I thought more guns=less crime?

[dansgotguns]

Im in a Facebook debate about guns (the usual). We've come to the topic of more guns equalling less crime. And I believe that to be true, but my adversary claimed that Arizona is a shall carry state (OC at will) and issues CC permits, and yet has a high crime rate.

So I looked into it and its true, they have half the population of Illinois but a large number of crimes commited, and a lot of firearm related crime. So I thought it would just be because of the population differences that the percentages would be more. (I've found this to be true every other time i've had this argument regarding another location) but its not just the percentages, the numbers actually compete with locations that enforce strict "gun control".

The only thing I can come up with is they have illegal immigrants flowing in, as well as there maybe isn't enough law abiding gun owners to reduce crime but idk.

I must be missing something, like I said every other time I've looked at the stats comparing a more restrictive gun law area to a less restrictive gun law area the less restrictive has less crime. So wtf? Why does Arizona have more crime than Illinois when they are less restrictive on guns. (Not all types of crime)

 

[jwh20]

As your likely already know, there are many factors that affect violent behaviors. Guns actually have almost nothing to do with it. Violent people will continue to be violent. What guns do is permit lawful people to defend themselves and deter violent offenders.

 

[dansgotguns]

As your likely already know, there are many factors that affect violent behaviors. Guns actually have almost nothing to do with it. Violent people will continue to be violent. What guns do is permit lawful people to defend themselves and deter violent offenders.

Right I do understand that, but doesn't this debunk the more guns less crime theory? Im very aware that guns do not create or dissipate crime, and its based on actions of people. Sooo my theory as to why they have so much crime would be that not enough law abiding gun owners are defending themselves amd keeping criminals at bay. interested in opinions

 

[JetGirl]

they have half the population of Illinois but a large number of crimes commited, and a lot of firearm related crime.

Firearm crimes committed by legal owners who've passed the NICS background check?
I'd think that's unlikely.
I'm betting the firearms crimes are from people not exactly meeting the "proper person" definition.

 

[armedindy]

youre going to have to realize that you can toil over stats all you want. But you cannot sacrifice or legislate away freedoms because of those stats. Its a philosophical issue, in which statistics have no merit.

 

[dansgotguns]

Firearm crimes committed by legal owners who've passed the NICS background check?
I'd think that's unlikely.
I'm betting the firearms crimes are from people not exactly meeting the "proper person" definition.

My thoughts exactly and I brought that up in the debate.

 

[dansgotguns]

youre going to have to realize that you can toil over stats all you want. But you cannot sacrifice or legislate away freedoms because of those stats. Its a philosophical issue, in which statistics have no merit.

Im with you on that, I in no way think we should be legislating anything but constitutional carry. And truthfully I believe statistics are crap because they dont add in contributing factors, its just that this is my first time seeing stats in favor of gun control, on fbi.gov

 

[armedindy]

Im with you on that, I in no way think we should be legislating anything but constitutional carry. And truthfully I believe statistics are crap because they dont add in contributing factors, its just that this is my first time seeing stats in favor of gun control, on fbi.gov

ive done some searching too, and found some surprising things....like indy has a higher murder rate than NYC....kind of ruined my argument but it was apparently true

 

[dansgotguns]

ive done some searching too, and found some surprising things....like indy has a higher murder rate than NYC....kind of ruined my argument but it was apparently true

More murders? Or higher percentage. You have to configure population.

 

[Bill B]

are comparing all types of violent crime, or just firearms crime?

 

[churchmouse]

Im in a Facebook debate about guns (the usual). We've come to the topic of more guns equalling less crime. And I believe that to be true, but my adversary claimed that Arizona is a shall carry state (OC at will) and issues CC permits, and yet has a high crime rate.

So I looked into it and its true, they have half the population of Illinois but a large number of crimes commited, and a lot of firearm related crime. So I thought it would just be because of the population differences that the percentages would be more. (I've found this to be true every other time i've had this argument regarding another location) but its not just the percentages, the numbers actually compete with locations that enforce strict "gun control".

The only thing I can come up with is they have illegal immigrants flowing in, as well as there maybe isn't enough law abiding gun owners to reduce crime but idk.

I must be missing something, like I said every other time I've looked at the stats comparing a more restrictive gun law area to a less restrictive gun law area the less restrictive has less crime. So wtf? Why does Arizona have more crime than Illinois when they are less restrictive on guns. (Not all types of crime)

If every citizen in Arizona had a fully auto carry the crime rate would still be high.
Think with me....where are they located....what country is to the immediate south of them....what does that country bring to us......a steady flow of violence associated with drugs and dirt bag vagrants flowing across the border. Arizona is the focal point of that area for drugs and dirt bags.
Hell yes they are up to their ears in crime.

 

[dansgotguns]

are comparing all types of violent crime, or just firearms crime?

All types. But mostly violent crimes and crimes with a firearm.

 

[dansgotguns]

If every citizen in Arizona had a fully auto carry the crime rate would still be high.
Think with me....where are they located....what country is to the immediate south of them....what does that country bring to us......a steady flow of violence associated with drugs and dirt bag vagrants flowing across the border. Arizona is the focal point of that area for drugs and dirt bags.
Hell yes they are up to their ears in crime.

Bingo, this is the only reasonable explanation I could find as well.

 

[jbombelli]

You can't compare two different cities with two different populations in that way. Comparing Chicago to NYC, or to Los Angeles, for example, is apples and oranges. Look at Detroit and Indianapolis. Michigan issues licenses/permits, and so does Indiana, but the two cities are pretty far apart when it comes to violent crime.

What you have to look at is what was the violent crime rate in a particular area before people started carrying firearms, and what happened to the violent crime rate after. The conclusion drawn from this approach is that violent crime rates tend to go down when a state allows its citizens to carry firearms. But even that is nothing more than correlation. There is so much more that factors into this that it boggles the mind.

But in the end, it's not right to try to tell someone, regardless of where he lives, that he cannot avail himself of the tools he needs to defend his own life.

 

[jblomenberg16]

I think there are a few other factors that a simple high level crime rate won't accurately measure.


1) As others mentioned, were the violent crimes committed by people who legally obtained and owned the guns?

2) How many crimes were prevented (such as assault, home burglary, etc) by legal gun owners defending themselves or their property?


I do not for a minute think that simply infusing more guns into a society wired for violence will make the crime rate go down.

I do firmly believe that when citizens legally arm themselves, and take steps to be safe and proficient with said arms, that they can greatly improve their chances of protecting themselves (either actively or passively) by being armed.


Remember the saying "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight?" There is a lot of truth in it. First, there will be fights. Second, Knives are still used more frequently than guns in violent crimes. Third, the person with the weapon advantage, so gun > knife likely has better odds of "winning" the fight.

 

[Sfrandolph]

Arizona is an anomaly. They have a significant amount of crime committed by illegal aliens (aka undocumented citizens). Therefore the crime stats don't hold true when measured against legal gun ownership.

 

[churchmouse]

And consider this....most of those who would enter into this debate on face book are not armed with any real knowledge of the issue. They come armed with sound bites and talking points provided by the lib media and institutions (literally) of higher learning.

 

[bingley]

I do not for a minute think that simply infusing more guns into a society wired for violence will make the crime rate go down.

I do firmly believe that when citizens legally arm themselves, and take steps to be safe and proficient with said arms, that they can greatly improve their chances of protecting themselves (either actively or passively) by being armed.

I think this is closer to the truth than simplifications like "more guns = less crime" or "fewer guns = less crime." This is not to say that guns have nothing to do with crime rate, but regulation and availability of guns are likely just two factors amongst many. Alas, complicated truths do not go over well in politics, and so people on opposite sides end up shouting simplifications at each other.

I quoted the second paragraph above because this is probably what many of us would advocate gun ownership. That is a perspective from "individual" need, and it's different from the "macroscopic" argument based on what gun ownership may or may not impact the safety of the public as a whole. There is a kind of conflict of perspective here, even though both sides are well-intentioned to begin with.

 

[SERparacord]

AZ, start of the cartel drug superhighway. Now why would they have more crime. Not counting the feds handing out guns.

 

[cobber]

And consider this....most of those who would enter into this debate on face book are not armed with any real knowledge of the issue. They come armed with sound bites and talking points provided by the lib media and institutions (literally) of higher "learning".

FIFY