Harvard study finds that Obama is wrong
 

Considering Obama obviously didn't listen in his Constitutional law classes I guess we can assume he will ignore this study as well.

Harvard gun study concludes gun bans don?t reduce the murder rate

In fact, it appears, bans may actually see them increase.

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/2...e-murder-rate/

i haven't verified anything, but this is fun reading:

http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2010/tle558-20100221-07.html

(A Brief History of British Gun Control )

Did anyone read the report?

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/...useronline.pdf

Very strange. It's a very well written report that is forty pages long, but only discusses gun violence and murder rates in Europe yet does not include England which seems to have a lower murder rate than all other countries in Europe. At the same time this report fails to compare stats from South America, where gun crime is unusually high.

Then at one point the article states:

"Americans are more likely to be shot to death than people in the world’s other 35 wealthier nations."

Interesting.

On one hand it's the most detailed report I've ever seen (I haven't read it fully obviously). On the other hand, it seems to be cherry pick stats

It's obvious that crime is dropping in the US, and has been for some time. I am not sure if this is because of gun control. I think it's more because of better police work - it's just so much harder to get away with shit now because of DNA and other such technology.

time and time again this point is stupid.

If you have a country where guns are banned and a criminal is stupid enough to carry one, they will have the whole city's police on them in literally hours and be in a cell by the end of the day with a 5 year jail sentence attached.

I don't have an interest in a fight, but someone should point out that the mass shootings that I'm sure Obama was referring to were pretty much all done by law abiding citizens. Until they decided / went nuts and had their shooting spree tantrums. So naturally, just like all laws and rules about anything under the sun, they only apply to people who aren't set on breaking them anyway.

i dont want to argue pro or against guns here - i would just like to say that i am really surprised that this study is supposed to be done by the Harvard university. Probably by their janitor.

They mention Germany as a country with significant gun ownership - yet in Germany your guns and ammunition have to be locked separately when at home, you cannot carry in public unless you get a license that is really hard to get (either you are in the security business or prove that your life is at risk) and to be able to shoot, you have to be in a club or be a hunter (again: with a license that takes months of studying and theoretical and practical tests)

seriously: if any "scientist" was involved in that study, he needs to be bitchslapped

And Luxembourg? Seriously? Luxembourg has 500k people, if 2 people are killed per year the rate is already higher than in all other European countries

that "study" is a joke...

but one of guys who wrote it has the last name "Mauser" - his family probably produces the guns, i wouldnt be surprised

Illegal guns start as legal guns. It's not like there's some factory making black market weapons. England has less murders because its not a gun culture. There's less guns circulating through the system, whether its legal or illegal -- because they're not gun crazy motherfuckers over there.

We had to take our freedom from them, so it makes sense we're still holding on to the right to bear arms.

And we know its a harvard study how?

Yeah, because the threat of jail has been so effective with assault, robbery, fraud . . .

It's up on the Harvard website, although... For all we know it's a homework assignment put together by a first year student. Well, a very well put together homework assignment.

Harvard :winkwink:

think I would rather be shot than have my head chopped off with a dull knife at the bus stop, on video.... just sayin' ya know?

almost everyone I known has a gun or guns... no one I know has ever shot anyone :2 cents:

i gave up on that discussion - just point out that this "study" is bullcrap

Really did not need a study to tell me Obama is wrong, about a LOT of things

he wont accept Obama care either but it's good enough for you

many studies are bullcrap , nothing new there :2 cents:

In this case, the study is clearly bullshit. It's very well put together, and compares gun deaths between the US and Europe. However, it's leaving out the UK which has pretty much banned firearms yet has a low gun violence rate. At the same time, the study fails to compare South America (lots of guns, lots of gun violence) and also Asia.

Not a good argument, because it's not like that's happening hundreds of time per day.

It is in a student folder. I just finished up at UW a couple of years ago. I had uw.edu subfolders at my disposal.

Jesus christ. It's a project written by an undergrad for their student newspaper, and then republished by Hotair.com (which is a right-wing "news" site) as some definitive study by Harvard itself. It's a fucking homework project by a Young Republican student, 20 seconds of 'research' will tell you that.

onwebcam is pretty much incapable of evaluating the source of any of these stupid stories he presents as fact. Why the fuck there are so many nutjobs lacking critical thinking skills on here, I just don't get.

If there is one thing GFY has taught me, it's that most people have some kind of an agenda and stats do in fact lie. Even if you are completely unbiased, your stats will portray one set of facts or another - and there will be other stats that say the direct opposite.

Jesus christ you obviously didn't do your research good enough.


In a research paper titled ?Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?,? first published in Harvard?s Journal of Public Law and Policy, Don B. Kates, a criminologist and constitutional lawyer, and Gary Mauser, Ph.D., a Canadian criminologist and professor at Simon Fraser University

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/b...ence-with-ban/

Well fuck me, you're right. Don Kates is actually a pretty interesting voice on gun control even if I do sort of disagree with him. Mea culpa.

Still, most of your posts are idiotic :)

All of which have been declining for years. So yeah maybe the longer sentences have had an effect.

I did not read it. Switzerland has the highest ownership rate in Europe and the highest murder rate in Europe. So where did they fit in the study?

I think you mean they have the lowest murder rate in Europe.

That sucks as the last time I checked it was one if not the highest. Skewed anyways as they have guns but no ammo.

Um, that is not a study. It is a sourced paper.

Or, as the authors themselves state, "a review of International and some domestic evidence."

(emphasis added by me)

what about the psycho guy? oh nevermind.. that was Norway.

http://ct.fra.bz/ol/fz/sw/i50/5/3/30...o-W-c656dc.jpg

If you read down below the article in the comment section it makes it clear that the article was published by the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy in 2007.

Considering who the OP is I am not surprised who is behind the report. Disseminating wacky stories that seem sound on the surface is what Libertarians do. :1orglaugh

:stoned

ADG

They got a gun death rate 12 times of England, which bans firearms.

Roe v Wade is the reason for the crime drop holmes

once was enough for the soldier, wasn't it?

:1orglaugh:thumbsup

whoops!!! not even slightly true: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._homicide_rate

homicides rate for England 1.2, Switzerland .07. I really doubt some dude killed with a knife or hammer is overjoyed because he wasn't killed with a gun... :2 cents:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._homicide_rate

Libertarians are just Republicans that smoke pot.

I dare you to make less sense.

That is so cute how you did that.... You twisted stats around. We aren't discussing homicide rates, we are discussing firearm deaths. How many people are stabbed to death or poisoned aren't relevant in a conversation about firearm deaths.

Firearm death rates for the Swiss are 3.84, while the UK is only 0.25.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate

and watch porn... :winkwink:

Only if the cops in your little scenario are psychic. For the rest of the non-psychic cops out there, they generally have to wait for the criminal to actually use the gun or be seen with it, or have the criminal make a mistake in some way. You know, like shooting someone during a break-in who wasn't supposed to be there.

Cops don't have built-in gun radar.

Thus that point you say is 'stupid', really isn't.

Umm the point in the study was to determine if gun bans decreased overall homicides. That would include stabbings, poisonings or plain ole beat downs. That is entirely the point that it doesn't matter if it's a gun or a knife if someone wants to kill someone they are going to do it however with whatever tools available. Sure a gun makes it easier to kill someone but it also makes it easy to protect yourself from that someone. If that someone knows that no guns will be around then they feel more secure in their killing spree which is why pretty much all of them have went into gun free zones. In fact the Aurora shooter drove past several theaters and out of his way to go to one that had gun free postings.

Face it, the government wants to take away your guns for the same reason they want to be able to disable your cell phone camera around the police.

http://news.msn.com/rumors/rumor-cop...mera-and-wi-fi

They have the tech, how long before they use it?