Show where it has been suggested that the state of the economy actually has an influencing effect on the decisions of those who do not hold lawful means of employment.
Your post doesn't make much sense. Becker and co (and this is criminology that many of the pro gunners celebrate) treat crime like a standard cost-benefit analysis. Thus, as the quality of legitimate economic opportunities falls, it is more likely that criminal activity is the optimal outcome. They don't just use this for property crime. Its also used to try and understand all crimes, including murder (spawning a pro-capital punishment literature). Its used of course to support the 'more guns=less crime' hypothesis, arguing that deterrence effects are naturally created (inflaming costs from crime)
The above fails to account for the fact that not every act of criminal behavior can actually be attributed, either directly or indirectly, to monetary or economic motivating factors.
It amuses me that you're attacking the criminology used to support the pro-gunner position. However, happy to play devil's advocate. The deterrence approach is based on putting everything into monetary terms. They of course recognise that there are non-monetary reasons for crime (e.g. thrill factor). In terms of understanding how deterrence operates, they argue that these non-monetary reasons can be understand as 'psychic income'. Once everything is put in the same terms, they can do their cost-benefit analysis that suggests any increase in expected costs (through probability of punishment, through magnitude of punishment or through potentially being shot) will impact on the 'marginal' decision (i.e. there will be some who, although previously they would have found crime attractive, now find it irrational)
Could the deterrence effect not simply be attributed to criminal individuals recognizing that they no longer have a corner market on the use of deadly force in public, and simply not wanting to be killed by their potential victims?
I think you're only telling me that you don't understand deterrence theory. Strange really, given your ideological spunk should be deterrence whizz.
Sure, the detergents theory States criminals fear washing due to the danger of going down the drain.. They state criminals do not fear Deterrence or punishments for their crimes, not prison time, not capital punishment, criminals are fearless.
It amuses me when pro-gunners dismiss the criminology that supports their opinion. It tells me that their understanding is particularly suspect.
If I wish that I can fly, and I jump out a window, as my cousin once did, I will fall and break my legs as he did. You can read studies, yet I can account the many times a small concealable revolver saved my life. If I have used guns defensively successfully to save my Life, how is that "wishful thinking"?
Anyone interested in valuable comment will. Its a shame that you know so little about these issues when it comes to honest debate.
You can allege all you wish. As a Police Officer, we did not rely on published studies, we investigated crimes.
No. I welcomed your "you can read studies". I merely acknowledged that you have very little knowledge of the available research. That is a shame as I can't debate with you and assume that you have knowledge. You can put that right mind you.
Present a case and I can refute it. You quote inane lines such as Josh Sugar-Pants, a gun kept in the home is more likely to kill it's owner than to be used defensively, such a blanket statement is foolish unproved quackery.
You're not making sense. Analysis has to be quantitative, making your avoidance of the research more tut-worthy.
Source; Brady campaign (A biased sourse) Home» Risks of Having a Gun in the Home Risks of Having a Gun in the Home 208 PROBLEM: Keeping a gun in the home increases the risk of injury and death. Gun owners may overestimate the benefits of keeping a gun in the home and underestimate the risks. DID YOU KNOW? Where there are more guns, there are more gun deaths. Gun death rates are 7 times higher in the states with the highest compared with the lowest household gun ownership. (Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard Injury Control Research Center, 2009). An estimated 41% of gun-related homicides and 94% of gun-related suicides would not occur under the same circumstances had no guns been present (Wiebe, p. 780). Household gun ownership levels vary greatly by state, from 60 percent in Wyoming to 9 percent in Hawaii (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2001). DID YOU KNOW? Keeping a gun in the home raises the risk of homicide. States with the highest levels of gun ownership have 114 percent higher firearm homicide rates and 60 percent higher homicide rates than states with the lowest gun ownership (Miller, Hemenway, and Azrael, 2007, pp. 659, 660). The risk of homicide is three times higher in homes with firearms (Kellermann, 1993, p. 1084). Higher gun ownership puts both men and women at a higher risk for homicide, particularly gun homicide (Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard Injury Control Research Center, 2009). DID YOU KNOW? Keeping a gun in the home raises the risk of suicide. Keeping a firearm in the home increases the risk of suicide by a factor of 3 to 5 and increases the risk of suicide with a firearm by a factor of 17 (Kellermann, p. 467, p. Wiebe, p. 771). The association between firearm ownership and increased risk of suicide cannot be explained by a higher risk of psychiatric disorders in homes with guns (Miller, p. 183). DID YOU KNOW? A gun in the home is more likely to be used in a homicide, suicide, or unintentional shooting than to be used in self-defense. Every time a gun injures or kills in self-defense, it is used: 11 times for completed and attempted suicides (Kellermann, 1998, p. 263). 7 times in criminal assaults and homicides, and 4 times in unintentional shooting deaths or injuries.
Because it is biased It is biased due to a multitude of factors You might be talking to a man who claims he has to walk around with a earthing wire hanging from his backside because he has been struck by lightning so many times in his life. Then you find that his job is fixing power line in the Congo which has the highest lightning strike rate in the world Does your experience translate to mine where even as an ICU nurse with decades of experience I can count the number of gunshot victims I have cared for and not reach 20 Compare that to America So we take all of that out and look at published research THEN we have fun critiquing the research
I observed during my clinical rotations in Coney Island Hospital, Emergency, and Critical Care, the Patients admitted after being shot, Ghetto residents, some shot by the Police in commission of a crime, most shot by other criminals, some merely victims of crimes, a study based in theße statistics is inaccurate and does not represent the vast majority of law abiding citizens.
And I could not give any figure on how many patient charts I have inscribed, patient care reports on Ambulance all related to shooting victims. Patients I worked on after being shot.
