More Gun Grabber Baloney

The anti-Second-Amendment crowd has been positively giddy over a new study that claims Connecticut’s gun registration law cut gun violence an amazing 40%.

I find this claim extremely suspect.

You can read some good critiques from Reason, Hot Air and especially John Lott. Lott is an object of hate from many gun grabbers because of his “more guns, less crime” theory. Some of the criticism is deserved: he can’t reproduce his original results because, he claims, his hard drive crashed. But what Lott is good at is poking holes in the claims of marginal studies of single states that make grand conclusions.

In this case, the authors’ result is that Connecticut saw a sharper reduction in gun violence than Rhode Island did over a very specific ten year frame. That’s it. So give up those NRA memberships guys, the debate is over.

Of course …

Of course, if you look at the data before that law was passed, Connecticut’s rate of gun violence was already falling. And if you look at the data after their ten year window, Connecticut’s rate comes back up. And if you compare them to literally any state other than Rhode Island, the supposed reduction in violence disappears. And if you look at other states that have passed similar gun control laws, you don’t see a reduction in gun murders.

To be clear: there’s no fraud here. Their claim is true. But it’s cherry-picked. You could do a hundred other studies looking at the effects of gun laws and not come to this conclusion. You could do this study with only slightly different parameters and not reach their conclusion.

And it’s not the first time for these guys. Recently, they claimed that violence in Missouri went up because of a repeal of a gun control law. That claim was also cherry-picked. And now comes information that the claim that mass shootings were going up was also bogus. For some time, Mother Jones had been ground zero for this nonsense, including a collection of mischaracterized, cherry-picked data that proved nothing.

But remember, folks. It’s conservatives who are the enemies of science. It’s we who ignore empirical data and substitute our feelings in. Not the Left, oh no. Especially not those who are funded by gun-grabber Michael Bloomberg.

Comments are closed.

  1. Christopher

    “For some time, Mother Jones had been ground zero for this nonsense…”

    It still is, unfortunately.  Primarily with their claims that no mass shootings have been stopped by armed civilians (they shrug off a few examples on the grounds that the defender in those cases were former or current law enforcement or military).  There’s also this, I take issue mostly with the VPC study that they’re publicizing:

    Since I’m here, do you have any thoughts on this next one?  It seems to be favored amongst more prominent gun control advocates like those at Media Matters or ThingProgress (I think you’ve mentioned one or two of the listed studies before):

    Thumb up 0

  2. AlexInCT

    It is people with a political agenda and a willingness to corrupt science to push that agenda that are an enemy of science. Both sides do it. The problem is that the unscientific  political agenda of the right is just stupid and painful, while the one on the left results in the death of millions and misery for all but the top men. Look at the history of the last 100 years and the role of collectivism in that. AGW is yet another attempt at genocidal reduction of the population by Gaia worshippers that believe they will be the ones spared when the masters cull the herd and make us all go back to living the quality of life people endured in the 17th century. The masters of course will not be asked to sacrifice anything.

    For the masters to feel same in their eugenic mission, they need a docile population. If they can’t get that, they need one that can’t fight back. That’s why the left is obsessed with disarming people that will never let them implement their final solution. And have no doubt that when a progressive talks about gun control the foremost thing on their mind isn’t that guns are bad, but that guns in the hand of people that will oppose them is a bad.

    Thumb up 1