Steve Chapman explains:
Gun control didn't work...Laws allowing concealed weapons proliferated--with no ill effects...The Second Amendment got a second look.
Yes, it was pretty much that simple. Of course, a lot of people (like Juan Williams) will persist in the delusion, in the face of all the counter evidence, that gun control works, and that increasing availability will result in a blood bath. But at least now, they won't be able any more to enact their delusions into laws that affect the rest of us.
You’ll have to forgive Juan. The liberal unwritten rule number one is:
Always protect the constituency from the consequences of their own bad behavior.
In this case someone who is careless with a gun in their home is not responsible for the tragic consequence of their carelessness. It is the fault of a society that would allow them to bring the weapon into their home to begin with.
Well, this gun guy says that the jury is still out on whether all gun control laws fail. For example, shall issue concealed carry laws (which I favor) either reduce violent crime by about one to four percent, or increase violent crime by one to four percent. So, the limited gun control measure of restricting concealed carry may reduce violent crime by a small amount. I do think it's clear that gun bans do not work nearly well enough to justify taking away a free man's rights.
If you read what Megan McArdle wrote here, I think you can reasonably conclude that we don't know whether gun control laws help or not. See especially this comment, where she says:
I've read, I think, all the major rape studies and they're suspect for the same reason that data on defensive gun usage are suspect. The coding problems are monstrous, surveys are inherently unreliable, and there's fairly sizeable selection bias in the samples. The very best you could say is that it is intellectually indefensible to stand by those surveys, and also to dismiss defensive gun usage when discussing gun studies.
Studying these sorts of complex sociological and political issues and getting reliable answers makes rocket science look like child's play. It doesn't help that the really good mathematicians would generally rather do rocket science and the really bad mathematicians would generally rather do sociology.
Yours,
Wince
Isn' it time for the guy who talks about Our Rights to at least own a gun, let alone know how to shoot one?
Instead, the Wimpberg shoots off his keyboard. Heh.
Well said, Wince.
I think, however, that you can conclude that gun control laws fail, because their entire raison d'etre is to significantly reduce crime committed with guns. If they fail to do so -- if they make no statistically measurable change -- then they have ipso facto failed.
An analogy: if I go on a diet and I fail to lose weight, do I say the jury is still out on the success of the diet? Nope. It's a failure.
Carl Pham,
I'll go with a failure to significantly reduce crime committed with guns. Great Britain is instructive. Crime committed with guns is rising, and the street price of handguns is about the same as it is in a gun store here, which says gun availability in Great Britain is hardly being restricted.
Yours,
Wince
I think there are some interesting points here, but I wonder how this will all play out in the next few weeks...???