There is no such thing as “gun crime”

In the debate over whether or not we should immorally and unconstitutionally seize firearms from American citizens, the anti-liberty community repeatedly throws out statistics about “gun crime”. These statistics are used to make these United States, look like a very violent dangerous place because of all the guns.

My dear people, “gun crime” is a made up category that has nothing to do with actual safety, particularly when the crimes are ranked based on “how many” crimes occurred or what “percentage” of crimes in “x number of countries” occurred in these United States.

The premise, that “gun crime” deserves its own category is completely disingenuous as well as disrespectful to the thousands of crime victims who were harmed using some other implement. Criminals will continue to commit crimes using whatever implement they happen to have at hand. Trying to create a separate category for guns is just a creative way to make the statistics say what you want them to.

The raw “numbers” also tend to make the United States appear to have more crime in general. This is done when the number of murders, robberies, etc. in these U.S. are compared with some other nation. This is pure junk mathematics. Many U.S. states have a population greater than many nations in Europe or South America. Trying to use the numbers to illustrate “greater violence” in the U.S. is just bad math. Instead what needs to be examined is the occurrence of crime relative to population. If you’ll google the daily mails report on violent crime per hundred thousand, you’ll find that the UK has nearly 4 times as many violent crimes as these United States. In fact, of the countries examined these U.S. doesn’t even make the top ten.

So when you see numbers tossed out on this issue, your best bet is probably just to ignore them. Focus on common sense and reasonable arguments and don’t rely on numbers to make your point for you. For example, we know that The State (nation in question doesn’t matter) is the greatest mass murderer of all time and that The State is greatly assisted by an unarmed opposition.

While raw data seems like it should be helpful, the problem lies with the assumptions made in the gathering of the data. Reason and common sense prove to be much more reliable, as usual.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “There is no such thing as “gun crime”

  1. Alan Mitchell

    Lack of data and statements such as “reason and common sense prove to be much more reliable” appear to be anti-scientific and a smokescreen for ignorance. Advocating that “your best bet is probably just to ignore them” (“them” being data, facts, numbers) is just another way of saying, “My opinion counts more than any amount of facts.” Well, everyone has an opinion, but opinion is often devoid of fact and is not required even to parallel reality. What are the facts? I came looking for facts and truth and found…unsupported opinion, magical thinking and self-delusion.

    Reply
    1. zeekbog Post author

      To be honest I find your response a tiny bit amusing…

      You have called for more science and facts, while seemingly disregarding the mathematical and scientific difficulties which summed up my critique. You seem to have made 2 common blunders.

      First of all you have assumed that statistics are facts. Statistics are a mathematical attempt at gathering facts, how they are gathered has everything to do with whether or not they are of any factual value. This is why I have pointed out the any “gun crime” numbers are pretty much cooked up. A crime victim doesn’t care what sort of weapon was used against them in the commission of the crime, they only care that they have been victimized. Any statistic that implies otherwise is simply trying to push the data a certain direction by emphasizing the use of firearms.

      Did you even bother to look up the other study I referenced? It demonstrates exactly what I was talking about. While these United States allegedly have more “gun crime” than European nations, we in fact have significantly less violent crime per capita, in other words our nation is less violent. This is why you have to go beyond the data, and see where it is actually coming from. Statistics have to come from some where, try asking where they came from and what assumptions they make. The vast majority of statistics are scientifically flawed in at least one area. Typically they have made assumptions that are unreasonable, that or they have failed to account for critical data. Whatever the case statics, outside of very particular applications, are unreliable. This is especially true when human issues are involved because they involve much more complex data sets than can be easily accounted for.

      Your second mistake is in assuming that science and fact have a monopoly on truth. It hasn’t been that long since science was telling farmers that we could feed dead cows to living cows, a “fact” which resulted in mad cow disease. Today, science is still telling farmers that is okay to feed cows chicken manure. Need I go on? Science makes mistakes just like any other tool used to discover truth. There are other tools, among them are reason, common sense, and human experience.

      You have accused me, despite basing my criticism of the above mentioned statistics based on the science and math of the issues, of being anti-science. At the end of the day, science really isn’t the best tool to use to answer this question. My opinion has little to do with it, reason and logic along with human experience, which are more wieldy tools in this case, strongly indicate that firearms and human liberty are mutually dependent.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s