Let’s hope The Supremes keep this in mind tomorrow as they begin hearing McDonald v. Chicago:
The District of Columbia’s murder rate plummeted by an astounding 25 percent last year, much faster than for the US as a whole or for similarly sized cities. If you had asked Chicago’s Mayor Daley, that wasn’t supposed to happen. The Supreme Court’s 2008 decision to strike down DC’s handgun ban and gunlock requirements should have lead to a surge in murders, with Wild West shootouts.
Compare those results to these:
The forthcoming third edition of More Guns, Less Crime shows that in the 17 years after its ban on new handguns went into effect, there are only two years where Chicago’s murder rate was as low as it was in 1982. Chicago’s murder rate fell relative to other largest [sic] 50 largest cities prior to the ban and rose relative to them afterwards. For example, Chicago’s murder rate went from equalling the average for those other cities in 1982, to exceeding their average murder rate by 32 percent in 1992 and by 68 percent in 2002. There is no year after the ban that Chicago’s murder rate fared as well relative to other cities as it did in 1982.
The empirical evidence supports gun ownership either way you look at it; restrict lawful gun ownership and you increase crime, relax lawful gun ownership and you decrease crime.
Similar Posts:
- The ‘Real and Bloody’ Truth About Legally Owned Guns
- The Supremes Rule Again For Gun Rights
- Supreme Court Agrees To Look At Chicago Gun Ban
- Freedom And Gun Control; Mutually Exclusive Concepts
- Mayors Against Illegal Guns or Mayors Against Gun Rights?
- Chicago Block Clubs Should Be Gun Clubs
- Gun Debate Reloaded
- U.S. Government 101
- Chicago Ramping Up For A Gun Fight (or a fight for gun rights)
- Gun Violence Statistics And What They Tell Me