Does Strict Gun Control Reduce Gun Homicides? No.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence ranks states according to the severity of their gun control laws. South Dakota, for example, ranks poorly.

South Dakota has weak gun laws that help feed the illegal gun market and allow the sale of guns without background checks. In the 2009 state scorecards released for all 50 states by the Brady Campaign, South Dakota earns just four points out of a total of 100.

"Since South Dakota does not require Brady criminal background checks on all firearm sales, including those at gun shows, gun traffickers don't need to leave the state to funnel illegal guns to felons and gang members," said Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign.

Well, like other South Dakotans, I am used to seeing my state ranking low on something. But it does occur to me to ask whether weak gun laws lead to more gun violence. I assume that the whole point of "strong" gun laws is to keep people from being shot out of their socks.

As it happens, this information landed in my email queue just this week, sent from a colleague. The following graph was prepared by a third year law student.

He compares gun homicides per 100,000 (that's the Y axis) with the Brady ranking of state gun control laws (that's the X axis). So up means more gun homicides, and further to the right means looser gun control laws. Here is what the chart actually shows:

Now what you look for in a chart like this is a more or less smooth line from bottom left to top right, or vice versa. If homicides were low where gun control was strict, and vice versa, that would tell you that gun control laws reduce gun violence. If the line tilted opposite, so that homicides were highest where gun control was strictest, one might think that gun control causes gun violence. Of course, all the chart can show is correlation, not causation.

What the chart in fact shows is that there is virtually no correlation between gun control laws and gun homicides. Hawaii, at the strict gun control end, has the lowest gun homicide rate. But Maryland, which rates slightly stricter on the Brady Scale, has the second highest gun homicide rate. Louisiana, with the second loosest gun laws has the highest gun homicide rate. North and South Dakota, ranking far to the right in laws, are at the bottom in gun violence.

Of course, gun violence is probably correlated with a lot of socio-economic factors. There are lots of reasons why Hawaii, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nebraska, South and North Dakota, are gun safe states. But if gun control laws really did any good, one would expect a lower left to upper right line to appear here. None does. On the contrary, if Louisiana, with the social chaos that resulted from Katrina, were taken off the chart, one would get a very gentle slope from high left to lower right.

There is in fact virtually no evidence that gun control laws reduce gun violence. This is one more thing that the American left knows for sure that isn't true.

Comments

[BillW]

While I am about as strong an anti-gun control guy as you will find, and I see the 2nd ammendment as pretty clear on the matter, an honest assessment of this data indicates that the lack of correlation is a two-edged sword. The notion that readily available guns actually deter murders (an arguement often advanced by the NRA and their supporters)doesn't seem to carry much weight either.

[George Mason]

Bill old friend, You may want to look into the work of John Lott who has done extensive research in the matter of guns and crime. His best known work is "More Guns, Less Crime" which demonstrated a correlation between the enactment of conceal-carry laws and a reduction in crime in the states that Lott studied. Anecdotally if there was a correlation between guns and crime South Dakota should resemble Chicago circa 1925. Also, two of the most heavily armed countries on earth are Sweden and Switzerland (they have universal military service and adult males maintain their weapons at home)have quite low rates of crime.
If you look at the FBI annual records you will find that murders committed by someone using a gun are disproportionally within specific racial and socio-economic parameters and the majority of these crimes are related to the illegal drug trade.

[BillW]

I am simply pointing out that Ken's chart demonstrating a lack of correlation demonstrates lack of correlation both ways. I don't think the presence or absence of guns has much to do with murder rates at all. I happen to believe that sick, violent people commit murders, and whether having a gun is legal or not, and whether a lot of people in the neighborhood have guns or not, doesn't play much part in the thought process one of these sickos brings to bear on the matter.

As far as the studies you cited go, they would seem to be at odds with the data Ken cited, wouldn't they?

That said, I think it is a very useful thing to have access to a gun in the unlikely event one of these wackos decides to come after you or me.

[strandediniowa]

The difference I see between Brady's numbers and the Lott or Kleck studies are that Brady's numbers are based on an opinion as in "My opinion is that South Dakota has lax guns laws". These types of arguments are like putting 50 people in a room and some will think the room is too cold, some too hot, and some just right.

Lott and Kleck could at least demonstrate actual numbers of gun ownership trending up and crime trending down.

As has been said, all this graph shows is that Brady's opinions of lax gun laws don't correlate to the murder rate of a state. The rate neither supports or disproves the organization's utopian ideal.

I wouldn't cite this study by Mr. Amkraut to disprove Lott or Kleck's work only Brady itself.

[Davidka]

Since it's just us scholars here, let's be frank with each other. You would find a very close correlation between what is euphemistically called "socio-economic factors" and the crime rate, including violent crime and including crimes involving guns. To get rid of euphemisms and be more frank, there is an obvious and direct correlation is between the percentage of blacks and to some extent certain Hispanics (e.g., Puerto Ricans in New York City), and the crime rates.

Certainly, however, the evidence does not indicate that few guns mean less crime; quite the opposite, as John Lott and others have clearly shown.

[KB]

Thanks to all for the thread so far. BillW obviously has a point. If gun violence rose in proportion to the severity of gun control laws, that would be a very robust finding for the NRA! It doesn't.

There is a difference between saying that certain kinds of crime decrease as a result of a right to carry law, and saying that gun violence decreases with relatively loose gun laws. Lott's argument, by which I was persuaded, was that the passage of a right to carry law leads to a decrease in personal assaults such as mugging or rape. I seem to recall property crimes showed a slight increase, suggesting that some criminals were moving to presumably unarmed targets. It occurs to me that that result may be in part due to psychology. A RTC law encourages a predator to wonder whether that pretty coed walking across the street from campus might have a pistol in her purse. I say good.

At any rate, the chart suggests that loose gun laws do not have an effect, positive or negative, on gun violence rates.

[KB]

Thanks to all for the thread so far. BillW obviously has a point. If gun violence rose in proportion to the severity of gun control laws, that would be a very robust finding for the NRA! It doesn't.

There is a difference between saying that certain kinds of crime decrease as a result of a right to carry law, and saying that gun violence decreases with relatively loose gun laws. Lott's argument, by which I was persuaded, was that the passage of a right to carry law leads to a decrease in personal assaults such as mugging or rape. I seem to recall property crimes showed a slight increase, suggesting that some criminals were moving to presumably unarmed targets. It occurs to me that that result may be in part due to psychology. A RTC law encourages a predator to wonder whether that pretty coed walking across the street from campus might have a pistol in her purse. I say good.

At any rate, the chart suggests that loose gun laws do not have an effect, positive or negative, on gun violence rates.