Strange coincidence--Chicago crime rose after handgun ban. What will happen if the ban ends?

[TPaine7]

Chicago crime rose after the handgun ban. So says a study by a William & Mary College economist:

Chicago passed its ban on handguns in 1982, one of the most restrictive in the U.S. It is that law that is being challenged in the Supreme Court.

A study last year by economist Carl Moody of William & Mary College found that after the ban was imposed, city crime rates rose significantly, almost immediately. The city is more dangerous now than it was before the ban, the study concluded, relative to the 24 largest American cities.

Officials here point to a 10 percent reduction in the murder rate in the past two years as proof that the handgun ban is beginning to work. Figures show that 81 percent of the murders in the city were gun-related; nearly 60 percent were gang-related.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/03/01/supreme.court.gun.control/index.html

Here's another strange coincidence--the year after the DC ban was lifted, crime fell. Dramatically. As I discussed earlier, homicides reached their lowest level since 1964. ( http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x278888 )

Now I know that correlation does not equal causation. And even many scholars who support gun rights are not yet ready to say that more guns = less crime.

But reverse correlation is strong evidence against causation; in other words, the history of D.C and Chicago brings into serious question the "more guns = more crime" belief of many who oppose gun rights. And if guns are neutral or better as the evidence tends to indicate, there's no utilitarian reason to ban them--only emotional reasons.

In any event, in spite of the fact that D.C.'s and Chicago's crime rate changes are just coincidences--as far as science can say with authority, at least--I am willing to go out on a limb and make some wild, unfounded, scientifically questionable predictions.

Within one to two years after the Supreme Court strikes down the Chicago gun ban (and Daley and his minions are forced to stop dragging their feet):

1) The Chicago violent crime rate will fall.
2) The Chicago murder rate will fall.
3) The Chicago gun crime rate will fall.
4) The Chicago gun murder rate will fall.
5) The Chicago home invasion robbery rate will fall.
6) If violent crime falls nationwide, Chicago's crime will fall faster than the national average.
7) The Brady Campaign, the Violence Policy Center and like-minded organizations and people will pretend it didn't happen.

Anyone else care to put their predictions on the record?

-------------------

Oh, I almost forgot the funniest part. The handgun ban passed in 1982. Chicago officials claim it's just started to work in the last couple of years--IN 2008 TO 2010. So while the almost immediate increase in crime after the ban was a simple coincidence, the decline in crime 25+ years later is a direct result. Yeah, THAT'S IT.

The gun control reality distortion field is a powerful thing.

[trumad]

1. Yeah---it wouldn't have nothing to do with the worst economy in decades.

:shrug:

[Hannah Bell]

2. and crack cocaine

[TPaine7]

4. Are you talking about Chicago or DC?

If you are talking about Chicago, consider the highlighted portion:

A study last year by economist Carl Moody of William & Mary College found that after the ban was imposed, city crime rates rose significantly, almost immediately. The city is more dangerous now than it was before the ban, the study concluded, relative to the 24 largest American cities.

[TPaine7]

3. Are you saying that the poor economy caused DC's crime rate to plummet? n/t

[rfranklin]

5. NYC has a dropping crime rate and a handgun ban...

The belief that more guns prevent crime is magical thinking.


Number of New York
City murders on target
for record low

BY Erin Einhorn
DAILY NEWS CITY HALL BUREAU

Originally Published:Monday, December 28th 2009, 2:
29 PM
Updated: Tuesday, December 29th 2009, 1:16 AM

Sabo/NewsSome 250 recruits graduated from the
NYDP Police Academy in a ceremony at Madison Square
Garden Monday.

New York is on pace to record fewer
murders in 2009 than in any year in recent
memory - and overall crime is plummeting,
too, officials said Monday.

"All of the experts said it couldn't be done,
particularly in a down economy, but we've
done it and we should all feel very proud,"
Mayor Bloomberg boasted in announcing
the news Monday at a swearing-in
ceremony for new police recruits.

New figures show the number of murders
and the number of major crimes both
poised to drop nearly 11% since last year -
with murders dropping from 523 to 461
and major crimes dropping from 116,522
to about 104,341.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2009/12/28/2009-12-28_new_york_citys_crime_rate_drops_11_since_last_year_on_target_for_record_low.html

[TPaine7]

6. I am sure that crime rises and falls in Japan,

and that crime rose and fell before guns were invented.

Your point and mine are unrelated, until and unless you claim that New York's falling crime rate came on the heels of severe new restrictions on handguns.

[rfranklin]

7. Not at all...you are claiming that DC experienced lower crime because...

people were allowed to have guns. I point to NYC which had a corresponding drop in crime without allowing more guns. Your thesis is weak.

[TPaine7]

10. "a corresponding drop in crime"

I don't think so.

There is nothing I know of about the crime decrease in New York that corresponds, by any relevant definition, to the 25% drop in DC homicides. The District's 25% decline does not correspond to the projected 11% decline in NY City.

The District's homicide decline is well over twice that of NY City's decline. That is not correspondence.

[Euromutt]

20. TPaine7 explicity said that he was *not* making that claim

From the OP:

Now I know that correlation does not equal causation. And even many scholars who support gun rights are not yet ready to say that more guns = less crime.
<...>
In any event, in spite of the fact that D.C.'s and Chicago's crime rate changes are just coincidences--as far as science can say with authority, at least--I am willing to go out on a limb and make some wild, unfounded, scientifically questionable predictions.

He explicitly stated that there's no hard evidence to support the hypotheses that a) increased gun control causes in increase in violent crime, and b) that reduced gun control causes a drop in violent crime.

Moreover, your argument is fallacious; even if TPaine7 were making the argument that relaxing firearms laws for non-prohibited persons causes a reduction in violent crime, he's not arguing that it is the only thing that will reduce violent crime. There are various possible factors that contribute to a change in violent crime rates, and the rates can change independent of any change in firearms law.

[PavePusher]

8. They also have an oddly draconian...

"Stop and Frisk" law (that seems VERY unConstitutional to me), and, when faced with a rising crime rate, actually put more officers out on the street, targeting high crime areas. And their gun laws are down right atrocious and labrynthine and have been since the Sullivan Act of 1911 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_Act).

They are one of the next on the chopping block.

[Statistical]

11. Yup. Just as Heller opened the door to McDonald ...

McDonald will open the door to a whole host of lawsuits.

I expect couple dozen to be filed in the first couple months post McDonald.

[SteveM]

13. At best, your argument means guns have little impact, either way...

The gun-controllers have used the "more guns=more crime" for years, yet the exceptions to this "rule" are the dominant phenomenon and firmly dis-prove the gun-controller "magic." We can conclude that this major argument made by controller/prohibitionists is full of spent brass.

I'll wait to see if crime rate drops can be linked to gun law liberalization. And that is the word: liberalization.

[bossy22]

16. NYC doesnt have a handgun ban

check your facts

[TheWraith]

17. They have a de facto ban by never issuing permits except to the rich and powerful.

If you're not an ex-police officer or someone with money and/or political clout you have no real chance of getting approved for a pistol permit in NYC. On the flip side, if you ARE rich/powerful, they hand them out like candy.

[Euromutt]

21. Don't confuse permits to possess with permits to carry

It's practically impossible to get a carry permit in NYC if you're not retired law enforcement, or rich/famous/politically connected. It is possible to get a permit to own a handgun, though it's still a massive pain in the bollocks to get it and keep it.

[paulsby]

22. or a double negative y0?!

[old mark]

9. Our county here in SE PA has at least 25 thousand people licensed to carry firearms, and

many thousands more who legally own guns but do not carry. We have a "shall issue" law, and a very gun-friendly sheriff (the license issuing officer). We have NO "waiting period", no registration per se, we can buy and sell long guns privately with no paperwork, and we have no limit on the number of guns we can buy at any given time (my personal best is 5 handguns at the same time).

Our rate of violent crime is the LOWEST in over 30 years.

Of course, that could be all the old "gun control" catching up, but we never had any to begin with.

We had crack, drug gangs, etc, same as everyone else, and we now have much less of that.

Could it be it never was the legal guns in the first place?

mark

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

12. I predict that 1, 2, 5, 6, & 7 will happen. 3 & 4 will might stay the same or rise.

1) The Chicago violent crime rate will fall.
2) The Chicago murder rate will fall.
5) The Chicago home invasion robbery rate will fall.
6) If violent crime falls nationwide, Chicago's crime will fall faster than the national average.
7) The Brady Campaign, the Violence Policy Center and like-minded organizations and people will pretend it didn't happen.

3) The Chicago gun crime rate will fall.
4) The Chicago gun murder rate will fall.

[SteveM]

14. Good post! Prediction: 1,2,3,4,6, agreed. 5 & 7 probably not...

As long as gangs of HyperPunks are drug-running in a regime of drug prohibition, they will continue to home invade; however, the victims of these home invasions will be even more poor blacks, the "traditional" victims of home invasions, because of the likelihood that other ethnic and income groups will arm quickly (I believe that gun-bans have somehow worked into the cultural identity of many blacks.) Further, gang recruitment requires a demonstration of "juice," and home invasions are a popular method. Several years down the line? I don't know.

The Bradys are the Bradys.

[slackmaster]

15. I predict violent crime will continue to fall because of changing demographics

The graying of the population.

[Tim01]

18. Gun control advocates are doing a really bad job of responding to this. nt

[DissedByBush]

23. We gun control advocates are responding to this

We recommend you get a gun and learn to properly control it.

Oh, you meant the groups who are against gun rights?

Yeah, they don't react well to reality.

They live in their own little reality distortion bubble where .50 BMG rifles are used by street hoods to kill people and can take down airliners.

[beevul]

19. You left out an option, one which is a certainty.

Murders will still happen, in Chicago.

But daley will blame the lack of a handgun ban on them.


Fairly certain, I'd say.