12/14/2006

A timely reminder: "Keeping lawful citizens unarmed won't reduce number of criminals"

What I would have added to this piece is that disarmament is a relative question. The issue is whether a law disarms more law-abiding individuals or criminals. Who is more likely to obey the law? Who is more likely to find the law imposing costs on their gun ownership? The problem is that the law-abiding citizens are often the ones who care more about obeying laws.

What both sides need to realize is that it's criminals - not guns or politicians - who are responsible for crime. If an individual is truly bent on breaking the law, he isn't going to be deterred by simply more laws.

The only sure way to reduce violent crime is to reduce the number of violent criminals.

Studies show that criminals are less risk-averse than the population at large. In fact, it turns out that people who commit crimes actually seek out risk.


My one complaint with the piece is that it uses numbers that I say in my book are unreliable. The purely cross-sectional comparison is made because that is what most people do, but it is very misleading and exaggerates the benefits from right-to-carry laws.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home