Harvard Study – Gun Control Does Not Reduce Murder Rates
Guns Save Lives is not supported by ads and is ran as an independent project. If you support this project please consider supporting us on Patreon. Registration takes just a moment and even $1 is a massive help in continuing our work. Thank you so much.
Several weeks ago we reported on a study commissioned by the White House for the CDC to perform some research on gun violence in America.
In that study we got some surprising results given the source of the information, but it was information those in the gun community have known for a long time. Info such as, guns are regularly used in self defense and having a gun in a violent encounter greatly increases your chance of avoiding significant injury or death.
Now we have another study coming from an unlikely source.
A study from 2007 in the Harvard Journal of Law found that gun control has little effect on murder rates.
In fact, some findings of the study even point to the opposite, that countries with high rates of private gun ownership actually have lower rates than some countries with strict gun control laws.
According to the study,
The same pattern appears when comparisons of violence to gun ownership are made within nations. Indeed, “data on firearms ownership by constabulary area in England,” like data from the United States, show “a negative correlation,”10 that is, “where firearms are most dense violent crime rates are lowest, and where guns are least dense violent crime rates are highest.”11 Many different data sets from various kinds of sources are summarized as follows by the leading text:
[T]here is no consistent significant positive association be‐
tween gun ownership levels and violence rates: across (1)
time within the United States, (2) U.S. cities, (3) counties
within Illinois, (4) country‐sized areas like England, U.S.
states, (5) regions of the United States, (6) nations, or (7)
population subgroups . . . .
The study reinforces what we’ve known for a long time – violent crime rates are not related to the availability of inanimate objects, but is rather rooted in complex socio-economic and societal issues that can vary greatly from country to country and even within regions of a country.
The study was done by Don B. Kates and Gary Mauser, both experienced criminologists.