Total Posts:78|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Gun ownership and violence

Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 1:06:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
http://www.census.gov...

http://www.debate.org...

In comparing state to state across the US, there is absolutely no correlation between gun ownership and murder (or murder prevention). There is also no correlation between gun ownership and crime (or crime prevention).

I'm tired of hearing both sides of this (that guns causes issues or that guns prevent issues), though I do believe that this will have little effect at stopping the silliness.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 1:48:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
16k will unload a full clip of charts into your target profile. Be careful.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 2:03:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/22/2012 1:55:53 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
I wonder if "diversity" is possibly a cause of violence?

Poverty is the primary cause of violence.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
johnnyboy54
Posts: 6,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 2:10:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/22/2012 2:03:32 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/22/2012 1:55:53 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
I wonder if "diversity" is possibly a cause of violence?

Poverty is the primary cause of violence.

I thought it was secularism?
I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 2:11:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
if gun ownership has no correlation between violence, then this is a point for the pro-gun activists. If it holds not externalities, there's no reason why one's freedom should be infringed. Nobody complains whether youtube should be banned because it doesn't provide a positive benefit like reduction in crime or whatnot.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 2:20:19 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/22/2012 2:11:53 AM, darkkermit wrote:
if gun ownership has no correlation between violence, then this is a point for the pro-gun activists. If it holds not externalities, there's no reason why one's freedom should be infringed. Nobody complains whether youtube should be banned because it doesn't provide a positive benefit like reduction in crime or whatnot.

I agree.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 2:27:59 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/22/2012 2:11:53 AM, darkkermit wrote:
if gun ownership has no correlation between violence, then this is a point for the pro-gun activists. If it holds not externalities, there's no reason why one's freedom should be infringed. Nobody complains whether youtube should be banned because it doesn't provide a positive benefit like reduction in crime or whatnot.

I would agree to a point. What this shows is that preventing the ownership of guns does not do anything one way or the other (this is also highly apparent by simply looking at Mexico vs Europe, both have tight gun control with wildly different results, so other factors are the major players). However, that does not mean that various restrictions do not have some kind of an effect on crime.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 2:30:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/22/2012 1:48:27 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
16k will unload a full clip of charts into your target profile. Be careful.

I was thinking of challenging him to a debate on GW based on stuff he's said on other walls, but I want to wait until the 2012 numbers are in.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
iamnotwhoiam
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 4:11:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/22/2012 2:10:31 AM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 12/22/2012 2:03:32 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/22/2012 1:55:53 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
I wonder if "diversity" is possibly a cause of violence?

Poverty is the primary cause of violence.

I thought it was secularism?

Homicide rate in Sweden: 1.0 per 100,000 inhabitants. Homicide rate in Texas: 5.4
http://en.wikipedia.org...
johnnyboy54
Posts: 6,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 4:29:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/22/2012 4:11:19 PM, iamnotwhoiam wrote:
At 12/22/2012 2:10:31 AM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 12/22/2012 2:03:32 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/22/2012 1:55:53 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
I wonder if "diversity" is possibly a cause of violence?

Poverty is the primary cause of violence.

I thought it was secularism?

Homicide rate in Sweden: 1.0 per 100,000 inhabitants. Homicide rate in Texas: 5.4
http://en.wikipedia.org...

...

I wasn't being serious...
I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
iamnotwhoiam
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 4:41:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/22/2012 4:29:26 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 12/22/2012 4:11:19 PM, iamnotwhoiam wrote:
At 12/22/2012 2:10:31 AM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 12/22/2012 2:03:32 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/22/2012 1:55:53 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
I wonder if "diversity" is possibly a cause of violence?

Poverty is the primary cause of violence.

I thought it was secularism?

Homicide rate in Sweden: 1.0 per 100,000 inhabitants. Homicide rate in Texas: 5.4
http://en.wikipedia.org...

...

I wasn't being serious...

I did consider that, but people do believe such things.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,789
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 6:32:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
FYI:"A new study suggests the use of handguns in crime rose by 40% in the two years after the weapons were banned."

http://news.bbc.co.uk...
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 10:50:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
States with conceal carry laws actually have lower crime rates.
http://www.cato.org...

Just so you know, I never compare crime rates because of differing populations etc. I prefer to use studies, like this one which argues 400,000 - 800,000 crimes are deterred by gun ownership each year.
http://saf.org...

And even if guns do not deter crime, it could still be argued they have a net benefit from self defense.
http://www.guncite.com...

And, if you like to compare countries, that merely proves guns deter robberies.
http://www.guncite.com...

Here is my opinion on the issue: I don't know. I am certain gun control fails to reduce crime, and am aware all mass shootings (except one) have happened on a gun free zone in recent history. There is a lot of evidence that liberalized conceal carry laws reduce crime, and data on gun bans is mixed from no effect (Canada, cross-sectional data) to a large increase in crime (UK, Ireland, Jamaica, Australia, trends data, cross sectional data for UK - US violent crime rates DC). Evidence leans towards the more guns less crime hypothesis, however the "no effect" crowd has more data (in my opinion) on things like assault weapons which are fairly rare. So, in sum: for sure, gun control is baloney, shall-issue laws seem to decrease crime, and gun bans give mixed results, usually an increase in crime. But really, all I know is gun control fails, that's the only conclusion I get from the academic literate.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 10:52:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/22/2012 1:06:12 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
http://www.census.gov...

http://www.debate.org...

Do you have a regression analysis for this? And can I have access to our data set (or is it the censusgov link).


In comparing state to state across the US, there is absolutely no correlation between gun ownership and murder (or murder prevention). There is also no correlation between gun ownership and crime (or crime prevention).

I'm tired of hearing both sides of this (that guns causes issues or that guns prevent issues), though I do believe that this will have little effect at stopping the silliness.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 11:19:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
This guy is an idiot. Just because there are no cases in which gun bans have reduced crime and only cases in which gun bans have increase crime doesn't mean that gun bans increase crime. Man, he irritates me.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2012 11:26:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I don't think the issue is guns and violence... On one hand, we have the possibility of guns preventing crime, and on the other, we have the added potential for misuse by existing weapons.

I read about the principal and another teacher running to the scene when they heard bullets. There is something pathetic (in a sad sort of way) about the idea of a woman, unarmed and in no position to harm anyone, running at a blood-thirsty man armed to the teeth with advanced weaponry. It's hard not to wish there was a rifle in that principle's office that day.

On the other hand, weapons in schools will increase the potential for accidents and misuse, and it's hard to say that we wouldn't lose more kids per year that way. Perhaps a teacher that flips his or her wig and grabs the gun, or a particularly troubled child who gains access to the weapon. Weapons can be lost, stolen, and misused in many ways and common sense seems to indicate that mistakes are going to outweigh the highly unlikely scenario of an assault by a gunman.
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2012 1:10:17 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/22/2012 10:50:02 PM, 16kadams wrote:
States with conceal carry laws actually have lower crime rates.
http://www.cato.org...

Conceal carry =/= gun ownership.


Just so you know, I never compare crime rates because of differing populations etc. I prefer to use studies, like this one which argues 400,000 - 800,000 crimes are deterred by gun ownership each year.
http://saf.org...

Cherry picked data. There will be some crimes that are not committed because of guns, and there will be others that are committed because of openly available guns. Recent examples are the shootings in Sandy Hook and Clackamas. Or fun things like these...

http://www.foxnews.com...
http://hiphopwired.com...
http://www.nbcdfw.com...


And even if guns do not deter crime, it could still be argued they have a net benefit from self defense.
http://www.guncite.com...

"Although there is no evidence to indicate gun ownership deters overall burglary rates, gun ownership may be a factor in deterring burglars from entering occupied dwellings."

All this based on interviews from prisoners in one state in 1985 (when crime was near its worst). The interviews actually suggest that criminals are not being "deterred" by the guns, only making them choose different times to rob homes (so the crime is not going away, just shifting from "hot" to "cold").


And, if you like to compare countries, that merely proves guns deter robberies.
http://www.guncite.com...

1) The previous part (which was in the same link) suggested that guns are redirecting criminals to rob at different times, not actually deterring them, while the calculations factor in if the US had more hot burglaries, without factoring down the cold.

2) That also looks at a very narrow selection.

http://www.nationmaster.com...

The latest stats actually show that a number of European nations have higher burglary rates, and a number have lower. The same applies to car theft, assault, and most violent crimes.

What I'll do, is pull gun ownership and compare between a number of 1st world nations with a number of various violent crimes.


Here is my opinion on the issue: I don't know. I am certain gun control fails to reduce crime, and am aware all mass shootings (except one) have happened on a gun free zone in recent history. There is a lot of evidence that liberalized conceal carry laws reduce crime, and data on gun bans is mixed from no effect (Canada, cross-sectional data) to a large increase in crime (UK, Ireland, Jamaica, Australia, trends data, cross sectional data for UK - US violent crime rates DC). Evidence leans towards the more guns less crime hypothesis, however the "no effect" crowd has more data (in my opinion) on things like assault weapons which are fairly rare. So, in sum: for sure, gun control is baloney, shall-issue laws seem to decrease crime, and gun bans give mixed results, usually an increase in crime. But really, all I know is gun control fails, that's the only conclusion I get from the academic literate.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2012 1:46:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
http://www.debate.org...

This compares the gun ownership to murder, assault, burglaries, robberies, and auto theft in the following countries. USA, Australia, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland.

As you can see, apart from murder, there is no real correlation between have guns and preventing or causing crime (the graphs go left to right). The culture is far more of a factor.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2012 4:54:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/23/2012 1:46:31 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

This compares the gun ownership to murder, assault, burglaries, robberies, and auto theft in the following countries. USA, Australia, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland.

As you can see, apart from murder, there is no real correlation between have guns and preventing or causing crime (the graphs go left to right). The culture is far more of a factor.

Looks pretty likely that guns cause higher murder rates, then.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2012 10:08:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/23/2012 4:54:28 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 12/23/2012 1:46:31 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

This compares the gun ownership to murder, assault, burglaries, robberies, and auto theft in the following countries. USA, Australia, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland.

As you can see, apart from murder, there is no real correlation between have guns and preventing or causing crime (the graphs go left to right). The culture is far more of a factor.

Looks pretty likely that guns cause higher murder rates, then.

We can say that there is a high correlation, though the first thing that many will say is that correlation =/= causation. A much larger correlation is the economy and society, as poorer nations will be more violent, even with less guns (see Mexico, Central America, and most of Africa).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2012 11:15:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/23/2012 1:10:17 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/22/2012 10:50:02 PM, 16kadams wrote:
States with conceal carry laws actually have lower crime rates.
http://www.cato.org...

Conceal carry =/= gun ownership.

I am aware.



Just so you know, I never compare crime rates because of differing populations etc. I prefer to use studies, like this one which argues 400,000 - 800,000 crimes are deterred by gun ownership each year.
http://saf.org...

Cherry picked data. There will be some crimes that are not committed because of guns, and there will be others that are committed because of openly available guns. Recent examples are the shootings in Sandy Hook and Clackamas. Or fun things like these...

How is it cherry picked?


http://www.foxnews.com...
http://hiphopwired.com...
http://www.nbcdfw.com...

Three cases! OMG! Ban the darn things!



And even if guns do not deter crime, it could still be argued they have a net benefit from self defense.
http://www.guncite.com...

"Although there is no evidence to indicate gun ownership deters overall burglary rates, gun ownership may be a factor in deterring burglars from entering occupied dwellings."

All this based on interviews from prisoners in one state in 1985 (when crime was near its worst). The interviews actually suggest that criminals are not being "deterred" by the guns, only making them choose different times to rob homes (so the crime is not going away, just shifting from "hot" to "cold").

Read Klecks estimate. The hot/cold proves they are afraid of gun owners.



And, if you like to compare countries, that merely proves guns deter robberies.
http://www.guncite.com...

1) The previous part (which was in the same link) suggested that guns are redirecting criminals to rob at different times, not actually deterring them, while the calculations factor in if the US had more hot burglaries, without factoring down the cold.

2) That also looks at a very narrow selection.

http://www.nationmaster.com...

The latest stats actually show that a number of European nations have higher burglary rates, and a number have lower. The same applies to car theft, assault, and most violent crimes.

What I'll do, is pull gun ownership and compare between a number of 1st world nations with a number of various violent crimes.

So you're arguing no correlation here? I am aware there is no correlation using cross sectional data.



Here is my opinion on the issue: I don't know. I am certain gun control fails to reduce crime, and am aware all mass shootings (except one) have happened on a gun free zone in recent history. There is a lot of evidence that liberalized conceal carry laws reduce crime, and data on gun bans is mixed from no effect (Canada, cross-sectional data) to a large increase in crime (UK, Ireland, Jamaica, Australia, trends data, cross sectional data for UK - US violent crime rates DC). Evidence leans towards the more guns less crime hypothesis, however the "no effect" crowd has more data (in my opinion) on things like assault weapons which are fairly rare. So, in sum: for sure, gun control is baloney, shall-issue laws seem to decrease crime, and gun bans give mixed results, usually an increase in crime. But really, all I know is gun control fails, that's the only conclusion I get from the academic literate.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2012 11:21:20 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/23/2012 4:54:28 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 12/23/2012 1:46:31 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

This compares the gun ownership to murder, assault, burglaries, robberies, and auto theft in the following countries. USA, Australia, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland.

As you can see, apart from murder, there is no real correlation between have guns and preventing or causing crime (the graphs go left to right). The culture is far more of a factor.

Looks pretty likely that guns cause higher murder rates, then.

Actually gun ownership is often caused by high crime.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2012 11:30:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/23/2012 11:15:13 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 12/23/2012 1:10:17 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/22/2012 10:50:02 PM, 16kadams wrote:
States with conceal carry laws actually have lower crime rates.
http://www.cato.org...

Conceal carry =/= gun ownership.

I am aware.



Just so you know, I never compare crime rates because of differing populations etc. I prefer to use studies, like this one which argues 400,000 - 800,000 crimes are deterred by gun ownership each year.
http://saf.org...

Cherry picked data. There will be some crimes that are not committed because of guns, and there will be others that are committed because of openly available guns. Recent examples are the shootings in Sandy Hook and Clackamas. Or fun things like these...

How is it cherry picked?

Because it only looks at the crimes that are deterred because of more guns, not at the crimes that are created because there are more guns.



http://www.foxnews.com...
http://hiphopwired.com...
http://www.nbcdfw.com...

Three cases! OMG! Ban the darn things!

Merely recent examples to show that the study was cherry picking. No need to strawman.




And even if guns do not deter crime, it could still be argued they have a net benefit from self defense.
http://www.guncite.com...

"Although there is no evidence to indicate gun ownership deters overall burglary rates, gun ownership may be a factor in deterring burglars from entering occupied dwellings."

All this based on interviews from prisoners in one state in 1985 (when crime was near its worst). The interviews actually suggest that criminals are not being "deterred" by the guns, only making them choose different times to rob homes (so the crime is not going away, just shifting from "hot" to "cold").

Read Klecks estimate. The hot/cold proves they are afraid of gun owners.

And suggests that the gun ownership does not deter crime, only makes them commit crime at a different time of the day.




And, if you like to compare countries, that merely proves guns deter robberies.
http://www.guncite.com...

1) The previous part (which was in the same link) suggested that guns are redirecting criminals to rob at different times, not actually deterring them, while the calculations factor in if the US had more hot burglaries, without factoring down the cold.

2) That also looks at a very narrow selection.

http://www.nationmaster.com...

The latest stats actually show that a number of European nations have higher burglary rates, and a number have lower. The same applies to car theft, assault, and most violent crimes.

What I'll do, is pull gun ownership and compare between a number of 1st world nations with a number of various violent crimes.

So you're arguing no correlation here? I am aware there is no correlation using cross sectional data.

Funny, you just previously said "if you like to compare countries, that merely proves guns deter robberies."

I'm glad to hear that you've back tracked on that.




Here is my opinion on the issue: I don't know. I am certain gun control fails to reduce crime, and am aware all mass shootings (except one) have happened on a gun free zone in recent history. There is a lot of evidence that liberalized conceal carry laws reduce crime, and data on gun bans is mixed from no effect (Canada, cross-sectional data) to a large increase in crime (UK, Ireland, Jamaica, Australia, trends data, cross sectional data for UK - US violent crime rates DC). Evidence leans towards the more guns less crime hypothesis, however the "no effect" crowd has more data (in my opinion) on things like assault weapons which are fairly rare. So, in sum: for sure, gun control is baloney, shall-issue laws seem to decrease crime, and gun bans give mixed results, usually an increase in crime. But really, all I know is gun control fails, that's the only conclusion I get from the academic literate.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2012 5:09:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/23/2012 11:30:42 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/23/2012 11:15:13 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 12/23/2012 1:10:17 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/22/2012 10:50:02 PM, 16kadams wrote:
States with conceal carry laws actually have lower crime rates.
http://www.cato.org...

Conceal carry =/= gun ownership.

I am aware.



Just so you know, I never compare crime rates because of differing populations etc. I prefer to use studies, like this one which argues 400,000 - 800,000 crimes are deterred by gun ownership each year.
http://saf.org...

Cherry picked data. There will be some crimes that are not committed because of guns, and there will be others that are committed because of openly available guns. Recent examples are the shootings in Sandy Hook and Clackamas. Or fun things like these...

How is it cherry picked?

Because it only looks at the crimes that are deterred because of more guns, not at the crimes that are created because there are more guns.

It never said guns save lives, rather guns stop some crimes




http://www.foxnews.com...
http://hiphopwired.com...
http://www.nbcdfw.com...

Three cases! OMG! Ban the darn things!

Merely recent examples to show that the study was cherry picking. No need to strawman.

You forget guns are used in defense more then that are used to commit a crime.





And even if guns do not deter crime, it could still be argued they have a net benefit from self defense.
http://www.guncite.com...

"Although there is no evidence to indicate gun ownership deters overall burglary rates, gun ownership may be a factor in deterring burglars from entering occupied dwellings."

All this based on interviews from prisoners in one state in 1985 (when crime was near its worst). The interviews actually suggest that criminals are not being "deterred" by the guns, only making them choose different times to rob homes (so the crime is not going away, just shifting from "hot" to "cold").

Read Klecks estimate. The hot/cold proves they are afraid of gun owners.

And suggests that the gun ownership does not deter crime, only makes them commit crime at a different time of the day.

"By comparing criminal victimization surveys from Britain and the Netherlands (countries having low levels of gun ownership) with the U.S., Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck determined that if the U.S. were to have similar rates of "hot" burglaries as these other nations, there would be more than 450,000 additional burglaries per year where the victim was threatened or assaulted. (Britain and the Netherlands have a "hot" burglary rate near 45% versus just under 13% for the U.S., and in the U.S. a victim is threatened or attacked 30% of the time during a "hot" burglary.)"
http://www.guncite.com...

This shows two things:

1) guns have the ability to reduce crime or deter some crime
2) they have to spend time casing houses to rob, and even then the possibility of someone armed in the home is still possible. Forcing criminals to case houses obviously reduces crime somewhat.





And, if you like to compare countries, that merely proves guns deter robberies.
http://www.guncite.com...

1) The previous part (which was in the same link) suggested that guns are redirecting criminals to rob at different times, not actually deterring them, while the calculations factor in if the US had more hot burglaries, without factoring down the cold.

2) That also looks at a very narrow selection.

http://www.nationmaster.com...

The latest stats actually show that a number of European nations have higher burglary rates, and a number have lower. The same applies to car theft, assault, and most violent crimes.

What I'll do, is pull gun ownership and compare between a number of 1st world nations with a number of various violent crimes.

So you're arguing no correlation here? I am aware there is no correlation using cross sectional data.

Funny, you just previously said "if you like to compare countries, that merely proves guns deter robberies."

You compared the types of crime, not when they are committed. Robert rates increase after gun bans. Comparing crime rates certainly isn't optimal. When taking away the cross sectional data your case has nothing. Gun control is not to blame for these countries low crime rates, as many studies point out. They have always has lower crime, example: the UK had lower crime than the US, even when they had little gun control.

Further, as you seem to support cross sectional data, it builds upon my case for burglaries. So I was merely using your data against you. I prefer trend data, and if possible corrected to account for errors.


I'm glad to hear that you've back tracked on that.


I have always thought there is no correlation of international crime rates, but don't think gun control cause the low European crime rates. If you read the opinion in the origional post, I have been drifting towards the "guns have no net effect" hypothesis, making gun control futile. (Though I believe CCW decreases crime). All I really know is that gun control fails to reduce crime.




Here is my opinion on the issue: I don't know. I am certain gun control fails to reduce crime, and am aware all mass shootings (except one) have happened on a gun free zone in recent history. There is a lot of evidence that liberalized conceal carry laws reduce crime, and data on gun bans is mixed from no effect (Canada, cross-sectional data) to a large increase in crime (UK, Ireland, Jamaica, Australia, trends data, cross sectional data for UK - US violent crime rates DC). Evidence leans towards the more guns less crime hypothesis, however the "no effect" crowd has more data (in my opinion) on things like assault weapons which are fairly rare. So, in sum: for sure, gun control is baloney, shall-issue laws seem to decrease crime, and gun bans give mixed results, usually an increase in crime. But really, all I know is gun control fails, that's the only conclusion I get from the academic literate.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2012 1:53:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/22/2012 2:03:32 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/22/2012 1:55:53 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
I wonder if "diversity" is possibly a cause of violence?

Poverty is the primary cause of violence.

For many years Ireland was one of the poorest countries in Europe, and also the least violent. (The violent separatist movement is more recent, was in Northern Ireland, and wasn't about poverty.) India and East Asia have places of extreme poverty and very low violent crime. Islamic terrorists are recruited from the middle and upper classes, not the poor.

I think there is some truth that the cultural reasons for poverty correlate to some degree with the reasons for violence, but the primary cause is cultural.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2012 2:14:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/22/2012 1:06:12 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
In comparing state to state across the US, there is absolutely no correlation between gun ownership and murder (or murder prevention). There is also no correlation between gun ownership and crime (or crime prevention).

I'm tired of hearing both sides of this (that guns causes issues or that guns prevent issues), though I do believe that this will have little effect at stopping the silliness.

If gun ownership makes no difference overall, then of course there is no reason to restrict the right to bear arms.

The problem in sorting out cause and effect is that many factors affect murder rates. Mexico has a complete ban on gun ownership, for example, and murder rates are high, because other things are going on. In comparing the different states, some important factors in murder rates are cultural differences (inner city gang violence, hard drug dealing), demographics (more young people, more violence), racial composition (which in the U.S. reflects culture), and law enforcement efficiency (laws and money spent on policing).

One way to separate out the factors is to observe what happens when everything else remains the same except the gun laws are changed, either tightened or loosened. Anyone who cares should read John Lott's "More Guns, Less Crime." It's a definitive analysis of the statistics.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2012 2:24:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I am bit busy right now but I am posting so I am reminded to come back to this forum. Lott lied about statistics. I think I mentioned this somewhere else.

Lott produced a statistical model "Model 1", that showed that significant crime decreases when guns were banned. Errors were discovered in Lott's work. Lott admitted the errors and posted a new table with new results. However, his new results were similar to his old ones.

Since Lott had no choice but to use the corrected data, and the corrected data erased his results, he decided to invent a different model ("Model 2") for use in this new table without disclosing the fact that he had switched to a new model specifically constructed to keep his results intact.

Lott then removed the old model from his website and put the new model in. He used the new model with the old data as well as the new data to make it seem like he used the new model all along. Lott also misrepresented the findings of the FBI.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com...

http://mediamatters.org...