New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Harvard Gun Study Shows Banning Weapons Doesn't Decrease Violence

Marcus Aurelius

Governor
Supporting Member
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/...d-gun-study-no-decrease-in-violence-with-ban/

In an independent research paper titled “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?,” first published in Harvard’s Journal of Public Law and Policy, Don B. Kates, a criminologist and constitutional lawyer, and Gary Mauser, Ph.D., a Canadian criminologist and professor at Simon Fraser University, examined the correlation between gun laws and death rates. While not new, as gun debates nationwide heat up, the paper has resurfaced in recent days, specifically with firearm advocates.“International evidence and comparisons have long been offered as proof of the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths. Unfortunately, such discussions [have] all too often been afflicted by misconceptions and factual error and focus on comparisons that are unrepresentative,” the researchers wrote in their introduction of their findings.

In the 46-page study, which can be read in its entirety here, Kates and Mauser looked at and compared data from the U.S. and parts of Europe to show that stricter laws don’t mean there is less crime. As an example, when looking at “intentional deaths,” or murder, on an international scope, the U.S. falls behind Russia, Estonia, and four other countries, ranking it seventh. More specifically, data shows that in Russia, where guns are banned, the murder rate is significantly higher than in the U.S in comparison. “There is a compound assertion that guns are uniquely available in the United States compared with other modern developed nations, which is why the United States has by far the highest murder rate. Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated, [the latter] is, in fact, false and [the former] is substantially so,” the authors point out, based on their research.

But when it comes to examining nations as a whole, the Harvard study suggests otherwise. “If more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death, areas within nations with higher gun ownership should in general have more murders than those with less gun ownership in a similar area. But, in fact, the reverse pattern prevails,” the authors wrote.
 
How does the writer explain Australia, Japan, U.K. for example? Russia is something else to compare to.
 
link to study in op.
Nothing about Australia, Japan or U.K. Only thing he is talking about is Russia has high murder rate with low gun ownership and some European countries have high gun ownership and low murder rates. Just don't think those European countries can be compared to the U.S. The populations are too different. Russia can't be compared to us either. What Australia did to lower their gun deaths is something that he should look at but I would guess he doesn't want to muddy his water with other facts. He wants to pick and chose his facts.
 
Nothing about Australia, Japan or U.K. Only thing he is talking about is Russia has high murder rate with low gun ownership and some European countries have high gun ownership and low murder rates. Just don't think those European countries can be compared to the U.S. The populations are too different. Russia can't be compared to us either. What Australia did to lower their gun deaths is something that he should look at but I would guess he doesn't want to muddy his water with other facts. He wants to pick and chose his facts.

Never argue with a marble statue. Nobody is better at "picking facts" than Marble Brain btw.

Indeed, while comparing different countries and cultures is wrought with hazard.. Australia and their buy-back program is one to look at.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/02/did-gun-control-work-in-australia/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/03/us-usa-guns-australia-idUSBRE9320C720130403
 
Last edited:
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/...d-gun-study-no-decrease-in-violence-with-ban/

In an independent research paper titled “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?,” first published in Harvard’s Journal of Public Law and Policy, Don B. Kates, a criminologist and constitutional lawyer, and Gary Mauser, Ph.D., a Canadian criminologist and professor at Simon Fraser University, examined the correlation between gun laws and death rates. While not new, as gun debates nationwide heat up, the paper has resurfaced in recent days, specifically with firearm advocates.“International evidence and comparisons have long been offered as proof of the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths. Unfortunately, such discussions [have] all too often been afflicted by misconceptions and factual error and focus on comparisons that are unrepresentative,” the researchers wrote in their introduction of their findings.

In the 46-page study, which can be read in its entirety here, Kates and Mauser looked at and compared data from the U.S. and parts of Europe to show that stricter laws don’t mean there is less crime. As an example, when looking at “intentional deaths,” or murder, on an international scope, the U.S. falls behind Russia, Estonia, and four other countries, ranking it seventh. More specifically, data shows that in Russia, where guns are banned, the murder rate is significantly higher than in the U.S in comparison. “There is a compound assertion that guns are uniquely available in the United States compared with other modern developed nations, which is why the United States has by far the highest murder rate. Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated, [the latter] is, in fact, false and [the former] is substantially so,” the authors point out, based on their research.

But when it comes to examining nations as a whole, the Harvard study suggests otherwise. “If more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death, areas within nations with higher gun ownership should in general have more murders than those with less gun ownership in a similar area. But, in fact, the reverse pattern prevails,” the authors wrote.
Eh, what do a buncha Harvard dummies know anyway? LOL
 
Back
Top