2009: More Guns, Less Crime, Again

[JohnRich 4]

News:

More Guns, Less Crime in '09

"Americans went on binges buying guns and ammunition in early 2009, worried that a radical leftist president and Democrat-dominated Congress would violate their Second-Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. The effects? Less murder, robbery, rape, and property crime, according to an FBI report released Monday..."

Story: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/12/more_guns_less_crime_in_09.html

Crime Stats: http://radio.woai.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=104668&article=6492241

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Are you sure that the guns were the cause? You just don't want to give the president credit.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

John, do you believe in the causation implied by the author?

[freethefly 6]

The article is nothing more than word fluff and proves nothing other than more people bought guns.

The article they link http://radio.woai.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=104668&article=6492241 says nothing about gun purchase being the reason for a decline. In fact, one of the cities mentioned in the linked article is NYC where there was a drop from 252 murders in 2008 to 204 reported during the first half of 2009. NYC does not allow gun ownership so the increase in gun ownership nation wide had zero affect in NYC. Other cities, however, where ownership is allowed saw an increase in shootings and reacted by deploying more police.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/08/newark_deploying_more_police_t.html
Unfortunately, there was also an increase in police being killed. http://news.opb.org/article/6463-more-police-nationwide-killed-gunfire-2009/
I would not credit any decline to the wannabe Rambo soccer moms and paranoid doomsayers. I credit the police and the police alone. Guys like my nephew who is on a drug task force closing down meth labs, crack houses and heroin dealers (he had to bust a fortified heroin house the day before Thanksgiving. He's the K-9 guy), and the guys who post here. Be careful.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[Ron 10]

Quote

The article is nothing more than word fluff and proves nothing other than more people bought guns.

But it does show that more guns does not equal more gun crime like some try to claim.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[freethefly 6]

Quote

Quote

The article is nothing more than word fluff and proves nothing other than more people bought guns.

But it does show that more guns does not equal more gun crime like some try to claim.

Actually, it does not. If a person would take the time to research the claim being made, they would see that rates were down in some cities, but up in others http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/2009prelimsem/index.html. Note that the table 4 report only includes cities with a population of 100,000 and greater. Overall, across the board the numbers are down, yet this means very little in the towns where rates had increased, like the majority of cities in Missouri (and we have plenty of guns here). Again, I would credit the police for any decline.
For the record, I am a gun owner.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[Ron 10]

Quote

Actually, it does not.

Yes, it still does:

Quote

Overall, across the board the numbers are down,

OVERALL the numbers are down. You can cherry pick the data to try to limit that impact, but it does show that a massive overall increase in firearm ownership has NOT increased overall gun crime.

One of the major arguments of anti gun folks is that gun ownership increases gun crime..... This information shows that that is not true.

Are there other reasons why crime rates have dropped? Sure, but the claim that more guns equal more gun crime is not supported by this report.

That is not saying that more guns is the ONLY factor or even a MAJOR factor in the reductions... But it DOES show that more guns does not equal more gun crime like some claim.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[b1jercat 0]

How about suicide by guns, I think the numbers reflect the total deaths by guns, is about the same.
With/out all the cherry picking.

blues

j

[freethefly 6]

I've long argued that gun ownership neither increase or decrease crime. I do argue that greater police presence and public relation is the leading factor for crime rate declines. I could argue that an increase in knife sales is the cause of any decline in violent crimes, but that would attract the same counter argument.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[kallend 2,230]

Without a proper epidemiological analysis correcting for confounding variables, these raw data by themselves show nothing whatsoever, either way.

Unfortunately, the best equipped epidemiological organization (the CDC) has been prevented from analysing anything gun related, thanks to the lobbying efforts of the NRA. Maybe the Harvard group will do a proper analysis.

Certainly an opinion piece in an ultra right wing site has no statistical validity.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

After several years averaging around 100 murders a year, San Francisco saw it drop to 45 last year, the lowest in 50 years. It's not like the city police/gov weren't trying for the past several years. I'm a bit puzzled that now they finally had success. Given the economy, you wouldn't expect big improvements.

[freethefly 6]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/12/30/MNIG1B1NGJ.DTL

Seems greater police presence works in the trouble areas. Yet, as someone in the article points out, police presence alone won't keep the numbers down.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Quote

The article is nothing more than word fluff and proves nothing other than more people bought guns.

But it does show that more guns does not equal more gun crime like some try to claim.

The FBI is one govt organization that is concerned about
crime and its causes. They blame it on criminals, not guns or gun control laws. They repeat that all the time.

In LA, there was a serious murder problem caused by
the gangs (organized criminals). The FBI addressed
the gang problem and the crime went down.

They plan to use the same approach in Chicago.

People ignore the FBI expertise and advice regularly to
tout their own agenda.

Oh, by the way, the TSA is going to stop airline bombings
by banning underwear.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/12/30/MNIG1B1NGJ.DTL

Seems greater police presence works in the trouble areas. Yet, as someone in the article points out, police presence alone won't keep the numbers down.

They tried police presence for the several years prior as well. ~5 years ago, the Mayor said he didn't deserve to keep his job if he couldn't get the numbers down. He couldn't. It's not so simple as telling people not to kill, and sending cops their way.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

I don't believe that more guns leads to less crime, nor do i believe less guns leads to less crime.
I do, however, firmly believe that the presence of guns changes the type of crime.
A simple assault can become a murder when the assailant chooses a gun instead of his fist.
Likewise, a rape and murder case can be prevented and turned to attempted rape when the intended victim is armed.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

The article is nothing more than word fluff and proves nothing other than more people bought guns.

...and that crime went down.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

I've long argued that gun ownership neither increase or decrease crime.

Historical data disagrees with you.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[kallend 2,230]

Quote

Quote

I've long argued that gun ownership neither increase or decrease crime.

Historical data disagrees with you.

Only if you have a very limited and selective view of history.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

After several years averaging around 100 murders a year, San Francisco saw it drop to 45 last year, the lowest in 50 years. It's not like the city police/gov weren't trying for the past several years. I'm a bit puzzled that now they finally had success. Given the economy, you wouldn't expect big improvements.

Could be the massive increase in entitlement programs, which typically require recipents to stay out of trouble with Johnny law to keep the money coming. Socialism at work - "be good little boys and girls and you get to keep your government check".

Personally I prefer to keep my money and protect myself.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[Ron 10]

Quote

Without a proper epidemiological analysis correcting for confounding variables, these raw data by themselves show nothing whatsoever, either way.

Then how can some claim increased guns equal increases in crime??? And why don't you say this to them?

Quote

Unfortunately, the best equipped epidemiological organization (the CDC) has been prevented from analysing anything gun related, thanks to the lobbying efforts of the NRA.

And the most recent piece from the CDC showed ZERO correlation in gun laws and crime rates.

Also, the Brady group was pushing for the CDC report, right up until that report didn't say what they wanted it to say.

Also, the CDC is centers for DISEASE control. Crime is not a disease. The FBI does studies about CRIME and most of their studies support my position more than your position.

Quote

Maybe the Harvard group will do a proper analysis.

Maybe....

Quote

Certainly an opinion piece in an ultra right wing site has no statistical validity.

When did the FBI become "an ultra right wing site"??????

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Certainly an opinion piece in an ultra right wing site has no statistical validity.

When did the FBI become "an ultra right wing site"??????

ANYTHING that mentions guns in a favorable aspect is 'ultra-right wing', didn't you know?

FBI gets special mention because they keep listing DC as a *state*, and kallend says that's WRONG.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[quade 4]

Quote

FBI gets special mention because they keep listing DC as a *state*, and kallend says that's WRONG.

Well, Washington DC isn't a state and never has been. It's a federal district as authorized by Article One of the US Constitution.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution

Anyone claiming it is a state is simply wrong.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

FBI gets special mention because they keep listing DC as a *state*, and kallend says that's WRONG.

Well, Washington DC isn't a state and never has been. It's a federal district as authorized by Article One of the US Constitution.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution

Anyone claiming it is a state is simply wrong.

Allow me to be more clear, then:

Substitute "keep listing DC crime stats along with those of the states", for "keep listing DC as a *state*"

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[freethefly 6]

Quote

Then how can some claim increased guns equal increases in crime???

They can't. There is absolutely no proof. Any rise or fall in crime rate is merely coincidental in relation to any given number of guns in any particular area. Crime rates rise and fall continuously and have so throughout the entire history of the gun debate.
With the extremely high number of people who own guns (myself being one of them), why is there still a somewhat high number of crimes if any crime at all? Again with the number of guns, why isn't there an astronomical number of crimes? Neither argument adds up. Neither side can say they are right.

Quote

Also, the CDC is centers for DISEASE control. Crime is not a disease. The FBI does studies about CRIME and most of their studies support my position more than your position.

Actually, the CDC does conduct studies on violence, criminal behavior, motor vehicle safety, brain injury... they do a lot of studies on things besides disease. Visit there website.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[kallend 2,230]

Quote

Quote

Without a proper epidemiological analysis correcting for confounding variables, these raw data by themselves show nothing whatsoever, either way.

Then how can some claim increased guns equal increases in crime??? And why don't you say this to them?

Quote

Unfortunately, the best equipped epidemiological organization (the CDC) has been prevented from analysing anything gun related, thanks to the lobbying efforts of the NRA.

And the most recent piece from the CDC showed ZERO correlation in gun laws and crime rates.

Seems to contradict the thread title.

Quote

Quote

Certainly an opinion piece in an ultra right wing site has no statistical validity.

When did the FBI become "an ultra right wing site"??????

Americanthinker.com is not the FBI, Ron.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.