More Guns, More Murder

hangover

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
5,734
Reaction score
642
Points
190
The largest study of gun violence in the United States, released Thursday afternoon, confirms a point that should be obvious: widespread American gun ownership is fueling America’s gun violence epidemic.

The study, by Professor Michael Siegel at Boston University and two coauthors, has been peer-reviewed and is forthcoming in the American Journal of Public Health. Siegel and his colleagues compiled data on firearm homicides from all 50 states from 1981-2010, the longest stretch of time ever studied in this fashion, and set about seeing whether they could find any relationship between changes in gun ownership and murder using guns over time.

Since we know that violent crime rates overall declined during that period of time, the authors used something called “fixed effect regression” to account for any national trend other than changes in gun ownership. They also employed the largest-ever number of statistical controls for other variables in this kind of gun study: “age, gender, race/ethnicity, urbanization, poverty, unemployment, income, education, income inequality, divorce rate, alcohol use, violent crime rate, nonviolent crime rate, hate crime rate, number of hunting licenses, age-adjusted nonfirearm homicide rate, incarceration rate,and suicide rate” were all accounted for.

No good data on national rates of gun ownership exist (partly because of the NRA’s stranglehold on Congress), so the authors used the percentage of suicides that involve a firearm (FS/S) as a proxy. The theory, backed up by a wealth of data, is that the more guns there are any in any one place, the higher the percentage of people who commit suicide with guns as opposed to other mechanisms will be.

With all this preliminary work in hand, the authors ran a series of regressions to see what effect the overall national decline in firearm ownership from 1981 to 2010 had on gun homicides. The result was staggering: “for each 1 percentage point increase in proportion of household gun ownership,” Siegel et al. found, “firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9″ percent. A one standard deviation change in firearm ownership shifted gun murders by a staggering 12.9 percent.

To put this in perspective, take the state of Mississippi. “All other factors being equal,” the authors write, “our model would predict that if the FS/S in Mississippi were 57.7% (the average for all states) instead of 76.8% (the highest of all states), its firearm homicide rate would be 17% lower.” Since 475 people were murdered with a gun in Mississippi in 2010, that drop in gun ownership would translate to 80 lives saved in that year alone.

Of course, the authors don’t find that rates of gun ownership explain all of America’s gun violence epidemic: race, economic inequality and generally violent areas all contribute to an area’s propensity for gun deaths, suggesting that broader social inequality, not gun ownership alone, contributes to the gun violence epidemic. Nevertheless, the fact that gun ownership mattered even when race and poverty were accounted for suggests that we can’t avoid talking about America’s fascination with guns when debating what to do about the roughly 11,000 Americans who are yearly murdered by gunfire.

Largest Gun Study Ever: More Guns, More Murder | ThinkProgress
 

skookerasbil

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
35,488
Reaction score
4,127
Points
1,140
Location
Not the middle of nowhere
Hmmm........Harvard University disagree's......study from last year.( April 2013)

What they found >>>



Many people believe that owning guns only increases the amount of crime. However, a recent study published in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy concluded that there is a negative correlation between gun ownership and violent crime in countries internationally. In other words, the more guns the less crime. The study showed that nations with strict gun control laws have substantially higher murder rates than those who do not. In fact, the 9 European nations with the lowest gun ownership rate have a combined murder rate that is three times that of the nine European nations with the highest gun ownership rate.



From the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy!!!



They find definitively that MORE GUNS = LESS CRIMES




Here is the full paper >>>>



http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
 

Slacker

Rookie
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Messages
16
Reaction score
9
Points
1
Location
Illinois
"No good data on national rates of gun ownership exist (partly because of the NRA’s stranglehold on Congress), so the authors used the percentage of suicides that involve a firearm (FS/S) as a proxy."
"Of course, the authors don’t find that rates of gun ownership explain all of America’s gun violence epidemic:"

Right, so they're guessing and cherry picking data to fit their agenda.
 

Mojo2

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2013
Messages
6,210
Reaction score
1,017
Points
190
The largest study of gun violence in the United States, released Thursday afternoon, confirms a point that should be obvious: widespread American gun ownership is fueling America’s gun violence epidemic.

The study, by Professor Michael Siegel at Boston University and two coauthors, has been peer-reviewed and is forthcoming in the American Journal of Public Health. Siegel and his colleagues compiled data on firearm homicides from all 50 states from 1981-2010, the longest stretch of time ever studied in this fashion, and set about seeing whether they could find any relationship between changes in gun ownership and murder using guns over time.

Since we know that violent crime rates overall declined during that period of time, the authors used something called “fixed effect regression” to account for any national trend other than changes in gun ownership. They also employed the largest-ever number of statistical controls for other variables in this kind of gun study: “age, gender, race/ethnicity, urbanization, poverty, unemployment, income, education, income inequality, divorce rate, alcohol use, violent crime rate, nonviolent crime rate, hate crime rate, number of hunting licenses, age-adjusted nonfirearm homicide rate, incarceration rate,and suicide rate” were all accounted for.

No good data on national rates of gun ownership exist (partly because of the NRA’s stranglehold on Congress), so the authors used the percentage of suicides that involve a firearm (FS/S) as a proxy. The theory, backed up by a wealth of data, is that the more guns there are any in any one place, the higher the percentage of people who commit suicide with guns as opposed to other mechanisms will be.

With all this preliminary work in hand, the authors ran a series of regressions to see what effect the overall national decline in firearm ownership from 1981 to 2010 had on gun homicides. The result was staggering: “for each 1 percentage point increase in proportion of household gun ownership,” Siegel et al. found, “firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9″ percent. A one standard deviation change in firearm ownership shifted gun murders by a staggering 12.9 percent.

To put this in perspective, take the state of Mississippi. “All other factors being equal,” the authors write, “our model would predict that if the FS/S in Mississippi were 57.7% (the average for all states) instead of 76.8% (the highest of all states), its firearm homicide rate would be 17% lower.” Since 475 people were murdered with a gun in Mississippi in 2010, that drop in gun ownership would translate to 80 lives saved in that year alone.

Of course, the authors don’t find that rates of gun ownership explain all of America’s gun violence epidemic: race, economic inequality and generally violent areas all contribute to an area’s propensity for gun deaths, suggesting that broader social inequality, not gun ownership alone, contributes to the gun violence epidemic. Nevertheless, the fact that gun ownership mattered even when race and poverty were accounted for suggests that we can’t avoid talking about America’s fascination with guns when debating what to do about the roughly 11,000 Americans who are yearly murdered by gunfire.

Largest Gun Study Ever: More Guns, More Murder | ThinkProgress
DECEMBER 8, 2013 · JOHNRLOTT

Problems with Public Health Research: Michael Siegel, Craig Ross, and Charles King, “The Relationship Between Gun Ownership and Firearm Homicide Rates in the United States, 1981-2010,” American Journal of Public Health

In a recent issue of the American Journal of Public Health, three researchers examine the relationship between “gun ownership” as measured by the percent of suicides committed with firearms. I have always found this measure less than useful as the method used to commit suicide varies appreciably with demographic characteristics (gender, age, race, etc.). The paper is available here and here.

Conclusions. We observed a robust correlation between higher levels of gun ownership and higher firearm homicide rates. Although we could not determine causation, we found that states with higher rates of gun ownership had disproportionately large numbers of deaths from firearm-related homicides. (Am J Public Health. 2013;103:2098–2105. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301409)

The letter I submitted to the journal was rejected, but it is pretty surprising that a count data approach was not used with actual count data and that the regressions didn’t use the most basic controls for panel data: year and state fixed effects.

Dear Editor:

Siegel et al. conclude gun ownership is positively related to firearm homicide rates in the US, but they use inappropriate statistical tests and their results are extremely sensitive to the test used.1

Negative binomial regressions use count data, not the rate data these authors use. In addition, overdispersion (the variance greater than the mean) doesn’t imply the distribution is negative binomial in form and it isn’t in this case. Economists and criminologists frequently deal with skewness in homicide rates by running the negative binomial regressions on true count data (not on the rates) or by taking the natural log of the rate.2-6 Performing either procedure dramatically alters their results. The natural log of the rate is normally distributed.

Siegel et al.’s regressions fail to take advantage of the panel nature of their data set. While fixed year effects are accounted for, because of failure to obtain convergence, fixed state effects are virtually never included.

Redoing the negative binomial regression using count data on age-adjusted number of firearm homicides, the variables reported in Tables 2 and 3, and year and state fixed effects, I found the percent of suicides committed with guns (FS/S) significantly positively related to firearm homicides, though the effect is half what they found (a one standard deviation change in FS/S explains just 7.8% of one standard deviation in firearm homicides).

However, replacing firearm homicides with nonfirearm homicides implies an even greater statistically significant negative relationship with FS/S (p=0.002). I found no relationship between total homicides and FS/S. Replacing FS/S with the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey data on gun ownership didn’t produce convergence.

Weighted least squares regressions with the natural logs of the rates raise questions about their measure of gun ownership. I found a one percentage point increase FS/S produced a 1.2% increase in firearm homicides, but the point estimate using the BRFSS survey data implied the same change produced a 1.2% decrease.

The correlation between FS/S and the BRFSS survey data is 0.80. But running the BRFSS data on FS/S after accounting for fixed year and state effects shows an insignificant negative relationship. FS/S is clearly not related to gun ownership when basic fixed effects are accounted for. Instead, firearm suicides appear to be measuring demographic and other variables related to homicides, not gun ownership.

* President, Crime Prevention Research Center.

1 Michael Siegel, Craig S. Ross, and Charles King III, “The Relationship Between Gun Ownership and Firearm Homicide Rates in the United States, 1981–2010,” Am J Public Health 2013; 103(11): 2098-2105.

2 Lott JR. More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; third edition, 2010.

3 Wellford CF, Pepper JV, and Petrie CV. Eds. Firearms and Violence: A critical Review. Washington, DC: National Academies of Science; 2005.

4 Helland E and Tabarrok A. “Using Placebo Laws to Test ‘More Guns, Less Crime’,” ADVANCES ECON. ANALYSIS & POL’Y 2004; 4 (1).

5 Plassmann F and Tideman TN. “Does the Right to Carry Concealed Handguns Deter Countable Crimes? Only a Count Analysis Can Say,” J.L. & ECON. 2001; 44: 771–798.

6 Olsen DE and Maltz MD. “Right-to Carry Concealed Weapons Laws and Homicide in Large U.S. Counties: The Effect on Weapons Types, Victim Characteristics, and Victim- Offender Relationships,” J.L. & ECON. 2001; 44: 747-770.

Here is some additional information.

The natural log of the firearm homicide rate is actually fairly normal. The closer the data is distributed along the 45 degree line, the closer the distribution is to being normally distributed.
Problems with Public Health Research: Michael Siegel, Craig Ross, and Charles King, "The Relationship Between Gun Ownership and Firearm Homicide Rates in the United States, 1981-2010," American Journal of Public Health - Crime Prevention Research Cen
 

DigitalDrifter

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2013
Messages
33,152
Reaction score
8,504
Points
1,330
Location
Oregon
I still would rather live in a country that allows me the choice to own a firearm.

So for me, stats are meaningless.
 

dannyboys

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2013
Messages
15,431
Reaction score
2,577
Points
280
Here's the real stat.: 55% of gun related homicides in the US were 'Black on Black' in 2010. Blacks make up only 13% of the population.
Deal with the fact that Blacks score about 15 points lower in IQ than Whites but are living in an ever increasingly more 'dog-eat-dog' competitive world and you are looking at an entire race that can not keep up. All the best will in the world can't fix 'stupid' when it comes to making it in this world. The hand-outs disguised by any other name have not helped and they are drying up globally. Remember those adds meant to break our hearts about the plight of Blacks kids in Africa so we would send money to a bottomless pit and basically make millionaires of Black despots? Unless it's Christmas those ads are gone. Tell you something?
The fact that the 'Black' problem' never goes away ought to wise up people.
 

HenryBHough

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
29,243
Reaction score
5,568
Points
290
Location
Oak Grove, Massachusetts
Clue to liberal Democrats:

Get behind rising murder stats. Fewer people alive means you can concentrate your social engineering bucks on a smaller base. AND....without having to soil your hands with health care rationing!
 

aaronleland

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2012
Messages
32,148
Reaction score
8,874
Points
1,360
Here's the real stat.: 55% of gun related homicides in the US were 'Black on Black' in 2010. Blacks make up only 13% of the population.
Deal with the fact that Blacks score about 15 points lower in IQ than Whites but are living in an ever increasingly more 'dog-eat-dog' competitive world and you are looking at an entire race that can not keep up. All the best will in the world can't fix 'stupid' when it comes to making it in this world. The hand-outs disguised by any other name have not helped and they are drying up globally. Remember those adds meant to break our hearts about the plight of Blacks kids in Africa so we would send money to a bottomless pit and basically make millionaires of Black despots? Unless it's Christmas those ads are gone. Tell you something?
The fact that the 'Black' problem' never goes away ought to wise up people.
We get it. You hate black people. :eusa_whistle:
 

Katzndogz

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
65,656
Reaction score
7,473
Points
1,830
The high incidence of murder has nothing to do with guns. It is caused by an incredible societal belief that so many people have that they are within their rights to kill someone who has something they want or has hurt their feelings. When everyone becomes their own little God, the mere mortals must genuflect or be punished.
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
66,734
Reaction score
19,485
Points
2,180
Location
Nevada
The largest study of gun violence in the United States, released Thursday afternoon, confirms a point that should be obvious: widespread American gun ownership is fueling America’s gun violence epidemic.

The study, by Professor Michael Siegel at Boston University and two coauthors, has been peer-reviewed and is forthcoming in the American Journal of Public Health. Siegel and his colleagues compiled data on firearm homicides from all 50 states from 1981-2010, the longest stretch of time ever studied in this fashion, and set about seeing whether they could find any relationship between changes in gun ownership and murder using guns over time.

Since we know that violent crime rates overall declined during that period of time, the authors used something called “fixed effect regression” to account for any national trend other than changes in gun ownership. They also employed the largest-ever number of statistical controls for other variables in this kind of gun study: “age, gender, race/ethnicity, urbanization, poverty, unemployment, income, education, income inequality, divorce rate, alcohol use, violent crime rate, nonviolent crime rate, hate crime rate, number of hunting licenses, age-adjusted nonfirearm homicide rate, incarceration rate,and suicide rate” were all accounted for.

No good data on national rates of gun ownership exist (partly because of the NRA’s stranglehold on Congress), so the authors used the percentage of suicides that involve a firearm (FS/S) as a proxy. The theory, backed up by a wealth of data, is that the more guns there are any in any one place, the higher the percentage of people who commit suicide with guns as opposed to other mechanisms will be.

With all this preliminary work in hand, the authors ran a series of regressions to see what effect the overall national decline in firearm ownership from 1981 to 2010 had on gun homicides. The result was staggering: “for each 1 percentage point increase in proportion of household gun ownership,” Siegel et al. found, “firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9″ percent. A one standard deviation change in firearm ownership shifted gun murders by a staggering 12.9 percent.

To put this in perspective, take the state of Mississippi. “All other factors being equal,” the authors write, “our model would predict that if the FS/S in Mississippi were 57.7% (the average for all states) instead of 76.8% (the highest of all states), its firearm homicide rate would be 17% lower.” Since 475 people were murdered with a gun in Mississippi in 2010, that drop in gun ownership would translate to 80 lives saved in that year alone.

Of course, the authors don’t find that rates of gun ownership explain all of America’s gun violence epidemic: race, economic inequality and generally violent areas all contribute to an area’s propensity for gun deaths, suggesting that broader social inequality, not gun ownership alone, contributes to the gun violence epidemic. Nevertheless, the fact that gun ownership mattered even when race and poverty were accounted for suggests that we can’t avoid talking about America’s fascination with guns when debating what to do about the roughly 11,000 Americans who are yearly murdered by gunfire.

Largest Gun Study Ever: More Guns, More Murder | ThinkProgress






Yeah, the only problem with this study is there are 20 others that show exactly the opposite. Including the most definitive study ever accomplished that went COUNTY by COUNTY. For every state in the US.

They reached the opposite conclusion.
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
66,734
Reaction score
19,485
Points
2,180
Location
Nevada
Here's the real stat.: 55% of gun related homicides in the US were 'Black on Black' in 2010. Blacks make up only 13% of the population.
Deal with the fact that Blacks score about 15 points lower in IQ than Whites but are living in an ever increasingly more 'dog-eat-dog' competitive world and you are looking at an entire race that can not keep up. All the best will in the world can't fix 'stupid' when it comes to making it in this world. The hand-outs disguised by any other name have not helped and they are drying up globally. Remember those adds meant to break our hearts about the plight of Blacks kids in Africa so we would send money to a bottomless pit and basically make millionaires of Black despots? Unless it's Christmas those ads are gone. Tell you something?
The fact that the 'Black' problem' never goes away ought to wise up people.
We get it. You hate black people. :eusa_whistle:





Actually we don't. We just don't want gun laws passed based on skewed data. Don't you find it sad the amount of black on black crime? I think it's tragic and horrible.
 

Uncensored2008

Libertarian Radical
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
84,509
Reaction score
14,531
Points
2,180
Location
Behind the Orange Curtain
The largest study of gun violence in the United States, released Thursday afternoon, confirms a point that should be obvious: widespread American gun ownership is fueling America’s gun violence epidemic.

The study, by Professor Michael Siegel at Boston University and two coauthors, has been peer-reviewed and is forthcoming in the American Journal of Public Health. Siegel and his colleagues compiled data on firearm homicides from all 50 states from 1981-2010, the longest stretch of time ever studied in this fashion, and set about seeing whether they could find any relationship between changes in gun ownership and murder using guns over time.

Since we know that violent crime rates overall declined during that period of time, the authors used something called “fixed effect regression” to account for any national trend other than changes in gun ownership. They also employed the largest-ever number of statistical controls for other variables in this kind of gun study: “age, gender, race/ethnicity, urbanization, poverty, unemployment, income, education, income inequality, divorce rate, alcohol use, violent crime rate, nonviolent crime rate, hate crime rate, number of hunting licenses, age-adjusted nonfirearm homicide rate, incarceration rate,and suicide rate” were all accounted for.

No good data on national rates of gun ownership exist (partly because of the NRA’s stranglehold on Congress), so the authors used the percentage of suicides that involve a firearm (FS/S) as a proxy. The theory, backed up by a wealth of data, is that the more guns there are any in any one place, the higher the percentage of people who commit suicide with guns as opposed to other mechanisms will be.

With all this preliminary work in hand, the authors ran a series of regressions to see what effect the overall national decline in firearm ownership from 1981 to 2010 had on gun homicides. The result was staggering: “for each 1 percentage point increase in proportion of household gun ownership,” Siegel et al. found, “firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9″ percent. A one standard deviation change in firearm ownership shifted gun murders by a staggering 12.9 percent.

To put this in perspective, take the state of Mississippi. “All other factors being equal,” the authors write, “our model would predict that if the FS/S in Mississippi were 57.7% (the average for all states) instead of 76.8% (the highest of all states), its firearm homicide rate would be 17% lower.” Since 475 people were murdered with a gun in Mississippi in 2010, that drop in gun ownership would translate to 80 lives saved in that year alone.

Of course, the authors don’t find that rates of gun ownership explain all of America’s gun violence epidemic: race, economic inequality and generally violent areas all contribute to an area’s propensity for gun deaths, suggesting that broader social inequality, not gun ownership alone, contributes to the gun violence epidemic. Nevertheless, the fact that gun ownership mattered even when race and poverty were accounted for suggests that we can’t avoid talking about America’s fascination with guns when debating what to do about the roughly 11,000 Americans who are yearly murdered by gunfire.

Largest Gun Study Ever: More Guns, More Murder | ThinkProgress

In other words, they fabricated results in direct contrast to the data.
 

Uncensored2008

Libertarian Radical
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
84,509
Reaction score
14,531
Points
2,180
Location
Behind the Orange Curtain
"No good data on national rates of gun ownership exist (partly because of the NRA’s stranglehold on Congress), so the authors used the percentage of suicides that involve a firearm (FS/S) as a proxy."
"Of course, the authors don’t find that rates of gun ownership explain all of America’s gun violence epidemic:"

Right, so they're guessing and cherry picking data to fit their agenda.
Well, they flat out lie also....

"The data didn't support our agenda, so we did a regression to alter the data..."

Fucking leftists
 

Vox

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2013
Messages
10,937
Reaction score
867
Points
138
think progress LOL

:lol:
 

Vox

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2013
Messages
10,937
Reaction score
867
Points
138
The largest study of gun violence in the United States, released Thursday afternoon, confirms a point that should be obvious: widespread American gun ownership is fueling America’s gun violence epidemic.

The study, by Professor Michael Siegel at Boston University and two coauthors, has been peer-reviewed and is forthcoming in the American Journal of Public Health. Siegel and his colleagues compiled data on firearm homicides from all 50 states from 1981-2010, the longest stretch of time ever studied in this fashion, and set about seeing whether they could find any relationship between changes in gun ownership and murder using guns over time.

Since we know that violent crime rates overall declined during that period of time, the authors used something called “fixed effect regression” to account for any national trend other than changes in gun ownership. They also employed the largest-ever number of statistical controls for other variables in this kind of gun study: “age, gender, race/ethnicity, urbanization, poverty, unemployment, income, education, income inequality, divorce rate, alcohol use, violent crime rate, nonviolent crime rate, hate crime rate, number of hunting licenses, age-adjusted nonfirearm homicide rate, incarceration rate,and suicide rate” were all accounted for.

No good data on national rates of gun ownership exist (partly because of the NRA’s stranglehold on Congress), so the authors used the percentage of suicides that involve a firearm (FS/S) as a proxy. The theory, backed up by a wealth of data, is that the more guns there are any in any one place, the higher the percentage of people who commit suicide with guns as opposed to other mechanisms will be.

With all this preliminary work in hand, the authors ran a series of regressions to see what effect the overall national decline in firearm ownership from 1981 to 2010 had on gun homicides. The result was staggering: “for each 1 percentage point increase in proportion of household gun ownership,” Siegel et al. found, “firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9″ percent. A one standard deviation change in firearm ownership shifted gun murders by a staggering 12.9 percent.

To put this in perspective, take the state of Mississippi. “All other factors being equal,” the authors write, “our model would predict that if the FS/S in Mississippi were 57.7% (the average for all states) instead of 76.8% (the highest of all states), its firearm homicide rate would be 17% lower.” Since 475 people were murdered with a gun in Mississippi in 2010, that drop in gun ownership would translate to 80 lives saved in that year alone.

Of course, the authors don’t find that rates of gun ownership explain all of America’s gun violence epidemic: race, economic inequality and generally violent areas all contribute to an area’s propensity for gun deaths, suggesting that broader social inequality, not gun ownership alone, contributes to the gun violence epidemic. Nevertheless, the fact that gun ownership mattered even when race and poverty were accounted for suggests that we can’t avoid talking about America’s fascination with guns when debating what to do about the roughly 11,000 Americans who are yearly murdered by gunfire.

Largest Gun Study Ever: More Guns, More Murder | ThinkProgress

In other words, they fabricated results in direct contrast to the data.
as they always do.

Leftards LIE.

That is their MO.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top