Looking for good arguments for a pro-gun society... difficult

[44 AMP]

I have yet to see any evidence that guns in the hands of private citizens has a positive effect on violent crime over all.

Kennesaw GA comes to mind. Not applicable to everywhere, of course, but look at what happened after they did what they did. They did have some crime, before, afterwards, it dropped to nearly zero across the board and completely zero in some categories. Not sure what has happened in the years since, but for a few years after they passed the "shall have a gun" law, crime there dropped dramatically.

The more I think on it, the more I realized that I don't really care much anymore about crime "overall", I care about crime on the personal level, in other words, what could happen to me, and mine. And on that level I ABSOLUTELY believe in the positive effect on crime of a gun in the hands of a private citizen (me!),

 

[rwilson452]

I seem to recall some time ago a gulf state LA I think was having a big problem with car jacking. They passed a law that basically said to was OK to shoot carjackers. Carjackings dropped to almost 0. In FL when they decided to recognize out of state CCW the problem of tourist getting carjacked or robbed dropped. You could tell the tourist by the rental car sticker on the car or the out of state plates. Both of these things happened so long ago I don't recall the numbers.

ADD:

As old Sam Clemens said, " There are three kinds of lies. lies, damn lies and statistics."

I don't put much faith in statistics especially when all you can get it the executive summary and they will not publish how they got there.

 

[armoredman]

...And, #2) they ought to go spend some time in a prison, (where there are no guns other than in the hands of the guards), and see how safe they feel there.

I work lock down, and wear a raid style stab vest plus face shield all day. The inventiveness of the human mind is full evident in how inmates make weapons. Plastic buckets can make a number of dandy shanks, and I saw a Mylanta bottle turned into a home made bomb. No guns inside the wire unless the wheels have come ALL the way off. This is why my tag line for years has been;
"If total government control equals safety, why are prisons so dangerous?"

 

[Spats McGee]

I have yet to see any evidence that guns in the hands of private citizens has a positive effect on violent crime over all.

The arguments for general gun ownership tend to be about individual action rather than social benefits.

Which doesn't bother me in the slightest. I don't carry a gun to improve crime rates. I carry one to protect my family.

This thread isn't focused on the US, but our Bill of Rights is all about protecting the individual. My daughter was horrified the first time I told her that it was the most undemocratic document ever drafted.

 

[zukiphile]

I have yet to see any evidence that guns in the hands of private citizens has a positive effect on violent crime over all.

The arguments for general gun ownership tend to be about individual action rather than social benefits.

Which doesn't bother me in the slightest. I don't carry a gun to improve crime rates. I carry one to protect my family.

Emphasis added.

It seems reasonable to exercise foresight about an act without regard to the motive for undertaking the act. The bolded part is your act.

How might your act change the behavior of others?

If you carry an arm concealed, and the other 19 people in a society of 20 don't, the benefit to you is direct, but some benefit may also accrue to the other 19. Someone seeking to use force against me may factor in the risk, a 5% chance of confronting someone armed, and amend his behavior. I'm a free rider in this scenario.

If the three of us are all part of a group of 20 who are prohibited from having arms, someone seeking to use force against me can factor in his own relative safety. There is no reason to believe this person so thoroughly irrational that he would disregard his own safety.

 

[Spats McGee]

^^^ Fair enough.

 

[spacemanspiff]

There is a lot of factors that get pulled into this type of a discussion. My opinion is that one factor rarely discussed holds more answers than everyone realizes. Apologies if its already been mentioned. I scanned thru the thread and did not see any similar ideas, but I also didnt read word for word.

Here goes: Todays violent criminals are either more prevalent, or more prone to commit the violence. 25, 30 years ago, the experts advice to anyone victimized by these violent criminals was "Comply, give them what they want, do not resist or fight back."
And that advice likely was best, and victims probably did have a higher survival rate if they complied. But, WHY was compliance back then able to avert violence? My hypothesis is that those criminals feared the repercussions of getting caught, and sent to jail.
It has only taken a few decades of relaxing crime laws, fumbled investigations and lazy prosecutors, etc, etc for the criminal mentality to adapt. Realizing that the risk of getting caught and locked up for their crimes is low enough in this day and age to justify using violence even when their victims are complying.

I couldn't say what todays experts advice is, but I do not believe in absolute compliance with an armed criminal. If one can fight or resist, I think one should.
Resistance would be much more complicated and difficult if our society was entirely anti-gun.

 

[K_Mac]

It has only taken a few decades of relaxing crime laws, fumbled investigations and lazy prosecutors, etc, etc for the criminal mentality to adapt. Realizing that the risk of getting caught and locked up for their crimes is low enough in this day and age to justify using violence even when their victims are complying.

Yet we have more people in prison now than ever before, and more per capita than any other developed nation in the world. We imprison non-violent offenders who need treatment and mental health care and turn them into dangerous violent criminals. They and others are often as much victims of the violent culture they live in as the victims of violent crime. Our prisons are cesspools; overcrowded and dangerous where the administration and staff can do little other than try to maintain some sort of control without getting killed in the process.

We continue to see a general outcry for something to be done to stop the senseless violence. That something is almost always a cry for more gun control laws. What we need is for politicians and government to have the guts and will to enforce the laws already in place, and to honestly address the underlying issues.

 

[Rangerrich99]

Just came across an article from 2016 that speaks rather clearly to the issues in this thread. It’s at https://ijr.com/2016/01/510415-10-charts-that-put-obamas-gun-violence-town-hall-in-perspective/

Strong recommendation for taking a look, as it gives some very interesting global perspectives.

K Mac and Manta especially might find it useful.

pax

Thank you for the link, that was a very interesting read. If you don't mind, I plan on stealing it for future use.

 

[ReadyOnTheRight]

Murder isn't a new problem. It has been around a lot longer than firearms and governments have always been the greatest offenders.

johnwilliamson062 - great quote.

 

[ReadyOnTheRight]

Which doesn't bother me in the slightest. I don't carry a gun to improve crime rates. I carry one to protect my family.

This thread isn't focused on the US, but our Bill of Rights is all about protecting the individual. My daughter was horrified the first time I told her that it was the most undemocratic document ever drafted.

I have been away from this site way too long.

"...the most undemocratic document ever drafted...".

What a great description of individual rights codified.

 

[Buzzcook]

44 AMP, The Kennesaw experiment isn't quite the clear cut victory its proponents claim.
https://www.snopes.com/kennesaw-gun-law/

Mandatory gun ownership in Kennesaw was a knee jerk reaction to anti-gun laws in Morton Grove Ill. The laws were not enforce so that not one person was required in fact to own a firearm.
Crime was already very low in Kennesaw, it had zero murders the year before the law was enacted and four armed robberies.

Burglaries did decrease from 55 in in 1981 to 27 in 1982 and then 11 by 1985.
But crime across the state of Georgia was dropping at a similar rate. So correlation is not causation, but there is a stronger correlation between criminal trends in Kennesaw and those state wide than there is with Kennesaw's gun law.

Another place that mirrored Kennesaw's drop in crime rates was Morton Grove, Ill.
Morton Grove's gun law stayed in place till 2008 till it was repealed due to the cost of litigation. Here's crime data from before the law was repealed and after. There is no statistically meaningful change.
http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Morton-Grove-Illinois.html

 

[Buzzcook]

zukiphile: Herd immunity perhaps? The closer the carry rate gets to 100% the less likely that anyone gets robbed.

It sounds good but lets say instead of a gun you are carrying a lump of metal that has several hundred dollars in value and is easily converted into cash.
What is the risk reward for the scenario? If criminals are rational actors when it comes to avoiding armed confrontations, would they not also be equally rational when it comes to getting a greater reward? would they be more likely to avoid or develop tactics to lessen the risk of getting that valuable lump of metal?

 

[armoredman]

K_Mac, which ones of these qualify as non-violent to you?

https://corrections.az.gov/sites/default/files/REPORTS/CAG/2018/cagjan18.pdf


Really not trying to be snarky, but I'm in the mix here, and honestly a number of SMI inmates are quite violent. The state currently classifies about 1/4 of the population as non-violent. I would hazard a guess that the citizens of my state might not be amused if we decided to let them all out the front door. Interestingly enough, we list more than 1/4 as requiring on going mental health treatment, and we do provide it 24/7, in some places.
You ask us to enforce the laws - we do, and this requires prisons. I would love to see a return to quality state mental institutions, with GOOD oversight this time to avoid the issues of the 60s and 70s that caused them to turn loose patients on the streets, sometimes turning to crime to live, but that would require some work on federal and state level. This would help - removing the criminal alien population would cut almost 10% of our population right off the top. Build the wall.
BTW, have you been in a prison? If not, I would ask you look into taking a tour of a facility near you.
Note, I am not disagreeing with you completely, but saying the solution to overcrowding is not as easy as it sounds. Interestingly enough, we aren't overcrowded, under capacity, and we released more inmates than we took in last month. Just sayin'.

 

[K_Mac]

Armoredman I have never been an inmate, but I have been in both state and federal facilities a number of times and have a couple of friends who have been correctional officers and medical staff for many years.

I am not suggesting turning loose all nonviolent prisoners. I am suggesting that we are locking up the wrong ones many times. We lock up drug offenders and abused and troubled youths and release violent cons.

If your facility is not overcrowded you are very lucky compared to anything in my part of the world.

As I said this will require government to address the underlying problems. I'm not attacking you and the men and women who put their lives on the line daily to serve in prisons. That does not mean that what we are doing is working though. The care given and conditions in the state and federal institutions all over our country should be an embarrassment to all thinking people. They are not correctional facilities, but holding pens. There are many who think that is good enough, but it creates a police state that is dangerous for all of us, especially the poor and marginalized. Taking our guns and locking up ever larger numbers of citizens is not going to stop the prevailing violence.

 

[zukiphile]

zukiphile: Herd immunity perhaps? The closer the carry rate gets to 100% the less likely that anyone gets robbed.

It sounds good but lets say instead of a gun you are carrying a lump of metal that has several hundred dollars in value and is easily converted into cash.
What is the risk reward for the scenario?

If the lump isn't a weapon, I would think the target would become more attractive. The effect would be something like just stepping away from an ATM.

If the lump is a weapon, we might get some insight into how enticing the prospect of stealing someone's weapon will be by examining the rate at which open carriers have their weapons stolen off their person. I haven't any stats on it, but pistols being taken by force from mall cops, armoured car staff and LEOs for later sale doesn't seem to an occurrence I can recall. I'm sure it has happened.

If someone wanted $100, there seem to be easier and safer ways to get it that to confront an armed person. Almost any other transaction seems safer. People do steal police cars, but that is generally when there isn't a PO in it.

If criminals are rational actors when it comes to avoiding armed confrontations, would they not also be equally rational when it comes to getting a greater reward? would they be more likely to avoid or develop tactics to lessen the risk of getting that valuable lump of metal?

Yes. Robbing a gun store might involve less risk.

A rational actor looking for value won't restrict the scope of his search to firearms being carried. Parked cars have historically been low hanging fruit. Unoccupied homes offer a lot of opportunity.

The rational avoidance of lethal risk may explain the frequency of sales scams. If you can get value from people with a lie rather than a physical confrontation you may lose, why risk the confrontation? It's a potentially career ending variable.

 

[Buzzcook]

zukiphile: I did a quick google and couldn't find stats on gun thefts from concealed carriers, or police. There are of course lots of articles on gun theft and it seems that many of the gun stolen are taken from cars.

Before I go on I should say I don't think we will find many rational actors among the criminals that are will to confront possible armed citizens.
Mainly because it is easier and safer to earn one hundred dollars working ~10 hours at a fast food restaurant.

But even if we were to look for stats, our first road block would be the gun owners. According to this article gun thefts from private individuals are under reported.
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/guns-crime/reports/2017/07/25/436533/stolen-guns-america/

Individual gun owners are also targets for thieves. It is difficult to ascertain the exact number of guns that are stolen from individuals in the United States because many of these thefts are not reported to law enforcement. However, estimates from a number of survey studies indicate that roughly 200,000 to 400,000 guns are stolen from individuals each year.

 

[Spats McGee]

zukiphile: . . . .Before I go on I should say I don't think we will find many rational actors among the criminals that are will to confront possible armed citizens.
Mainly because it is easier and safer to earn one hundred dollars working ~10 hours at a fast food restaurant. . . . .

I'm not sure what line if work you're in Buzzcook, but I'll say this: Working fast food may be safer, but you'd be surprised at how fast a lot of the defendants on my docket make bail.

. . . .But even if we were to look for stats, our first road block would be the gun owners. According to this article gun thefts from private individuals are under reported.
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/guns-crime/reports/2017/07/25/436533/stolen-guns-america/

I don't know anything about americanprogress.org, but I took a look at a few of their articles. I'd be pretty cautious about citing them as a source. They have an entire section on "Gun Violence," and do not seem hesitant to use the Violence Policy Center, The Trace, or Everytown for Gun Safety as sources.

 

[zukiphile]

zukiphile: I did a quick google and couldn't find stats on gun thefts from concealed carriers, or police. There are of course lots of articles on gun theft and it seems that many of the gun stolen are taken from cars.

I wouldn't be surprised. There's a reason so many parking garages warn customers not to leave valuable in their cars.

Before I go on I should say I don't think we will find many rational actors among the criminals that are will to confront possible armed citizens.

I agree, and would add that even people who do bad or foolish things can operate rationally. Recreational arson isn't itself rational, but one could pursue the end in a rational manner. Theft, mugging, robbery etc can be pursued in a manner that is calculated in optimize return and minimize risk.

Rational actor analysis will run into limits. The fellow who beats to death the man he finds in bed with his wife is unlikely to be dissuaded by making homocide illegal, but for most transactions we can at least imagine why people pursue ends we want to prohibit and state appropriate disincentives.

But even if we were to look for stats, our first road block would be the gun owners. According to this article gun thefts from private individuals are under reported.
https://www.americanprogress.org/iss...-guns-america/

I am somewhat familiar with the source. It's an advocacy source. That doesn't mean it's information is wrong, but it does press a view.

I've little doubt that theft of many kinds aren't reported at 100% of their rate of occurrence. However that isn't an obstacle to opining reasonably on the social effects of concealed carry of arms in the general population.

Individual gun owners are also targets for thieves. It is difficult to ascertain the exact number of guns that are stolen from individuals in the United States because many of these thefts are not reported to law enforcement. However, estimates from a number of survey studies indicate that roughly 200,000 to 400,000 guns are stolen from individuals each year.

Note that this figure is an estimates of thievery in total from homes and cars as well, not taken off the person of a concealed carrier. Footnote 17 seems intentionally ambigious in that it cites to several different article for the same proposition, yet neither source actually supports the idea that it is the owners themselves who are targeted for theft. Instead they suggest that unsecured arms in cars and homes are the targets of theft.

When we are examining personal carry, that seems an important difference.

 

[Brit]

I worked as a Doorman (Bouncer) in Liverpool for 5 years. Four of them at the Cavern, of Beatles fame, from 1960 till 1964, and a year at the Blue Angel, a nightclub on Seal St.

Was stabbed twice at the Cavern (The Club was full of young girls!) was in lots of fights, we would start most of them, you tend to win the ones you do not wait to get hit before you get involved.

Lived in Toronto Canada for 32 years. Got involved with one fight (if you could call it that) a Large Irish man, wanted to dance with my Girlfriend, a very lovely Trinidadian. It was noisy, loud music.

The second time he approached our table, he had a bottle of beer in his right hand. So I could hear him better, I presume, he leaned his weight on the bottle, on the table and leaned over starting to speak.

I cupped the bottle, and pulled it towards me, he fell forward, my sharp quick headbutt (Liverpool kiss) sat him down on the floor.

Two of the bouncers, dragged him off, down the stairs. Came back to tell me he had caused trouble in there before.

I have a very good looking Wife, who some well dressed young man, who had just stepped into the elevator, in which only my Wife and I were the sole occupants of, stated he wanted a hug? She was at the buttons, I was standing back. He was in front of me, holding a Martini Glass, with a wee umbrella in it, half full. Or half empty?

Not sure if anyone here has seen the result of a glass in the face? I was born in a pub, I have.
When he lifted his foot, the left one, to go a hugging, I stepped under his left arm, and drove him into the wooden bar, on the back wall of the elevator.

When he opened his eyes, they were scrunched uptight! I informed him to keep away from my Wife. Must have hurt.

We left. I was carrying a Glock 19, and a Benchmade folder. Never thought of weapons, not required. We were attending a Firearms forum.

This was in Sept. 2004, Dayton Ohio.

Have not hit anyone since moving to Florida, in 13 years, carry a gun every day, have not shot anyone either, but there are many unsavoury people out there, I must say I have only met pleasant and polite ones in those 13 years.
Having the means of self-defence is a good thing. Having the skill to use it, that's good as well.