Crime is in direct proportion to the amount of human trash allowed to run free in the population.
If the proportion of firearms were doubled and the proportion of human trash remained the same, I don't believe there would be a significant increase in crime.
If the number of firearms were doubled, and the proportion of human trash were reduced by one half, there would surely be a significant decrease in crime.
It is the human trash component which contributes most significantly to the levels of crime, and the only realy way to effectively decrease the levels of crime is to reduce the proportion of human trash running free in society.
This explains to my satisfaction the situation in the "northern cities" the author mentions.
You have it exactly. It’s not only how much trash there is, but what you do with the trash that makes the difference. For instance, despite all the guns in Virginia, the crime rate there is only a fraction of what it is in D.C. or New York. Why? If guns = crime, and gun control stops crime, then D.C. and New York should be much, much safer places than Virginia, but the opposite is true. It’s all in how you deal with criminals: D.C , for instance, is where you get probation for felonies, and Virginia is where you get jail time for misdemeanors.