supposed facts are derived at by studies.

The thing is you have tipped your hand concerning your desire for guns to be controlled by government. Common sense says that we shouldn't trust government that far. It's like believing what a car salesman says about the cars he's selling.

Jesus Christ you're actually serious. Well if you want to be ignorant, by all means go ahead.

 

[Texmex]

Jesus Christ you're actually serious. Well if you want to be ignorant, by all means go ahead.

When you disagree with me it only lets me know I am on the right track.

 

[joko104]

It is always a very simple question to me.

How would preventing my wife and I from having firearms make US safer?

 

[TiredOfLife]

It is always a very simple question to me.

How would preventing my wife and I from having firearms make US safer?

Well that kind of depends on who the gun is used on. If you only kill each other, no worries. If you shoot the kid next door in the process, big worries. Gun control isn't about lowering crime, it's about lowering gun deaths.

 

[joko104]

Well that kind of depends on who the gun is used on. If you only kill each other, no worries. If you shoot the kid next door in the process, big worries. Gun control isn't about lowering crime, it's about lowering gun deaths.

Why is "lowering gun deaths" of itself a good thing if it not a matter of lowering crime? Guns for self defense is specifically about lowering crime - lowering crime committed against the gun owner.

The myth is that it takes shooting someone for a gun to prevent a crime. The mere presence of a gun prevents crime.

In a sense, your response is why there is no reason for us to oppose having guns for ourselves. I am concerned of our safety. Your concern is the safety of others. I don't put the safety of others first at our own endangerment. Why would I?