Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

applegrove

(123,007 posts)
Tue Nov 18, 2014, 10:10 PM Nov 2014

More guns, more crime: New research debunks a central thesis of the gun rights movement

More guns, more crime: New research debunks a central thesis of the gun rights movement

By Christopher Ingraham at the Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/11/14/more-guns-more-crime-new-research-debunks-a-central-thesis-of-the-gun-rights-movement/

"SNIP...........................



Now, Stanford law professor John Donohue and his colleagues have added another full decade to the analysis, extending it through 2010, and have concluded that the opposite of Lott and Mustard's original conclusion is true: more guns equal more crime.

"The totality of the evidence based on educated judgments about the best statistical models suggests that right-to-carry laws are associated with substantially higher rates" of aggravated assault, robbery, rape and murder, Donohue said in an interview with the Stanford Report. The evidence suggests that right-to-carry laws are associated with an 8 percent increase in the incidence of aggravated assault, according to Donohue. He says this number is likely a floor, and that some statistical methods show an increase of 33 percent in aggravated assaults involving a firearm after the passage of right-to-carry laws.

These findings build on and strengthen the conclusions of Donohue's earlier research, which only used data through 2006. In addition to having nearly two decades' worth of additional data to work with, Donohue's findings also improve upon Lott and Mustard's research by using a variety of different statistical models, as well as controlling for a number of confounding factors, like the crack epidemic of the early 1990s.

These new findings are strong. But there's rarely such a thing as a slam-dunk in social science research. Donohue notes that "different statistical models can yield different estimated effects, and our ability to ascertain the best model is imperfect." Teasing out cause from effect in social science research is often a fraught proposition.


...........................SNIP"
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
More guns, more crime: New research debunks a central thesis of the gun rights movement (Original Post) applegrove Nov 2014 OP
If this were true, then why doesn't the FBI's UCR reflect that? GGJohn Nov 2014 #1
GG, you are missing a lot. Crime would be even less with fewer gunz and Hoyt Nov 2014 #2
Your missing my point completely, GGJohn Nov 2014 #3
Do you know what the phrase "other factors equal" means? Hoyt Nov 2014 #4
I know exactly what it means, GGJohn Nov 2014 #5
So riddle me this, GG flamin lib Nov 2014 #6
Huh? GGJohn Nov 2014 #7
I'll type this real slow 'cause you seem to not read well . . . flamin lib Nov 2014 #8
Then I would suggest you put me on ignore also, GGJohn Nov 2014 #9
You can stand by being willfully ignorant if you want but flamin lib Nov 2014 #10
Willfully ignorant? GGJohn Nov 2014 #11
more guns more crime & more lies jimmy the one Nov 2014 #12

GGJohn

(9,951 posts)
1. If this were true, then why doesn't the FBI's UCR reflect that?
Wed Nov 19, 2014, 01:15 AM
Nov 2014

Violent crime has been declining since the 70's, a 40% decline I believe, and gun related crime is down in 2013 from 2012

Murder, by State and Type of Weapon, 2013 (FBI)

Total murders...................... 12,253
Handguns............................ 5,782 (47.2%)
Firearms (type unknown)............. 2,079 (17.0%)

Clubs, rope, fire, etc.............. 1,622 (13.2%)
Knives and other cutting weapons.... 1,490 (12.2%)
Hands, fists, feet.................... 687 (5.6%)
Shotguns.............................. 308 (2.5%)
Rifles................................ 285 (2.3%)


2012 and 2010, for comparison:


Murder, by State and Type of Weapon, 2012 (FBI)

Total murders...................... 12,711
Handguns............................ 8,813 (49.9%)
Firearms (type unknown)............. 1,848 (14.5%)

Clubs, rope, fire, etc.............. 1,637 (12.9%)
Knives and other cutting weapons.... 1,583 (12.5%)
Hands, fists, feet.................... 678 (5.3%)
Rifles................................ 320 (2.5%)
Shotguns.............................. 302 (2.4%)


Murder, by State and Types of Weapons, 2010 (FBI)

Total murders...........................12,996
Handguns.................................6,009 (46.2%)
Firearms (type unknown)..................2,035 (15.7%)
Clubs, rope, fire, etc...................1,772 (13.6%)
Edged weapons............................1,704 (13.1%)
Hands, feet, etc...........................745 (5.7%)
Shotguns...................................373 (2.9%)
Rifles.....................................358 (2.8%)


The 9-year trend in rifle homicides, 2005-2013:

2005: 442
2006: 436
2007: 450
2008: 375
2009: 348
2010: 358
2011: 323
2012: 302
2013: 285


So I don't see the "more guns=more crimes" assertion, unless I'm missing something here.
I think I'll believe the stats compiled by the FBI over a Stanford prof.
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
2. GG, you are missing a lot. Crime would be even less with fewer gunz and
Wed Nov 19, 2014, 01:54 AM
Nov 2014

the yahoos attracted to them.

You have to control for other factors -- aging population, better survelience, tougher sentences, etc. If you guys could bring yourself to keep less guns and stop promoting then, no telling how low crime rates might go.

We do appreciate your keeping up with the stats. If only you knew how to interpret them. I guess your three safes full of gunz are reflective of your bias.

GGJohn

(9,951 posts)
3. Your missing my point completely,
Wed Nov 19, 2014, 02:03 AM
Nov 2014

Stanford law professor John Donohue is saying that more guns=more crimes, but according to the FBI's UCR, that's not true at all.

You say I'm not interpreting them correctly? Then why don't you interpret them for me and show where I and the FBI made our mistake.

BTW, it's not 3 safes full of guns, I'll let you guess how many it really is.

GGJohn

(9,951 posts)
5. I know exactly what it means,
Wed Nov 19, 2014, 02:08 AM
Nov 2014

but you still haven't shown how I and the FBI have mis-interpreted the stats.
It's really simple, Stanford law professor John Donohue is wrong.

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
6. So riddle me this, GG
Wed Nov 19, 2014, 11:09 AM
Nov 2014

Finland is the industrialized country nearest the US in household gun ownership (38% vs 43%). Finland's death by gun rate is 4.5 per 100,000 and the US rate is 10 per, more than twice as much. 17% of US households own handguns and Finland has a pistol ownership rate of 6%. Hmmmm, twice as many pistols in the US and twice as many deaths.

The nearest country to the US educationally, ethnically, culturally and economically is Canada with a gun ownership rate of 15% overall and 3% for pistols. The gun death rate there is 2.5 per 100,000. Canada also outlaws semi auto guns of all types.

So, even though gun deaths are down in the US, Americans are twice as likely to die by gun as Finland (nearest in gun ownership rate) and 6 times more likely than in Canada. Could it be that, as Hoyt said upthread, that crime rates in the US could be much lower if there were fewer guns?

If gun ownership has nothing to do with death by gun, how do you account for these numbers? I'd be careful trying to cite "other factors" after the upthread exchange . . .

http://guncontrol.ca/overview-gun-control-us-canada-global/

GGJohn

(9,951 posts)
7. Huh?
Wed Nov 19, 2014, 11:14 AM
Nov 2014

That has nothing to do with my post saying that Donohue was wrong about more guns=more crime.

Sure, gun deaths would be fewer if there were fewer guns, but deaths by other means would probably increase.

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
8. I'll type this real slow 'cause you seem to not read well . . .
Wed Nov 19, 2014, 11:51 AM
Nov 2014

The OP indicates that more guns equates to more crime.

Your first reply was with FBI statistics and "So I don't see the 'more guns = more crime' assertion . . ."

Hoyt pointed out that there could be many mitigating reasons for lowering crime rates, that crime could be much lower than it is with fewer guns and you reply that FBI stats prove that more guns does not mean more crime ignoring the other factors that might account for falling crime rates.

I weigh in with another study that includes other countries and has statistics that parallel the conclusions of the OP study.

You claim that my post has nothing to do with Donohue being wrong. Huh? Multiple studies, different sources, same conclusions. But you can't, or won't, see that. This is the sort of willful refusal to admit that guns increase death rates that permeates the Gungeon.

You have that in common with all the gun nuts that I have on ignore.

GGJohn

(9,951 posts)
9. Then I would suggest you put me on ignore also,
Wed Nov 19, 2014, 12:01 PM
Nov 2014

but I stand by what I said, Donohue is wrong according to the FBI stats, more guns do not = more crime.

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
10. You can stand by being willfully ignorant if you want but
Wed Nov 19, 2014, 12:07 PM
Nov 2014

anyone without the blindness brought on by the religious seal of a gun nut can see that Donohue is not wrong and that there are multiple studies and statistics that parallel those conclusion.

Now, complying with your wishes.

jimmy the one

(2,717 posts)
12. more guns more crime & more lies
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 12:57 PM
Nov 2014

ggjohn: Your missing my point completely, Stanford law professor John Donohue is saying that more guns=more crimes, but according to the FBI's UCR, that's not true at all.

.. Donahue is not contending crime didn't fall, he's contending that lax CCW laws caused higher rates of aggravated asslt, robb, rape & murder, than existed prior to states passing such laws. Donahue's data does not necessarily run from early 90's to now (when violent crime declined), but from when a state passed a shall issue ccw law.
Learn to comprehend better so as to not footstick.

"The totality of the evidence based on educated judgments about the best statistical models suggests that right-to-carry laws are associated with substantially higher rates" of aggravated assault, robbery, rape and murder, Donohue said.. The evidence suggests that right-to-carry laws are associated with an 8% increase in the incidence of aggravated assault .. He says this number is likely a floor, and that some statistical methods show an increase of 33% in aggravated assaults involving a firearm after the passage of right-to-carry laws. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/11/14/more-guns-more-crime-new-research-debunks-a-central-thesis-of-the-gun-rights-movement/

ggjohn: You say I'm not interpreting them correctly? Then why don't you interpret them for me and show where I and the FBI made our mistake.

Look above.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control Reform Activism»More guns, more crime: Ne...