Gun control should be a lower priority; yes, even now.

The horror of an event lasts, but the real and overall numbers belie weightier problems 

This info-graphic has been floating around the internet, as a kind of perspective on the recent tragedy of school shootings.[1] I think there are two suggestive things here. First, that we get upset over something which has comparatively very small impact (in terms of total number of deaths of citizens); and, second, that emotion of recent events easily clouds our judgement on overall factors.

I am presuming that since all deaths happen only once to each citizen, they must be counted as equal. Yet since so many more deaths occur in all these other categories, guns are actually a much smaller problem for the country as a whole than these other issues. However, the emotive baggage toward guns and the highly publicized (albeit terrible) episodes involving them is what biases a response in people.  But that doesn't change what facts there are on the actual numbers of deaths. So, as an overall assessment, I'd say the gun worries are overblown.

One might counter that self inflicted or accidental deaths are not a "problem" that the country needs to deal with, certainly not with legal solutions. In fact, some libertarians would further are that (1) we should be allowed to harm ourselves, and (2) we can't legislate accidents away.[2]

But I think there is a way to approach the matter which moves the issue to the first or initiating causes of citizen deaths. Just as a badly broken mental health system can allow a person to end up using a gun in terrible ways, so can other broken social systems -- such as substandard auto monitoring, allowing under monitored or dangerous practices,  perpetuating addictive cigarettes in society, etc. -- all these allow other consequences where many, many citizens die. Therefore, it's the initiating causes that we should be worrying about, and the initiating causes for gun deaths have far, far less consequences in terms of citizen deaths than the initiating causes behind these other social issues that lead to citizen deaths. So (and again), as an overall assessment, I argue that gun worries are overblown.

 O.

[1] One should also note that the claim about FBI and baseball bats is incorrect (source).

[2] Of course, if one can't legislate accidents away, there is this mystery of what the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has been doing all these years.

U.S. and gun control: wise or foolish?

0. An old friend of mine recently wrote on his blog the following:

[The second amendment] has widely been interpreted (erroneously, I believe) to give every American the right to own any kind of gun they please. I believe the Fathers would have worded the amendment more carefully if they could have foreseen how many innocent people were being slaughtered daily in one of the most advanced countries in the world.

He goes on to cite sobering statistics concerning the various groups which die of gun deaths in the U.S. He closed by accusing the N.R.A. and other lobbyists of being responsible for keeping Americans asleep on this issue. I have, on and off through the years, owned guns, and have more than once considered joining the N.R.A., so in many ways my friend brought the issue to a point in my mind.

Admittedly, gun ownership in the U.S. is a very tricky issue. I will grant that many undesirable deaths are indeed caused by the prevalence of guns in America. However, I believe there are other matters regarding gun ownership that are worth considering.

1. First, Many of the deaths in the U.S., about 81 per day in 2004, are by suicides, particularly by white males over 40. So if one adjusts for those deaths, 25 of the 39 deaths per day in that age bracket are for people who are choosing to end their own life. This hardly counts against gun use, since people use autos and other technology to end their lives too.[1]

2. Second, although guns cause lots of undesirable deaths in the U.S., which is a bad thing, they also save lots of lives and injury by preventing many crimes. In fact, an academic study on this advantage showed a clear preventative use of guns which far outweighs the damage done by them:

"The most comprehensive study of defensive gun use, by award-winning criminologist Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz (1993), found that handguns were used for defense nearly two million times per year, amounting to two-thirds of defensive gun uses. Kleck separately studied National Crime Victimization Surveys and found that people who use guns to defend themselves are less likely to be attacked or injured than people who use other means, or no means, of protection. Kleck has concluded that guns are used to defend against crime 3-4 times more often than to commit it. Forty states have Right-to-Carry laws allowing people to carry concealed handguns for protection away from home, and such states have lower violent crime rates, on average, compared to the rest of the country. Since 1991, the number of states that have Right-to-Carry laws has risen from 17 to 40 (an all-time high) and violent crime has dropped 38 percent."[2]

3. I conclude, then, that the gun, like the automobile, does result in many injuries and deaths, but the benefits that autos and guns offer actually outweigh their liabilities.

4. Finally, I like the idea of there being a registration database for handguns, since these types of guns are most likely to be used in a crime. Also, it is enlightening to consider that virtually no gun crimes are committed by people who are N.R.A. members, so perhaps the key is some sort of certification program in addition to a registration program--at least for handgun ownership.

O.

REFERENCES

[image] "What is 'gun control'" www.a-human-right.com (Accessed 5/2/2009)

[1] "An accounting of daily gun deaths" New York Times


[2] "Handguns:Summary" NRA Website