Harvard concludes gun bans are ineffective/useless
77 replies, posted
Not a news article per say. Thought I'd stoke the fire a bit with Obama's recent push.
It's a long read.
[url]http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf[/url]
[quote]This Article has reviewed a significant amount of evidence from a wide variety of international sources. Each individual portion of evidence is subject to cavil―at the very least the general objection that the persuasiveness of social scientific evidence cannot remotely approach the persuasiveness of conclusions in the physical sciences. Nevertheless, the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra. To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world.
Over a decade ago, Professor Brandon Centerwall of the University of Washington undertook an extensive, statistically sophisticated study comparing areas in the United States and Canada to determine whether Canada's more restrictive policies had better contained criminal violence. When he published his results it was with the admonition:
"If you are surprised by [our] finding[s], so [are we]. [We] did not begin this research with any intent to "exonerate" handguns, but there it is―a negative finding, to be sure, but a negative finding is nevertheless a positive contribution. It directs us where not to aim public health resources."[/quote]
this is most excellent.
I actually just saw a piece on Vice where they were talking about the Philippians. Gun violence is bad, but guns are legal. If they weren't, it wouldn't change a thing because they are already so saturated with guns that it's silly. Plus there are workshops dedicated to making guns.
I am almost sure this is the same case with America. Concluding bans, and restrictions would only make things more difficult, but far from impossible.
i feel it the same as the war on drugs. it's doing more harm then good. if people are truly committed to acquiring something, they will acquire it, and i think extremely strict regulations will do nothing but waste time and resources of everybody involved.
An old study, few months old. I've sourced it a few times in arguments here in the past already.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;40240423]An old study, few months old. I've sourced it a few times in arguments here in the past already.[/QUOTE]
Is it old? I thought it was brand new damnit.
Gun bans I imagine would be about as effective as the war on drugs. It would only service to fill the prisons and allow crime to get an even more upper hand.
Yet people will still argue that everything is wrong etc...
Sorry I wasn't specific
I mean about research done by Harvard, the police poll on gun bans, people in the hobby.
[QUOTE=Aman VII;40240433]Is it old? I thought it was brand new damnit.[/QUOTE]
It's from mid last year.
[QUOTE=Siminov;40240443]Yet people will still argue that everything is wrong etc...[/QUOTE]
It is, just banning things isn't the answer.
Our black market is too strong. Banning guns, or even only certain kinds off guns would only serve to strengthen it. Canada is a good country to compare the U.S. to because both countries are massive and impossible to secure. Comparing the U.S. to a country like the UK is beyond idiotic. All that a gun ban in the U.S. would accomplish would be increasing the prevalence of illegal automatic weapons.
its sort of hilarious how the usa is stuck so far in the gun zealot hole that they can't even get out of it by banning them
[QUOTE=Kinglah Crab;40240651]its sort of hilarious how the usa is stuck so far in the gun zealot hole that they can't even get out of it by banning them[/QUOTE]
You know the only thing this study has to do with America is that it was conducted there, right? This whole study is about Europe.
Can they let Governor Martin O'malley know this, because shit is about to get shittier in MD.
Gun laws worked in Australia? Sure there's ways of getting a firearm but its harder and very punishable
[QUOTE=Fourm Shark;40241062]"because guns r bad right guys? zing me lol"[/QUOTE]
No, because the rest of society can live their lives without guns just fine and we don't have 4 assault rifles and enough ammo to kill 30 men in our garage
How wonderful, its good that the USA Government is pursuing stricter gun control, NOT gun banning...
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;40242087]Gun laws worked in Australia? Sure there's ways of getting a firearm but its harder and very punishable[/QUOTE]
The point of legislation shouldn't be to reduce gun crime, but to reduce crime.
FP gun threads: Take a shot everytime someone mentions a black market without saying how this mystical force works
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;40242087]Gun laws worked in Australia? Sure there's ways of getting a firearm but its harder and very punishable[/QUOTE]
You can't compare two completely different countries and say that because one thing happens here, the same will happen in this other place. It's a complete logical fallacy.
Life's not that simple unfortunately.
How long until the Fracepunch armchair experts arrive?
So how come there are never any anti gun studies? I hate how the anti gun people dont post in this these threads, and never have evidence when they do.
And Sobotnik please dont post here, I find you as a poster overall entertaining but your gun posts are so bad and boring
[QUOTE=scout1;40243111]FP gun threads: Take a shot everytime someone mentions a black market without saying how this mystical force works[/QUOTE]
Ask the people in the drug subforum.
Saying 'Harvard concludes' is a ridiculous assertion, the university is not a homogeneous mass with distinct stances on certain issues, the view of some of its academics does not mean their is total agreement among its faculty
I don't believe the authors are even from Harvard, the article is simply published in the Law School's journal
so many people have jumped on the soccer mom bandwagon to ban guns. it's so stupid. They make it seem so much worse that a bunch of kids died. kids are humans, and humans die every day.
As if you can even ban guns in a country with more guns than people and even pretend to expect it to work.
[QUOTE=Aman VII;40240337]Not a news article per say. Thought I'd stoke the fire a bit with Obama's recent push.
It's a long read.
[url]http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf[/url][/QUOTE]
first off, neither of these people are harvard professors. this is not a harvard study. at all. it was published in the harvard law journal as a controversial article. both are cold war nutters that think that gun legislation is a soviet conspiracy.
additionally, they frequently point to the differences between the united kingdom and the united states in the 1990s citing that murder rates rose in england despite gun legislation where in the us it declined. they are ignoring the fact that american gun legislation intensified in the 1990s with the brady handgun violence prevention act and the assault weapons ban.
there's also a methodological fallacy that they're utilizing. they're saying that gun regulation doesn't lead to fewer deaths, but then he cites how state legislation regarding licenses and registration are occuring in that time period of the United States' falling murder rates.
if you also read the entire article they basically say a large portion of it is due to the prison industrial complex and that the drug war helped reduce crime. not guns.
they even keep pointing at luxembourg saying that it's got a higher murder rate than the united states. it doesn't. not even close. the united states has [I]twice the fucking homicide rate as luxembourg.[/I]
this whole article is full of holes.
[editline]11th April 2013[/editline]
if you actually meant to say that harvard concluded this in a study you were either being really stupid or really intentionally misleading. do not do either of those things again.
[QUOTE=deltasquid;40242127]No, because the rest of society can live their lives without guns just fine and we don't have 4 assault rifles and enough ammo to kill 30 men in our garage[/QUOTE]
No one in the country has four assault rifles and if they do then no laws are going to stop them
[QUOTE=BrickInHead;40245507]first off, neither of these people are harvard professors. this is not a harvard study. at all. it was published in the harvard law journal as a controversial article. both are cold war nutters that think that gun legislation is a soviet conspiracy.
additionally, they frequently point to the differences between the united kingdom and the united states in the 1990s citing that murder rates rose in england despite gun legislation where in the us it declined. they are ignoring the fact that american gun legislation intensified in the 1990s with the brady handgun violence prevention act and the assault weapons ban.
there's also a methodological fallacy that they're utilizing. they're saying that gun regulation doesn't lead to fewer deaths, but then he cites how state legislation regarding licenses and registration are occuring in that time period of the United States' falling murder rates.
if you also read the entire article they basically say a large portion of it is due to the prison industrial complex and that the drug war helped reduce crime. not guns.
they even keep pointing at luxembourg saying that it's got a higher murder rate than the united states. it doesn't. not even close. the united states has [I]twice the fucking homicide rate as luxembourg.[/I]
this whole article is full of holes.
[editline]11th April 2013[/editline]
if you actually meant to say that harvard concluded this in a study you were either being really stupid or really intentionally misleading. do not do either of those things again.[/QUOTE]
It was the end of the crack epidemic that lead to diminishing crime rates in the 90s (which was caused by inner city folks seeing the zombies that crack heads became) not gun laws.
[QUOTE=Appellation;40248235]It was the end of the crack epidemic that lead to diminishing crime rates in the 90s (which was caused by inner city folks seeing the zombies that crack heads became) not gun laws.[/QUOTE]
the crack epidemic went through the 90s... the rise in crime went through 95. even then, the point is that the increased focus on the punitive system is what drove down crime, not more guns.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.