Do more guns equal more crime? Prove it.

And that's why you'll always lose the argument. The theory leads to ambiguous conclusions. Everyone is in agreement, however, that there are multiple factors that impacting on crime. You'd only have a point if you were living in a fairy land where all these factors are constant.

Get back to me when you know how to construct a grown-up argument!

 

Stop your tantrums. You have nothing. You can not counter this. The data will have to speak and it speaks loudly.

If more guns = more crime then the US should be on the top of the list as far as crime rates go. It is not. Why do a study?

 

The problem is that you are not learning. You haven't appreciated the importance of isolating gun effects, despite that fact being awfully obvious! You're therefore reliant on bluster, repeated again and again. Its a little tedious. I'll set you a task: Refer to one recent empirical study that supports your argument. Until you do that you're on ignore (in the hope that I can enforce a rational change in your behaviour)

 

I am rational. I am educated and I have learned that economists are a problem. They feel the need to try and analyze things and make each item an independent variable. This is where they fail.

Economics is great at explaining why things are the way they are but when you move out of finance and start bringing social issues related to psychology to the front they fail.

Yes econ. is a social science but it is not an end all tell all. You refuse to accept the compiled data because it will not fit your narrow view.

 

Peer review has shown that Lott can renormalize a psi function and properly account for boundry conditions. Where as you don't seem to understand this important tool.

 

That socioeconomic factors affect crime ratios, is beyond logical dispute. Firearm security, education, and licencing is a given in any adult debate on the subject of violent crime, as is the simple fact that criminals will always arm themselves. Firearms can be 100% safe, but in the hands of an idiot, a firearm is a disaster waiting to happen, so is a hammer, a can of lawnmower fuel, etc. etc.

Common sense is too often lost amongst the available reams of statistics and swindle sheets. Emotive attitude can almost never be swayed by common sense. Firearms are a fact of life, Australian politics has in recent years, lost sight of that simple fact, tightened firearm laws, and in some areas, introduced laws repressive to responsible shooters with clean records. Conversly, although Australian laws have hardened toward responsible firearm owners, they remain patheticly soft on criminals. All they have effectively done, has been to nurture the firearm black market, which is flourishing.

 

But you do have a very high murder and non reportable crime rate and you also seem to be ignoring the fact that the US has been locking up offenders at the biggest rate in modern history. The problem is you are reaching a point where it is just not feasible to keep paying for and building more prisons, what then?

 

Look this is far out but it is related. Did you know that not less than 20% of the US prison population are not US citizens?

The US does lock up people that do not need locked up.

Now the rest of you post would be logical if you could tie guns to the crimes. You can not.

http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/America_s_One_Million_Nonviolent_Prisoners.pdf

Care to try again?

 

What some people lose sight of is the fact that freedom can sometimes be messy and produce outcomes that certain people don't like, like gun ownership and the possibility of someone getting hurt from one of them. So as those with entirely good intentions try to manage freedom find they become the enemy of freedom through law. Enter totalitarian democracy.

 

This is just your opinion though, isn't it? You're going to struggle to support it with evidence. First, you'll have to show that gun control has not had a positive effect on reducing homicide rates. Second, you'll have to show that government policy has actually increased crime rates (given your argument is essentially arguing that there is a deterioration in deterrence and therefore, as shown by criminology such as that provided Ehrlich). We've already seen that that the evidence suggests gun control measures have been successful. Moreover, we know that there isn't any evidence in support of a negative crime effect

 

You mean your point of view has been proven by that study that uses sales of "Guns&Ammo" as an indicator of gun ownership?

 

IO think that was one I linked for other reasons.

 

I don`t mean to give offence, but common sense must be the foundation stone of any mental process, if honest logic is the aim. I see, you are trying to get me on the back foot by giving me a list of jobs that take you into your comfort zone. As previously stated, statistics and swindle sheets can be used to avoid reality, but common sense won`t allow diversion from reality. A cherry picking approach to any issue is a self defeating mentality, the old ostrich with the head in the sand syndrome.

Any accident, or violent crime causing trauma or death, is always to be avoided, obviously. However, if reality is to prevail, we must recognise that a multitude of other means of violent acts and accidents, pale firearm misuse into insignificance. This isn`t to say that firearm misuse & ownership by inappropriate people shouldn`t be kept to a minimum, but paranioa isn`t constructive.

Here`s a job for you friend. Tell us how many people are killed by eating junk food per anum in your state.

 

I've referred to logic. If your opinion (and lets be honest here you're only pulling out the 'common sense' card as that's all you have) is correct then the evidence would show gun control necessarily has no positive effect on crime reduction (and we should actually see the reverse). The evidence doesn't show that. You might not like that, you may even whinge about that evidence, but we can't shy from the reality (even if dissonance relief demands it!)

 

What is your point Ian? How does this relate to the topic. More people are beaten to death than shot, especially in Australia, and definitely in the USA. What to you propose to do about that one? Cut off everyone`s hands & feet?

 

Nup, wrong again. In this country, it has become easier to buy black market firearms, than before the new laws. Anyone can obtain a black market pistol now, You don`t like the "common sense card" ? I have to wonder why that would be. Statistics can be found to support any argument, common sense deals strictly with reality.

 

Again with the lack of evidence! There is no such thing as perfect gun control. However, the evidence does show that it has worked in Australia. You may not like that but, forgive me here, 'tough'

Empirical studies apparently cannot be found to support your argument though!

 

Forget the emotive tactics, I`ve been a legal firearms owner for over 40 years, the restrictive laws don`t affect me personally, sorry. There is no such "evidence" to prove that the Australian laws have reduced violent crime. You may find selected, and misleading statistics and swindle sheets to support your agrument, but the reality is, you are barking up the wrong tree.

I may get back to you when time allows, and when you are prepared to discuss the issue on a more realistic basis. Meanwhile, if you wish to cherry pick until you have a bag of apples, you have my blessing.

 

Indeed, you should. Stick to trying to support your position with evidence.

I'll assume you won't (as I know you can't)

 

Unless you are capable of discussing the subject objectively and in it`s entirety, as opposed to selectively, and emotively, you won`t take your argument far.

 

He is incapable I am afraid. Unless there is a peer reviewed study that agrees with him then he is incapable of discussing anything.

 

The point is that crime has been trending down for a number of years in the US, this is indisputable. By the OPs logic this is because of increased gun ownership. I am saying it is because they are very good at incarcerating criminals for longer periods.

So? Firearms make it easier to kill people from a distance, are you arguing otherwise? Simply because there are a greater amount of deaths from other methods does not negate the fact that a greater prevalence of firearms within society leads to a greater homicide rate. Although our circumstances in Australia are vastly different to the US the basic premise remains the same. As an example you might or might not be aware we have a huge problem with blood feuding Aboriginal clans in Western Australia, we have huge riots happening between families almost every weekend with weapons involved, our prisons are over 50 percent Aboriginal. Can you imagine if we threw easy availibility of firearms into the mix? We only need to look to the US at the futility of going down this road, a society cannot just keep building bigger prisons. The one thing I admired about JWH was his stance on gun control, I am dissapointed at how in practise nothing really happened because we never got the uniform gun laws which were intended, the Americans often point to our violent crime statistics since the 90s to prove gun control doesnt work but what they are missing and what we know is that more people in Australia own guns than ever before. I see how in a previous post you stated you werent too keen on idiots owning firearms but the sad fact is that as far as handling firearms goes most of the population are idiots. I cant tell you how many people I have seen with years of firearm experience pointing their firearms at others in the form of a joke. You know , and sometimes these firearms are loaded, and these are professional people I am talking about. The average person can not be trusted to own a firearm, it is far too lethal an object to be entrusted to anyone except law enforcement and military, even then only because they are a necassary evil.

 

Only because we do not have the uniform gun laws that were proposed, it is now easier in some states to obtain a firearm legally.

 

Reiv, anything to you is nonsense if it disagrees with you.

 

Reiv, the thread is "Do more guns equal more CRIME""!!!! Crime, Reiv, CRIME not deaths, CRIME!!! Do you understand the word??? Here, this will be a good start for you;

Crime

1. an action or an instance of negligence that is deemed injurious to the public welfare or morals or to the interests of the state and that is legally prohibited.

2. criminal activity and those engaged in it: to fight crime.

3. the habitual or frequent commission of crimes: a life of crime.

4. any offense, serious wrongdoing, or sin.

5. a foolish, senseless, or shameful act: It's a crime to let that beautiful garden go to ruin.


And I will admit that the U.S. has more car thefts every years than any other country. Yes Sir, we sure do. But then we HAVE more cars than anyother country.

How about burglaries, Reiv?? Where does the U.S. stand there??? Number 14?? And where does Australia stand??? Number 2??? Now how can that be?? Australians don't have any guns so their crime rate should be WAYYYYYYY down.

I know, how about assults. Since the Americans are armed they HAVE to have more assults than other people, right? What does it mean that Australia has more than the U.S.??? Australias at numbe 6 while Armerica is at number 7, how can this be???

O.K., let's check and see where Australia stands on the issue of rapes. See, I told you, Australia is at number 43. And just where does America stand??? Number 57??? This can't be, America is armed, they HAVE to have more crime!!!