Business Insider says "Gun control really works — here's the science to prove it"

[DaleA]

Business Insider August 27, 2018

https://www.businessinsider.com/scie...t-works-2018-2

BI bemoans the fact that there is no national database of gun owners and no requirement to register guns.

"That's one of the many obstacles researchers come up against when trying to evaluate why so many people die from guns in the US."

But despite this obstacle they have been able to reach some conclusions:

1. "Making it easier to carry concealed guns increases the number of gun homicides." Must be true. They've got "studies" that show a 9% increase in homicides where concealed carry is easy.

2. There was a spike in gun sales after Sandy Hook. (true) Their conclusion?
"The researchers' calculations showed that 40 adults and 20 children died as a result of those additional gun purchases [after Sandy Hook]." Really?

3. "The so-called Lautenberg amendment to the 1968 Gun Control Act disqualifies people with a misdemeanor conviction for domestic violence from buying or owning weapons. Researchers found that gun murders of female intimate partners decreased by 17% as a result of the amendment."

4. "Laws that call for longer sentences for gun crimes also seem to help a little." Hmmm...maybe because the bad guys that have proven they will shoot you with a gun are no longer out in public?

5. "States that have stricter gun-control laws and spend more money on education and mental-health care have fewer school shootings." "There was an average of one school shooting per year from 1966 to 2008, but an average of one per week from 2013 to 2015, the study found." I think NPR just recently busted the school shooting statistics.

6. "After Congress let a 1994 ban on assault weapons expire in 2004, gun massacre deaths skyrocketed." "The number of gun massacres and massacre deaths decreased by 37% and 43% respectively after the 1994 ban on assault weapons went into effect, one researcher found. After it expired in 2004, they shot up by 183% and 239%."

Let's just say the BI has got a LOT of "studies".
Business Insider has some things we could do to quell gun violence in America.

1. "According to one study, replacing medium- and large-caliber weapons with small-caliber guns would dramatically reduce gun homicide rates."
They're talking about the (flawed) Boston study of gunshot deaths released in July and discussed here:

https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=597292

Being totally uncharitable today I can see how this would work. Instead of a 'gun buyback' program there would be a 'gun exchange' program where thugs could turn in their used guns (.380 caliber and up) and get shiny new handguns (.22, .25 etc. up to .32 caliber...maybe an exception would have to be made for the .327 magnum...that might be too powerful but hey since it's the caliber that's deadly why not allow it anyway.) After this program gets underway I see a wave of kinder, gentler shootings in our urban areas.

2. "Weapons buy-back programs have been successful in reducing mass shootings." They bring out the Australian gun buyback program with some startling results. "firearm suicides dropped by 65% and homicides by 59% over the next 10 years. While Australia had seen 13 mass shootings — defined as five or more deaths — in the 18 years before the 1996 massacre, there has only been one in the 22 years since."

3. "Reducing access to guns could reduce the number of suicides in the US." They've got some startling results here too. "When the Israel Defense Forces stopped letting troops bring weapons home on the weekends, suicide rates dropped by 40%, one study found." Wow. Color me stunned (or skeptical).

4. "The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma has called for regulations that they say will make the population safer. Their recommendations include removing firearms from domestic violence perpetrators (and those threatening violence while their cases are underway); regulating the sale of high volume ammunition, semi-automatic weapons, bump stocks, and trigger actuators; and requiring reporting of all firearm sales." Regulating the sale of high volume ammunition? I just gave up figuring out what that means but hey, isn't it something we should at least try, even if we don't know what it is? (sarcasm off)

[TXAZ]

Good input Dale, thanks.

The title "Journalist" used to mean something in the Walter Cronkite era.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Do you have access to Google?

Can you cut and paste?

Are you willing to spend six figures to obtain a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and a Graduate degree in journalism?

Yes? Then you too can enter the exciting world of telling Business Insider readers what constitutes “science!”*

*No actual knowledge of the scientific method or ability to objectively evaluate research necessary!

[Tom Servo]

Allow me to build on a few of your points.

They've got "studies" that show a 9% increase in homicides where concealed carry is easy.

Except the study is behind a paywall. I've seen no data from numerous other studies that bears that number out, so I'm calling shenanigans.

The researchers' calculations showed that 40 adults and 20 children died as a result of those additional gun purchases [after Sandy Hook].

Again, it's behind a paywall. I'd REALLY like to see how they made that correlation. What were the circumstances behind those deaths? Can they really tie those incidents to guns purchased after Sandy Hook? I really doubt it.

Laws that call for longer sentences for gun crimes also seem to help a little

Actually, enforcing the laws AT ALL would be a nice change. In Fulton county, Georgia, they prosecute less than 10 people per year for felon in possession. They didn't prosecute a single person for trafficking the last two years.

States that have stricter gun-control laws and spend more money on education and mental-health care have fewer school shootings

The FBI recently did a study on spree shooters, and what they found was that distribution was pretty much random in respects to geography. These are black swan events that can occur anywhere and which won't be affected by gun laws. And yeah, NPR did debunk those numbers, which casts a pall over their whole argument.

After [the AWB] expired in 2004, [mass shootings] shot up by 183% and 239%

Nope. Not even wrong, and completely debunked.

According to one study, replacing medium- and large-caliber weapons with small-caliber guns would dramatically reduce gun homicide rates.

The AR-15 is a "small caliber gun."

I've debunked my share of "studies" from the graboids, and I lament the fact that they can just wave a paper with some numbers and graphs and claim it to be unimpeachable science.

[Scorch]

I've read that 73% of all statistics are just made up on the spot. Including this one.

[arcticap]

Bartholomew Roberts said;

Are you willing to spend six figures to obtain a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and a Graduate degree in journalism?

Yes? Then you too can enter the exciting world of telling Business Insider readers what constitutes “science!”*

*No actual knowledge of the scientific method or ability to objectively evaluate research necessary!

I really do object to the characterization that these studies
and statistics are being promulgated by political scientists.

Just because BI uses the word "science" in the title of their
article doesn't mean that these studies or statistics have
any connection to the study of political science at all.

It would seem to me that these types of studies are written
by sociologists, otherwise known as social scientists. More
specifically, sociologists who major in criminology and who
study criminal behavior trends within society and the reasons
why individuals have committed mass murders and other gun
related crimes, whether motivated by pyschological, social or
political reasons such as related to terrorism. And then try to
statistically analyze the effects of gun policies and gun use on
society.

"What is a sociologist job?
Sociologists typically do the following: Design research projects
to test theories about social issues. Collect data through
surveys, observations, interviews, and other sources. ...
Consult with and advise clients, policymakers, or other groups on
research findings and sociological issues."

https://www.truity.com/career-profile/sociologist

[44 AMP]

The researchers' calculations showed that 40 adults and 20 children died as a result of those additional gun purchases [after Sandy Hook].

People don't die as a result of a gun purchase, they die as a result of being shot.

Gonna count people shot and killed with guns bought after Sandy Hook? ok. Does it mean something? Will it mean something in 20 years? How about all the guns bought after Sandy Hook that have shot no one? Better count everyone in the US as a life saved then! Do they count everyone who dies in Hiroshima today as killed by the atom bomb??

what is it with these people??

[armoredman]

Lies, half truths and shading doesn't matter as long as it furthers The Agenda with these people. Some are genuine Useful Idiots who blindly march along under the banner, the others know exactly what they are doing.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I really do object to the characterization that these studies
and statistics are being promulgated by political scientists

The characterization was about what it took to be the “science” writer for Business Insider. It was not my intention to draw any broader conclusions.

[Ike666]

Tom Servo

If you're interested you can access the "9% increase" article here:

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/do...PH.2017.304057

Two things: Siegle is a long time anti-gun shill and the article merely states that there is an "association" between shall-issue states and increase homicide rates. One could as easily infer from this data that the increase in homicide led the state legislatures to loosen restrictions on issuing concealed permits.

To establish causality you must:

1) establish that there is a non-random relationship between the variables (did that)
2) that the causal variable occurred before the outcome variable; temporal ordering (failed to do that)
3) control for rival or spurious causal relationships (miserably failed to do that)

This is little more than the misuse of statistics and science to further a agenda.

[TXAZ]

I just sent the author a respectful email on some of the inaccuracies. It will be interesting (actually surprising) if I get a response.

You can also at:
kloria at techinsider dot io

[Spats McGee]

Please let us know if there's a response, TXAZ. I'm awfully curious about that.

[TXAZ]

Originally Posted by Spats McGee

Please let us know if there's a response, TXAZ. I'm awfully curious about that.

Sure Spats, will do. I'm holding my breath as I type.
Sure hope he replies soon.....

[zukiphile]

Originally Posted by Acticap

I really do object to the characterization that these studies
and statistics are being promulgated by political scientists.

The problem is that the author addressed by Dale actually has an undergraduate PoliSci degree and attended J-school.

TXAZ, I don't know if BI has something like a letter to the editors section. Maybe if your business model is selling clicks rather than publishing a periodical of which someone would want an entire copy, you don't have such a section. I don't see a commnets section for the article itself.

[TXAZ]

I'll give him the benefit of doubt Zukiphile. I read some of his other 'stuff', there seems to be a common thread.... So I don't expect inviting him to the .50BMG fun shoot would get a positive response, even with free travel and ammo

But we'll see.
In reality I don't expect any reply from him because it does nothing for his credibility to acknowledge someone who may have pointed out factual errors in his work.

[arcticap]

Originally Posted by zukiphile

The problem is that the author addressed by Dale actually has an undergraduate PoliSci degree and attended J-school.

Thanks for that info. since I missed it.
I don't think his Poli Sci degree is a "problem" since the BI author also has a degree in philosophy, which was omitted from the post that I initially replied to.
Why mention one degree and not the other?

https://www.businessinsider.com/author/kevin-loria

The BI author concludes his article with a statement linked to a book that's written by 2 UC Berkley criminologists (among their other academic degrees), and they collaborated on authoring many books.

And that's the point that I was trying to make about the actual profession of the people performing these "scientific" studies that the BI author relies on in his article.

By parroting the bias of people like these criminologists who advocate such social engineering, he's helping to spread their propaganda like a virus.

[44 AMP]

I don't care if he has sixteen degrees or none, he's spouting nonsense and lies (inaccurate or distorted statistics).

Other than actual accidents, which are pretty rare, really, people get shot because of criminal acts. Either by someone committing a criminal act, or by someone seeking to prevent a criminal act. THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION.

Every bolded statement in the OP is NOT fact it is a conclusion, which implies a fact that is not proven. Choosing ONE fact with a relationship to murders with guns, and ASSUMING that fact is the sole cause of any statistical change is fallacy.

X% change (up or down) after passing this or that law, claiming that the law, and the law alone created the change, totally ignoring ALL other factors is fallacy. It is flawed logic.

One can find a "connection" or a "correlation" between everything on Earth, if you're willing to make it, no matter how tenuous. If it happened on Earth, that is a relationship. SO, therefore, to reduce murders, on Earth, we should outlaw Earth. Makes just as much sense.

Doesn't matter how many people with paper on their walls agree with it, drivel is still drivel.

[Roamin_Wade]

One little factual statistic that they never talk about is that every 3 out of 4 people in this country make up 75% of the population! The left never talks about that!!!

[Number10GI]

"Caliber didn't affect where on the body people got shot. But people who were shot with larger bullets were more likely to die. People shot with medium-caliber weapons (defined as .38, .380, and 9 mm) were more than twice as likely to die as those shot with small-caliber guns (defined as .22, .25, and .32 mm). "


I didn't know that there were hand held .22, .25 and .32mm guns. It would require two men and 8 or 10 boys to tote and shoot that thing.

[MoArk Willy]

It's humorous that the one "statistic" that the gun grabbers never use is the most important one.
99.998% of gun owners, according to "statistics" have never committed a crime with their guns.
The fact that they pour over every other statistic is just proof that they have no idea what to do about criminals and their only solution is to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens.
It's the Sal Alinksy way....step #4 in the handbook to create a social state.

[Armed_Chicagoan]

Originally Posted by Number10GI

I didn't know that there were hand held .22, .25 and .32mm guns. It would require two men and 8 or 10 boys to tote and shoot that thing.

Actually .32 mm is less than half the diameter of a sewing needle, maybe you could kill a flea with a gun that fires a bullet that size.

[NateKirk]

I think one of the complaints of the left is nitpicking technical errors such as .32 caliber vs .32 mm, as a way of circumventing discussion of the actual point they were trying to make. It makes for stupid debates.

[Wag]

Originally Posted by MoArk Willy

The fact that they pour over every other statistic is just proof that they have no idea what to do about criminals and their only solution is to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens.

This. Absolutely this.

Just goes to show that politicians only pretend to solve problems rather than actually solving them.

--Wag--

[4V50 Gary]

Agenda driven article probably paid for by some "benign" NGO. Business insider should concentrate on business (Fed Res raising interest rates and how it impacts emerging markets whose debts are denominated in dollars, true inflation, credit bubble, housing bubble, car loan bubble, subprime lending) just like the AMA should concentrate on health, prevention and not social issues.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Having heard similar screeds at the American Society for Criminology meeting and the well known cautions of correlation vs. causality plus the direction of causality, I've never seen a study that indicates that if you look at the increase in incidents they were because of shots fired by licensed gun carriers. It seems to be argued that legal gun carriers have some minding bending aura that leads criminals to commit more crime - now how does that work?

If you actually go to professional meetings on such, you know that the conclusions of some researchers are well known as to their position.

You do find some honest folks. I have sat with pro-gun criminologists, psychologists and the like who think some of the pro-gun researchers are a touch suspect and vice versa.

They are rare and good folk.