Chicago gun ban struck down! (Washington, Columbia: crime, purchase, taxes)

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

Nope. In shear numbers of murders, Chicago has been tops occasionally because New York and L.A. have lower crime rates. But "crime rates" are adjusted on a per capita basis, and Chicago has been nowhere near the top for decades.

It's wikipedia but the numbers are taken directly from the FBI. It shows Chicago is definately worse for crime than several cities with less restrictive laws (Louisville, KY, El Paso, TX, etc.). United States cities by crime rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 2010 Chicago is definately the "murder capitol" of the U.S. Murder is by far the worst crime.

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by brien51

Ahhh but it does:

"More Guns, Less Violent Crime", Professor John R. Lott, Jr.,




The Lott-Mustard Report John Lott and David Mustard, in connection with the University of Chicago Law School, examining crime statistics from 1977 to 1992 for all U.S. counties, concluded that the thirty-one states allowing their residents to carry concealed, had significant reductions in violent crime. Lott writes, "Our most conservative estimates show that by adopting shall-issue laws, states reduced murders by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%. If those states that did not permit concealed handguns in 1992 had permitted them back then, citizens might have been spared approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and 12,000 robberies. To put it even more simply criminals, we found, respond rationally to deterrence threats... While support for strict gun-control laws usually has been strongest in large cities, where crime rates are highest, that's precisely where right-to-carry laws have produced the largest drops in violent crimes."

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdgeff.html


Contrary to myth that using a gun in self-defense is more likely to result in injury or death to the victim or innocent bystanders and fail to successfully thwart the crime rather than the criminal, the evidence, as opposed to selective anecdotes, suggests the opposite. (Of course this doesn't mean that all people should have a gun, or a gun should be used in all life-threatening situations.)

If defensive gun use is common then many criminals should certainly have encountered armed resistance. Professors James D. Wright and Peter Rossi surveyed 2,000 felons incarcerated in state prisons across the United States. Wright and Rossi reported that 34% of the felons said they personally had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"; 69% said that they knew at least one other criminal who had also; 34% said that when thinking about committing a crime they either "often" or "regularly" worried that they "[m]ight get shot at by the victim"; and 57% agreed with the statement, "Most criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police." (James D. Wright & Peter H. Rossi, Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms [1986]. See Guns and Public Health: Epidemic of Violence or Pandemic of Propaganda? by Don B. Kates, et. al. Originally published as 61 Tenn. L. Rev. 513-596 [1994]).

These studies have all been refuted. You can cherry pick all you want, but the facts are that less restrictive gun rights have very little effect on crime. I also believe that gun control has little effect on crime, and that these laws are basically useless in a society where guns are readily available. They only work in Europe because they have successfully limted the supply of guns. Our laws have virtually no effect on supply.

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by arctichomesteader

It's wikipedia but the numbers are taken directly from the FBI. It shows Chicago is definately worse for crime than several cities with less restrictive laws (Louisville, KY, El Paso, TX, etc.). United States cities by crime rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 2010 Chicago is definately the "murder capitol" of the U.S. Murder is by far the worst crime.

And there are several cities with less restrictive gun laws with higher violent crime rates than Chicago. This proves nothing.

To me, the "murder capital" must have the highest murder rate. Chicago does not.

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by eevee

didn't DC repel its gun ban not too long ago? what affect did it have on their crime rates?

Nope.

Crime rates go up and down, and it's actually quite impossible to do a study where the statistical controls can prove cause and effect in this realm. Correlation can be proved, but not causation.

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by eevee

didn't DC repel its gun ban not too long ago? what affect did it have on their crime rates?

EDITORIAL: Learning from the D.C. handgun ban - Washington Times

The murder rate dropped 25 percent.

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by arctichomesteader

EDITORIAL: Learning from the D.C. handgun ban - Washington Times

The murder rate dropped 25 percent.

Correlation, not causation. The book Freakonomics does a good job of explaining this.

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

These studies have all been refuted. You can cherry pick all you want, but the facts are that less restrictive gun rights have very little effect on crime. I also believe that gun control has little effect on crime, and that these laws are basically useless in a society where guns are readily available. They only work in Europe because they have successfully limted the supply of guns. Our laws have virtually no effect on supply.

Can you provide links to studies refuting these studies?

[eevee]

Originally Posted by arctichomesteader

EDITORIAL: Learning from the D.C. handgun ban - Washington Times

The murder rate dropped 25 percent.

not trusting that article. no real stats and nothing to state WHY the repel of the gun ban has dropped the crime rates. are more law-abiding citizens getting guns and shooting criminals? have criminals stated that they are more apprehensive to commit crimes due to the repealed gun ban? that's just another op-ed piece and can't be held as proof, IMO. DC's crime rate is still very, very high. IIRC, DC's top cop stated the repeal of the gun ban didn't change much (will have to track down that article)

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by eevee

not trusting that article. no real stats and nothing to state WHY the repel of the gun ban has dropped the crime rates. are more law-abiding citizens getting guns and shooting criminals? have criminals stated that they are more apprehensive to commit crimes due to the repealed gun ban? that's just another op-ed piece and can't be held as proof, IMO. DC's crime rate is still very, very high. IIRC, DC's top cop stated the repeal of the gun ban didn't change much (will have to track down that article)

DC's top cop is a gun control activist, take that opinion with a grain of salt.

[SAI126]

I have two good friends that saved themselves a beating or much worse by being armed. Neither one fired their weapon, just let it be known they were armed and prepared. Self preservation is the most basic of rights. Any government that denies this isn't worth a damn.