4
   

Crime Decreases As Numbers of Gun Owners Rise

 
 
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2011 05:50 pm

From the NRA
Friday, October 07, 2011

To those who've heard the repetitive song of the gun control crowd, the hysterical refrain is a familiar one:
"more handguns and more freedom will lead to more crime and more violence."

Since the landmark Supreme Court decisions that struck down restrictive gun ban laws in Washington, D.C. and Chicago, the "more-guns-equals-more-crime" contingent has predicted soaring murder and violent crime rates. Anti-gun politicians and their media sycophants decried the Supreme Court's rulings and assured us that mayhem would follow.

Guess what? They were wrong. Again.

According to a September 30 FoxNews.com opinion piece by John Lott, newly released data for Chicago shows that, as in Washington, murder and gun crime rates didn't rise after the bans were eliminated--they plummeted. In fact, they have fallen much more than the national crime rate.

So what have the naysayers said about this positive trend? Nothing. Not a peep.

According to Lott, in the first six months of this year, there were 14 percent fewer murders in Chicago compared to the first six months of last year (when owning handguns was illegal), which marks the largest drop in Chicago's murder rate since the handgun ban went into effect in 1982. Similarly, in the year after the 2008 Heller decision, the murder rate in Washington, D.C., fell two-and-a-half times faster than in the rest of the country.

When citizens are able to exercise their Second Amendment rights, crime drops.
When guns are banned, murder and violent crime rates increase.

[All emfasis has been added by David.]
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2011 06:11 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
there were 14 percent fewer murders in Chicago compared to the first six months of last year (when owning handguns was illegal), which marks the largest drop in Chicago's murder rate since the handgun ban went into effect in 1982

One would think Lott would get his statistics right.
2003: 598
2004: 448
That would be a drop of 25% which is larger than the 14% Lott is claiming as the largest since 1982.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2011 10:40 pm
Lott is a master of the specious statistic. Re-examinations of his studies of gun crimes in states that adopt carry and concealed carry laws have shown that his claim that \crimes drop after adoption of carry laws is pretty much not true, an artifact of his use of a small sample size and a too-short time frame. As more states have adopted the laws, and as the laws have been in effect for a longer period, the relation just does not hold true.

Further, his "statistics" in the Chicago case are equally bogus. For example, he makes much of the drop in gun murder rate between 2008, when handgn control was in effect, and 2011, when it isn't. If however, he chose the interval 2005-2011, the rate of gun murder is absolutely flat--same rate with handgun control and without. Or if you look at 2007-2011, there is a 9+% RISE in the rate of gun murder after gun control laws are ruled illegal. Which basically means he's cherry-picking his statistics, on an invalidly short time frame, using a crime figure which naturally varies quite a bit from year to year anyway. It's basically bullshit criminology, and the old GIGO maxim "garbage in, garbage out" holds true here. That's just the kind of nonsense I'd expect David to fall for.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 10:49 am
@OmSigDAVID,
If your claim is true, how do you explain the increase of crime in Mexico's drug cartels?

BBB
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 12:17 pm
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
If your claim is true, how do you explain the increase of crime in Mexico's drug cartels?

BBB
In that there is a war going on,
the situation is chaotic.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 12:27 pm

John Lott is making the point
that altho leftists, those who wish to suppress
the right to personal defense from predatory violence,
had hysterically predicted horrible carnage
if gun freedom returned, those predictions have been disproven by peace.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 12:34 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
A fine case of correlation is not causation.

So many correlative studies... so little useful information.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 12:36 pm
And, if you will notice, David, your blinkered, Pollyannaish headline for this thread is disproven as well
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 01:11 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
And, if you will notice, David, your blinkered, Pollyannaish headline for this thread is disproven as well
I don 't think so, Jack.
Correct me if I am rong,
but I believe that it is undisputed
that the numbers of armed citizens have continued to rise
and that crime has continued to fall; therefore, as I see it,
the headline is justified. Yes??

The challenge, as I understand it,
is as to the RATE of the decline of crime.





David
parados
 
  5  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 04:10 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
that the numbers of armed citizens have continued to rise
and that crime has continued to fall; therefore, as I see it,

If only you had facts to back up either of those statements, let alone evidence that one caused the other.

What evidence that the number of armed citizens has risen? You might be able to argue that number of citizens licensed to be armed has risen but that isn't proof that the number that are armed has changed.
Rockhead
 
  2  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 04:13 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
actually, dave, armed robbery is on a significant upswing where I live.

Is that caused by more gun owners as well?
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 04:15 pm
@parados,
One thing is certain, since conceal/carry was passed the number of licensed CCW persons committing crimes when carrying has increased.

And that is as meaningless of a stat as Lott's is.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 06:42 pm
@parados,
David wrote:
that the numbers of armed citizens have continued to rise
and that crime has continued to fall; therefore, as I see it,
parados wrote:
If only you had facts to back up either of those statements, let alone evidence that one caused the other.

What evidence that the number of armed citizens has risen?
Well, since obama got in, gun merchants have prospered dramatically,
according to what thay have told us. Gun sales r up.
( Admittedly, some of them r probably repeat sales. )
We have heard from gun merchants that sales to women,
unaccustomed to guns has risen.
I believe that I have posted some of those accounts.

Gun control laws have continued to fall.




parados wrote:
You might be able to argue that number of citizens licensed to be armed has risen but that isn't proof that the number that are armed has changed.
See above.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 06:44 pm
@Rockhead,
Rockhead wrote:
actually, dave, armed robbery is on a significant upswing where I live.

Is that caused by more gun owners as well?
Assuming that the robbers own their guns, technically: yes.
I hope that the future VICTIMS will prepare themselves to WIN if that happens to them!





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 06:48 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:
One thing is certain, since conceal/carry was passed the number of licensed CCW persons committing crimes when carrying has increased.
HOW is that "certain", parados??
I understand that licensed gun owners have committed fewer crimes than the police have.


parados wrote:
And that is as meaningless of a stat as Lott's is.
, but is it true??????
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2011 07:53 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
I understand that licensed gun owners have committed fewer crimes than the police have.

And how would you know that?

You might be able to cite statistics about convictions, but that doesn't say definitively who's committing crimes. It just says who's getting caught.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Oct, 2011 02:02 am
@DrewDad,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
I understand that licensed gun owners have committed fewer crimes than the police have.
DrewDad wrote:
And how would you know that?

You might be able to cite statistics about convictions, but that doesn't say definitively who's committing crimes. It just says who's getting caught.
Yes; that reinforces and it magnifies my point,
but that is not how it SHOUD be, that only
the saints and angels of American citizens own guns.
The 2nd Amendment, like the First, was enacted for everyone (as a limit on government power).
It was not enacted only for the benefit of the super-perfect elite of immaculately innocent citizens.




( Men whose violent histories have proven them to be intolerable threats, shoud be isolated
from the decent people, preferably not on this Continent.)
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Oct, 2011 08:21 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Anecdotal evidence is your only evidence it seems.

Even you admit that the sales could just be to repeat buyers.

So.. you have ZERO actual evidence and are simply adjusting the evidence to support your conclusion. Gee.. why would you do that David?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Oct, 2011 08:35 am
@OmSigDAVID,
It's certain because PRIOR to CCW licensing there would be ZERO licensed CCW persons.

1 is greater than ZERO. But 403 CCW license holders charged with crimes in Michigan for 2005 is greater even than 1.

But since we want to play with statistics.. Let's look at Michigan crime committed by CCW license holders
From July 2004-June 2005 it was 403 charged crimes
From July 2007- July 2008 it was 1319 charged crimes

Crimes by CCW license holders have more than tripled.

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/CCWAnnualReport_181416_7.pdf
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/CPL_Annual_Report_2007-2008_269128_7.pdf

Yes, I did cherry pick my statistics. But then so did Lott.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Oct, 2011 09:32 am
@parados,
parados wrote:
It's certain because PRIOR to CCW licensing there would be ZERO licensed CCW persons.

1 is greater than ZERO. But 403 CCW license holders charged with crimes in Michigan for 2005 is greater even than 1.
What is the source of this "403" figure??
I checked your first link, but failed to find it.
I DID see that it contemplates such crimes
as "Falsifing a record on a used motor vehicle part"
( u need a gun for THAT, right????)
and "Operating a motor vehicle without a
license on person"; will u admit that there is
a difference in principle between such crimes
as driving thru a gun free zone and crimes of violence ?

I remain curious as to WHAT it is that 403 license holders
allegedly DID.





parados wrote:
But since we want to play with statistics.
I do not concede that Lott has been guilty of doing that.




parados wrote:
Let's look at Michigan crime committed by CCW license holders
From July 2004-June 2005 it was 403 charged crimes
From July 2007- July 2008 it was 1319 charged crimes

Crimes by CCW license holders have more than tripled.

Wait a minute, there: the way u wrote that
convictions r unnecessary. I can CHARGE u with sodomizing Abraham Lincoln
( whether u have a gun license or not ).
Does such a "charge" prove anything?? I think NOT,
but your alleged statistic implies that it DOES. I object to that.

I looked at your first link n failed to find that "403" figure.

I looked at your second link n saw that it has 147 pages.
I do not see a means of enlarging the font; it is too small to see.


I wish that he were within access, to defend himself.
 

Related Topics

Drumsticks - Discussion by H2O MAN
nobody respects an oath breaker - Discussion by gungasnake
Marksmanship - Discussion by H2O MAN
Kids and Guns by the Numbers - Discussion by jcboy
CO gun-grabbers go down in flames in recall - Discussion by gungasnake
Personal Defense Weapons (PDW) - Discussion by H2O MAN
Self defense with a gun - Discussion by H2O MAN
It's a sellers market - Discussion by H2O MAN
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Crime Decreases As Numbers of Gun Owners Rise
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/25/2019 at 10:26:11