Harvard study proves gun-grabbers’ argument dead wrong

Will a Harvard man listen to Harvard research?

Probably not, if the Harvard man is Barack Obama, and the research finds flies in the face of liberal pieties – and misconceptions and lies – about gun ownership, gun violence and gun control in the United States.

gunstudyLike the recently reported CDC study about gun violence Obama commissioned himself, the message to gun grabbers is clear:

They’re wrong.

A study released in the spring in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy – to virtually no media attention – focused on the prevalence of gun ownership in the United States versus those strict gun-control countries in Europe the left is so fond of talking about.

It was called, with disarming bluntness, “Would banning firearms reduce murder and suicide?”

Its answer was: “No.”

Looking at historical patterns in the United States from the colonial and post-colonial days, and in Europe going back to the time before guns were even invented, two researchers came to a clear conclusion:

“Nations with higher gun ownership rates … do not have higher murder or suicide rates than those with lower gun ownership.”

That’s just a fact, even in those European countries the U.S. left is so fond of citing.

Heavily armed Norwegians, where gun ownership is highest in Western Europe, have the continent’s lowest homicide rate, researchers Don Kates at the Independent Institute in Oakland and Gary Mauser of Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, British Columbia, wrote.

Russia, where the civilian population was virtually disarmed by the communist government for 80 years, has one of the highest homicide rates in Europe – and one four times higher than in the United States.

In the United States, homicide rates were relatively low, despite periods when firearms were widely available – the colonial era, when Americans were the world’s most heavily armed population, the post-Civil War years, when the country was awash in surplus guns and filled with men trained to use them.

Homicide rates in the United States didn’t increase dramatically until the 1960s and ‘70s, which correlated with a rise in gun purchases, but Kates and Mauser point out that fear of crime could just as easily have sparked a rise in gun purchases, rather than more guns causing more crime.

And today?

Communities where gun-ownership rates are highest are where the homicide rates are lowest, Kates and Mauser wrote:

“Where firearms are most dense violent crime rates are lowest, and where guns are least dense violent crime rates are highest.”

That’s not what the gun grabbers want to hear.

And the two researchers know it. In their conclusion, they launched a pre-emptive defense, quoting another researcher who found similarly unwelcome (to the left) results when he studied crime in the United States versus gun-restrictive Canada:

“If you are surprised by [our] finding[s], so [are we]. [We] did not begin this research with any intent to ‘exonerate’ hand‐ guns, but there it is — a negative finding, to be sure, but a negative finding is nevertheless a positive contribution. It directs us where not to aim public health resources.”

The study takes up 45 pages in the journal’s spring issue.

But when it comes to gun-grabbers, the whole thing can be summed up in two words:

You’re. Wrong.

Correction: And earlier version of this post incorrectly identified Don Kates and Gary Mauser as “Harvard researchers.”

 

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed
About Joe Saunders

Joe Saunders, a 25-year newspaper veteran, is a staff writer and editor for BizPac Review who lives in Tallahassee and covers capital and Florida politics. Email Joe at jpjsaunders@gmail.com.

  • Bob A

    Even the Harvard liberals see the wisdom of an armed citizenry. Especially with the epidemic of black on white violence.

    • Robert Tennant

      You sound intelligent for a racist! The article clearly is a study pertaining to armorment and the correlation to homicides. Do humanity a favor by moving yourself to a country that has more gun control and take the other bigoted pieces of feces with you!

      • tonya

        Nothing bigoted here. Truth is truth.

        • Robert Tennant

          All one has to do is click and read the previous comments by a person to see a trend Tara. You have absolutely NO emotional baggage whatsoever!

        • groverpm

          You, assuming you’re white, are more likely to be murdered by another white person. In the last decade 43,8% of murders were white on white. 39,2% were black on black. 8.1% were black on white while 4,2% were white on black.

          • Naturalism

            Wow that’s astounding considering black folks make up 13% of America’s population. You’re saying that 47.3% of all murders are committed by 13% of the population?

          • Chris Bowen

            Wish seems to correlate with the poverty level for the races as well. I wonder where the cause is at…

          • Naturalism

            There’s an undeniable link between poverty and crime. There is also an undeniable link between culture and crime, and between race and culture. We know that immigrant populations have crime rates, reproduction rates, food habits, medical outcomes etc. which match their mother culture more strongly than their adopted culture. I really want to avoid going any farther down the racial path here, but American crime stats don’t look so bad if you control for the racial dimension. Oh, Norwegians in Norway don’t commit much crime? Well goodness gracious, look at that, Norwegians in America don’t commit much crime either.

            All that said, I refuse to let racists run with those facts. They run to places that are untenable.

          • Chris Bowen

            Either you are agreeing with me, missed the sarcasm in my last sentence or misunderstood me. Not sure which.

          • kaioti

            Cultures often develop OUT OF living conditions.

            I see what you were trying to do there. Got a chart to check the income levels of the white murderers? Bet it was mostly poor people and I bet there is indicators for drug use.

            In FACT I would bet that the living conditions for most “white on white and white on black” homicides are from a similar poverty centric culture.

          • Bexcee

            And one of largest factors for poverty and crime, drug abuse is growing culture of generational fatherlessness. +70% of black children are born out of wedlock. This tragedy also crosses ethnic lines and is seen in growing numbers of white families. You can’t destroy the traditional family unit and expect healthy society. Education won’t solve the problem. Good husbands and good fathers need role models in their homes. Not generations of female only. Probably one reason for such fear of guns we have now, Mommas raising boys, and gangs raising boys. In the 60′s and early 70′s we used to have target ranges in schools, guys brought guns to school in back of pick up trucks…no rampant shootings, etc. What changed? The family.

          • tmanosaurus

            You have to be my age. Where i grew up it was all family, good and bad but family way before the first nighting, family splitting divorces of America that gave children like awards to women for a gov. bridge to more dependency in society. Well anyway, many kids, including myself brought shotguns to school locked in the trunks of our cars to go duck hunting after school. We had NRA safety courses at school to which we would bring our rifles and shotguns to and played sports and walked home from school and had happy days like Im sad for people to be missing.
            What people dont know now that they knew then is you made your own fate, you didnt blame it on someone else for not making it for you. We were happy for what we had because we got it ourselves…. thats called pride and its nearly gone. I could bring ten kids from inner city New York and get them to live a life they could never discover with the progressive psychiatrist teacher spewed propaganda and politifcally correct broken family gender twisted self mutilating anything to feel something traps in life that the last seven generations have been living in.
            Oh I have a story that made this sooo clear to me. Its like seeing dead people everywhere i go just like in the movie, except these dead people are called PC libs that think its rules and psychology and laws they make and not discovery, experience and time to grow without living in a goose step schedule of public education that lets one grow.
            This truly is a time when its the idea that others are supposed to make us happy and they owe it to us for reasons of skin, or language, or government or politics, or gender or anyother reason to point a finger instead of lifting a finger.
            So its simple after all …dont point a finger, lift a finger (no not your middle finger), give a hand or a smile, even to ol Leo G. the crab. Weve slid down along ways, climbing back up a slippery slope isnt easy but its worth it!

          • AsylumSeaker

            When there is an impression that a race is predisposed to bad behaviour, they’re treated as such. Whether the argument is for a genetic predisposition, or the effects of environmental conditioning, or simply an objective observation of the statistics, the result tends to be that members of that race are assumed predisposed to bad behaviour by default.

            Being treated as bad by default puts one at a social disadvantage and causes stress not faced by other races. The result is that even were there no meaningful differences between the races beforehand, meaningful differences are created in practice due to this differing treatment.

            It’s not hard to see how this feeds back into the development of racial cultures, and leads to the situation we have where races are often divided and in conflict with each other. And yet all of this can happen with nothing of real importance at the center – no inherent racial traits are necessary. It’s a crisis of perception, and that is all.

          • tmanosaurus

            Gee I guess were stuck then and we need government to tell us to “be nice to each other and extend a hand ” by some law eh? Well I’ll tell ya that except for the name that wont get a shrink a nickle, the walk of Christ and the faith of John would do alot for a neighborhood, without saying a name or demanding an allegience. They pretty much recommend hangin out, yakking and telling stories, laughing and talking about life and playing games and experiencing brotherhood and sisterhood in you neighborhood.
            Botherhood, sisterhood, neighborhood.
            Thats a clue for kids.
            Let em clean each others teeth with a dental kit, that’ll loosen them up.

          • AsylumSeaker

            In the immortal words of Lil Jon.. What?

          • Jerry

            Some liberal will still deny that fact.

          • beakgeek

            Look at the authors who wrote this. Gee, one of them has a pic holding a huge handgun. They are so unbiased – NOT

          • James B.

            Source?

          • groverpm

            http://www.theindychannel.com/news/interracial-homicide-rate-growing. The actual source cited is the Scripps Howard News service.

      • Bob A

        9 of 10 violent interracial crimes are committed by blacks against whites. So now I’m a bigot if I state the accurate historical record! Its you race baiting liberals who try and censor free speech with your slanderous name calling. You nothing but a bunch of intolerant Nazis!

        • Chris Bowen

          First citation for your stats.

          Second, if there there are 10 interracial crimes, and 9 are committed by a black person that does not mean there is an epidemic, and that is even if I believe your stats.

          • dwinkle

            Your “disbelief” is why we have these problems.

          • Chris Bowen

            No, your lack of logic is why we have these problems… I quite clarly showed the error with the stats, but you had to come up with a strawman.

          • Bob A

            In the 500 days of the Zimmerman trial 10,000 blacks were murdered by other blacks. is an epidemic! Only a stupid liberal could deny it for political reasons!

          • Chris Bowen

            First your statement does not make sense.. There was 1 and 4 months between the time he was charged and the time the trial ended. The trial started in June, meaning it lasted less than 1 year 1 month.. That means at most the trial was 395 days long. if you dont mean trial by the use of trial, but instead mean the whole time from charge to acquittal than you would be close to the 500 day mark, but still overshot by about 12%. After that I am not sure where you get 10k from, I assume you are estimating, since the stats are not out for the first 6 months of this year.

            And your new statement is relevant to the old statement of “9 of 10 violent interracial crimes are committed by blacks against whites” how?

            In addition, 90 out of 100 regular readers of this site has killed someone, look I just presented “facts” without supporting documentation.. Only a “stupid” conservative believes statistics made by online strangers.

          • Bob A

            From the time Trayvon attacked Zimmerman to the time he was acquitted was just over 500 days moron! The 9 of 10 comes straight from the FBI. Just read Drudge. There is a new black atrocity every day. All you liberals try to bend reality to you ideological fancies. Just because you liberals will generate lies to promote your anti-American policies doesn’t mean I have to. The truth is on my side. Your no different than terrorist muslims which the Koran allows them to lie if it promotes islam! Lying to you liberals is just a management technique.

          • Chris Bowen

            Firstly you did not say from the time he killed Trayvon, you said the trial. Words have meaning, if you wanted to say from the time he killed the young man you should not have said the trial…. The rest of your post just degenerated into a bunch of logical fallacies, blah blah blah..

          • Bob A

            Blah, blah, blah is the most intelligent thing you said. LOL 10,000 blacks were murdered by other blacks in that time period! You’ve got to be a teacher or a member of a COMMUNIST UNION.

          • Chris Bowen

            citation, or you are just another conservative idiot who likes to spout numbers without anything to back them up.. And why do you keep on with the fallacies, you know it does not hurt my feelings or make you look smart.

          • Bob A

            Either your too stupid or to lazy to do your own work.

          • Chris Bowen

            Because it is “my work” to prove you correct right? WRONG, if you make the statement, it is YOUR job to prove it.

          • anthroscientist

            Chris is right. Burden of proof. You should go back to class son.

          • Bob A

            It wouldn’t you white hating racist liberals except nothing that doesn’t fit your slandering rhetoric. Typical communist unionist and pointy headed academic. LOL

          • anthroscientist

            Typical conservative response. Insults and verbally throwing feces. Do you deny evolution too?

          • kaioti

            Hey, Liberals are good and frequent feces throwers too. just re-read YOUR posts. :)

          • Naturalism

            “Epidemic”

            That word has a meaning, and you aren’t using it right. “Epidemic” implies a sudden increase in incidence. The word you should be using is “Endemic” meaning “regularly found among a population”.

            Because sadly, crime in the black community isn’t new.

          • Bob A

            Its not new but it is increasing. 50% of black kids in the hood don’t graduate high school. Of the half that graduate, half of them are functionally illiterate. 7 of 10 black children in the hood are nothing but welfare money makers for their mothers. They are brought up by street gangs, drug dealers and pimps. Its much worse than it was 20 years ago. But you liberals don’t care. You just need to trot them out for protests and elections every two years and tell them its those white people who are keeping them down, when its immoral living keeping them down.

          • bleedinell

            10,865 blacks killed other blacks from the time of the shooting to the time he was acquitted, 503 days.

          • Bob A

            I had a couple of liberals who refused to believe that statistic. If it doesn’t agree with their fictitious world view, they shut their eyes, cover their ears and start shouting lalalalalalalalalal! LOL

        • Robert Tennant

          LOL!! You just used a interracial stat to validate my point. Check your past comments and give us the pecentage of racial arguments you have participated in. Then list the non-racial topics you have responded using a racial response. The Nazis would have made you their top General ! It is really a shame that I volunteered my time and life by serving in the armed forces to protect the rights and liberties of a piece of garbage such as yourself. Enjoy your wretched existence!

          • Bob A

            The definition of racism is anything you American hating liberals don’t like. Telling the truth to you liberals is like sun light to a vampire. Your just afraid if the truth gets out, blacks will run from their liberal slave masters in charge of your plantation.

          • anthroscientist

            American hating liberals? Hahahahahahahaha. It is Republicans that are cutting education, health care, services to senior citizens, lying us into wars (Obama might do it with Syria so fair enough on that one), constantly protecting big business and destroying the environment. Check your facts, all you have to do is look at Republican policy. It is okay though, young people are wise to your crap. You are a dying breed and good riddance to you pieces of garbage.

          • Charles Wesley

            Repubs lying us into wars, huh? Let’s see… Spanish-American, brought in under McKinley. WWI, led in by Wilson (DFL). WWII, under DFL (FDR). Korean involvement, under Truman (DFL). Vietnam, under JFK and LBJ (DFL). Hmmm. do you sense a pattern here?

            GOP, Desert Storm–at request of Kuwait.
            Attacked 2001, with a second attack and Third attack (one foiled) under Clinton.
            Also USS Cole (Clinton)

            Let’s see…adding this up– GOP in 2. DFL in 1,2,3,4…Hmmm. How do you explain this?

            Your facts don’t stand up to scrutiny. I wonder why…

          • anthroscientist

            Where is your proof that these wars were brought on through lies by POTUS? All you did was provide stats on which presidents were in office during war time. Maybe you want to learn how to better construct evidence and an argument. Typical GOP bs. Lyers, cheaters, haters of women and the poor. Claim to be the moral party but are composed of a bunch of selfish cowards.

          • Charles Wesley

            Let’s see… they’ve found WMDs in the Mid-East, haven’t they? Hmmm. Looks like you’ve lost that.

            JFK indicated that our troops in ‘Nam would be there only as advisers. You know how that turned out.

            Iraq was, and still is, a staunch supporter of terror, offering safe haven to Al-Qaeda.

            HEY, did you miss something? Sept. 11, 2001, attacked by a variety of Muslims from countries including Iraq.

            OH, and what about last year? Can you say BENGHAZI? I thought you could….

            You talk about “proof”…

            BTW, did you notice something? Yeah, I did…”Lyers.” Exactly what is that? Oh, this must be the new Lib-speak?

            Assuming that was a typo (Which is giving you the benefit of a doubt), do you ever go back to read what you have written?

            Nixon, despite his own scandal, got us out of ‘Nam. Barry promised us out of Afghanistan, Iraq. Now we’re still in Iraq (Not combat troops, however), we’re still in Afghanistan, we’re in Pakistan. The Mid-East is more unstable than ever. Egypt, Iraq, Iran, “Palestinian”, and now he wants to move into Syria. While the use of Sarin gas has been confirmed, the question of “who actually used it?” remains. Let the Muslim Brotherhood take over Syria? The Muslim Brotherhood hates the US; if we provide weapons, they will be used, soon, against us.

            Let’s see: Clinton had Monica, Whitewater. Carter had Bert Lance, Billy Carter. Reagan had Iran-Contra. BHO has… Muslim Brotherhood, Fast and Furious, IRS, Benghazi, NSA, Phone records… Next to BHO, Nixon looks like a saint.

            Oh, If I have offended your sensibilities, maybe you need to look to see why.

            We survive. We will continue to speak the truth. Untruths cannot survive in light of truth.

      • Charles Wesley

        How Amazing you are — you apparently have no answer that makes sense, so you throw out the race card. Of course; when you have no logical premise or answer, you simply resort to insult and sarcasm. This is the mark of a loser.

        I do not have the figures in front of me from the justice system (Which I admit is flawed, but it is still the best available–a sorry statement) . I fear there are still some countries where you can be accused, found innocent, then tried and continue to be tried until they get the verdict “THEY” want. If you want, you’re welcome to live there, but I’m not sure you’d want to do so, especially since this country permits free speech… some places you can still wind up in jail for speaking out against the Government.

        You can blame “guns” all you want. What about knives, ropes, sticks, rocks, vehicles? Or just bare hands?

        No gun’s trigger pulls itself. A knife won’t jump out of the drawer and stab you. A rope won’t find its way around your neck unless it is put there.

        Anything can be a weapon. And the strongest weapon is intelligence. It slays the stupid with logic and the loser rants on and on.

        If you stick your finger in an electrical socket but didn’t turn off the power…are you going to blame the power company? Or are you going to accept the fact that you were thoughtless, careless and stupid?

        Accept it: there will always be a few dangerous people. You won’t know who they are until too late. Or are you going to profile everyone?

        Your response would be interesting…can you do it without name calling or throwing out the race card? For some reason, I doubt it. Let’s see if you can prove me wrong.

        • anthroscientist

          So, disgusting idiots make racist comments, someone calls them out for being racist, and then they are using the race card? I am going to make a bigoted comment. I actually despise conservatives and Republicans. Your authoritarian, fascist, xenophobic viewpoints are not only disgusting, but stupidly devoid of facts. Most young people see right through your crap and Republicans and are increasingly tolerant. I cannot wait to see you disgusting people die off.

          • Charles Wesley

            Absolutely amazing. Thanks for proving my point. I made absolutely no statement against anyone, except to say that when you try to play the “race” card, you’ve already lost. and then you accuse me of being xenophobic, fascist and authoritarian.
            This is just as I was stating. Name calling is the mark of someone with no argument. I used examples… Guns don’t pull their own triggers, knives don’t leap of of drawers and stab you. I challenge you to show me any proof otherwise. And it is quite obvious that you have been indoctrinated into “lib-think” and “lib-speak.” But it seems that you make statements without thinking. Before you accuse me of what you do, get to know me. Understand my viewpoint. Then, if you don’t want, you can ignore it.

            Name calling gets you nowhere. All it does is prove that you have a great career ahead as a court jester. Or maybe as a political commentator.

            You take offense at the truth? Sorry if that hurts. But the truth always wins.

            You might try to file this under “R” for racist… I’ll file it under R for reality.

            I don’t need to file you under anything. And BTW, “Guest,” hiding — maintaining your anonymity, strikes me as a bit cowardly. Stop hiding. I do not have to hide. I speak truth.

    • groverpm

      If 0.01% of white youth might murder you and 0.02% of black youths might murder you then, given the larger white population, you are more likely to be murderd by a caucasian.

      • Bob A

        9 of 10 interracial violent crime is perpetrated by blacks against whites. And that’s a true statistic, not a phoney one like yours.

        • Chris Bowen

          If it is so true why do you refuse a citation..
          In addition why does it even matter? You are using a subset of the data to make a point to the overall stats, but the subset is not representative of the overall set.

          • Slam1263

            Here ya go:
            http://www.bing.com/search?q=black%20on%20white%20crime%20statistics&PQ=black%20on%20white&SP=1&QS=AS&SK=&sc=8-31&form=BSRTSS&pc=BBSR
            It isn’t real hard to Bing something to find out if it is true or not.
            This search took o.14 seconds and returned 13 Million results.
            Wow, the DOJ says it’s true. But you don’t have to believe it, it is headed by a racist.

          • Chris Bowen

            Yes, it took you “0″.14 second and still does not support what he stated. Awesome.

          • Slam1263

            Oh, I’m sorry, you can’t really read.
            Give me a buzz, I’ll help you learn.

          • Chris Bowen

            So now you start with the logical fallacies. When someone claims a fact they give a source, they dont give a link to a search term in a search engine and say here is a bunch of related things, figure it out. If you want me to take a fact seriously cite a source. The only thing even remotely close I have seen stated 300k violent crimes more than the FBI statistics on total violent crimes.

          • Slam1263

            See, I helped already.
            You are so welcome :)

          • Chris Bowen

            So you helped with what? A link that showed nothing, using one of the worst search engines in the world? The source I found was before your link, and again the only thing that supported it had inaccurate stats so why would I trust it for the stat he claims?

          • Slam1263

            Stop it, you’re making me blush.
            I already said thanks.

          • Bob A

            You liberals are always the same. You want someone else to pay your bil and you want me to do research for you. You do it yourself idiot!

          • Chris Bowen

            I dont want you to pay my bills, I can handle my bills on my own.. Also I dont want you to “do my research for me”… If you state something as fact you should be prepared to cite the source, otherwise it is nothing more than a random internet idiot making up crap.

          • Rick Shope

            “The number sounds extremely precise, but it’s actually something of a
            rough guess based on back-of-the envelope math. No one actually knows
            how many African-Americans were murdered by other African-Americans in
            that time frame, and the numbers cited are actually an extrapolation of
            murder statistics for 2005. More current figures from 2011 show fewer
            deaths. So the specific numbers are not literally accurate.” PolitiFact.com

          • Chris Bowen

            And how many white on white murders were there? If white people are the majority of killers, as stats show, and blacks control the interracial killings, that means there will have been many more than that number of white killing white.

          • http://www.Xenu.net/ simkatu

            You made the claim. It is your job to provide a citation to a credible source. Otherwise I could say your mom has had sex with 93.4% of all animals at the San Diego Zoo. Now do the research yourself and if you can’t find it, then I am right.

          • Bob A

            I have found it is impossible to convince a liberal of something he doesn’t like, regardless of the amount of historical evidence. Go chase your tail.

          • anthroscientist

            If you present a “fact,” it is up to you to provide proof of it. You conservatives are all the same. Devoid of logic and intellectual cripples.

        • Naturalism

          I doubt it’s true, but even if it were it would be irrelevant for the reason GP noted.

          • Bob A

            The more concealed carry permits in a county the lower the crime rate. In South Chicago, Philly, NY City only the criminals have guns. The criminals know the law abiding people can’t shoot back!

        • groverpm

          Please show me the source for that. You might also like to look the statistics for interracial murders I posted above. You’re still more likely to be murdered by somebody of your own race.

      • kaioti

        If you are white and you live in nice white neighborhoods. Ass hat.

        You know I really don’t understand the attempts to downplay the situation coming out of the mouths of people trying really really hard to not be racist.

        You shouldn’t have to try that hard. The numbers are what they are. The numbers SUCK. The education system SUCKS. The welfare system SUCKS. The Drug Laws SUCK. The prison system SUCKS.

        I would like very much to fix those things so that everyone has a better time while they are here. I would like to fix those things so that everyone gets equal footing.

        I’m not going to sit around going “Oooh look at the dangerous blacks…it is what it is guys. Oooh…I’m a justified asshat!”

        I’m also NOT going to sit around going “Man look at how not racist I am! LOOK AT IT!…Even *I* almost believe it… ”

        Both types of people (the people I’m responding to on this thread) are not complete, honest or respectable.

  • tonya

    I don’t need a Harvard study to tell me that taking my gun away makes me less safe.

    • groverpm

      A 1998 study in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery that found that “every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.” Pistol owners’ fantasy of blowing away home-invading bad guys or street toughs holding up liquor stores is a myth debunked by the data showing that a gun is 22 times more likely to be used in a criminal assault, an accidental death or injury, a suicide attempt or a homicide than it is for self-defense.

      • LordBobo

        Thats why they should outlaw studies on guns. All of them studdies are slanted by libtards to show what they want them to show. Can’t trust their numbers. Gotta go to the WORD OF GOD. If his Apostles had been packing, Jesus would still be here to this day.

        • Chris Bowen

          That gets my vote as the most idiotic post of the day.. Lets outlaw studies on guns because all the evidence presents a liberal slant!!!!

          Better yet lets just outlaw all facts we dont agree with.

          Also if Jesus had guns he would have lived to be around 2013 years old, neglecting several things.

          1. If he had guns the Romans soldiers would have too.

          2. If he is God than he could have just created guns out of thin air.

        • bbbooobbbb

          The Bible specifically says that Jesus disciples were chanting for his execution, so your argument is nullified by scripture

      • tonya

        LOL

    • Chris Bowen

      Unfortunately for your belief that is not what the study stated.

      • scarbarough

        No, the study didn’t address what groverpm wrote.Can you cite anything in the study that talks about guns being used in self-defense?

        • Chris Bowen

          I have no clue what that has to do with my statement.. I never stated anything about self defense.

          • scarbarough

            Bah, my misread – I thought you were replying to grover, not to Tonya

    • Naturalism

      You wouldn’t believe it either way, so it doesn’t really matter does it?

  • Robert Ivey

    Small problem with this theory
    Norway has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the world.

    1. You can get a license for any firearm.
    2. You have to prove you have a reason to own a firearm.
    3. You have to pass a background check. (mental/Criminal

    4. You have to pass a training course on gun safety.
    5. All Firearms are registered and there is a national registry
    6. Its illegal to privately sell firearms.
    7. There are regulations on what is considered safe storage of firearms and ammunition.
    8. There are regulations on what is considered safe storage for the transportation of firearms.
    9. All firearms in Norway have unique markings allowing the tracing of ownership.
    10. Carrying Firearms is prohibited by law in public concealed or unconcealed.

    I mean other then those 10 things America and Norway are totally the same…

    • GrumpyNinja

      you forgot the most important one of all. Most Norwegian gun owners are more educated, enjoy much higher standards of living when compared to their American counterparts.
      You are less likely to use you gun for criminal intent if all the basic necessities in life are met and then some.

      • Mike Renell

        Not true… Quantify “More Educated” Also, your basic necessities spiel is nonsense people commit crimes for a variety of reasons…

        • Naturalism

          WTF? No it’s not nonsense. Are you seriously questioning the link between poverty and crime? Seriously?

          “More educated” is one of the easiest of all measures of demographics. Quantify it? Normally we quantify it with four thresholds: primary, college, graduate, doctorate. Most commonly we boil it down to “percent of population with a college education”.

        • Chris Bowen

          How about Norway ranks 7th is attainability while the US ranks 13, which leads to more educated people in that country compared to ours. Also it is not nonsense. Just because it does not account for all does not mean it does not account for most.

        • Mike Renell

          Keep going… good arguement…
          But… There is probably no real corelation between education and whether someone will commit crime

          • Chris Bowen

            What? There is a correlation between poverty and education, and there is a correlation between poverty and crime. That means by the transitive property there is a correlation between education and crime.

          • anthroscientist

            Were you dropped on your head?

        • GrumpyNinja

          Of course people commit crimes for a variety of reasons HOWEVER when was the last time a gun owning doctor, engineer, professor, teacher etc was involved in a violent home invasion, gang shooting, drive bys??
          The FACT is majority of CRIMINAL gun owners have these things in common. LACK of education, lack of opportunities AND for the most part near poverty.
          Your argument is the nonsensical one.

          • Mike Renell

            Not A FACT… Your opinion. Many well educated folks kill… that’s an easy google search…. you don’t know what you are talking about

          • Chris Bowen

            He did not say all, he said most. Just because many educated folks kill does not take away from the fact that most criminals have these things in common.

          • VMA223Stone

            Mike you are wrong sir. Perhaps you need lessons in Google searches yourself. Overwhelming majority of people who committed murders via firearms are non college educated. Most didn’t even finish HS.

    • anthroscientist

      ^BOOM

  • GrumpyNinja

    Article is dumb! fact is guns make it much easier and convenient to kill people. PERIOD!
    stats can skew either way. For every location where more guns = less murder there is another where more guns = more murder.
    For every Norway there is a Somalia.
    Problem has always been the people. Guns are too easily available to the general masses… and for every one ‘good’ guy who buys a gun there is another not so good who does too.

    • Slam1263

      Better to stab them, Ninja?
      Odd, that you don’t like guns, but have a screen name that has an element that traces back to 16th century Nippon theater scenery handlers that were often the cause of death of many of the characters.
      Just a dichotomy I guess. Or a split personality. Either way, stay on your meds, and away from things that will harm others.

      • anthroscientist

        Well, he is a Ninja, so I would guess that stabbing is the best course of action in his opinion :). (Please spare me the stupid comments, this is humor.)

  • xcott

    This is not a “Harvard study.” The authors are unaffiliated with Harvard; you can see their affiliation on the first page.

    Not to detract from their findings, but an article published by a Harvard journal, or archived on a Harvard server, doesn’t mean that the authors or their results are from Harvard.

    • Naturalism

      To be fair, “Harvard” doesn’t “do” studies because “Harvard” is a bunch of land and buildings.

      • xcott

        Even accounting for metonymy, this article falsely refers to the authors as “Harvard researchers.”

        I find it particularly astonishing that the author links directly to their paper, where they plainly lay out their non-Harvard affiliation on the first page; then writes an article (and headline!) calling it a Harvard study by Harvard researchers.

        Maybe it’s a “citizen journalism” thing and maybe my mind is poisoned by the evil MSM, but I expect a journalist to at least read the first page of a report and not just stop at the domain name in the URL.

  • Joel

    a. I noticed you didn’t mention accidental death by handgun.
    b. We have seven million guns in Canada. We’re actually not that gun restrictive at all. Be nice if people started fact checking before they started drawing bizarre conclusions.
    c. Gun ownership levels would be highest in areas that have more money and therefore less poverty. In poorer areas those that have guns are more likely to use them in criminal activities.
    d. The conclusion for this study may or may not be correct, but waaaay more research needs to be done to figure that out.
    e. You Americans need to stop treating guns like they’re some kind of a religious icon. It’s a tool. Nothing more. Getting all bent out of shape to either defend the right to have them or get rid of them just clouds the discussion and creates unbalanced posts like this one.

    • Robert Ivey

      Actually Canada has some of the same laws Norway does which makes it about 10000000 times more restrictive then the United States.

  • Ben Gazi

    The world evolves. I wish I could come back in 1,000 years and see what has happened.. I would think crime in civilize countries will be tiny in assaults and murders because of developing video servallence. And

    • Curtisl13

      … people with criminal intent suddenly disappearing.

  • Random Guy

    Not a Harvard study.

    Interestingly, there are Harvard studies on this. They say pretty much the opposite of what this study says: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/

    • DavVictor

      Read the second page header ….

      p. 650 Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, Vol. 30

      • Naturalism

        Okay. We read it. It says it was published in a Harvard journal. Now, what’s your point? I know you can’t possibly mean that “published in a Harvard journal” means “came from Harvard”, so tell us what you do mean.

        • Chris Bowen

          Well according to him if it was published in all journals it must be a world wide collaborative study.

        • DavVictor

          Look here, unlike yourself (obviously) I have an upper graduate degree and have had to look through umpteen journals doing research both for my degrees and for my career. Perhaps you and the guy posting below can do a little self-study and learn a little more about this rather than open your mouth first.

          http://www.harvard-jlpp.com/

          It says in the link provided,
          “The Harvard Journal of Law & Public policy is published three times annually by the Harvard Society for Law & Public Policy, Inc., an organization of Harvard Law School students.

          The Journal is one of the most widely circulated student-edited law reviews and the nation’s leading forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship.”

          Are we finished arguing this point yet?

    • DavVictor

      Once again,

      “The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy is published three times annually by the Harvard Society for Law & Public Policy, Inc., an organization of Harvard Law School students.

      The Journal is one of the most widely circulated student-edited law reviews and the nation’s leading forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship.”

      Straight cut and paste from this link
      http://www.harvard-jlpp.com/

      .

  • lacrossestar83

    Swing and a miss.

  • Chris Bowen

    Actually nothing you stated here contridicts the “gun grabbers” .

    First and foremost correlation does not equal causation, especially when you dont completely compare all the facts.

    For example they use norway, while they may be “more heavily armed” than most EU countries they are till 1/3 guns per capita than the US, and are at a .6% homicide rate compared to the 4.8% for the United States. This shows that there is something different than gun ownership at work here…

    I am a gun rights supporter, but dont try to spread rubbish.

    • Robert Ivey

      The most common way to get a gun in Norway is by getting a hunting license.

      To obtain a hunting license, the applicant must complete a 30 hour, 9
      session course and pass a written multiple choice exam with 80% fail
      rate. The course includes firearm theory, firearm training, wildlife
      theory and environment protection training.

      So to get a gun in Norway via the easiest method you only have to take a 30 hour course with a test that fails 80% of its applicants…

      The other way is to be a sports shooter.

      A regular attendance and membership to a approved gun club over the
      course of six months. The applicant must use the firearms owned by the
      club or borrow at the range for this. After six months, the applicant
      may apply for a weapon for competition and training. The start license
      and a written recommendation from the gun club president is brought to
      the police station, and the competition class is filled out on the
      application. If approved, it will be returned to the applicant as with
      the hunter example.

      So the other way is to spend 6 months at a gun club and get a written recommendation from the gun club president. Please notice the Police handle the firearms permitting process…

      • Chris Bowen

        Not sure why you wrote all that to me.. I stated clearly that the article was silly in regards to this.