Quote:
|
Originally Posted by IdahoDoug
Fred,
To get an impartial and statistically valid picture of the impact the presence of lawfully owned guns has on crime, purchase a book I've previously recommended on threads you've been on. It is called "More Guns, Less Crime" and analyzes the US's crime statistics and gun ownership and carry rules county by county. It was written by an economist, and in the process of researching it, he inadvertently uncovers gross fraud by government keepers (read Liberal anti-gun types) who intentionally used improper sampling techniques and other creative math to swamp us with anti gun results. It's quite convincing, and while somewhat dry is interesting to someone looking for the cold facts on this volatile issue. Since its publication, there have been zero "studies released" by the Libs on this topic because now they have a high profile watchdog who'll expose them on the news the next night. Boo hoo - game over....
DougM
|
Yeah, I'm sure a good statistician can prove about anything.
But I'm simply not convinced one is affected by the other.
I simply am skeptical of *anyone* who claims they can prove that "more guns = less crime," just as I am of anyone who claims that "less guns = less crime."
Neither statement meshes with my observations in various places in the world.
Like I said, there are countries where guns are illegal with very low crime rates, and there are ones with very high crime rates. There are places where they're legal that have very low crime rates, and there are places that have high crime rates.
The problem isn't guns. Guns don't cause crime. (I think we agree on that, no?) But likewise, I don't think they prevent crime, either. If we assume that guns do not influence crime, then we see that something else must be at work.
If a=a and b=b in both Denmark and the United States, then why does a + b = 1 in the US and a+b=2 in Denmark? Cause there's more than just a "+" between them, there's something that's being left out either willfully or out of ignorance.
I submit that guns and crime are two seperate variables that are not related directly, but can possibly be connected via other variables in between. My guess is that crime is caused by criminals, and to understand why there are criminals in any society, you have to dig deeper in that country's social fabric and uncover exactly what causes crime. I'd say that "availability of guns" has little to do with the causations of criminal activity.
Why is Milwaukee a bad town to walk around in the night time, whereas Helsinki, a city of roughly the same size when you count suburbs, is considered extremely safe? Gun ownership is legal and common in both, so I don't think that's the answer. In contrast, why does Washington D.C., where guns are illegal, have a very high crime rate, yet Vienna, which has very low rates of gun ownership (though it is legal but very strictly controlled) has a very low crime rate?
The problem is, when searching for data, because it is such a hot-button issue, we're forced to wade through bad science/bad statistics put forth by both sides of the issue. Thus, it's very difficult to find studies conducted with high levels of discipline and objectivity on which to base any truly intelligent conclusions.
Fred