Bob Costas; idiot, hack, fool, jerk, all of the above?

[markroxny]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Question: Why are there lower major crime rates in states that have concealed carry laws than those that don't?

Like Atlanta?
http://www.usacarry.com/georgia_conc...formation.html

http://www.atlnightspots.com/atlanta...es-in-america/

[CuteOldGuy]

Atlanta is a state? Good job, KarlMarxRoxny.

[markroxny]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Atlanta is a state? Good job, KarlMarxRoxny.

Ok, GEORGIA. Still blows your theory.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Question: Why are there lower major crime rates in states that have concealed carry laws than those that don't?

I thought that there were only 2 states that did not have concealed carry laws. Can you give us some statistics to back up your claims?

Here is a website that gives deaths by handgun per 100,000 people, by state. Feel free to use any other source if you so choose.

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri...te-per-100-000

[Whirlaway]

Note that Speed Racer's link includes suicides, homicides, self-defense, etc.

What percentage of deaths are suicides (a crime in many states) ? About half I think. And what percentage of suicides use a gun ?

No surprise Hawaii has the lowest suicide rate and Alaska one of the highest !!!!!!!!!!!

Useless data if you want to have a meaningful discussion on gun control.

[timpage]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Only in your world, Timmy, does defending the 2nd Amendment equate to defending murder. You are really reaching, there, dude.

Question: Why are there lower major crime rates in states that have concealed carry laws than those that don't?

Only in your world could anybody come up with that interpretation of my post.

Got any answers? Are you OK with 90 Americans dying from gunshot wounds every day? Is that a good thing?

And you're a fool if you think criminals forgo committing crimes because they are afraid the general population is armed. It's an absurd premise. I just know that all those rapists, burglars and robbers wake up every morning and think "Gee, I can't rape, burgle or rob anybody today because of the concealed carry laws." Ridiculous. Same as the argument that the death penalty has some deterrent effect. There are lots of reasons the crime rate has gone down, no serious criminologist believes concealed carry has anything to do with it. Save the Lott links....he's an NRA shill and a quack out to make money, nothing more.

[timpage]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Note that Speed Racer's link includes suicides, homicides, self-defense, etc.

What percentage of deaths are suicides (a crime in many states) ? About half I think. And what percentage of suicides use a gun ?

No surprise Hawaii has the lowest suicide rate and Alaska one of the highest !!!!!!!!!!!

Useless data if you want to have a meaningful discussion on gun control.

You want to have a "meaningful discussion on gun control"?!?!??

I don't believe I have every quoted Marshall/Choom before but.....

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.....HA HA HA HA HA....

You don't want to have a meaningful discussion on anything you pinhead. You want to spout slogans and speak in cliches. It's all your intellectually capable of....

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Note that Speed Racer's link includes suicides, homicides, self-defense, etc.

What percentage of deaths are suicides (a crime in many states) ? About half I think. And what percentage of suicides use a gun ?

No surprise Hawaii has the lowest suicide rate and Alaska one of the highest !!!!!!!!!!!

Useless data if you want to have a meaningful discussion on gun control.

In typical Whirlaway fashion, you have taken something out of a post that was hardly the theme of the post, and made a major issue out of it. The link was added as one source of data, and I clearly stated that COG or anyone else could cite another data source. It wasn't there to prove ANYTHING, one way or the other.

COG made a statement (Why are there lower major crime rates in states that have concealed carry laws than those that don't?) and I simply wanted to know where he got his information from.

How about this from

http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews...te%3A_findings

"Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).."

[tttalinky]

[Whirlaway]

You are the one who posted a link to a source that doesn't prove (or disprove) COG's statement......why did you post it ?

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

In typical Whirlaway fashion, you have taken something out of a post that was hardly the theme of the post, and made a major issue out of it. The link was added as one source of data, and I clearly stated that COG or anyone else could cite another data source. It wasn't there to prove ANYTHING, one way or the other.

COG made a statement (Why are there lower major crime rates in states that have concealed carry laws than those that don't?) and I simply wanted to know where he got his information from.

How about this from

http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews...te%3A_findings

"Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).."

[Whirlaway]

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.

Question: Your argument about criminals and deterrence doesn't tell the whole story. Don't statistics show that most people are killed by someone they know?

Lott: You are referring to the often-cited statistic that 58 percent of murder victims are killed by either relatives or acquaintances. However, what most people don't understand is that this "acquaintance murder" number also includes gang members killing other gang members, drug buyers killing drug pushers, cabdrivers killed by customers they picked up for the first time, prostitutes and their clients, and so on. "Acquaintance" covers a wide range of relationships. The vast majority of murders are not committed by previously law-abiding citizens. Ninety percent of adult murderers have had criminal records as adults.

Question: But how about children? In March of this year [1998] four children and a teacher were killed by two school boys in Jonesboro, Arkansas. Won't tragedies like this increase if more people are allowed to carry guns? Shouldn't this be taken into consideration before making gun ownership laws more lenient?

Lott: The horrific shooting in Arkansas occurred in one of the few places where having guns was already illegal. These laws risk creating situations in which the good guys cannot defend themselves from the bad ones. I have studied multiple victim public shootings in the United States from 1977 to 1995. These were incidents in which at least two or more people were killed and or injured in a public place; in order to focus on the type of shooting seen in Arkansas, shootings that were the byproduct of another crime, such as robbery, were excluded. The effect of "shall-issue" laws on these crimes has been dramatic. When states passed these laws, the number of multiple-victim shootings declined by 84 percent. Deaths from these shootings plummeted on average by 90 percent, and injuries by 82 percent.

For other types of crimes, I find that both children as well as adults are protected when law-abiding adults are allowed to carry concealed handguns.

Finally, after extensively studying the number of accidental shootings, there is no evidence that increasing the number of concealed handguns increases accidental shootings. We know that the type of person who obtains a permit is extremely law-abiding and possibly they are extremely careful in how they take care of their guns. The total number of accidental gun deaths each year is about 1,300 and each year such accidents take the lives of 200 children 14 years of age and under. However, these regrettable numbers of lives lost need to be put into some perspective with the other risks children face. Despite over 200 million guns owned by between 76 to 85 million people, the children killed is much smaller than the number lost through bicycle accidents, drowning, and fires. Children are 14.5 times more likely to die from car accidents than from accidents involving guns.

Question: Wouldn't allowing concealed weapons increase the incidents of citizens attacking each other in tense situations? For instance, sometimes in traffic jams or accidents people become very hostile—screaming and shoving at one another. If armed, might people shoot each other in the heat of the moment?

Lott: During state legislative hearings on concealed-handgun laws, possibly the most commonly raised concern involved fears that armed citizens would attack each other in the heat of the moment following car accidents. The evidence shows that such fears are unfounded. Despite millions of people licensed to carry concealed handguns and many states having these laws for decades, there has only been one case where a person with a permit used a gun after a traffic accident and even in that one case it was in self-defense.

Question: Violence is often directed at women. Won't more guns put more women at risk?

Lott: Murder rates decline when either more women or more men carry concealed handguns, but a gun represents a much larger change in a woman's ability to defend herself than it does for a man. An additional woman carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for women by about 3 to 4 times more than an additional man carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for men.

Question: Aren't you playing into people's fears and prejudices though? Don't politicians pass these shall-issue laws to mollify middle-class white suburbanites anxious about the encroachment of urban minority crime?

Lott: I won't speculate about motives, but the results tell a different story. High crime urban areas and neighborhoods with large minority populations have the greatest reductions in violent crime when citizens are legally allowed to carry concealed handguns.

Question: What about other countries? It's often argued that Britain, for instance, has a lower violent crime rate than the USA because guns are much harder to obtain and own.

Lott: The data analyzed in this book is from the USA. Many countries, such as Switzerland, New Zealand, Finland, and Israel have high gun-ownership rates and low crime rates, while other countries have low gun ownership rates and either low or high crime rates. It is difficult to obtain comparable data on crime rates both over time and across countries, and to control for all the other differences across the legal systems and cultures across countries. Even the cross country polling data on gun ownership is difficult to assess, because ownership is underreported in countries where gun ownership is illegal and the same polls are never used across countries.

Question: This is certainly controversial and there are certain to be counter-arguments from those who disagree with you. How will you respond to them?

Lott: Some people do use guns in horrible ways, but other people use guns to prevent horrible things from happening to them. The ultimate question that concerns us all is: Will allowing law-abiding citizens to own guns save lives? While there are many anecdotal stories illustrating both good and bad uses of guns, this question can only be answered by looking at data to find out what the net effect is.

All of chapter seven of the book is devoted to answering objections that people have raised to my analysis. There are of course strong feelings on both sides about the issue of gun ownership and gun control laws. The best we can do is to try to discover and understand the facts. If you agree, or especially if you disagree with my conclusions I hope you'll read the book carefully and develop an informed opinion.




Copyright notice: ©1998 by the University of Chicago. All rights reserved. This text may be used and shared in accordance with the fair-use provisions of U.S. copyright law, and it may be archived and redistributed in electronic form, provided that this entire notice, including copyright information, is carried and provided that the University of Chicago Press is notified and no fee is charged for access. Archiving, redistribution, or republication of this text on other terms, in any medium, requires the consent of both the author and the University of Chicago Press.<

John R. Lott, Jr.
More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws, Third Edition
© 1998, 2000, 332 pages
Paper $14.00 ISBN: 978-0-226-49364-0

For information on purchasing the book—from bookstores or here online—please go to the webpage for More Guns, Less Crime.

See also:

Our catalog of economics titles
Our catalog of law and legal studies titles
Other excerpts and online essays from University of Chicago Press titles
Sign up for e-mail notification of new books in this and other subjects

[markroxny]

Counterpoint:

Fact Check: Do concealed weapons lower crime rates?

"I don't know if you can contribute it all to conceal carry," Hilton said, but he insisted some part of that drop in crime is due to more responsible, armed citizens. More than 275,000 North Carolina residents hold active concealed weapons permits, a little less than three percent of the population.
"The tools that we have show a long-term, steady decline in violent crime and property crime both nationally," said James Brunet, an associate professor and crime expert at N.C. State's Department of Public Administration. "We really don't exactly know why. We've had so many different crime policies over the past 20 years which may have contributed to the drop, but we can't disentangle them."
Brunet said it's unlikely that any one policy is the "magic bullet" that has lowered crime.
"There's no firm, solid evidence that the growth in concealed weapons permits has contributed to a drop in crime rates," said James Alan Fox, a criminologist at Northeastern University in Boston.
Among the reasons most criminologists think crime is dropping, he said, are better policing strategies, an end to the crack cocaine epidemic and high rates of incarceration. Even the fact that more Americans have cameras in their phones, and are able to capture crime as it happens, may have contributed.
Fox notes that crime rates have dropped even in states like Massachusetts, which have very restrictive gun laws.
At least one academic has put forward the theory that a higher availability of guns lowers crime. John Lott, author of the book More Guns Less Crime is often cited by proponents of expanding concealed-carry laws.
But as PolitiFact noted when a claim by the head of the NRA that "violent crime in jurisdictions that recognize the Right to Carry is lower than in areas that prevent it," Lott's work is deemed flawed by many other academics. Fox called it "controversial" and said that it was not widely accepted.
And as PolitiFact also noted, a National Academies of Sciences report in 2005 said current crime data doesn't allow policymakers to draw a conclusion one way or the other.
"The evidence to date does not adequately indicate either the sign or the magnitude of a causal link between the passage of right-to-carry laws and crime rates," reads one conclusion in the report.


About the numbers, yes. Violent crime has dropped during the same time period North Carolina has allowed citizens to obtain concealed weapons permits. However, that drop in crime is part of a national trend, and there's not good evidence that expanding concealed weapons laws has contributed to that drop in crime.
Hilton adds one note. In 1995, he said, many worried out loud that offering concealed weapons permits would lead to a Wild West mentality and cause violent crime to go up.

http://www.wral.com/news/state/nccap...tory/11204311/

[CuteOldGuy]

Pretty weak defense, KarlMarxRoxny. A liberal professor from a liberal university? C'mon. You got nothin', do you?

[Whirlaway]

COSTAS: GUNS WOULDN'T HAVE STOPPED 'DARK KNIGHT RISES' MASSACRE.........

From Breitbart.com

Last night, Bob Costas offered a mealy-mouthed apology to anyone who misunderstood his now-infamous NFL-halftime anti-gun rant and then launched into yet another illogical and nonsensical assault against gun-ownership. The most outrageous and bizarre point he makes, though, involves his being thankful that no one in that Aurora movie theater was armed and able to defend themselves against a madman earlier this year..................

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journal...stake-Was-Time

[markroxny]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Pretty weak defense, KarlMarxRoxny. A liberal professor from a liberal university? C'mon. You got nothin', do you?

Fox is a criminologist, hardly nothing.

You are the one who can't back up your own assertions these days.

You are the one who's got nothing.