Homicide was increasing before the invention of concealable firearms and decreasing after. While there may be many other theories, the sudden and spectacular decline in violence around 1505 and again around 1610-1621 is consistent with the theory that the invention and proliferation of concealable firearms was responsible, at least in part, for the decline in homicide. The landscape of personal violence was suddenly and permanently altered by the introduction of a new technology. The handgun was the ultimate equalizer. The physically strong could no longer feel confident of domination over the weak.
Even in the United States today, criminals are reluctant to encounter armed victims. In 1981 Wright and Rossi interviewed 1874 incarcerated felons in ten states. Eighty-one percent agreed with the statement, βA smart criminal always tries to find out if his potential victim is armed.β Thirty-four percent report being, βscared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed victim. (Wright and Rossi 1986, pp. 132-155) Using the same data, Kleck found that, among criminals who had committed violent crimes or burglaries, 42 percent had been deterred during an attack by an armed victim and 56 percent agreed that, βmost criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police.β(Kleck 1997, p. 180)
What I would rather see is proper protection for homeowners
suddenly the UK has turned into another USA.
Quote from: Mr Psychologist on February 16, 2015, 08:58:44 AMWhat I would rather see is proper protection for homeownersI'm with you, there.Quotesuddenly the UK has turned into another USA.The problem with this is that it's two-dimensional. Like I've said before, Plano is a lot safer than Chicago. Challenger has explained this in the past with the differences between those two places in terms of gangs--which is correct. It's more the culture of a place which determines things like gun crimes, not the stance of gun control. That being said, there is quite a clear empirical basis for not jumping the gun (hue) and saying that the legalisation of handguns will turn England into Fallout: New Vegas.
. . .
Quote from: Mr Psychologist on February 16, 2015, 09:25:15 AM. . .Oh yeah, I'm completely with legalising things like batons and mace in the first instance.
Long guns are better than handguns. Why not advocate for less gun restrictions so you can enjoy them as a sport, not just as a tool to feel safer?
Quote from: Risay117 on February 16, 2015, 11:49:02 AMI will make the point that Chicago is surrounded by guns so trying to control guns in that city is impossible.A better point to make is that Chicago has been one of the crime capitals of the US for decades before gun control even became a thing. Those bringing up Chicago as a point that gun control doesn't work are the same kind of people who put a bandaid on a gun shot wound and then claim that bandaids don't work because it didn't heal the injury. I'm not going to bother looking up the statistics again, but both gun and "ordinary" violence strongly declined in Chicago after the gun control measures were implemented. tl;dr: It's an argument only the most uninformed people make.
I will make the point that Chicago is surrounded by guns so trying to control guns in that city is impossible.
Quote from: Flee on February 16, 2015, 12:09:37 PMQuote from: Risay117 on February 16, 2015, 11:49:02 AMI will make the point that Chicago is surrounded by guns so trying to control guns in that city is impossible.A better point to make is that Chicago has been one of the crime capitals of the US for decades before gun control even became a thing. Those bringing up Chicago as a point that gun control doesn't work are the same kind of people who put a bandaid on a gun shot wound and then claim that bandaids don't work because it didn't heal the injury. I'm not going to bother looking up the statistics again, but both gun and "ordinary" violence strongly declined in Chicago after the gun control measures were implemented. tl;dr: It's an argument only the most uninformed people make.The entire point of the Chicago argument--at least when I make it--is that gun control is not the prime determinant of gun crime.
Quote from: Risay117 on February 16, 2015, 11:49:02 AMI will make the point that Chicago is surrounded by guns so trying to control guns in that city is impossible. I'm not going to bother looking up the statistics again, but both gun and "ordinary" violence strongly declined in Chicago after the gun control measures were implemented.
in the U.K. handguns used in crime have doubled since they were banned in 1997
Quotein the U.K. handguns used in crime have doubled since they were banned in 1997Your link requires me to subscribe to the Times. You got a different link that corroborates with this claim?
Not specifically that claim. But here is an article by the BBC from back in 2001 a few years following the ban
The research, commissioned by the Countryside Alliance's Campaign for Shooting, has concluded that existing laws are targeting legitimate users of firearms rather than criminals.
and (>.>) an article from the Daily Mail from 2009.
I'm not so much questioning the data, but I think you can do better with some of these sources Meta.
Make Britain safer; bring back handguns
