CA: More Burglars Shot, Less Burglaries. Who Knew?

Gun Watch ^ | 17 December, 2014 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Who would suspect that when burglars are shot, the burglary rate would go down?

I have seen the sentiment before, but never in quite such a succinct way.  The article was about a third burglar suspect being shot and killed in Richmond, California, this year.  From  richmondconfidential.org:

Terrell Ruben, 42, became the third person shot and killed in an attempted burglary in Richmond this year. A Richmond homeowner shot Ruben in the chest after he discovered Ruben and another man attempting to steal property from his backyard last Saturday. 

I think most people would see a clear connection between more burglars being shot, and fewer burglaries being committed, but it seems to escape the writer of the article.  This bit of journalistic word-twisting is in the article.  It shows a peculiar view of reality: 

Despite the unusually high number people shot in burglary attempts, residential burglaries have gone down 28 percent compared to last year in the period between Jan. 1 and Nov. 30.

To most people, this would seem to be a reversal of causation.  If you shoot more burglars, you will get less burglaries, and certainly less home invasions, where people who want to steal your stuff are willing to do it when you are there.   There is a reason why criminological research shows that places where guns are highly restricted, such as in England, have much higher levels of home invasions. 

I have seen this weird reversal of causality with the restoration of the right to bear arms and to defend oneself and others, as shall issue concealed carry, castle doctrine, and stand your ground laws have been implemented across the nation.

That version goes something like this:

In spite of higher numbers of self defense shootings, the overall murder rate is down.


Again, most people would assume that most of those who are justifiably shot are violent criminals, and they would be correct.   If more violent criminals are removed from society, then it makes sense that the murder rate would drop.

The old "progressive elite" model of murder, where the average murderer is an ordinary Joe who just got upset that day, and a gun was handy, has been discredited.  The modern model of murder is that most murders are committed by a tiny segment of violent criminals.   If those violent criminals are in jail or dead, they are not committing crimes.

Most people can easily understand that logic.   But most reporters seem to be stuck in the old discredited "progressive elite" model of murder, and are surprised that when you make crime less attractive, you get less of it.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

[The_Reader_David]

Or

Less burglary.

I actually like the poetics of using burglary as a collective noun for the activity, rather than the more prosaic fix of correctly using fewer applied to the plural.

[SaraJohnson]

I was told by the police chief in a town I lived in that when your house is empty, make it appear like you are home with light timers. Thieves shop for houses to hit and they don’t want to be confronted by homeowners.

They don’t want to be confronted by homeowners because they are in danger of being killed.

[Kenny Bunk]

...... vandalize a car, throw a brick through a window, paint graffiti on a wall, drive aggressively, participate in a fistfight, use drugs, illegally carry a firearm... all that every single day....

Yes, but that was before FR gave me an outlet!

[TangoLimaSierra]

Or

Less burglary.

Yes, like less traffic but fewer cars.

[Kenny Bunk]

Classic example of a logical theorem called:

"Lucus a non Lucendo."

Or literally, "it is called a grove of trees because it does not shine".

So, "Despite vicious redneck bible-thumping gun-hugging homeowners shooting more burglars, obtusely upsetting our prediction mantra of "more guns=more crime," it cannot be a "crime rate reduction" because there are fewer crimes, which are the substance of crime reduction. Therefore, as night follows day, there can be no statistical reduction in crime without crime data.

Quite simple really. To believe otherwise is racist, gender normative, eurocentric, patriarchal, imperial,hegemonic thinking.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

“Guns lower the recidivism rate. About six feet.”

[BobL]

“Despite the unusually high number people shot in burglary attempts, residential burglaries have gone down 28 percent compared to last year in the period between Jan. 1 and Nov. 30.”

Line like that let us really GET INSIDE THE HEADS of liberals. Another one, that I always like to point out, and pops up every few hears goes something like this:

“Despite a record number of people in jail, the crime rate continues to fall in the United States.”

They (the left-wing reporters) really cannot understand what they’re writing...or they wouldn’t even write it.