Do Guns Make People Safer?
Lots of great points in the comments. If guns made people safer, I would agree wholeheartedly that they should be legal and accessible to (almost) everyone. I would have one at home. The problem is, I have yet to see any evidence that they make us safer. In fact, all the evidence I have seen shows that the opposite is true.
This 2004 study analyzes U.S. mortality data to find out whether having a gun in your home affected your risk of dying by gun. It turned out that people with guns were at greater risk of being murdered at home in general--and murdered by a gun specifically. Men with guns in their home were also more likely to kill themselves (which is not a small thing, since most gun deaths are suicides). There are a lot of studies like this, some of which are very old and some of which are better than others. But the general finding seems to be fairly consistent.
All of this is consistent with the research I did for the book into how the brain works under extreme stress. As any combat trainer will tell you, it is actually extremely difficult to hit a target when you are frightened. If you talk to police officers who have shot people, they will tell you that everything suddenly changed: their senses of sight, hearing and time. Many do not hear their guns go off at all. Many experience serious failures of eye-hand coordination and other cognitive functions. This is totally understandable, but it makes me less likely to trust any human with a gun. I trust some cops, if they are trained well and regularly, and even then I am amazed there aren’t more accidental shootings by police officers.
Have you seen a rigorous, peer-reviewed study that showed something different? If so, please send it along!
Also a good point that gun laws don’t seem to be working. But I suppose the big question is, how do we explain how much higher our gun violence rates are than other developed nations? I think it has something to do with our laws, although I realize these things are rarely explained by one answer. In any case, the fix for bad gun laws is not to go to the other extreme and make them looser. Maybe we need to make them stronger, and enforce them all more rigorously.
As to the comment that guns are more regulated than tobacco, I respectfully disagree. There are lots of holes in the regulations that are out there. Under current federal law, unlicensed gun dealers at gun shows, for example, do not need to do a background check before they sell a weapon. No one really knows how many guns are sold this way. (Gun-control proponents say it could be nearly 40% of guns; gun-rights groups say the number is under 3%.) The simple fact that Congress has repeatedly failed to pass legislation closing this loophole is a good indication of the rigor of our gun-control laws in general.
M. Rush said on June 30, 2008 at 8:25 am
With regard to the results of studies either for or against gun control, I can only say that there are three types of lies; Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics. Serious thought on the matter of a handgun in the home making one a more likely homicide victim invites several questions. How precisely is an inanimate object in a person’s home CAUSING another person to murder them? Are there other factors inviting violence into the home? I don’t need to be convinced of the study’s accuracy but I have to question the usefulness of it’s findings. As for those with guns in the home being more likely to commit suicide with a firearm, I can’t say I’m particularly surprised. I’m sure that people who own peanut butter are more likely than those who don’t, to find some stuck to the roof of their mouths from time to time. I imagine if you look carefully at the data, to the areas where handgun ownership is highest, you would be peering into numbers from the midwest and deep south. These areas, where gun ownership is traditionally higher, are also home to urban areas that have suffered from years of increasing poverty, unemployment, drug use and general neglect. On the other hand, I would wager, most areas where gun ownership is traditionally lower, are home to more affluent communities, urban areas with more robust economies, and an overall older population. To attribute the higher rates of homicide to the fact there is a gun in the home is intellectually dishonest at best.
I don’t advocate that everyone rush out and buy a gun. Responsible firearms ownership is a matter of choice and that choice should be made with cautious consideration. My argument is simply this. MY firearm, being safely stored in my home, or carried on my hip, is NOT causing the homicide or suicide of anyone. Therefore I find the argument that I should forfeit a right inherited from my ancestors, on the basis of cold statistics, to be absurd. While I may appreciate concern for my emotional well being, I would not appreciate my elected representatives legislating my guns out of my home in the interest of preventing my suicide.
I understand the physiological hurdles involved in the proper use of a firearm for lawful purposes. I have spent my entire adult life carrying a handgun both in the course of my duties as a police officer and military member, and as a private American citizen taking prudent measures to protect his own safety. I know that stress and fear make any task difficult, however people have been defending themselves successfully with firearms for as long as they have been successfully murdering one another with them. It is fine to hope for better, and seek change where problems exist. Most people, however, dream of a society without guns and unfortunately wake up before they get to the neighborhood where everyone is bludgeoning one another to death. Violence is simply a fact of human (and animal) existence. A fact we can’t wish away.
If we want laws to protect us, we need to enact and enforce laws that protect us from bad people, not bad things. The number of people walking our nation’s streets who have clearly demonstrated they have no right to live in decent society is staggering. We sentence them to their second homes for a few years now and then, then release them among us to harm others again. All the while, we continue to train the next generation of sociopaths. We teach those at the lower reaches of society that their struggles and failures are someone else’s fault and that they are entitled without obligation to things others have earned. We teach those at the society’s higher elevations that nothing matters more than trivial entertainment, and that they are insulated forever from want or hardship. We then toss the most vulnerable of each group into a world artificially colored by media, devoid of traditional moral restraints on behavior, and let them duke it out. If it is a reduction of lawless violence we desire, then cold, rational, realistic consideration dictates that lawful gun ownership would be far toward the bottom of a list of topics to be addressed whether by legislation, or by grass-roots, widespread drastic change in our collective social standards.
Again, with regards and respect.
Max D. said on July 01, 2008 at 6:59 am
The problem is, I have yet to see any evidence that they make us safer.
No, the problem is that you have yet to believe any evidence that they make us safer.
Have you seen a rigorous, peer-reviewed study that showed something different? If so, please send it along!
In my previous comments I mentioned ”More Guns, Less Crime.” I believe that fills the bill. If, that is, you’re willing to read it.
So have you gone to the range yet? Have you actually spoken to anyone who shoots for fun? Or have you chosen to remain in your cocoon, “safe” from all those evil guns?
One last thing: Laws don’t work on guns. They work (or don’t work) on people. And some people just don’t care what the laws are. (There are more than 30,000 gun laws on the books at last count.)
Max D. said on July 02, 2008 at 10:49 am
Here are a couple of studies, and they don’t cost $50 to read:
http://www.illinoiscarry.com/GunFacts4.pdf
http://www.guncite.com/gcdgklec.html
http://saf.org/LawReviews/SouthwickJr1.htm
J.B. Clark IV said on July 06, 2008 at 9:43 am
I am not surprised to learn that there is a correlation between having a gun and being murdered by a gun. But perhaps it would be inaccurate to conclude from such a study that having a gun increases one’s risk of being murdered by a gun.
Correlation is not the same as causation. I would venture that the relevant cause and effect relationship here is that people who live in a dangerous area, in which the risk of being murdered by a gun is higher, are also the ones most likely to have a gun, a direct consequence of their perceived need for one.
Now this is not to suggest that those living in such high risk areas decrease their risk of being murdered by gun by having a gun of their own. My guess would be that a gun provides a false sense of security that, by lowering the guard of those who have one, statistically negates the added level of security it provides in some instances. But my gut feeling is that the calculus of crime risk, as it relates to firearm ownership and murder, is much more complicated that current studies suggest.
The Swiss lead the way said on July 16, 2008 at 2:49 am
We could all take an example from the Swiss, the world’s most secure, neutral, peaceful, prepared and armed citizens. Everyone else is a Red Cross food line basket case waiting to happen.
(8?» said on July 16, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Amanda,
The people who would’ve benefited the most from the safety of having a gun are dead. So yeah, it is kind of hard for them to let you know this.
How much different would the Holocaust have been had the Jews not been “legally” disarmed first?
It amazes me that people fear guns, but have no problem voting for the Hitler of the day. Why don’t you fear these megalomaniacs who destroy far more than an individual with a gun can?
michael said on July 16, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Love the gun zealots on both sides—no one proved Godwin’s Law faster.
Here’s the bottom line: If you want a gun, get one (I have several, BTW). Just realize that it’s way more likely that the gun you buy will kill you or someone you love than that it will kill an intruder or someone who’s a threat to you.
WV said on July 17, 2008 at 4:28 am
I’m not surprised by this information.
There was this one fellow long ago that said: ‘all who take the sword will die by the sword’.
Max D. said on July 21, 2008 at 3:25 am
It’s funny, though, WV, that the same guy also said
“But now the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag. And the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one.” (Luke 22:36)
Josh said on July 22, 2008 at 5:51 pm
The numbers on this issue are tricky. John Lott’s work really is questionable, but the 2004 epidemiological study is as well. Statistics that don’t adjust for the fact that gun ownership is a choice that people make for potentially unobservable reasons are going to be biased. This sort of endogeneity is often considered by economists, but is rarely considered by epidemiologists.
Tamagotchi Town said on December 28, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Great info, thanks
Smoking Cigars said on February 05, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Wow, I admire what you have done with this your blog. I like the part where you say you are doing this to give back but I would assume by all the comments that this is working for you as well.
Lorene J. Diggs said on March 03, 2009 at 9:46 am
Penegra is a generic medication for erectile dysfunction or impotence, and belongs to a group of the medicines that prevent the enzymes called phosphodiesterase from working too quickly, this is a little penegra history, is a success product that is an effective remedy for treating male impotence or erectile dysfunction.
Cailis said on May 13, 2009 at 7:16 am
Really interesting. I have read a lot about this on other articles written by other people, but I must admit that you is the best.
Barney said on June 01, 2009 at 6:21 pm
wow a good article an easy to read, thx for share.
Mcme said on July 24, 2009 at 9:23 pm
“One last thing: Laws don’t work on guns. They work (or don’t work) on people. And some people just don’t care what the laws are.”
Then I guess we shouldn’t have any laws at all.
Poor argument for no gun laws,
clothing racks for sale said on February 04, 2010 at 6:21 am
The numbers on this issue are tricky. John Lott’s work really is questionable, but the 2004 epidemiological study is as well. Statistics that don’t adjust for the fact that gun ownership is a choice that people make for potentially unobservable reasons are going to be biased.
florida gator forum said on July 01, 2010 at 3:21 pm
Guns is never be the solution. It just create violence
offshore company said on July 03, 2010 at 12:02 pm
Some time it could be a solution but many time not.We can not change human nature because human will ultimately fight so if you left gun you will make yourself week.
kerja part time said on July 08, 2010 at 9:54 pm
Guns make it easier to kill and injure people. Therefore, it is obvious to any fool that reducing the prevalence of guns will reduce the prevalence of death and injury. But, what about people who aren’t fools?