Before I catch any flak about not mentioning the Lott and Mustard studies, here are some observations made by others.
Re: Lott's vaunted study:
Quote:Lott and Mustard argued that their results indicated that the laws caused substantial reductions in violence rates by deterring prospective criminals afraid of encountering an armed victim. This conclusion could be challenged, in light of how modest the intervention was. The 1.3% of the population in places like Florida who obtained permits would represent at best only a slight increase in the share of potential crime victims who carry guns in public places. And if those who got permits were merely legitimating what they were already doing before the new laws, it would mean there was no increase at all in carrying or in actual risks to criminals. One can always speculate that criminals' perceptions of risk outran reality, but that is all this is--a speculation. More likely, the declines in crime coinciding with relaxation of carry laws were largely attributable to other factors not controlled in the Lott and Mustard analysis.
Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz,
Armed resistance to crime: The prevalence and nature of self defense with a gun, 86 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 86, 150-187 (1995).
Before you dismiss this as nonsense from anti-gun researchers, Gary Kleck has publicly stated that he believes in the deterrent effects of guns, although he also apparently believes in the illuminating effects of an objective analysis.
Other researchers used Lott's model to test period between 1992-1996 (Lott looked at data before 1992), when 14 more jurisdictions adopted carry laws. They found an
increase (!!!) in crime by using Lott's exact econometric analysis. They conclude:
Quote:Those who were swayed by the statistical evidence previously offered by Lott and Mustard to believe the more guns, less crime hypothesis should now be more strongly inclined to accept the even stronger statistical evidence suggesting the crime- inducing effect of shall issue laws. [The opposite effect, how can that be?]
Ian Ayres and John J. Donohue III,
Shooting down the more guns, less crime hypothesis, 55 Stan. L. Rev. 1193-1312 (2003).
In the end, you can pick and choose your statistics and studies. You accept whatever politically motivated "facts" you want
