Why does more Guns = Less Crime ?

An interview with
John R. Lott, Jr.
author of More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws

Question: What does the title mean: More Guns, Less Crime?

John R. Lott, Jr.: States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest drops in violent crimes. Thirty-one states now have such laws—called “shall-issue” laws. These laws allow adults the right to carry concealed handguns if they do not have a criminal record or a history of significant mental illness.

Question: It just seems to defy common sense that crimes likely to involve guns would be reduced by allowing more people to carry guns. How do you explain the results?

Lott: Criminals are deterred by higher penalties. Just as higher arrest and conviction rates deter crime, so does the risk that someone committing a crime will confront someone able to defend him or herself. There is a strong negative relationship between the number of law-abiding citizens with permits and the crime rate—as more people obtain permits there is a greater decline in violent crime rates. For each additional year that a concealed handgun law is in effect the murder rate declines by 3 percent, rape by 2 percent, and robberies by over 2 percent.

Concealed handgun laws reduce violent crime for two reasons. First, they reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves.

Question: What is the basis for these numbers?

Lott: The analysis is based on data for all 3,054 counties in the United States during 18 years from 1977 to 1994.

rest of interview here...
www.press.uchicago.edu...

Why do more guns = less crime ?

Because the 'solution' to 'bad' people with guns.

IS ALWAYS.

To call the 'good' guys with guns.

Because one bad guy with a gun beats twenty good guys with swords

To a further extent, it's basic laws of nature.
Predators always target the weaker prey. That prey which is less able to defend itself.

Taking it a little further, those who would commit such crimes can be seen as scavengers not predators. Scavengers don't target prey that have any means of defense, where as a predator will sometimes engage a target who can defend itself anyway. A scavenger will not.

It's a jungle out there...

neo96
Why do more guns = less crime ?

Because the 'solution' to 'bad' people with guns.

IS ALWAYS.

To call the 'good' guys with guns.

edit on 4-4-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

I agree Neo96,

But there is a baited hook inside the fleshy meat we are supposed to agree with. The opening post contains a classic false paradigm. The regulations that "shall issue" are weighted against criminal, and mental, but doesn't do what it should which is require a higher level of training to be in evidence. The criminal and mental checks act to suppress application of the "shall issue", but training ensures we turn the dangerous into the qualified.

Some friends are not really on our side.

The clue is when they are telling us
how others should live, and how
it is good for us.


Mike Grouchy

This is what people to remember:

anon72
This is what people to remember:

And the biggest wolf in this country ?

Is it's own government hiding in sheeps clothing.

reply to post by neo96


Perhaps, but they'll at least think twice when they come for me.

Once you are not feared as a man anymore, you are no longer a man......

anon72
reply to post by neo96

 

Perhaps, but they'll at least think twice when they come for me.

Once you are not feared as a man anymore, you are no longer a man......

The rest will just dial 9-1-1.

Ands wait for someone to come 'save' them.

reply to post by dashen


Oh not so.

I used to do italian renaissance fairs. And at those we did stage combat with swords. Living chess at Vizcaya in Miami FL.

About 6 guys in our group went dressed up for Halloween in full italian renaissance garb. Dublet, tights, cod piece, hats and swords.

As they were leaving Coconut Grove at 2am some guy pulls a gun on them by the parking lot. He says give me your money.

The guys all look at each other and draw swords.

One of my friends told the guy, "I've been shot and I've been stabbed. Being stabbed hurts worse. You might shoot one of us. But the rest are going to run you through if you shoot. And we'll wait till you bleed out before calling 911. Your call."

The guy dropped the gun and ran.

Thanks OP for this posting.. Very telling numbers. Why does crime go down when gun ownership go up? As the OP said, it's quite simple.... If the crook breakin into your house at 3 am thinks there's a chance you are armed, he may pass your home by for one that isn't. If he knows the populace is unarmed, you are at their whim. I have talked to quite a few people in areas where guns are basically outlawed, and while some are ok with it, I've heard time and again, how folks are being robbed at gunpoint, with no way to defend themselves. This wouldn't be so bad, but the crooks keep coming back, over and over, as they know these folks are unarmed.

I am also in agreement that gun training should be an ongoing thing. But it is the responsibility of the owner to obtain that training. With the ownership of such a weapon, comes a great responsibility, to yourself, your family, and your community. It would be a real shame if you owned a gun, didn't have training, and accidentally shot someone other than the crook you were aimin for. People call me pro-gun, but I'm rather pro-responsibility. Just my 2 cents.

reply to post by Taobender


It is so nice to have a proper discussion about 'why' as opposed to 'if' an armed populous decreases crime.

Might want to take Canada as an example...

Little to no guns, little to no gun violence... except by a few idiots, and cops...

Works for us... why not for the US as well?

I'd like to see his findings replicated.

I think you only have to look at cities with draconian gun laws... ie. Washington D.C., New York, Chicago and compare them with cities that allow concealed/open carry ie. Phoenix, Houston, even Seattle. Compare the rates of gun violence between the two and it is quite telling. Gun control turns citizens into victims. The deadliest shooting are always in "gun free zones", (Columbine, Sandy Hook, Ft. Hood) as the shooter has a reasonable assurance that no one will be shooting back...

Akragon
Might want to take Canada as an example...

Little to no guns, little to no gun violence... except by a few idiots, and cops...

Works for us... why not for the US as well?

To paraphrase, "the only people we have who are armed are idiots and cops".

madmac5150
I think you only have to look at cities with draconian gun laws... ie. Washington D.C., New York, Chicago and compare them with cities that allow concealed/open carry ie. Phoenix, Houston, even Seattle. Compare the rates of gun violence between the two and it is quite telling. Gun control turns citizens into victims. The deadliest shooting are always in "gun free zones", (Columbine, Sandy Hook, Ft. Hood) as the shooter has a reasonable assurance that no one will be shooting back...

Yep we really don't have to look at other countries like previously mentioned.

All we have to do is look at the 'gun free zones' right here in the US.

Let me explain it this way. One US state made guns legal to own and carry for pretty much everyone, and crime went way, WAY down.

The reason? Criminals are a bit more hesitant to rob that little old lady or that guy in the wheelchair-or mom with kids...when they know they all could be packing.

Too risky. A deterent. And its a major one. Death.

reply to post by Taobender


Why does this "rule" do not apply to European nations? When you take in US state-by-state it might be like that, if you take a look at the world-perspective, it is the opposite.

reply to post by Taobender


This is why: