Does reasonable, sane Gun Control have any effect on murder rates?

[botias]

In the UK, they responded to the actions of one uniquely crazy individual by enacting strict rules for millions of normal people. Did it make them more safe? In the absence of firearms, those convenient devices for killing, did the men and women of England and Wales murder one another less than they had before? I got this graph from the UK's Guardian newspaper. The article is here, and is about how murder rates are looking rather nice lately, relatively speaking (much as they are in the U.S.). I indicated the dates of gun control legislation myself.




From this graph, I don't get the idea that UK murderers were rendered impotent by sensible, or even by strict gun control. In 2005, when someone decided it would be a good idea to kill a few dozen innocent people in the UK, they used explosives. I understand that telling a gun control supporter that laws won't make them more safe is very much equivalent to telling a Christian that there is no heaven. It's hurtful, and it's equally successful in changing that person's convictions. The difference is that people that want me to be Christian only knock on my door and leave pamphlets. Gun control advocates want to use force of law.



This graph was made by someone (else) specifically looking at this issue. The entire post is here, and makes interesting reading. These are homicide rates in Australia over time; the vertical black line indicates the date of their 'sensible' gun control, which was a strict ban.



I'm not impressed, yet one doesn't have to look very far today to find news articles suggesting that the US can learn from the Australian experience with gun control. I agree, but I don't think they are referring to the same conclusions that I come to when I look at the numbers.

ETA: Gun Nuts will sometimes say that violent crime in Australia went up after their gun ban. Bad, bad Gun Nuts! Violent crime in Australia was trending up before the gun ban, and statistically the ban doesn't seem to have had an effect either way. Some Gun Nuts will also tell you that rape is way up in the UK and Australia since their bans. What these Gun Nuts may not know is that rape is very under reported and NO ONE knows for certain what rape rates actually are. The rises in reported rapes may actually represent progress in this area, but reflect nothing about the rate of this crime.

Comments

[hobbituk.livejournal.com]

It's a cultural issue I suspect. You come from a place where it is commonplace to see people packing weapons, whereas I come from a place where it is (thankfully) extremely unusual, even for the police to have weapons. Do I feel more afraid because of that? I'd have to say no.

I think you are misreading the statistics on our murder rates because the fact is we just don't have as many gun murders/shootings, full stop. Proportionally, shootings are quite low - and headline news if they do occur. It would be interesting to see the numbers of shootings in your murder rates, compared to ours. Stranglings, stabbings, bludgeoning or just beating up... much more likely here. We don't get many random killings of strangers either way - most are victims of crime, or domestic violence.

I don't think the gun ban made much difference simply because there just wasn't widespread gun ownership already. If you say people can't have guns but only 20% of the population have them, that means 80% are going to say "Huh, what??"

[botias.livejournal.com]

So your gun ban did not affect your murder rates, they continued to climb apparently and then eventually to decline. You suspect this was because the UK never actually had a gun problem. The US on the other hand, might be aided by gun control because we have always had a lot of guns in private ownership. I can see what you are saying. I disagree that gun control would have a different effect in the US than it has in the UK. This conclusion requires some assumptions that I am not convinced of at this time. Such as that the government has such good control over people's behavior that it can keep guns from people that really want them, and that people are prevented from murdering by the absence of firearms. In any case, it's moot due to the cultural issues that you cite.

For what it's worth, that's 'concealed carry' of weapons. My more knowledgeable spouse occasionally notices that someone is carrying a handgun, but showing your gun such that people might feel threatened is considered 'brandishing' and it's a crime. Though it's true that police and armed guards are openly armed. I don't think I would feel particularly less safe as a citizen if our law enforcement were not armed; their guns are not to protect me. They show up _after_ crimes are committed. But if I were a police officer I would certainly feel less safe without a gun. I wouldn't ask them to go unarmed.

[deborahw37.livejournal.com]

I saw an interesting statistic recently. LAPD fired more bullets in one incident than were fired by the entire German police service in the whole of 2011

[botias.livejournal.com]

I'd still rather go to Disneyland than Oktoberfest. Drunk people creep me out!