By the Numbers Private Firearm Ownership: A Net Positive or Net Negative to Society? Topics 1. The balance between rights and risks 2. Relationship between guns and violence 3. Cost-benefit analysis: lives lost vs. lives saved 4. Gun suicides and accidents 5. Personal protection: an individual responsibility 6. Mass shootings: an American phenomenon? 7. Legislation: assault weapons, background checks 8. Second Amendment: a personal or collective right? 9. Democide: gun controls human toll Part 1: Dangerous Rights Seeking an appropriate balance between liberty and safety All rights carry dangers The right to vote: George W. Bush elected twice by American people, started Iraq war that killed half a million Iraqis and led to rise of ISIS [1]1 Almost 35X the number of people murdered in the U.S. in a year [2]2 The right to privacy: Absent mass surveillance, unknown suspects can plot in secret, investigations are harder and intelligence is missed Would 9/11 have happened if not for the 4th amendment? Right to remain silent: Many dangerous and guilty people evade prosecution and conviction exercising this right, and go on to repeat their crime All rights carry dangers, continued The right to free speech: A book by Karl Marx sparked communist revolutions which led to the deaths of tens of millions in purges [3]3 Freedom of the press: Newspapers have disclosed state secrets to public, possibly jeopardizing lives and secret programs that could save lives Freedom of religion: Throughout history wars, murders, and terrorist attacks have been motivated by differences of religion and belief Worth their cost? Most rights have the potential to lead to death and injury But that doesn't mean we shouldn't have them Are the costs of a right justified? Is our right to privacy worth the occasional terrorist attack? Is our right to vote worth the occasional tyrant or illegitimate war? Is our right to own arms worth the occasional misuse of arms? The right to arms is not the only right bearing a cost that can be measured in lives. But what is the justification for this right? Are people dying for what is now only a hobbyor worsea fantasy? Let us focus on one question There is universal agreement on the goal: Let us maximize the number of lives saved The disagreement is on the following: Are more lives saved, or more lives lost when ordinary citizens have the right of to own guns for their own protection? If more lives are saved, would anyone oppose the 2 nd amendment? There are two ways to decide, only one can succeed: Decisions based on impressions, anecdotes, and personal feelings Decisions using agreed-upon facts, figures, statistics, and numbers Part 2: Guns and Violence What is their relationship? America is awash with guns Gun ownership is at its highest levels since 1993, 47% report having a gun in the home [4]4 There are an estimated 310 million privately owned guns [5], but only 308 million people [6]56 Every State now allows concealed carry Concealed carry permits increased from 4.6 million in 2007 to 12.8 million in 2015 [7]7 5% of adults have a concealed carry permit, 10 states now dont even require one [8]8 Changing Attitudes Americans increasingly believe in the right of ordinary people to own guns [9]9 Firearm Homicides Rates Despite all these guns, gun homicides are down 49% from their peak in 1993 [10]10 Murder rate, new guns, total guns [11][12][13]111213 A look at other countries [14]14 Homicide rates per 100,000 by country U.S. murder rate is below median and below mean [15]15 Global Picture [16]16 Inequality-adjusted Development [17][18]1718 Demographics of U.S. homicide rates Average firearm homicide rate: 3.6 Hispanic: 3.2, White: 1.4, Black: 14.5 [19]19 Have a gun in home: Hispanic: 20%, White: 41%, Black 19% [20]20 Gun ownership vs. gun murder by state [22][23][24] NH VT HI ND ID DE MD DC MO LA Uneven Murder Rates 15 most murderous cities 15 least murderous cities Can the availability of guns explain these vast differences in murder rates? [66][67]6667 Effect of Concealed Carry Laws Preventing law-abiding citizens from carrying handguns does not end violence, but merely makes them more vulnerable to being attacked. The very large size and strength of our results should at least give pause to those who oppose concealed handguns. Chances to relax regulations that potentially offer at least 8% drops in murder rates are difficult to ignore. [25]25 Summary of Findings Across time: Number of guns keeps increasing, violence continues to decrease Across countries: No clear correlation between gun ownership and murder Across states: Gun ownership and gun murder are negatively correlated Across demographics: More widespread ownership correlates with lower murder rates Across legal systems: Permissive concealed carry laws are followed by decreases in murder Are guns the problem? Part 3: Cost-Benefit Analysis How many lives do guns save? Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs) In 1990, 3.8% of households reported having used a gun in defense in the previous 5 years, leading to an estimate of 2.5 million DGUs a year in the United States [26]26 Out of 10 national surveys, none resulted in an estimated incidence of DGUs lower than 764,000 per year [26]26 Low end estimates suggest 256,500 per year (over 700/day) [27]27 When interviewed about their perceived likelihood of someone dying had they not used their gun in defense: [26]26 15.7% said someone Almost certainly would have died 14.2% said someone Probably would have died 16.2% said someone Might have died Response to the DGU study Marvin E. Wolfgang: [28]28 I am as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among the criminologists in this country. If I were Mustapha Mond of Brave New World, I would eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the police. I hate guns-ugly, nasty instruments designed to kill people. What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator. The Kleck and Gertz study impresses me for the caution the authors exercise and the elaborate nuances they examine methodologically. I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology. They have tried earnestly to meet all objections in advance and have done exceedingly well. DGU Frequency and Outcomes Assuming 256,000 DGUs per 50 million gun owners, this works out to one DGU per 195 gun-owner years In other words: gun owners could only expect to use their gun defensively once every three lifetimes (individually it is rare) But they add up: With 256,000 DGUs a year and 8,583 gun murders a year [29] there are 29.8 DGUs for ever murder with with a gun29 When guns are used defensively, 91.7% of the time, they ward off the attack without injuring or killing the attacker [30]30 75.7% of the time, merely displaying the gun ended the attack People survive over 85% of gunshot wounds [31][32]3132 Taken together, only 1.2% of defensive gun uses kill the attacker If the victim had more than a1.2% chance of being killed, the DGU was a net positive in terms of lives saved Justifiable Homicides Between 6.5% % homicides ruled justifiable: [33]33 Out of the 11,208 homicides this means 728 to 1,356 criminals are justifiably killed by citizens determined to be in fear of their lives We can use this to provide another way to estimate DGUs Given that about 1.2% of DGUs result in a death: 60,600 to 113,000 criminals are deterred by guns each year More when misses and unreported gunshot wounds are factored in A miss rate of 50% would double these numbers If 1/3 rd of gunshot wounds are not reported, increases estimate by 50% Estimate range of 60,600 to 339,000 DGUs/year DGUs are legal when in fear of grievous bodily harm or death If not for the DGU, these would be batteries, rapes, and murders Passive Deterrent Effect Many crimes are stopped in the criminals mind, when contemplating possible repercussions that may result Case 1: A criminal considers taking a few thousand in a bank robbery, but then considers the risk of getting caught and ending up in prison too high of a risk to take Case 2: A criminal considers breaking into a house that he knows to be occupied. He considers the risk of being shot too great and decides instead to target an unoccupied home This implies guns have utility even when not actively used, and even when they dont exist beyond someones imagination Percent of burglaries that are hot: UK 36-45%, US 9-12% [34]34 Passive Benefits Would you post a sign outside your house that read: This house has no guns If not, then you accept protection from the passive deterrent effects of your neighbor's guns: without owning any guns, you are protected, in part, by the chance that you do [35]35 In the U.S. we benefit from being able to credibly bluff: "Stay out I have a gun!" In gun-restricted places, a criminal isnt likely to believe this Even if you would never own a gun, you can bluff to defend yourself because gun ownership is common in this country Encounters with armed citizens In interviews with 1,874 imprisoned felons across 10 states: [36]36 74% said Burglars avoided occupied dwellings for fear of being shot 57% said that Most criminals fear armed citizens more than the police 57% of felons who used guns themselves reported having Encountered potential victims who were armed 34% reported having been Scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed citizen Cost-Benefit Conclusions It is impossible to know exactly how many lives are saved by active defensive use and passive deterrence by guns Conservatively, assuming a small percentage of active DGUs save a life (e.g. 5%), using a low-end estimate of DGUs (256K), and assuming 0 lives are saved by passive deterrence: 256,000 5% = 12,800 lives saved annually Many times that number are saved from rapes, batteries, and robberies This is more than the 11,208 firearm homicides in the U.S. [37]37 As Russia and Luxembourg show us, even without guns in civilians hands, the homicide rate would not go to zero. Russias homicide rate is 4 times greater than that of the U.S. [14]14 Part 4: Suicides and Accidents Murder is not the only source of gun deaths Homicides are a small fraction [37]37 More guns = more gun-related deaths [21][22]2122 Gun Deaths Suicides and Accidents [22][23][24]222324 International gun-suicide relationship [14][38][39]143839 Accidental Gun Deaths Should we ban guns to prevent 505 accidental gun deaths? In 2006 there were 4,837 accidental motorcycle deaths [40] out of approximately 6.68 million motorcycles [41] :4041 One accidental death per 1,381 motorcycles There are on average 2,826 pool drownings [42][43] out of approximately 10.7 million pools [44] in the U.S One accidental death per 3,786 pools Accidental Gun Deaths in Perspective In 2013 there were 505 accidental gun deaths [37] out of approximately 310 million guns in the U.S. [5]375 One accidental death per 613,861 guns Your neighbors pool is 162 times more dangerous than your neighbors gun. You are 444 times more likely to die by your motorcycle than from an accident with your gun! We tolerate the accidental risks these items pose in society, even when their main purpose is recreation Part 5: Personal Protection An individual responsibility But I can just call 911 The average police response time is 10 minutes [45]45 It is unreasonable to expect that a 911 call can protect you from being beaten, maimed, raped, or killed At times there will be no police response at all (e.g., riots, disasters) Supreme Court: police have no obligation to protect you Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005) [46], ruled, 72, that a town and its police department could not be sued for failing to enforce a restraining order, which led to the murder of a woman's three children by her estranged husband46 If the police fail to get there in time, you have no recourse Police Attitudes toward Concealed Carry In a survey of 14,200 police, one question asked [47] :47 Do you support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or not been deemed psychologically/medically incapable? Defensive Tools What people carry to protect themselves [48] :48 Injury rates of defensive strategies Using a gun for defense results in lower injury rates than not resisting, or using any other weapon: [49]49 Lawfulness of Concealed Carriers Arrest rates per 100,000 among the population groups [50]50 Is it unreasonable to carry a gun? Cost of homeowners insurance over 50 years: $42,350 [51]51 Chance of home burning down in lifetime: 1 in 4 [52]52 Cost of gun and quarterly training over 50 years: $10,500 Chance of being violent crime victim over lifetime: 5 in 6 [53]53 Chance of being assaulted: 3 in 4 Chance of being injured in assault or robbery: 2 in 5 Chance of being robbed: 1 in 3 Change of being raped (as female): 1 in 12 Depending on where you live, might be much higher or much lower Are those who pay for homeowners insurance unreasonable or paranoid for spending so much for something so unlikely? Personal Objections to Violence I would use a baseball bat, but not a gun These people are not OK with shooting someone but have no moral objection to using a bat to bash someones head in I would just call 911 When you dial 911, you are summoning men with guns to come to your rescue, who may shoot and kill your attacker If your attacker is lucky, he will only be kidnapped and caged for a good portion of his lifeand wont be raped in prison A less violent outcome: Your attacker is deterred by a gun point with no shots fired He flees and decides to pursue another, less risky, career Part 6: Mass Shooting and Killings A uniquely American phenomenon? Only in America? Obama: But lets be clear: At some point, we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries. It doesnt happen in other places with this kind of frequency. [54]54 [55]55 Are guns necessary for mass killings? Knife attacks: 50 killed in mass knifing attack in Xinjiang China (2015) [56]56 33 killed, 143 wounded in mass knifing in Kunming China (2014) [57]57 8 children stabbed to death in Australia (2014) [58]58 Vehicle attacks: 3 killed, 34 injured when SUV plows into crowd in Austria (2015) [59]59 17 killed in a tractor rampage in China (2010) [60]60 7 killed when man sped into a parade in the Netherlands (2009) [61]61 Fire attacks: 11 killed in arson attack on nursing home in Australia (2011) [62]62 192 killed, 152 injured in mass murder by fire in South Korea (2003) [63]63 37 die in arson attack on nightclub in London (1980) [64]64 Gun Free Zones Gun Free Zones are Disarmed Victims Zones Since 1950, all but 2 public mass shootings in America have occurred in places where guns were prohibited [65]65 Mass shooters want mass casualties. To kill as many as possible before someone can end their spree [65]65 South Carolina shooter chose a church over a college because the it had guards and SC law bans concealed carry in churches Of the 7 theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment, James Holmes chose the only one with signs prohibiting guns Canadian spree shooter Justin Bourque mocked defenseless people in gun free zones on his facebook page Recent shootings stopped by citizens 2015 Conyers GA, permit holder stopped robber after executing two people in a store 2015 Chicago IL, Uber driver stopped gunman firing indiscriminately into a crowd 2015 Philadelphia PA, permit holder stopped a shooting in barber shop 2014 Darby PA, psychiatrist with concealed gun stopped shooting in hospital after caseworker murdered 2014 Chicago IL, ex-soldier with permit stopped a gang shooting attack at a party 2012 Plymouth PA, concealed permit holder stopped killer at a restaurant 2012 Spartanburg SC, permit holder captures and subdues shotgun wielding man after he kicks in door of church 2012 Clackamas OR, mass shooter committed suicide after a permit holder placed him in his sights [68][69]6869 Part 7: Legislation Can laws reduce gun deaths or crime? Assault Weapons what are they? Assault Weapons look like rifles used by the military, but their capabilities are identical to those of ordinary rifles Since they have identical function to ordinary rifles, the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban chose to define assault weapons as rifles with 2 or more of the following cosmetic traits: [70]70 Pistol Grips Telescoping Stock Flash Hider These sound like scary features, but as we will see, they only serve to make a rifle look more like a modern military rifle Illegal Cosmetic Features One of these rifles has two of the restricted features, making it an assault weapon Can you spot them? [71][72]7172 Illegal Ergonomic Features Telescoping stocks are merely adjustable stocks, so that shooters of different sizes can comfortably use the same rifle. The rifle at top has an illegal adjustable stock: [73]73 Assault Weapon Not an Assault Weapon Are Assault Weapons more deadly? Both of these rifles: [74][75]7475 Are loaded with detachable magazines Fire one shot with each trigger press Fire the same ammunition type Assault Weapon Hunting Rifle Weapon choices of murders Rifles of any kind are used in 2.55% of murders [76]76 Far less often than hammers, clubs, and bludgeons (3.92%) Result of Assault Weapon Ban Given that: 1. Rifles were used in such a small fraction of crimes 2. The rifles banned were no more useful or effective for criminals than rifles not meeting the definition of assault rifles The Assault Weapon Ban had no detectable effect on crime: A government study concluded Given the limited use of the banned guns and magazines in gun crimes, even the maximum theoretically achievable preventive effect of the ban on outcomes such as the gun murder rate is almost certainly too small to detect statistically [77]77 The 10 year ban was not renewed and it expired in 2004 [78]78 Magazine Limits The ban also limited magazines to just 10 rounds [79]79 The result? Mass shooters just brought more magazines: Eric Harris brought 13 ten round magazines, firing 96 times [80]80 Seung-Hui Cho brought 19 magazines (nearly 400 rounds) [81]81 The magazine limit puts normal peoples lives at risk: Practically all police forces use magazines with over 10 rounds [82]82 Firing under stress, over 70% of shots fired by police miss [83]83 Against multiple assailants 10 rounds is likely not enough Background Checks Recent study found 40 out of 48 criminals (83%) charged with gun possession obtained their gun from friends or family [84]84 15% of males charged had gun initially bought by a woman Criminals often convince girlfriends with a clean background to purchase a gun for them from a store, and then report it stolen Both the straw purchase and false report are highly illegal (up to 10 years in prison) [85], but rarely is the original buyer investigated or prosecuted85 Out of 48,321 cases involving straw purchasers only 44 were prosecuted [86]86 So long as the only obstacle to a criminal getting a gun is knowing someone with a clean background, universal background checks will remain useless and ineffective Why arent the laws working? CDCs First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws concluded: [87]87 During , the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (the Task Force), an independent nonfederal task force, conducted a systematic review of scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of firearms laws in preventing violence, including violent crimes, suicide, and unintentional injury. The following laws were evaluated: bans on specified firearms or ammunition, restrictions on firearm acquisition, waiting periods for firearm acquisition, firearm registration and licensing of firearm owners, "shall issue" concealed weapon carry laws, child access prevention laws, zero tolerance laws for firearms in schools, and combinations of firearms laws. The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes. Why is it that no laws appear to curb violence? By definition, those committing acts of violence do not follow laws So what laws would help? Enforce the laws that exist Prosecute straw purchasers and falsely reported thefts Allow private firearm transactions access to background check system that federally licensed dealers use The BATFE only lets their gun sellers access this system [88]88 Repeal laws that criminalize concealed carry in certain gun free zones, they only increase death tolls when someone chooses them for a mass shooting Part 8: Second Amendment A personal or collective right? Second Amendment A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. [89]89 Supreme Court: In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision that held the amendment protects an individual right to possess and carry firearms [90]90 English Grammar Expert: When asked: Can the sentence be interpreted to grant the right to keep and bear arms solely to 'a well-regulated militia'? Professor Roy Copperud replied: The sentence does not restrict the right to keep and bear arms, nor does it state or imply possession of the right elsewhere or by others than the people; it simply makes a positive statement with respect to a right of the people. [91]91 Analogous Sentence Compare it to this grammatically identical sentence: A well schooled electorate being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed. This statement offers a reason why keeping and reading books is important, but does not condition this right on being a member of the well-schooled electorate The right is explicitly acknowledged as belonging to the people [90]90 Limits of the Second Amendment Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Courts opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Millers holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those in common use at the time finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 5456. [90]90 Supreme Court of the United States Part 9: Democide The human toll of gun control Democide and state oppression Democide is a term revived by the political scientist R. J. Rummel as: the murder of any person or people by their government, including genocide, politicide and mass murder. [92]92 His research shows that the death toll from democide is far greater than the death toll from war. After studying over 8,000 reports of government-caused deaths, Rummel estimates that there have been 262 million victims of democide in the last century. According to his figures, six times as many people have died from the actions of people working for governments than have died in battle. [93]93 Governments have murdered more people than all deaths combined due to traffic accidents, war, homicide, and alcohol. [94]94 Quotes on Gun Control The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. [95]95 Adolf Hitler Quotes on Gun Control Every Communist must grasp the truth, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party. [96]96 Mao Zedong Armenians Disarmed in Turkey Ottoman law criminalized possession of firearms without government permission. As British traveler H.F.B. Lynch wrote in 1901, the Armenians were rigorously prohibited from possessing firearms [97]97 The Armenian Genocide was the Ottoman government's systematic extermination of its minority Armenian subjects inside their historic homeland, which lies within the territory constituting the present-day Turkey. The total number of people killed as a result has been estimated at between 800,000 and 1.5 million. [98]98 Armenians Fight for Life The Armenians were not completely wiped out Fighting for their very existence the Armenians managed to acquire arms and gathered people from all walks of life to put up a final resistance near the city of Yerevan The Battle of Sardarabad [99][100]99100 "Had they failed, it is perfectly possible that the word Armenia would have henceforth denoted only an antique geographical term... [101] Historian Christopher Walker New York Times headline May 1918 Jews Disarmed in Germany November 10th, 1938, newspapers report: Jews Forbidden to Possess Weapons By Order of SS Reichsfhrer Himmler (the day after Kristallnacht) The order stated: Persons who, according to the Nrnberg law, are regarded as Jews, are forbidden to possess any weapon. Violators will be condemned to a concentration camp and imprisoned for a period of up to 20 years. [102]102 Dissidents in the Soviet Union If the opposition disarms, all is well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves. [103] -- Joseph Stalin103 In his book, Unnatural Deaths in the U.S.S.R.: , I.G. Dyadkin estimated that the USSR suffered 56 to 62 million "unnatural deaths" during that period, with 34 to 49 million directly linked to Stalin [104]104 Comrades turn in your weapons 1918 communist propaganda poster Quotes on Gun Rights No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. [105]105 Thomas Jefferson, 3 rd president, author of the U.S. Declaration of Independence Quotes on Gun Rights Americans have the right and advantage of being armed unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. [106]106 James Madison, 4 th president, author of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights Quotes on Gun Rights Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn. [107]107 Mohandas K. Gandhi, leader of the Indian independence movement Could armed citizens fight back? Possibly: Americas navy, air force, and nuclear stockpile cannot be used to put down an internal resistance, this requires boots on the ground Armed citizens outnumber active duty soldiers almost 100 to 1 The army has just one tank for every 430 square miles of U.S. soil Smaller countries, like Vietnam and Iraq successfully resisted occupation [108]108 [109]109 Democide Conclusions Tens, perhaps hundreds, of millions have died at the hands of their government or majorities in power Almost universally, concentration of arms in the hands of the few has been a necessary pre-condition for the political instability that brings dictators into power and leaves minorities and opponents defenseless against them A Final Weighing Are guns a net positive or net negative? Net positive or net negative? Reasons to prohibit Reasons to allow Reduce suicide Reduce murder Reduce gun accidents Defense from criminals Defense from animals Crime deterrence Defense of country Defense from tyranny Political stability Recreation Hunting The End There is no such thing as gun control, there is only centralized gun ownership in the hands of a small political elite and their minions. -- Stefan Molyneux