🚀 go-pugleaf

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C08C6C.DCB240C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel013101.shtml

/31/01 11:10 a.m.
The Fallacy of "43 to 1"
The all-time favorite statistic of the gun-prohibition lobby.

 By Dave Kopel, of the Independence Institute
=20
Perhaps the most enduring factoid of the gun prohibition movement is =
that a person with a gun in the home is 43 times as likely to shoot =
someone in the family as to shoot a criminal. This "43 times" figure is =
the all-time favorite factoid of the gun-prohibition lobby. It's not =
really true, but it does tell us a lot about the gun-prohibition =
mindset.=20

The source of the 43-to-1 ratio is a study of firearm deaths in Seattle =
homes, conducted by doctors Arthur L. Kellermann and Donald T. Reay =
("Protection or Peril?: An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the =
Home," New England Journal of Medicine, 1986). Kellerman and Reay =
totaled up the numbers of firearms murders, suicides, and fatal =
accidents, and then compared that number to the number of firearm deaths =
that were classified as justifiable homicides. The ratio of murder, =
suicide, and accidental death to the justifiable homicides was 43 to 1.=20

This is what the anti-gun lobbies call "scientific" proof that people =
(except government employees and security guards) should not have guns.=20

Of the gun deaths in the home, the vast majority are suicides. In the =
43-to-1 figure, suicides account for nearly all the 43 unjustifiable =
deaths.=20

Counting a gun suicide as part of the increased risk of having a gun in =
the home is appropriate only if the presence of a gun facilitates a =
"successful" suicide that would not otherwise occur. But most research =
suggests that guns do not cause suicide.=20

In the book Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America, Florida State =
University criminologist Gary Kleck analyzed suicide data for every =
America city with a population more than 100,000, and found no evidence =
that any form of gun control (including handgun prohibition) had an =
effect on the total suicide rate. Gun control did sometimes reduce gun =
suicide, but not overall suicide.=20

Notably, Japan, which prohibits handguns and rifles entirely, and =
regulates long guns very severely, has a suicide rate of more than twice =
the U.S. level. Many of the northern and central European nations also =
have very high suicide rates to accompany their strict gun laws. (Of =
course, if you have any suspicion that anybody in your home might be =
suicidal, it would hardly be a mistake for you to ensure that they do =
not have ready access to guns, tranquilizers, or other potentially =
lethal items.)=20

Putting aside the suicides, the Kellermann/Reay figures show 2.39 =
accidental or criminal deaths by firearm (in the home) for every =
justifiable fatal shooting. Now, 2 to 1 is a lot less dramatic than 43 =
to 1, but we still have more unjustifiable gun deaths than justifiable =
gun deaths in the home.=20

But just as many other people who would commit suicide with a gun would =
use an equally lethal method if guns are unavailable. Many of the people =
who kill themselves in firearm accidents may also be bent on =
destruction, regardless of the means. One study of gun-accident victims =
found that they were "disproportionately involved in other accidents, =
violent crime, and heavy drinking." (Philip Cook, "The Role of Firearms =
in Violent Crime: An Interpretative Review of the Literature," in =
Criminal Violence).=20

Or, as another researcher put it, "The psychological profile of the =
accident-prone suggests the same kind of aggressiveness shown by most =
murderers." (Roger Lane, "On the Social Meaning of Homicide Trends in =
America," in Violence in America, Vol. I, 1989.)=20

Without guns, many accident victims might well find some other way to =
kill themselves "accidentally," such as by reckless driving.=20

So by counting accidents and suicides, the 43-to-1 factoid ends up =
including a very large number of fatalities that would have occurred =
anyway, even if there were no gun in the home.=20

Now, how about the self-defense homicides, which Kellermann and Reay =
found to be so rare? Well, the reason that they found such a low total =
was that they excluded many cases of lawful self-defense. Kellermann and =
Reay did not count in the self-defense total of any of the cases where a =
person who had shot an attacker was acquitted on grounds of =
self-defense, or cases where a conviction was reversed on appeal on =
grounds related to self-defense. Yet 40% of women who appeal their =
murder convictions have the conviction reversed on appeal. ("Fighting =
Back," Time, Jan. 18, 1993.)=20

In short, the 43-to-1 figure is based on the totally implausible =
assumption that all the people who die in gun suicides and gun accidents =
would not kill themselves with something else if guns were unavailable. =
The figure is also based on a drastic undercount of the number of lawful =
self-defense homicides.=20

Moreover, counting dead criminals to measure the efficacy of civilian =
handgun ownership is ridiculous. Do we measure the efficacy of our =
police forces by counting how many people the police lawfully kill every =
year? The benefits of the police - and of home handgun ownership - are =
not measured by the number of dead criminals, but by the number of =
crimes prevented. Simplistic counting of corpses tells us nothing about =
the real safety value of gun ownership for protection.=20

Finally, Kellermann and Reay ignore the most important factor of all in =
assessing the risks of gun ownership: whose home the gun is in. You =
don't need a medical researcher to tell you that guns can be misused =
when in the homes of persons with mental illness related to violence; or =
in the homes of persons prone to self-destructive, reckless behavior; or =
in the homes of persons with arrest records for violent felonies; or in =
the homes where the police have had to intervene to deal with domestic =
violence. These are the homes from which the vast majority of handgun =
fatalities come.=20

To study these high-risk homes and to jump to conclusions about the =
general population is illogical. We know that possession of an =
automobile by an alcoholic who is prone to drunk driving may pose a =
serious health risk. But proof that automobiles in the hands of =
alcoholics may be risky doesn't prove that autos in the hands of =
non-alcoholics are risky. Yet the famous Seattle 43-to-1 figure is based =
on lumping the homes of violent felons, alcoholics, and other disturbed =
people in with the population as a whole. The study fails to distinguish =
between the large risks of guns in the hands of dangerous people, with =
the tiny risks (and large benefits) of guns in the hands of ordinary =
people.=20

But then again, treating ordinary people according to standards that =
would be appropriate for criminals and the violently insane is what the =
gun control movement is all about.=20
=20


------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C08C6C.DCB240C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel013101.shtml">http://www=
.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel013101.shtml</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D1>/31/01 11:10 =
a.m.<BR></FONT></STRONG><STRONG><FONT=20
face=3D"Times New Roman, Times, serif" color=3D#990033 size=3D4>The =
Fallacy of &#8220;43 to=20
1&#8221;<BR></FONT><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman, Times, serif" =
color=3D#999999 size=3D2>The=20
all-time favorite statistic of the gun-prohibition =
lobby.</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT color=3D#999999 size=3D2></FONT></STRONG>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp;<FONT face=3D"Times New Roman, Times, serif" =
color=3D#000000=20
size=3D2>By <FONT size=3D1><FONT size=3D2><A target=3D_blank=20
href=3D"http://www.davekopel.com/"><FONT color=3D#003333>Dave =
Kopel</FONT></A>, of=20
the <A target=3D_blank href=3D"http://i2i.org/"><FONT =
color=3D#003333>Independence=20
Institute</FONT></A></FONT></FONT></FONT><BR>&nbsp;<BR>Perhaps the most =
enduring=20
factoid of the gun prohibition movement is that a person with a gun in =
the home=20
is 43 times as likely to shoot someone in the family as to shoot a =
criminal.=20
This "43 times" figure is the all-time favorite factoid of the =
gun-prohibition=20
lobby. It's not really true, but it does tell us a lot about the =
gun-prohibition=20
mindset. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>The source of the 43-to-1 ratio is a study of =
firearm deaths=20
in Seattle homes, conducted by doctors Arthur L. Kellermann and Donald =
T. Reay=20
("Protection or Peril?: An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the =
Home," New=20
England Journal of Medicine, 1986). Kellerman and Reay totaled up the =
numbers of=20
firearms murders, suicides, and fatal accidents, and then compared that =
number=20
to the number of firearm deaths that were classified as justifiable =
homicides.=20
The ratio of murder, suicide, and accidental death to the justifiable =
homicides=20
was 43 to 1. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>This is what the anti-gun lobbies call "scientific" =
proof that=20
people (except government employees and security guards) should not have =
guns.=20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Of the gun deaths in the home, the vast majority are =
suicides.=20
In the 43-to-1 figure, suicides account for nearly all the 43 =
unjustifiable=20
deaths. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Counting a gun suicide as part of the increased risk =
of having=20
a gun in the home is appropriate only if the presence of a gun =
facilitates a=20
"successful" suicide that would not otherwise occur. But most research =
suggests=20
that guns do not cause suicide. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>In the book Point Blank: Guns and Violence in =
America, Florida=20
State University criminologist Gary Kleck analyzed suicide data for =
every=20
America city with a population more than 100,000, and found no evidence =
that any=20
form of gun control (including handgun prohibition) had an effect on the =
total=20
suicide rate. Gun control did sometimes reduce gun suicide, but not =
overall=20
suicide. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Notably, Japan, which prohibits handguns and rifles =
entirely,=20
and regulates long guns very severely, has a suicide rate of more than =
twice the=20
U.S. level. Many of the northern and central European nations also have =
very=20
high suicide rates to accompany their strict gun laws. (Of course, if =
you have=20
any suspicion that anybody in your home might be suicidal, it would =
hardly be a=20
mistake for you to ensure that they do not have ready access to guns,=20
tranquilizers, or other potentially lethal items.) </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Putting aside the suicides, the Kellermann/Reay =
figures show=20
2.39 accidental or criminal deaths by firearm (in the home) for every=20
justifiable fatal shooting. Now, 2 to 1 is a lot less dramatic than 43 =
to 1, but=20
we still have more unjustifiable gun deaths than justifiable gun deaths =
in the=20
home. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>But just as many other people who would commit =
suicide with a=20
gun would use an equally lethal method if guns are unavailable. Many of =
the=20
people who kill themselves in firearm accidents may also be bent on =
destruction,=20
regardless of the means. One study of gun-accident victims found that =
they were=20
"disproportionately involved in other accidents, violent crime, and =
heavy=20
drinking." (Philip Cook, "The Role of Firearms in Violent Crime: An=20
Interpretative Review of the Literature," in Criminal Violence). =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Or, as another researcher put it, "The psychological =
profile=20
of the accident-prone suggests the same kind of aggressiveness shown by =
most=20
murderers." (Roger Lane, "On the Social Meaning of Homicide Trends in =
America,"=20
in Violence in America, Vol. I, 1989.) </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Without guns, many accident victims might well find =
some other=20
way to kill themselves "accidentally," such as by reckless driving.=20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>So by counting accidents and suicides, the 43-to-1 =
factoid=20
ends up including a very large number of fatalities that would have =
occurred=20
anyway, even if there were no gun in the home. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Now, how about the self-defense homicides, which =
Kellermann=20
and Reay found to be so rare? Well, the reason that they found such a =
low total=20
was that they excluded many cases of lawful self-defense. Kellermann and =
Reay=20
did not count in the self-defense total of any of the cases where a =
person who=20
had shot an attacker was acquitted on grounds of self-defense, or cases =
where a=20
conviction was reversed on appeal on grounds related to self-defense. =
Yet 40% of=20
women who appeal their murder convictions have the conviction reversed =
on=20
appeal. ("Fighting Back," Time, Jan. 18, 1993.) </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>In short, the 43-to-1 figure is based on the totally =

implausible assumption that all the people who die in gun suicides and =
gun=20
accidents would not kill themselves with something else if guns were=20
unavailable. The figure is also based on a drastic undercount of the =
number of=20
lawful self-defense homicides. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Moreover, counting dead criminals to measure the =
efficacy of=20
civilian handgun ownership is ridiculous. Do we measure the efficacy of =
our=20
police forces by counting how many people the police lawfully kill every =
year?=20
The benefits of the police &#8212; and of home handgun ownership &#8212; =
are not measured by=20
the number of dead criminals, but by the number of crimes prevented. =
Simplistic=20
counting of corpses tells us nothing about the real safety value of gun=20
ownership for protection. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Finally, Kellermann and Reay ignore the most =
important factor=20
of all in assessing the risks of gun ownership: whose home the gun is =
in. You=20
don't need a medical researcher to tell you that guns can be misused =
when in the=20
homes of persons with mental illness related to violence; or in the =
homes of=20
persons prone to self-destructive, reckless behavior; or in the homes of =
persons=20
with arrest records for violent felonies; or in the homes where the =
police have=20
had to intervene to deal with domestic violence. These are the homes =
from which=20
the vast majority of handgun fatalities come. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>To study these high-risk homes and to jump to =
conclusions=20
about the general population is illogical. We know that possession of an =

automobile by an alcoholic who is prone to drunk driving may pose a =
serious=20
health risk. But proof that automobiles in the hands of alcoholics may =
be risky=20
doesn't prove that autos in the hands of non-alcoholics are risky. Yet =
the=20
famous Seattle 43-to-1 figure is based on lumping the homes of violent =
felons,=20
alcoholics, and other disturbed people in with the population as a =
whole. The=20
study fails to distinguish between the large risks of guns in the hands =
of=20
dangerous people, with the tiny risks (and large benefits) of guns in =
the hands=20
of ordinary people. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>But then again, treating ordinary people according =
to=20
standards that would be appropriate for criminals and the violently =
insane is=20
what the gun control movement is all about.=20
<BR>&nbsp;<BR></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C08C6C.DCB240C0--