-Your link requires a subscription to read the article.
-An analysis of the previous article; written by people loyal to the University of Chicago; with a bias toward getting guns out of the inner city. Your link requires a subscription to read the article.
-Again, written by Chicago authors with a bias toward the Brady bunch, and removing guns from the inner city. Not to mention, it's 14 years old.
Quote:
http://hercules.gcsu.edu/~jswinton/E...Deterrence.pdf
"The benefits that a county obtains from its state passing a shail-issue concealed-handgun law are generally stronger than those found in previous work. Spillover effects on neighboring areas are almost always deleterious."
In other words, counties benefit, but it seems that crime just moves elsewhere instead of reducing.
|
-What's the problem? If it gets crime out of my area, why should I care?
You also left out the primary statement in that data: "Except for assaults, these spillover effects are either deleterious or
insignificant."
...Not that the "insignificant" spill over effects matter... they're plugging their statistics into an unproven algorithm. None of their conclusions are based on hard data. It's based on estimates that were pumped out of the algorithm.
That isn't a fair comparison. They're using different data collection and reporting methods. I can find data to support the idea that it's cheaper to live on Mars, than in Manhattan; but that doesn't make it true.