253 Articles, 99 Books, 43 Gov't Pub's: Gun Control Laws Don't Reduce Violent Crime

[Overpaid Slacker]

Eugene Volokh has an interesting review of the National Academy of Sciences' 328 Page Report on the (complete lack of) efficacy of Gun Control Laws.

An excerpt from Volokh's piece:

Last month, the National Academy of Sciences issued a 328-page report on gun control laws. The big news that has been ignored on all the blog sites is that the academy's panel couldn't identify any benefits of the decades-long effort to reduce crime and injury by restricting gun ownership. The only conclusion it could draw was: Let's study the question some more.

The panel has left us with two choices: Either academia and the government have wasted tens of millions of dollars and countless man-hours on useless research (and the panel would like us to spend more in the same worthless pursuit), or the National Academy is so completely unable to separate politics from its analyses that it simply can't accept the results for what they are.

Based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn't identify a single gun control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents.

From the assault weapons ban to the Brady Act to one-gun-a-month restrictions to gun locks, nothing worked. (Something that I have been the first person to investigate empirically for many of these laws, and I also had been unable to find evidence that they reduced violent crime.)


But what are the odds that the gun-control myth will die?

Shyt, what are the odds that any of the AMMP (American Mainstream Media Party) will shout this from the rooftops.

JP

[Burnin' oil]

Right-wing drivel . . .

[Groesbeck Hurricane]

This has me quite confused!!! I have always felt that there should be gun control. If you cannot control your gun, how do you expect to hit your target? Am I wrong here?

[makaio]

I could have told you that. All those gun control laws do is make sensless people feel warm and fuzzy. I don't know how long it will take for people to realize that criminals don't care about gun control laws. They will own them no matter what law is passed. Believe that!

[Overpaid Slacker]

Matt, I agree, and together we could've told everybody we could corner; however, it's not "true" until the government says so.

Now it's said so, more or less, by not saying that there is any evidence of there being a positive effect of GCL.

But the point, AFAIC, is that, strangely, this word isn't getting out. Here is a meta-study of epic proportions that shatters a Liberal shibboleth. Who's heard of this report, or the results?

It's not going to be news until NYT, WaPo, LAT, Boston Globe, etc. decide it's news and disseminate the info. Don't hold your breath for that. This GCL efficacy lie will be deliberately allowed to continue by those who will not allow fact to get in the way of their prejudice. They cannot win this debate, so they stifle the information needed to have the debate in the first place.

Our unbiased, agenda-free, dispassionate, objective, "performing a public service" media.

Yeah.

JP

[BigD9146gt]

It will never die, but one thing that will keep it a myth on a federal level is the fact the President has to be inlisted in one part of the armied forces. I haven't seen a large number of military vets wanting to bann guns lately... have you?

Moores movie, Bowling for Colimbine, brings up some very good points though. But most of them arn't about peoples in-abilities with guns, its our own irationall thoughts and scared thinking that leads us to use guns. If you look at the statistics, we are one sick, gun using country.

But the left-wing "la la land" thinking doesn't solve anything either. Just because we bann guns, doesn't mean jack to those who get them illegally. If we killed those who used guns (eye for an eye) then that would do wonders. BUT, the lefties think thats wrong too.... Its the middle of left and right that we need to find to solve these problems. The main problem is everyone is so tied up in being left or right, they don't see the purpose of a middle ground by which ultimatly makes our country work.

[Moneyguy1]

The gun was invented. The genie was out of the bottle and will not be coerced back in. Every technological advance has potential good and bad. The problem becomes the wisdom and maturity of the individuals using that technology.

I wouldn't care how many studies are done; if the results are predetermined, the facts can be found to support the wanted conclusion.

Perhaps if every man, woman and child were given, through a government project, their own AK47, we might be able to collect some imperical data on the emotional stability of certain facets of the population.

[ronin]

Originally posted by Overpaid Slacker
the panel couldn't identify a single gun control regulation that reduced violent crime...

well well now, JP. we have obviously overlooked one piece of legislation that - wherever it has been tried - has been sucessful in doing just that. and what, pray tell, might this legislation be? the good ole' CWP

[Milu]

No reply from the antigun crowd?

[666]

No reply from the antigun crowd?

HHMMMM. Where are the slimy bastards now that there ammo has run out?

[Eric 951]

I have never understood the gun-control stance. We have had firearms in my family since the great-great-great grandfolks came over on the boat. Per our family's genealogist only 1 was ever used to commit a crime(horse rustling in the late 1800s) and he was subsequently hanged.

How would taking my guns away make this country safer?

[Joeaksa]

I like gun control. One shot, one kill, now thats gun control.

As long as we have Feinstein, H. Klinton, and Schumer in office and trying to get more votes to be re-elected they will jump on anything they feel needed and right now gun control is on their list.

The facts are out that restricting lawful gun ownership does nothing to improve the safety of the public.

JoeA
Lifetime NRA member

[djmcmath]

Originally posted by Moneyguy1
Perhaps if every man, woman and child were given, through a government project, their own AK47, we might be able to collect some imperical data on the emotional stability of certain facets of the population.

I run a military barracks for mid-grade criminals and people suffering from varying degrees of idiocy, personality disorders with "psychotic episodes," and other fun folks. I personally don't think it's necessary to issue assault rifles to everyone in order to determine their emotional stability.

I'm reliving the episode from December, wherein a fine upstanding young sailor (tic) was running down the hallway screaming "I'm going to get you, you fat bald mother-f---er! I won't be in the brig forever you piece of s---!" Three of my staff tackled this character, who continued undaunted. "You a--hole! I'll f---ing f--- you up, g--d---it!!! Send your minions to fight me? Bring it on yourself, man to man, f---er!!! Come on, fight me!!!" He would have made a proud linebacker, had we not had to chain him hand and foot and haul him kicking and screaming over to the brig.

So, perhaps it would be wiser, after all, if we weren't all carrying assault rifles.


Dan

[666]

Yup.