New gun study

[Brain357]

Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.



Guns Don t Deter Crime Study Finds

 

[Pogo]

When you live in gun culture, your culture will have guns.
Inevitably some will be used against that culture's population. There's no way around that.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.



Guns Don t Deter Crime Study Finds

New gun study...Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

 

[Esmeralda]

Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.



Guns Don t Deter Crime Study Finds

New gun study...Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

This is the abstract from the research. It seems pretty straightforward to me. They used statistics about events of firearm violence and rates of gun ownership in different regiions of the US. The areas with more gun ownership had higher levels of gun violence.

Why do you doubt what is fact supported by empirical evidence? I suspect the only reason you doubt it is that you don't want to accept it: very logical indeed.

Introduction
Although some view the ownership of firearms as a deterrent to crime, the relationship between population-level firearm ownership rates and violent criminal perpetration is unclear. The purpose of this study is to test the association between state-level firearm ownership and violent crime.

Methods
State-level rates of household firearm ownership and annual rates of criminal acts from 2001, 2002, and 2004 were analyzed in 2014. Firearm ownership rates were taken from a national survey and crime data were taken from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports. Rates of criminal behavior were estimated as a function of household gun ownership using negative binomial regression models, controlling for several demographic factors.

Results
Higher levels of firearm ownership were associated with higher levels of firearm assault and firearm robbery. There was also a significant association between firearm ownership and firearm homicide, as well as overall homicide.

Conclusions
The findings do not support the hypothesis that higher population firearm ownership rates reduce firearm-associated criminal perpetration. On the contrary, evidence shows that states with higher levels of firearm ownership have an increased risk for violent crimes perpetrated with a firearm. Public health stakeholders should consider the outcomes associated with private firearm ownership.

 

[Esmeralda]

Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.



Guns Don t Deter Crime Study Finds

New gun study...Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

Maybe you ought to read the study before you summarily dismiss it, or would that be against your illogical thinking?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.



Guns Don t Deter Crime Study Finds

New gun study...Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

This is the abstract from the research. It seems pretty straightforward to me. They used statistics about events of firearm violence and rates of gun ownership in different regiions of the US. The areas with more gun ownership had higher levels of gun violence.

Why do you doubt what is fact supported by empirical evidence? I suspect the only reason you doubt it is that you don't want to accept it: very logical indeed.

Introduction
Although some view the ownership of firearms as a deterrent to crime, the relationship between population-level firearm ownership rates and violent criminal perpetration is unclear. The purpose of this study is to test the association between state-level firearm ownership and violent crime.

Methods
State-level rates of household firearm ownership and annual rates of criminal acts from 2001, 2002, and 2004 were analyzed in 2014. Firearm ownership rates were taken from a national survey and crime data were taken from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports. Rates of criminal behavior were estimated as a function of household gun ownership using negative binomial regression models, controlling for several demographic factors.

Results
Higher levels of firearm ownership were associated with higher levels of firearm assault and firearm robbery. There was also a significant association between firearm ownership and firearm homicide, as well as overall homicide.

Conclusions
The findings do not support the hypothesis that higher population firearm ownership rates reduce firearm-associated criminal perpetration. On the contrary, evidence shows that states with higher levels of firearm ownership have an increased risk for violent crimes perpetrated with a firearm. Public health stakeholders should consider the outcomes associated with private firearm ownership.

Do the extra guns cause the extra crime, or do law abiding citizens own more guns because they live in areas with high crime?

You could look at Chicago during the period when legal gun ownership was outlawed.
Did the anti-gun legislation reduce gun crime or non-gun crime. Not so much.

 

[there4eyeM]

No one is as anti-firearms as 'gunners' are pro. It is a mystery what they fear so much. They have their guns, and no one is trying to take them away. What motivates such vociferous verbal aggression when they have what they want and no sign of losing it is on the horizon?

 

[Pogo]

Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.



Guns Don t Deter Crime Study Finds

New gun study...Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

This is the abstract from the research. It seems pretty straightforward to me. They used statistics about events of firearm violence and rates of gun ownership in different regiions of the US. The areas with more gun ownership had higher levels of gun violence.

Why do you doubt what is fact supported by empirical evidence? I suspect the only reason you doubt it is that you don't want to accept it: very logical indeed.

Introduction
Although some view the ownership of firearms as a deterrent to crime, the relationship between population-level firearm ownership rates and violent criminal perpetration is unclear. The purpose of this study is to test the association between state-level firearm ownership and violent crime.

Methods
State-level rates of household firearm ownership and annual rates of criminal acts from 2001, 2002, and 2004 were analyzed in 2014. Firearm ownership rates were taken from a national survey and crime data were taken from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports. Rates of criminal behavior were estimated as a function of household gun ownership using negative binomial regression models, controlling for several demographic factors.

Results
Higher levels of firearm ownership were associated with higher levels of firearm assault and firearm robbery. There was also a significant association between firearm ownership and firearm homicide, as well as overall homicide.

Conclusions
The findings do not support the hypothesis that higher population firearm ownership rates reduce firearm-associated criminal perpetration. On the contrary, evidence shows that states with higher levels of firearm ownership have an increased risk for violent crimes perpetrated with a firearm. Public health stakeholders should consider the outcomes associated with private firearm ownership.

Do the extra guns cause the extra crime, or do law abiding citizens own more guns because they live in areas with high crime?

Classic chicken-egg question.
Actually both are caused by having the values of a gun culture and not doing anything about it.

You could look at Chicago during the period when legal gun ownership was outlawed.
Did the anti-gun legislation reduce gun crime or non-gun crime. Not so much.

You could look at that, but it's not the topic. The topic is "more guns", not "more legislation".

 

[there4eyeM]

What if trigger locks were required and misused firearms would be the responsibility of the owner? No 2nd problem and increased owner alertness.

 

[Brain357]

Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.



Guns Don t Deter Crime Study Finds

New gun study...Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

This is the abstract from the research. It seems pretty straightforward to me. They used statistics about events of firearm violence and rates of gun ownership in different regiions of the US. The areas with more gun ownership had higher levels of gun violence.

Why do you doubt what is fact supported by empirical evidence? I suspect the only reason you doubt it is that you don't want to accept it: very logical indeed.

Introduction
Although some view the ownership of firearms as a deterrent to crime, the relationship between population-level firearm ownership rates and violent criminal perpetration is unclear. The purpose of this study is to test the association between state-level firearm ownership and violent crime.

Methods
State-level rates of household firearm ownership and annual rates of criminal acts from 2001, 2002, and 2004 were analyzed in 2014. Firearm ownership rates were taken from a national survey and crime data were taken from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports. Rates of criminal behavior were estimated as a function of household gun ownership using negative binomial regression models, controlling for several demographic factors.

Results
Higher levels of firearm ownership were associated with higher levels of firearm assault and firearm robbery. There was also a significant association between firearm ownership and firearm homicide, as well as overall homicide.

Conclusions
The findings do not support the hypothesis that higher population firearm ownership rates reduce firearm-associated criminal perpetration. On the contrary, evidence shows that states with higher levels of firearm ownership have an increased risk for violent crimes perpetrated with a firearm. Public health stakeholders should consider the outcomes associated with private firearm ownership.

Do the extra guns cause the extra crime, or do law abiding citizens own more guns because they live in areas with high crime?

You could look at Chicago during the period when legal gun ownership was outlawed.
Did the anti-gun legislation reduce gun crime or non-gun crime. Not so much.

They found that gun ownership increased before crime. I think this study does more to show more guns does not equal less crime, than more guns equals more crime.

Pinpointing causation

The results do need to be interpreted with caution — this study method proves that more guns are linked to more gun crime and overall homicide, but not that access to guns directly causes this criminal uptick, said study researcher David Hemenway, the director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center.

"This study suggests that it's really hard to find evidence that where there are more guns, there are less crimes, but you can easily find evidence that where there are a lot more guns, there are a lot more gun crimes," Hemenway told Live Science.

It's possible that people stockpile guns in response to higher levels of crime. The researchers tried to tease out whether this was the case by testing whether gun ownership levels were a prerequisite for crime or a response to higher crime levels. Though they still couldn't prove causation, they did find that higher gun ownership levels preceded crime increases, not the other way around.

"It's difficult to imagine how the hypothesis that increased ownership reduces criminal behavior could be valid, given our findings," Monuteaux said.

 

[Missourian]

Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.



Guns Don t Deter Crime Study Finds

New gun study...Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

This is the abstract from the research. It seems pretty straightforward to me. They used statistics about events of firearm violence and rates of gun ownership in different regiions of the US. The areas with more gun ownership had higher levels of gun violence.

Why do you doubt what is fact supported by empirical evidence? I suspect the only reason you doubt it is that you don't want to accept it: very logical indeed.

Introduction
Although some view the ownership of firearms as a deterrent to crime, the relationship between population-level firearm ownership rates and violent criminal perpetration is unclear. The purpose of this study is to test the association between state-level firearm ownership and violent crime.

Methods
State-level rates of household firearm ownership and annual rates of criminal acts from 2001, 2002, and 2004 were analyzed in 2014. Firearm ownership rates were taken from a national survey and crime data were taken from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports. Rates of criminal behavior were estimated as a function of household gun ownership using negative binomial regression models, controlling for several demographic factors.

Results
Higher levels of firearm ownership were associated with higher levels of firearm assault and firearm robbery. There was also a significant association between firearm ownership and firearm homicide, as well as overall homicide.

Conclusions
The findings do not support the hypothesis that higher population firearm ownership rates reduce firearm-associated criminal perpetration. On the contrary, evidence shows that states with higher levels of firearm ownership have an increased risk for violent crimes perpetrated with a firearm. Public health stakeholders should consider the outcomes associated with private firearm ownership.

Do the extra guns cause the extra crime, or do law abiding citizens own more guns because they live in areas with high crime?

You could look at Chicago during the period when legal gun ownership was outlawed.
Did the anti-gun legislation reduce gun crime or non-gun crime. Not so much.

They found that gun ownership increased before crime. I think this study does more to show more guns does not equal less crime, than more guns equals more crime.

Pinpointing causation

The results do need to be interpreted with caution — this study method proves that more guns are linked to more gun crime and overall homicide, but not that access to guns directly causes this criminal uptick, said study researcher David Hemenway, the director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center.

"This study suggests that it's really hard to find evidence that where there are more guns, there are less crimes, but you can easily find evidence that where there are a lot more guns, there are a lot more gun crimes," Hemenway told Live Science.

It's possible that people stockpile guns in response to higher levels of crime. The researchers tried to tease out whether this was the case by testing whether gun ownership levels were a prerequisite for crime or a response to higher crime levels. Though they still couldn't prove causation, they did find that higher gun ownership levels preceded crime increases, not the other way around.

"It's difficult to imagine how the hypothesis that increased ownership reduces criminal behavior could be valid, given our findings," Monuteaux said.

Except they intentionally restricted the crime parameters. Not all violent crime...just the small subset that gives them the result they wanted.

How do I know?

Because there are many more guns, and much fewer violent crimes across the board.

And when we look at the smallest gun ownership per capita states:

And then look at the Homicide Rate:

​

And then compare to Homicide By Firearm:

​

You see that states like Maryland, California and Illinois have low firearm ownership rates and higher murder rates and higher murder rates by firearms...whereas West Virginia, North Dakota and Montana have very high firearm ownership and low murder rates with even lower murder rates by firearms.

Pretty much blows the whole "by state" statistical model to smithereens.

But what we do know without doubt is Gun Ownership is on the increase, and Violent Crime is on the decrease nationwide.

As conceal carry increased, and the population increased by 50 million people, all violent crime decreased...and in many categories the decrease has been almost 50%.

The graph won't fit the page...here is a thumbnail
of the FBI Graph:

​

Increased Conceal Carry:

​

These too are correlations...but pretty darned convincing correlations that More Guns = Less Crime.

 

[Missourian]

What if trigger locks were required and misused firearms would be the responsibility of the owner? No 2nd problem and increased owner alertness.

Had those CNN anchor/reporters had trigger locks on their guns, they would be dead...and criminals would have had two more firearms. The trigger locks would have ended up in a landfill.

 

[Missourian]

Nifty graph from Wikipedia.

Gun violence in the United States by state - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

If you go to Wikipedia, you can rearrange the columns by largest and smallest.

 

[westwall]

Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.



Guns Don t Deter Crime Study Finds

New gun study...Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

This is the abstract from the research. It seems pretty straightforward to me. They used statistics about events of firearm violence and rates of gun ownership in different regiions of the US. The areas with more gun ownership had higher levels of gun violence.

Why do you doubt what is fact supported by empirical evidence? I suspect the only reason you doubt it is that you don't want to accept it: very logical indeed.

Introduction
Although some view the ownership of firearms as a deterrent to crime, the relationship between population-level firearm ownership rates and violent criminal perpetration is unclear. The purpose of this study is to test the association between state-level firearm ownership and violent crime.

Methods
State-level rates of household firearm ownership and annual rates of criminal acts from 2001, 2002, and 2004 were analyzed in 2014. Firearm ownership rates were taken from a national survey and crime data were taken from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports. Rates of criminal behavior were estimated as a function of household gun ownership using negative binomial regression models, controlling for several demographic factors.

Results
Higher levels of firearm ownership were associated with higher levels of firearm assault and firearm robbery. There was also a significant association between firearm ownership and firearm homicide, as well as overall homicide.

Conclusions
The findings do not support the hypothesis that higher population firearm ownership rates reduce firearm-associated criminal perpetration. On the contrary, evidence shows that states with higher levels of firearm ownership have an increased risk for violent crimes perpetrated with a firearm. Public health stakeholders should consider the outcomes associated with private firearm ownership.

And yet, they make no mention of cities that have banned firearms ownership have significantly higher rates of gun crime and murders. How is that?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.



Guns Don t Deter Crime Study Finds

New gun study...Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

This is the abstract from the research. It seems pretty straightforward to me. They used statistics about events of firearm violence and rates of gun ownership in different regiions of the US. The areas with more gun ownership had higher levels of gun violence.

Why do you doubt what is fact supported by empirical evidence? I suspect the only reason you doubt it is that you don't want to accept it: very logical indeed.

Introduction
Although some view the ownership of firearms as a deterrent to crime, the relationship between population-level firearm ownership rates and violent criminal perpetration is unclear. The purpose of this study is to test the association between state-level firearm ownership and violent crime.

Methods
State-level rates of household firearm ownership and annual rates of criminal acts from 2001, 2002, and 2004 were analyzed in 2014. Firearm ownership rates were taken from a national survey and crime data were taken from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports. Rates of criminal behavior were estimated as a function of household gun ownership using negative binomial regression models, controlling for several demographic factors.

Results
Higher levels of firearm ownership were associated with higher levels of firearm assault and firearm robbery. There was also a significant association between firearm ownership and firearm homicide, as well as overall homicide.

Conclusions
The findings do not support the hypothesis that higher population firearm ownership rates reduce firearm-associated criminal perpetration. On the contrary, evidence shows that states with higher levels of firearm ownership have an increased risk for violent crimes perpetrated with a firearm. Public health stakeholders should consider the outcomes associated with private firearm ownership.

Do the extra guns cause the extra crime, or do law abiding citizens own more guns because they live in areas with high crime?

Classic chicken-egg question.
Actually both are caused by having the values of a gun culture and not doing anything about it.

You could look at Chicago during the period when legal gun ownership was outlawed.
Did the anti-gun legislation reduce gun crime or non-gun crime. Not so much.

You could look at that, but it's not the topic. The topic is "more guns", not "more legislation".

You could look at that, but it's not the topic. The topic is "more guns", not "more legislation".

So less guns caused more crime and now more guns cause more crime.
Liberal logic! Reminds me of their AGW idiocy.

 

[9thIDdoc]

A repeat of discredited BS propaganda.

 

[Pogo]

Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.



Guns Don t Deter Crime Study Finds

New gun study...Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

This is the abstract from the research. It seems pretty straightforward to me. They used statistics about events of firearm violence and rates of gun ownership in different regiions of the US. The areas with more gun ownership had higher levels of gun violence.

Why do you doubt what is fact supported by empirical evidence? I suspect the only reason you doubt it is that you don't want to accept it: very logical indeed.

Introduction
Although some view the ownership of firearms as a deterrent to crime, the relationship between population-level firearm ownership rates and violent criminal perpetration is unclear. The purpose of this study is to test the association between state-level firearm ownership and violent crime.

Methods
State-level rates of household firearm ownership and annual rates of criminal acts from 2001, 2002, and 2004 were analyzed in 2014. Firearm ownership rates were taken from a national survey and crime data were taken from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports. Rates of criminal behavior were estimated as a function of household gun ownership using negative binomial regression models, controlling for several demographic factors.

Results
Higher levels of firearm ownership were associated with higher levels of firearm assault and firearm robbery. There was also a significant association between firearm ownership and firearm homicide, as well as overall homicide.

Conclusions
The findings do not support the hypothesis that higher population firearm ownership rates reduce firearm-associated criminal perpetration. On the contrary, evidence shows that states with higher levels of firearm ownership have an increased risk for violent crimes perpetrated with a firearm. Public health stakeholders should consider the outcomes associated with private firearm ownership.

Do the extra guns cause the extra crime, or do law abiding citizens own more guns because they live in areas with high crime?

Classic chicken-egg question.
Actually both are caused by having the values of a gun culture and not doing anything about it.

You could look at Chicago during the period when legal gun ownership was outlawed.
Did the anti-gun legislation reduce gun crime or non-gun crime. Not so much.

You could look at that, but it's not the topic. The topic is "more guns", not "more legislation".

You could look at that, but it's not the topic. The topic is "more guns", not "more legislation".

So less guns caused more crime and now more guns cause more crime.
Liberal logic! Reminds me of their AGW idiocy.

Yyyyyeah, unfortunately I didn't make any such point. I'm pretty sure I can still write my own points, but when I need to hire a writer I'll contact your agent.

There is a summary given in post 10 that may be more accurate:

"This study suggests that it's really hard to find evidence that where there are more guns, there are less crimes, but you can easily find evidence that where there are a lot more guns, there are a lot more gun crimes"

--- However you're both wrong about one thing:
FEWER guns and FEWER crimes.... not "less". Fewer of many; less of much.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

New gun study...Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

This is the abstract from the research. It seems pretty straightforward to me. They used statistics about events of firearm violence and rates of gun ownership in different regiions of the US. The areas with more gun ownership had higher levels of gun violence.

Why do you doubt what is fact supported by empirical evidence? I suspect the only reason you doubt it is that you don't want to accept it: very logical indeed.

Introduction
Although some view the ownership of firearms as a deterrent to crime, the relationship between population-level firearm ownership rates and violent criminal perpetration is unclear. The purpose of this study is to test the association between state-level firearm ownership and violent crime.

Methods
State-level rates of household firearm ownership and annual rates of criminal acts from 2001, 2002, and 2004 were analyzed in 2014. Firearm ownership rates were taken from a national survey and crime data were taken from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports. Rates of criminal behavior were estimated as a function of household gun ownership using negative binomial regression models, controlling for several demographic factors.

Results
Higher levels of firearm ownership were associated with higher levels of firearm assault and firearm robbery. There was also a significant association between firearm ownership and firearm homicide, as well as overall homicide.

Conclusions
The findings do not support the hypothesis that higher population firearm ownership rates reduce firearm-associated criminal perpetration. On the contrary, evidence shows that states with higher levels of firearm ownership have an increased risk for violent crimes perpetrated with a firearm. Public health stakeholders should consider the outcomes associated with private firearm ownership.

Do the extra guns cause the extra crime, or do law abiding citizens own more guns because they live in areas with high crime?

Classic chicken-egg question.
Actually both are caused by having the values of a gun culture and not doing anything about it.

You could look at Chicago during the period when legal gun ownership was outlawed.
Did the anti-gun legislation reduce gun crime or non-gun crime. Not so much.

You could look at that, but it's not the topic. The topic is "more guns", not "more legislation".

You could look at that, but it's not the topic. The topic is "more guns", not "more legislation".

So less guns caused more crime and now more guns cause more crime.
Liberal logic! Reminds me of their AGW idiocy.

Yyyyyeah, unfortunately I didn't make any such point. I'm pretty sure I can still write my own points, but when I need to hire a writer I'll contact your agent.

There is a summary given in post 10 that may be more accurate:

"This study suggests that it's really hard to find evidence that where there are more guns, there are less crimes, but you can easily find evidence that where there are a lot more guns, there are a lot more gun crimes"

--- However you're both wrong about one thing:
FEWER guns and FEWER crimes.... not "less". Fewer of many; less of much.

Yyyyyeah, unfortunately I didn't make any such point.

Your point was to agree with the "study".
My point was real life in Chicago.

 

[Pogo]

This is the abstract from the research. It seems pretty straightforward to me. They used statistics about events of firearm violence and rates of gun ownership in different regiions of the US. The areas with more gun ownership had higher levels of gun violence.

Why do you doubt what is fact supported by empirical evidence? I suspect the only reason you doubt it is that you don't want to accept it: very logical indeed.

Do the extra guns cause the extra crime, or do law abiding citizens own more guns because they live in areas with high crime?

Classic chicken-egg question.
Actually both are caused by having the values of a gun culture and not doing anything about it.

You could look at Chicago during the period when legal gun ownership was outlawed.
Did the anti-gun legislation reduce gun crime or non-gun crime. Not so much.

You could look at that, but it's not the topic. The topic is "more guns", not "more legislation".

You could look at that, but it's not the topic. The topic is "more guns", not "more legislation".

So less guns caused more crime and now more guns cause more crime.
Liberal logic! Reminds me of their AGW idiocy.

Yyyyyeah, unfortunately I didn't make any such point. I'm pretty sure I can still write my own points, but when I need to hire a writer I'll contact your agent.

There is a summary given in post 10 that may be more accurate:

"This study suggests that it's really hard to find evidence that where there are more guns, there are less crimes, but you can easily find evidence that where there are a lot more guns, there are a lot more gun crimes"

--- However you're both wrong about one thing:
FEWER guns and FEWER crimes.... not "less". Fewer of many; less of much.

Yyyyyeah, unfortunately I didn't make any such point.

Your point was to agree with the "study".
My point was real life in Chicago.

I didn't even comment on the study. For that matter I didn't even read it. Or the OP article.
Perhaps what you need is an optometrist.
Be sure to take yer proxy penis gun.

 

[Brain357]

Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.



Guns Don t Deter Crime Study Finds

New gun study...Finds that more guns does not lead to less crime...

This is the abstract from the research. It seems pretty straightforward to me. They used statistics about events of firearm violence and rates of gun ownership in different regiions of the US. The areas with more gun ownership had higher levels of gun violence.

Why do you doubt what is fact supported by empirical evidence? I suspect the only reason you doubt it is that you don't want to accept it: very logical indeed.

Introduction
Although some view the ownership of firearms as a deterrent to crime, the relationship between population-level firearm ownership rates and violent criminal perpetration is unclear. The purpose of this study is to test the association between state-level firearm ownership and violent crime.

Methods
State-level rates of household firearm ownership and annual rates of criminal acts from 2001, 2002, and 2004 were analyzed in 2014. Firearm ownership rates were taken from a national survey and crime data were taken from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports. Rates of criminal behavior were estimated as a function of household gun ownership using negative binomial regression models, controlling for several demographic factors.

Results
Higher levels of firearm ownership were associated with higher levels of firearm assault and firearm robbery. There was also a significant association between firearm ownership and firearm homicide, as well as overall homicide.

Conclusions
The findings do not support the hypothesis that higher population firearm ownership rates reduce firearm-associated criminal perpetration. On the contrary, evidence shows that states with higher levels of firearm ownership have an increased risk for violent crimes perpetrated with a firearm. Public health stakeholders should consider the outcomes associated with private firearm ownership.

Do the extra guns cause the extra crime, or do law abiding citizens own more guns because they live in areas with high crime?

You could look at Chicago during the period when legal gun ownership was outlawed.
Did the anti-gun legislation reduce gun crime or non-gun crime. Not so much.

They found that gun ownership increased before crime. I think this study does more to show more guns does not equal less crime, than more guns equals more crime.

Pinpointing causation

The results do need to be interpreted with caution — this study method proves that more guns are linked to more gun crime and overall homicide, but not that access to guns directly causes this criminal uptick, said study researcher David Hemenway, the director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center.

"This study suggests that it's really hard to find evidence that where there are more guns, there are less crimes, but you can easily find evidence that where there are a lot more guns, there are a lot more gun crimes," Hemenway told Live Science.

It's possible that people stockpile guns in response to higher levels of crime. The researchers tried to tease out whether this was the case by testing whether gun ownership levels were a prerequisite for crime or a response to higher crime levels. Though they still couldn't prove causation, they did find that higher gun ownership levels preceded crime increases, not the other way around.

"It's difficult to imagine how the hypothesis that increased ownership reduces criminal behavior could be valid, given our findings," Monuteaux said.

Except they intentionally restricted the crime parameters. Not all violent crime...just the small subset that gives them the result they wanted.

How do I know?

Because there are many more guns, and much fewer violent crimes across the board.

And when we look at the smallest gun ownership per capita states:

And then look at the Homicide Rate:

​

And then compare to Homicide By Firearm:

​

You see that states like Maryland, California and Illinois have low firearm ownership rates and higher murder rates and higher murder rates by firearms...whereas West Virginia, North Dakota and Montana have very high firearm ownership and low murder rates with even lower murder rates by firearms.

Pretty much blows the whole "by state" statistical model to smithereens.

But what we do know without doubt is Gun Ownership is on the increase, and Violent Crime is on the decrease nationwide.

As conceal carry increased, and the population increased by 50 million people, all violent crime decreased...and in many categories the decrease has been almost 50%.

The graph won't fit the page...here is a thumbnail
of the FBI Graph:

View attachment 44043 ​

Increased Conceal Carry:

​

These too are correlations...but pretty darned convincing correlations that More Guns = Less Crime.

Crime has been trending down since long before concealed carry started trending up.