bulletproof schoolbags

[Hermit]

Rules Of Engagement.

And that trend line is hokey as all shit.

Feel free to prove the trend line hokey. I provided links to the data I used.

The R squared value is very, very low. It would be difficult to say that the upward trend is statistically significant. I suspect that there is a real, if small effect, but it is nothing like a strong proof...

Proof of what? It's a real, if small effect. Fewer guns, lower murder rate. I would not expect a huge drop anyway. As the Australian gun buyback scheme in 1996 has shown, a lot of murders and suicides were effected by other means rather than prevented due to the absence of firearms. That's one of the flies in the ointment I have alluded to earlier. In the case of murder the popularity of knives increased. In the case of suicides, drugs and ropes.

[pErvinalia]

There was death via samurai sword a week or two back.

[JimC]

Banzai!

[Jason]

The correlation of more guns, more homicide is undeniable.

I'm just going to respond to your conclusion here; I think that there is a possibility that that correlation may be driven by the desire of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves in areas where homicide is more prevalent.

I'll just put this here.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01064462

[JimC]

The correlation of more guns, more homicide is undeniable.

I'm just going to respond to your conclusion here; I think that there is a possibility that that correlation may be driven by the desire of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves in areas where homicide is more prevalent.

I'll just put this here.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01064462

That seems like a possible factor, but what it does ensure is an overall increase in the number of guns available. A society where there is relatively easy access to guns will inevitably have more deaths from guns, whatever the ownership motivation may be...

[Hermit]

The correlation of more guns, more homicide is undeniable.

I'm just going to respond to your conclusion here; I think that there is a possibility that that correlation may be driven by the desire of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves in areas where homicide is more prevalent.

That is a distinct possibility. In fact, I do believe that millions of US citizens do own fire arms explicitly for the purpose of defending themselves from other people with fire arms. But what came first? Increased violent crime or increased private ownership of fire arms? There has to be a correlation proving one or the other, right? Go, find it.


(Data for chart sourced from column five here).

I'll just put this here.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01064462

Oh. Kleck's much discussed study featuring the claim about 2.5 million defensive gun uses per year. Since you just put it here I'll just comment on it. I won't go into its methodological failures for now, but just observe that you obviously have not read it, or at best read it selectively. If you had read it in full, you would have noticed that Kleck is not arguing "more guns, less homicide". He is not even arguing "more guns, less crime". His central thesis is that gun control laws do not reduce gun prevalence in US cities. That is a thoroughly uncontroversial assertion to make in a nation where they are not uniform. Unless all 50 states, counties and cities uniformly and simultaneously end their "shall issue" policies and most severely restrict the right to own side arms, be they concealed or open carry, there will always be enough gaps to drive a 22-wheeler through - sideways.

These results generally support the view that (1) existing gun control laws do not reduce gun prevalence in U.S. cities, (2) gun prevalence does not have any measurable net positive effect on violence rates except for a possible effect on suicide rates, and (3) most gun control laws do not reduce violence rates, though a few may do so.

Also, note that he agrees that more guns means greater likelihood of murder:

Kleck and McElrath (1991) found that an aggressor's possession or use of a gun appears to reduce the probability of a physical attack (as opposed to a mere threat) on the victim and appears to reduce the probability that the attack will result in a physical injury, while increasing the probability that an injury will be fatal.

Lastly, the study is quite equivocal about gun control:

owner licensing appears to reduce homicides and may reduce total suicides. Purchase permits may reduce homicides

Requiring permits to buy guns (BYPERMIT) may reduce rates of suicide. Bans on possession of guns by convicted criminals (CRIMINAL) may reduce rates of aggravated assault and robbery. Bans on possession of guns by mentally ill persons (MENTAL) appear to reduce homicide and may reduce suicide. Requiring a state or local license to be a gun dealer (DEALER) appears to reduce rates of robbery and may reduce aggravated assaults and suicides. Laws that provide mandatory penalties for unlawful gun carrying (MANDPEN) may reduce robbery. Laws providing discretionary additional penalties for committing crimes with a gun (ADDONDIS) may reduce murder and robbery. Finally, local bans on the purchase of handguns appear to reduce robbery rates

The authors have cited several measures that will reduce the prevalence of guns and may reduce crime. Waddaya know?

[Jason]

You are correct, I have not read it yet. It is fairly expensive at $40. Do you think you could see clear to sharing your copy with me?

[Rum]

People have touched on it, but gun control laws aside, it strikes me that America seems to have violence at its core - it almost seems to be a 'value'. The nation building myths are about the violent defeat of 'savages' (albeit there has been a lot of revisionist history of late), the 'wild west' created the mythological image of an America where the toughest and hardest survived and fought off those out to get his 'stuff' from him. You even have the right (as I understand it) to shoot trespassers on your property (here we have a right to walk more or less anywhere with impunity).

With violence as a corner stone of your culture and gun laws which reflect those values, it seems to me to be a pretty lethal combination.

[Sean Hayden]

Violence is an American value? I've heard it all now.

Itchin for another shot at civilizing the beast eh brit?

[Sean Hayden]

Seriously Europe, do you guys even study your history? You've had wars longer than we've been a nation! What shall I make of you lot based on that? Nothing I suppose because you've put together a few decades of peace...not counting violence elsewhere...

[Svartalf]

well, you have to admit that the country is founded on violence, both at the state and personal level... be in the Indian wars, the conquest of Hawai'i and Guam, the sending of the Black ships under Commodore Perry to Japan... or a consitutional amendment stating that the rights of the citizens to own and carry weaponry will not be abridged... and the fact that it clearly implies that the weaponry in question is SOTA arms, not just the muskets that ware the SOTA at the time the amendment was passed...

[Svartalf]

Seriously Europe, do you guys even study your history? You've had wars longer than we've been a nation! What shall I make of you lot based on that? Nothing I suppose because you've put together a few decades of peace...not counting violence elsewhere...

At least I don't have a constitutional right to own and carry assault rifles... because any limitations preventing citizens from having state of the art weaponry are clearly contrary to the spirit of the 2nd.

[Sean Hayden]

, you have to admit that the country is founded on violence

Vs France, you must be joking? We're practically saints compared to Europe.

[Rum]

Seriously Europe, do you guys even study your history? You've had wars longer than we've been a nation! What shall I make of you lot based on that? Nothing I suppose because you've put together a few decades of peace...not counting violence elsewhere...

I think you are being defensive. I wasn't suggesting that America was bad and the rest of us were angels. Europe has a long history of death and destruction as you say. But there is something in the founding myths and history of your country that seems to glorify it to some extent.

Just trying to add to the conversation about why you guys shoot each other in the tens of thousands ffs.

[Jason]

What's so egregious about "assault rifles?"