Posted by Stuart Benjamin: Bad News for John Lott: Back in 1997, John Lott wrote an article in the Journal of Legal Studies putting forward data that seemed to show that right-to-carry (gun) laws reduced violent crimes. That article, and the subsequent book [1]"More Guns Less Crime" influenced me and many others -- including state legislatures that passed right-to-carry laws based in significant part on the assertion that this would reduce crime. I don't have any particular precommitments regarding guns (and I shot many a gun while hunting as a youth), so I am guided by the empirical evidence. If more guns produces net benefits to society, then let's have more guns; if it doesn't, then let's not.
Anyway, Lott's thesis has come under attack from [2]a number of quarters. His bizarre behavior -- like [3]writing emails as "Mary Rosh," a student who said "he was the best professor I ever had," etc. -- did not help his credibility, but it did not impugn his data. (He ultimately [4]admitted he was Rosh.) His apparent fabrication of a study on which he relied was more serious, since it was part of his factual underpinnings, but the study was not central to his thesis. (By the way, co-blogger Jim Lindgren did excellent work [5]ferreting out the details about the phantom survey.) The key question was, and is, whether his data are correct that right-to-carry laws reduce crime. His core thesis, though, was called into doubt by a number of researchers, most prominently in a [6]study (and [7]reply, both complete with [8]data sets) written by Ian Ayres and John Donohue, two top empirical economists. They concluded that the data did not support Lott's assertions regarding right-to-carry laws and crime. Lott helped to write and then [9]withdrew his name from a response to Ayres and Donohue. He responded in other venues to them, but did not respond to some of their key assertions. Perhaps he was waiting/hoping for vindication from the closest thing to a gold standard in academic review -- a report on the issue from the National Research Council. That report has been years in the making, and features some of the [10]top researchers in the country. Well, the [11]report has been issued, it contains bad news for Lott: It [12]concludes that "There is no credible evidence that 'right-to-carry' laws, which allow qualified adults to carry concealed handguns, either decrease or increase violent crime." They discuss [13]Lott's research at some length and find it wanting. Note that they do not say that right-to-carry laws increase crime. That may be a silver lining for those opposed to gun control who believe that in the absence of evidence of a benefit states should allow people to carry guns, but it doesn't help Lott very much: He staked his reputation on his claim that the data showed a decrease. So much for his reputation. References 1. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0226493636/103-5540385-3948664?v=glance 2. http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/guns/lott98update.html 3. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A8884-2003Jan31¬Found=true 4. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A8884-2003Jan31¬Found=true 5. http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/guns/lindgren.html 6. http://islandia.law.yale.edu/ayers/Ayres_Donohue_article.pdf 7. http://islandia.law.yale.edu/ayers/Ayres_Donohue_comment.pdf 8. http://islandia.law.yale.edu/ayers/ 9. http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/guns/lott98update3.html#2003-04-30 10. http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309091241/html/309.html#pagetop 11. http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091241/html/ 12. http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/0309091241?OpenDocument 13. http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309091241/html/120.html#pagetop _______________________________________________ Volokh mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://highsorcery.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
