HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control Reform Activism (Group) » Yet another study about g...

Wed Mar 2, 2016, 05:24 PM

Yet another study about guns and death

http://www.gq.com/story/new-gun-control-study
Massive New Study Shows How Effective Gun Control Can Be

A few months ago, I went to Los Angeles's beautiful Arclight Cinemas in Hollywood to see a midnight screening of Star Wars: The Force Awakens. I had never seen the lobby so crowded. There were more than thirty separate sold-out or near sold-out screenings of the movie happening that evening. Every single screen was dedicated to the return of the legendary franchise, and the crowd seemed impossible to navigate through. People were so happy and excited. It was the kind of night that you dream of if you love going to the movies. But, as much as I wanted to just enjoy it, I couldn't shake a low-level, but constantly nagging sense of dread. "This would be the type of event that a gunman would want to destroy," my brain kept whispering to me. It felt like our very happiness was dangerous, and somehow made us targets. That at any moment there was a real possibility that a damaged person with a gun could end our fun.
====
The study, which was published by Epidemiologic Reviews, looked at gun laws around the world and the gun violence stats both before and after those gun laws were enacted. The results? Well, while the academics are quick to say that the study doesn't conclusively prove that gun control reduces gun-related homicides, it does show that there is a trend whereby an increase in restrictions on firearm purchase and ownership leads to a decrease in gun deaths. So even though the evidence might not "prove" that gun control reduces deaths, the evidence does strongly suggest that.
====
Here's how Vox characterizes the findings.

"Rather, countries passed big packages of gun laws, which overhauled the nation's firearm code fairly broadly, which all tended to share similar features. According to [lead author Julian] Santaella-Tenorio, they generally included:

Banning "weapons that are actually very powerful," like automatic weapons.
"They all implemented background checks."
"They all required permits and licenses for purchasing guns."
South Africa's comprehensive Firearm Control Act, passed in 2000, contained all these measures. One study found that firearm homicides in five major South African cities decreased by 13.6 percent per year for the next five years."
====
By contrast, laws favored by the National Rifle Association (such as concealed carry or stand your ground), when implemented, either had no effect on gun deaths or increased gun violence. And Santaella-Tenorio found this by considering not just studies that reached this conclusion, but also studies that supported loosening gun laws.

Most of the studies that supported these laws were written by a handful of authors, like Florida State's Gary Kleck and independent scholar/Fox News columnist John Lott. Scholars who reexamined their conclusions, sometimes even using their own data, generally came to the opposite results.

The point, then, is that the pro-gun studies tended to be outliers in the literature, and were not supported by the most rigorous available analysis.


Additional reading: http://www.vox.com/2016/2/29/11120184/gun-control-study-international-evidence

http://www.gq.com/story/american-shootings-nra-gun-lobby

Cue the Gungeoneers! The study is bogus. It's not peer reviewed by people we like. It's biased (yeah, toward the truth). Second amendment!!1!! God Given Right1!11!! Violent crime is down! That's why we need guns! Cause freedumb!

9 replies, 2160 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 9 replies Author Time Post
Reply Yet another study about guns and death (Original post)
flamin lib Mar 2016 OP
revbones Mar 2016 #1
flamin lib Mar 2016 #2
revbones Mar 2016 #3
flamin lib Mar 2016 #4
revbones Mar 2016 #5
flamin lib Mar 2016 #7
monicaangela Mar 2016 #6
Jackson3000 Mar 2016 #8
monicaangela Mar 2016 #9

Response to flamin lib (Original post)

Wed Mar 2, 2016, 05:25 PM

1. So if Democrats are for gun control...

 

And the NRA hates those that are for gun control...

And the NRA is now raising money for Hillary...

What does that mean?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to revbones (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 2, 2016, 05:28 PM

2. Don't bring your crazy ass Bernie primary shit to me.

I've trashed all the primary groups for a reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #2)

Wed Mar 2, 2016, 05:29 PM

3. Did I mention Bernie?

 

Nope. Just pointed out the new money tree Hillary is shaking - the NRA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to revbones (Reply #3)

Wed Mar 2, 2016, 05:33 PM

4. You didn't need to.

Account status: Active
Member since: Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:31 PM
Number of posts: 462
Number of posts, last 90 days: 462
Favorite forum: General Discussion: Primaries, 393 posts in the last 90 days (85% of total posts)
Favorite group: Bernie Sanders, 23 posts in the last 90 days (5% of total posts)
Last post: Wed Mar 2, 2016, 03:30 PM

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #4)

Wed Mar 2, 2016, 05:43 PM

5. So because that listed my fav group for 23 posts, I'm not allowed to comment on gun control?

 

Or Hillary being hypocritical on it by taking NRA money?

I thought we were supposed to be in favor of gun control and anti-NRA - AND that we were Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to revbones (Reply #5)

Wed Mar 2, 2016, 06:19 PM

7. No, Just leave your primary shit where it belongs. There are three groups for that shit.

If there is basis for such blathering from a Bernie bro show it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Original post)

Wed Mar 2, 2016, 06:04 PM

6. Excellent study flamin lib!

It appears that these studies are overlooked by those in power, those that have the power to do something about this problem. We have known for a long time now that our laws are a big part of the reason we have so many deaths due to firearms, but we have chosen to look the other way, even when other countries like Austria, Australia and South Africa have proof that restrictive laws, that do not take away gun privileges but just remove the ability of their citizens to purchase weapons that are made for war, weapons that are used for killing humans and the ability to purchase those weapons easily without proper background checks as in our internet sales, gun show sales etc are implemented. Every time I look at the situation we have in the U.S. all I can think is GREED is a big factor, the maniacal efforts of a faction that loves seeing the population culled through the use of these weapons are also a big part of it, and citizens that are so afraid of their government and their fellow citizens they refuse to see the havoc that is being wreaked upon our nation by the NRA and these weapons merchants that apparently have little to no conscience when it comes to providing guns for violence in this nation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monicaangela (Reply #6)

Wed Mar 2, 2016, 06:26 PM

8. Really?

Austria, Australia and South Africa have proof that restrictive laws, that do not take away gun privileges but just remove the ability of their citizens to purchase weapons that are made for war,

You need to read about those countries you are pointing to. And you really think we would be better off if we were like South Africa? You do know their homicide rate is like 5 times ours, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackson3000 (Reply #8)

Wed Mar 2, 2016, 07:00 PM

9. Did you read the study?

I was referring to this:

This finding doesn't highlight one specific law, like an assault weapon ban, in isolation. There were "so many different kinds of laws," Santaella-Tenorio explains, that it was hard to make good international comparisons on every specific kind of gun restriction.

Rather, countries passed big packages of gun laws, which overhauled the nation's firearm code fairly broadly, which all tended to share similar features. According to Santaella-Tenorio, they generally included:
Banning "weapons that are actually very powerful," like automatic weapons.
"They all implemented background checks."
"They all required permits and licenses for purchasing guns."

South Africa's comprehensive Firearm Control Act, passed in 2000, contained all these measures. One study found that firearm homicides in five major South African cities decreased by 13.6 percent per year for the next five years. "Reductions in nonfirearm homicides were also observed," Santaella-Tenorio et al. note, "although not as pronounced as the ones observed for firearm homicides."

Austria's 1997 firearm law, similarly, required background checks, limited access to powerful firearms, and imposed rules about how gun owners had to store their guns. Santaella-Tenorio reviewed two studies on Austria's 1997 law, both of which found evidence that the law had reduced deaths. According to one of them, firearm homicides went down by 4.8 percent, while suicides went down by 9.9 percent.

Australia's 1996 National Firearms Agreement (which outright confiscated 650,000 guns, in addition to imposing background checks and licensing rules) is perhaps the best-studied of any of the international laws. Santaella-Tenorio et al. reviewed eight studies on it, most of which found clear and strong evidence of a reduction in firearm deaths after the law's passage.


Which was included in the study. My reference was to the study, and I have read about the countries I referred to and do realize they are at least trying to do something about the problem, we don't seem to be able to find anyone intelligent enough in this country to even be able to address the issue, or to care enough about the issue to address it. Big Difference.



This sounds so familiar, it appears it is the excuse across borders and cultures and, well just watch



And Austria, same problem, citizens wanting to take the law into their own hands



So, just to make a long story short and so that you don't have to do too much reading about what I know, I hope you have an idea of what I think about guns and what I think about the gun game, and last but not least, why I think the study was a good one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread