Gun statistics

[Pathfinder]

One of the key issues is that the states that might have the best records - like CA, MA, IL - are also the ones with the most restrictive anti-gun ownership laws.

IL for example has their infamous FOID card - you are not even allowed to handle ammunition, let alone a firearm, without one. Every commercial sale has to go through the State Patrol. So a query to them might shake some data loose. Even if it does, the restrictiveness of the laws, such as in Cook County, will skew your results. And it's been too many years since I had to do a school paper to remember how to address such skewing.

Have you looked at John Lott's books ""More Guns, Less Crime" and "The Bias Against Guns"?

Another issue is that records such as the ones you are seeking are quite properly not kept except in states such as the above. Just like records as to where I go to church are not kept (hopefully), nor my letters to the editor.

Good luck, and welcome to the site.

[MikeBjerum]

tak,

Welcome to the forum.

 When I am looking at issues involving violence I have found it easier to look at the weapon as a tool and not the actual cause.  Looking at something specific, like a gun, knife or club, clouds the issue, and that narrow focus creates flawed data.  However, if you look at a broad picture of violent crime you will find data including demographics, geography and weapons used.  You can then work your way backwards through availability  and controls on said weapons.

Good luck on the paper!

[tombogan03884]

the only thing the stats community agrees on when it comes to gun stats is...

guns play no roll in crime stats.


so unless you  have a idiot for a professor, I'd strongly recomend changing subjects.

I disagree TAB, You and I have argued this, but aside from that, A proof that gun numbers play no role in crime stats STILL discredits the anti's theory that passing MORE useless laws on people who aren't criminals will have an effect on crime.
The only thing that will have an effect on crime rates is the meaningful punishment of violent offenders.

[TAB]

my point was, if you use cite bad numbers, it makes your paper look bad.


When it comes to writing papers its best to stay as far away from "hotly" debated subjects as you can.

oddly enough, they have found that even increasing punishment( IE time in jail/fines)  plays no roll in crime stats.

now granted if they were to increase capitol crimes, and right after the trial took them out back and put a 22 in thier head, we might see some change.   Time in jail does not deter crimals.( you and me maybe... then again, I've always said,lots of people are only alive as its illegal to kill them.)

[tombogan03884]

Time in jail does not deter crimals.


Maybe not, but it spaces them out further and reduces the ratio of crimes per BG
Remember when they had that spate of Cop killings in Philly ? The one who jumped in the river had ALREADY served a prison term for shooting a young girl, he got 9 years, for murder. What about those 2 women from the SLA Emily Harris and the other one, they were convicted of Kidnapping Patty Hearst, robbing banks and killing at least 1 cop, they did not serve 10 combined, both are out of jail NOW. That's BS.

[Sponsor]

[TAB]

one would think that, but as it turns out, that really plays no roll.

its like the tent city in AZ, one would think that would make it so you never wanted to come back, yet they have the same resitavism rate as the national average.

improvements in economic conditions is the only thing proven to lower crime.

now back to gun stats.  if you want to write a paper on them,

I would highly recomend you write about how inaccurate they are.

[Pathfinder]

one would think that, but as it turns out, that really plays no roll.

its like the tent city in AZ, one would think that would make it so you never wanted to come back, yet they have the same resitavism rate as the national average.

improvements in economic conditions is the only thing proven to lower crime.

now back to gun stats.  if you want to write a paper on them,

I would highly recomend you write about how inaccurate they are.

Off gun stats - this is something that is driving me nuts. OK, we're all a little dyslexic at times, fat-finger the keyboard, and I have personally asked people to stop me from posting at night when I'm tired (or in the morning, or. . .  nevermind) but this is driving me nuts.

A Roll is something you freakin' eat!

A Role is a part you play.

So, according to Tab (and he's wrong) guns play no role in dropping crime.

Sorry, my (now ex-) boss had this same problem, and was more than a little pissed at me for correcting him. As clips are Haz's white whale, this one is mine, all mine.

Back to the show already in progress . . . .

[Timothy]

How about "recidivism" and "recommend".....drive's me crazy as well.....especially from someone with an advanced degree!

I try my best but it's more from the speed at which I type that I make mistakes.  I will correct them when I see them though...

[Texas_Bryan]

How about "recidivism" and "recommend".....drive's me crazy as well.....especially from someone with an advanced degree!

I try my best but it's more from the speed at which I type that I make mistakes.  I will correct them when I see them though...

Way off topic, but, I'm from Texas, I ain't got to answer for my spelling.  'I'm about to misspell your face if you don't run along now.'  It's all good, but I'd recomend you watch your tone before your hospital resitavism rate doubles.

[fightingquaker13]

Off gun stats - this is something that is driving me nuts. OK, we're all a little dyslexic at times, fat-finger the keyboard, and I have personally asked people to stop me from posting at night when I'm tired (or in the morning, or. . .  nevermind) but this is driving me nuts.

A Roll is something you freakin' eat!

A Role is a part you play.

So, according to Tab (and he's wrong) guns play no role in dropping crime.

Sorry, my (now ex-) boss had this same problem, and was more than a little pissed at me for correcting him. As clips are Haz's white whale, this one is mine, all mine.

Back to the show already in progress . . . .

Ok, I will roll (not role) the dice and answer this. TAB is neither wrong, nor right. This means he is (probably?) right. If that sounds confusing, it was meant to be. The thing is, when you perform a single, or even multiple variable, regression analysis comparing crimes per hundred K to factors X, Y and Z its all pretty much noise, EXCEPT for unemployment. This isn't a head scratcher. People by and large comit crimes for money. If they have a job, they won't take on the risk of stealing your TV and taking it to a fence. If they don't have that job and don't have good morals, well......No crook ever thinks he is going to get caught. That's why they commit crimes in the first place. What TAB's point DOES show, conclusively, is that more guns does NOT equal more crimes. The biggest (and best) anti-CCW argument was that we would get a hoarde of Bronson wannabe's and Elmer Fudds. The fact that crime rates weren't changed by CCW permits showed two  things. They didn't prove CCW reduced crime. They DID prove that it didn't increase it. No rash of vigilantes, no epidmic of accidents. At worst it preserved the status quo. This is key. In a free society, we shouldn't have to ask the government for permission to do something with the burden of proof on us. They should have to tell us why we can't, with the burden of proof on them. The one thing the stats say is that we win that argument.
FQ13