[Centurion2000]

The findings, by Stanford University law professor John Donohue

Never trust a lawyer.

[dirtboy]

For his part, Donohue said that right-to-carry laws may deter violent crimes, such as murder or robbery, in some situations, while encouraging them in others.

For example, he said, an attacker may wrest control of a handgun away from a victim, who may be less experienced in handling firearms, and use it against the victim.

Also, otherwise law-abiding citizens may become "emboldened to do bad things, some of them violent" in the heat of the moment, Donohue said.

Yeah, it's supposed to be a scientific study, but all Donohue can engage in is hypotheticals. I expected as much. We'll have to meander over to Brookings and dissect the logic, or lack thereof, in this study.

[dirtboy]

The findings, by Stanford University law professor John Donohue, contradict an influential study by economist John R. Lott Jr,

Let me see. One is trained in the professional use of statistics, and the other is trained in the professional use of bullsh**. Which results should I believe to be scientific? This is a toughie...

[Support Free Republic]

Free Republic Rocks, Big Time!
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

[jimt]

The guy has obviously studied England and Switzerland.

NOT !

[IGOTMINE]

"Brookings Institute". No more need be said.

[dirtboy]

As an FYI, Donohue was one of the authors of a study that tied the legalization of abortion in 1973 to the drop in the crime rate in the 1990s.

[dirtboy]

This is so much fun. In the LA Times article, Donohue first claims this:

According to his research, 13 states that enacted right-to-carry laws after 1992 experienced steep increases in murder and other violent crime rates, compared with states without such laws.

But then, he offers this rebuttal to Lott:

A comparison of crime trends in adjacent counties in two states -- one with a right-to-carry law and one without -- demonstrates "a drop in crime rates in the areas with the law and an increase in those without the law," Lott said.

But Donohue argues that such comparisons are generally skewed, since the states that have adopted such laws tend to be rural and relatively isolated from the types of violent crime -- such as offenses related to crack cocaine -- that disproportionately affect more urbanized states, many of which have not enacted similar laws.

So after claiming that violence and murder rates went up in states that enacted CCW laws, he then has to explain away the fact that such rates dropped relative to neighboring states. He just contradicted himself, which IMO indicates he used highly subjective filters on the data to come to his conclusions.

[ZULU]

The entire premise of this "study" flies in the face of all facts observed in EVERY jurisdiction where the citizens have been disarmed.

Beyond that, the Founding Fathers CORRECTLY viewed an armed citizenry as just another chack and balance in the system they created to prevent autocracy - a condition the liberal left would dearly love to achieve in America.

[goodnesswins]

What's with the location shown on this piece: "Washington".....is that The State, or DC....just wondering.

[Fiddlstix]

More Guns in Citizens' Hands Can Worsen Crime, Study Says

[Semper Paratus]

Hows crime doing in Australia and Great Britain since they've taken guns out of citizens' hands.

It's skyrocketed.

[steve-b]

law-abiding citizens may become "emboldened to do bad things, some of them violent"

Earth to Donohue: Popping a cap into some thug who is trying to rob, rape, or kill you is not, I repeat, NOT, a "bad thing".

[Gophack]

State laws that allow private citizens to carry concealed weapons do not reduce crime and may even increase it

Bullsh*t

[Taxman]

LIEbrals LIE! That is all we need to know. And this LIEbral is lying through his teeth.

The Brookings Institute is a LIEberal/Socialist/Marxist think tank whose express purpose in life is to subvert our FRee Republic. Every single paper or "study" Brookings produces is a lie.

Unfortunately, the Brookings Institute has powerful allies in the LIEbral/Socialist/Marxist press, and this terribly flawed study will get a lot of play.

The good news is that Dr. Lott will get funded to rebut this study. The bad news is that you will not read about it in many "mainstream" papers or hear/see his rebuttal on many radio/TV stations.

[Redcloak]

From the article...

A comparison of crime trends in adjacent counties in two states -- one with a right-to-carry law and one without -- demonstrates "a drop in crime rates in the areas with the law and an increase in those without the law," Lott said.

But Donohue argues that such comparisons are generally skewed, since the states that have adopted such laws tend to be rural and relatively isolated from the types of violent crime -- such as offenses related to crack cocaine -- that disproportionately affect more urbanized states, many of which have not enacted similar laws.

However, Lott and Mustard already accounted for differences such as rural versus urbanized. They found, contrary to Donohue's ranting, that right-to-carry has a greater impact on violent crime in urban areas! Of course, this means letting non-Whites carry concealed weapons; a thought that terrifies racist, White liberals.

[B.O. Plenty]

Everything this guy just said is bullshit!....My Cousin Vinney.

[sailor4321]

Other than Lott and a few others, gun studies tend to be characterized by "cherry-picking" data to "prove" a hypothesis. I suspect very much that is the case here as well. Can't wait to see what Lott has to say about this study....

[Nataku X]

99% of men are just looking for free milk from the cow. Gals, don't be fooled no matter how flowery your boyfriend is.

[Ches]

Yikes! Just registered with the LA Times, more personal information than is required to delve into the government archives in Bejing. Far more than a federal firearms registration form. I filled it out anyway so I could read this liberal fluff/propaganda piece in order to maintain my proper level of indignation. It may have catapulted me past healthy outrage and indignation, proving conclusively that armed with this disinformation, an otherwise law-abiding citizen could become"emboldened to do bad things, some of them violent in the heat of the moment"

Is it a liberal trick to get our information registered with this leftist rag?