Limiting Gun Ownership to Registered Gun Clubs

[Monash]

Omon, the problem is you need data. The fact that there are more guns in the USA and less apparent crime does nor exclude other causes for the decline in crime rates. There are a series of false assumptions that can be made when analyzing statistical information. One I vaguely remember from my class in statistics at University (Minskaya help please!) related to false conclusions drawn from unrelated measurements. The example the lecturer gave I think was a comparison of statistics regarding the height of the Archbishop of Canterbury's Mitre (hat) and another unrelated statistic - something like death global death rates due to war or some such. The point was that if you plotted the two statistics on a graph you would see an apparent correlation. As the height of the bishops hat increased so did deaths due to war. The 'obvious' conclusion to be drawn from this was that you could reduce global death rates or whatever by making the Bishop wear shorter hats!

Obviously the two sets of statistics were entirely unrelated. Now I am not suggesting that this is the case in the present discussion. What I am saying is that before you can say X has deceased because Y has increased you need to be very confident that the two trends are strongly correlated which is not the case here since we don't as far as I am aware have the evidence/data to confirm it. The number of guns in the USA may be a factor in the reduction in crime, it may not but even if this assumption is correct it is unlikely in the extreme to be the only factor in play. Indeed until the hypothesis is tested/researched it has to be accepted that it might not be a factor at all, however unlikely this is in reality. Just saying something is true doesn't always make it so.

My point is we simply don't know how big a factor firearms are in crime reduction. I might add that even if it is the case in the US WAB is global forum and statistics and trends need to be measured in a global perspective. Even if it was proved that more guns = less crime in the US it does not automatically follow that this is the case in a globally. The world is not the USA and USA is not the world - there are a host of different factors/influences to be considered.

[omon]

Omon, the problem is you need data. .

There is no problem, we have plenty of real world data, but you looking for studies, that either biased (they always are), or simply do not exist, and no one is conducting them.
while real world hard numbers are ignored.

i see all i need to see, guns do save lives and prevent crimes. that is a fact. you can't deny it, and that is all i need to know, just ask anyone that has protected themselves, and alive\unharmed today, because of it. we have hard data of every reported event.
this is what you need to look at, not some mythical\none existent study.

but if you are into studies, and numbers, there is no study exsists that concludes, guns kill. is there???

[omon]

The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia's ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes.

The city's population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996 (latest available estimate). Yet there have been only three murders: two with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997). After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982.
And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998.

With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn't. The fact is I can't remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you?

The reason is obvious. Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms actually improves safety and security. This is not the message that the media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are the cause of violence.

Gun Ownership Mandatory In Kennesaw, Georgia --- Crime Rate Plummets.

does that prove guns in right hands make streets safer??? it sure does to me.

but wait, there is more.

'I didn't have time to get scared': Surveillance camera captures the moment mother opens fire on home invaders with assault rifle.

i wonder does she need a study to tell her that she just saved her and kids life with her gun???

[Monash]

The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia's ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes.

Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms actually improves safety and se[/B]curity. This is not the message that the media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are the cause of violence.

Omon, Referring to my previous posts, one outlier or data point does not a a causal trend make. Kennesaw has a population of about 30,000 people the US has a population of more than more than 300 million. This is simply not a statistically reliable sample when discussing in the issue at a national, not to mention global level. The same would be the case if I chose another part of the US, say East or West Detroit and said "look that's what happens when civilians have access to firearms!". Apart from being disingenuous I would also be wrong. There are a number of reason why crime rates including violent crime can vary from city to city or region to region. In addition it also follows that what might have worked in one situation (Kennesaw) doesn't necessarily have to work in another - say New York City. There are a host of factors such as income distribution, social cohesiveness and proximity to other population centers etc at play.

Even if we accept as fact the idea that the low crime rate in Kennesaw is due partly or even wholly to their mandatory firearm laws it doesn't follow that this effect will remain constant over time. A well observed phenomenon in nature and human behavior/economics relates to how people (including criminals) react to changed conditions. I can't recall the exact term at the moment but I can give an example and you can probably think of some yourself.

At the moment Kennesaw (K) is somewhat distinct from surrounding towns in the Greater Atlanta area (I'm sure others have adopted or are at least considering similar laws). This provides K with a 'competitive advantage' for want of a better term over it's neighbors i.e. as a criminal and being aware from news reports/word of mouth etc that every home in K has a gun I can choose to minimize my personal risk by simply avoiding K and choosing another town/community as a target for my crimes. Now assume most if not all other local townships follow K's example. As they do K's competitive advantage diminishes and so does the deterrent effect. As 'soft' targets disappear my only choices become (A) accept the risks and do what I can to counter them, e.g. change my M.O. /arm up to match etc. or (B) give up crime (there is a reason the words 'habitual' and 'criminal' get linked together so often). After a certain point up-arming by the communities becomes a zero sum game, the deterrent effect diminishes and differences in crime rates also start to diminish as well. (Not saying this is guaranteed to be the case here just that this is a well observed phenomenon which takes time to become apparent.)


Another classic example are engine immobilisers/vehicle security systems. When they first came out they were only fitted to high end products so for most street level crooks they easy to avoid. As they started to become standard features in all new cars however this was no longer an option so the criminals 'adapted, improvised and overcame' Can't break in - then car jack, steal the keys from the home or office or drive off while the vehicle is unattended. (Car theft is still trending down though.)

What is needed is serious long term study. Until that is done the "more guns = less crime" argument cannot be sustained (or refuted). I am however doubtful that any correlation between the two trends will ever be proved to be strictly linear i.e. the number of guns in a community will never prove to be the only influencing factor, perhaps not even the major one. So the claim we have been discussing here remains unproven at this point in time and shouldn't simply be take as fact, at least not just yet. Crime stats, cause and effects etc are a really complex area of analysis.

Cheers

[Gun Grape]

Omon

Thats not really a good argument to make. I know you are just repeating it.

Kennesaw passed their mandatory gun ownership law in response to Morton Grove passing their city gun ban.

A fair assessment of of More guns = Less crime would be to see how these two cities did. Both cities have about the same population

Morton Grove, IL Crime Rate Indexes - CLRSearch

Kennesaw, GA Crime Rate Indexes - CLRSearch

In the index the US average for each crime is 100. A lower number means less crime. This is from 2010

Overall Risk

Kennesaw 56
Morton Grove 35

The only crime that is lower in Kennisaw is Larceny and Assault.

When it comes to Murder, Rape, Robbery, Burglary and auto theft, the city that banned guns has a lower risk factor that the one that made them mandatory.

Both cities are below the US average.

Using this reference they average out for the years that data is available for both cities.

Kennisaw had a lower overall crime rate in 2000/01/02 and 2011
Morton Grove had a lower rate in 2003/04/05/2012

Crime rate in Kennesaw, Georgia (GA): murders, rapes, robberies, assaults, burglaries, thefts, auto thefts, arson, law enforcement employees, police officers statistics

Crime rate in Morton Grove, Illinois (IL): murders, rapes, robberies, assaults, burglaries, thefts, auto thefts, arson, law enforcement employees, police officers statistics

Maybe the reason behind the lower than US average crime rates in BOTH cities is because of factors other than gun ownership?