----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Lambert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 2:34 PM Subject: Re: Kovandzic and Marvell find right-to-carry concealed handgun laws do not reduce violent crime.
Guy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tim reported: > > > http://timlambert.org/2003/08#0818 > > A study by Kovandzic and Marvell has been published in July issue of > > Criminology and Public Policy. (A draft of their paper is here.) From > > the journal's news release about their findings: > > > > In the recently published study "Right-to-Carry Concealed > > Handguns: Crime Control through Gun Decontrol?," Kovandzic and > > Marvell examine what, if any, impact Florida's right-to-carry law > > has had on its rate of violent crime. > > <snip> > > > First, they point out that > > few people have taken advantage of the concealed carry law? > > "despite millions of Floridians being eligible for permits... 12 > > years after the [RTC] law was in effect, there were only 248,O49 > > valid concealed weapons permits in Florida, representing 2.1% of > > the Florida adult population." > > Ever wonder why so few people play Russian Roulette? Cost/benefit. Though > the chance of ending your own life is only 1-in-6, the cost is so high few > people are willing to risk it. Criminals, as thick as they may be, operate > on the same informal analysis. Sure, only 2.1% of the population carries . > . . but when I mug someone at the ATM, will they be in that 2.1%? Not worth > the gamble. If criminals were so concerned about the tiny chance of encountering a gun carrier then they would already have been deterred by the far larger chance of being arrested and convicted for their crime. ***************** This objection seems to assume that all criminals operate with the same risk-assessment mentality and that it is a rational one. But if you look beyond violent or property criminals, you see that people respond differently to different types of risks. Many people wear helmets when riding motorcycles or mopeds because they think it's the safe choice, others do so grudginly only because they'll get a ticket for not doing so. Some choose not to take/deal drugs because of the health risks, others only make that choice out of fear they'll be caught. Same for drunk driving. And people are not that great at risk-assessment. 2 books (both called The Culture of Fear) point to numerous instances where people alter their behaviour (or authorities draft policies) to avoid extremely unlikely but exceptionally dramatic consequences while ignoring much more probable (but much more mundane) risks. For example, parents will buy bottled water, skip important immunizations, and keep their children from GM food while ignoring basic nutrition guidelines they should have picked up when they were children. Or...if people were so concerned about the tiny chance of being in a plane crash then they would already have been deterred by the far larger chance of being in an automobile accident on the way ot the airport.
