This. The average American isn't uncomfortable enough to make a stand. They still have food, jobs, housing, schools, transportation. While the average American's needs are met, I doubt much will happen.

Say the line by y0kai in c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world

[-] y0kai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago

Castle doctrine / stand your ground laws

Basically they compared two studies that covered a 10 year period (2000-2010) and showed an increase in homicide rates to a study that covered a 28 year period (1977-2005) which showed a 9% reduction in homicide rates. I'd like to see what Cheng and Hoekstra would conclude using the same 28 year period.

Laws targeting firearms sales

Cross-sectional studies assessing the association between background checks/waiting periods and firearm deaths provide mixed results and are therefore, inconclusive.

What I got from reading this section was:

Good background checks and bans on those with certain mental health conditions tend to work in reducing homicide, and they work better with more info and at more local levels. According to 3 separate studies, The Brady Act, in contrast, showed " No associations between the Brady Act and firearm homicides among adults (aged 21 years or older and 55 years or older) were observed.", though middle aged and older people used less guns when killing themselves in places where a waiting period was mandated. One study found the opposite was true.

The rest of the section talks about similar laws on smaller scales, some of which are more targeted toward very specific groups (domestic abusers and their victims), as well as laws regarding licensing of dealers. The former seemed to work, as did the latter for homicide, but not suicide.

Laws targeting firearms ownership

"... permits and licenses to purchase firearms were associated with lower rates of firearm suicides. In a longitudinal study using NCHS data (1970–1998), Marvell (65) found that laws restricting juvenile access to firearms were not associated with all or firearm homicide or suicide rates among youth. Studies using times-series analyses from Webster et al. (66) and Rosengart et al. (38) did not find evidence of reductions in firearm deaths associated with state and federal laws raising the legal age to 18 or 21 years for handgun purchases/possession. Rodríguez Andrés and Hempstead (61) in unadjusted models found that minimum age requirements were associated with fewer suicides among males."

These laws made it harder to commit suicide, which is cool. They seem to do nothing for homicide though. One study followed the repeal of one law in one state and found a drastic increase in homicide rates. That law "... required all handgun purchasers to have a valid license to purchase handguns."

Laws targeting firearms storage regulations

Several studies show these seem to work to keep guns away from children under 15. One study showed there was no correlation with these laws and accidental firearm deaths. All together, these laws seem to be effective in preventing accidental injury and death.

Say the line by y0kai in c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world

[-] y0kai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago

Here's a breakdown, since you clearly didn't read it:

Licenses to carry concealed firearms or “shall issue” laws

"In the United States, Lott and Mustard (15) using a times-series design approach and data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) (1977–1992) identified that shall issue laws were associated with lower rates of homicides at the county and state levels. Bronars and Lott (16) also noted evidence that shall issue laws were associated with an apparent increase in the rate of homicides in adjacent counties without shall issue laws (16). Seven other studies (17–23) supported Lott and Mustard’s findings."

Heck yeah.

-but-

"Others found inconsistent results when using different modeling strategies (24–31) and suggested the presence of errors in the data used in this study (32)."

So, they found that shall issue laws were not associated with reductions in homicide rates.

In looking at the graph in Figure 2, (which I may be misunderstanding as it's a graph type I am unfamiliar with. It's like a box and whisker, but there is no box? I tried to look it up, but to no avail. If you know what it's called, I'd love to see how it is actually supposed to work) only 3/25 showed a range that didn't dip into the "reduction" in homicides and firearm homicides side of the chart. But, 10/25 (less than half) did indicate an increase in firearm homicide rates overall.

Further research showed:

"Using additional data from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Rosengart et al. (38) and Hepburn et al. (39) showed no association between these laws and overall and firearm homicides. Studies comparing cities with a population of 100,000 or more (40) and others using samples of large cities in the United States (41, 42) found similar findings."

One study about Southern Arizona showed an (amount unspecified in the article) increase in proportions of firearm injuries/deaths associated with shall issue laws.

"In recent years, studies by Strnad (44) using a Bayesian approach and by ~~Moody and Marvell~~ (45, 46), Lott (47), and Gius (48) showed that shall issue laws were associated with reductions in homicide rates (extending data to 2000)" (Moody and Marvell struck-through by me because one article disagreed with their modeling and suggested not to use county level data due to inconsistencies)

"In Colombia, Villaveces et al. (52) examined the association between laws banning the carrying of firearms during weekends after paydays, holidays, and election days in Cali and Bogota and the rate of homicides."

So, they found a reduction of 13% and 14% in these cities, respectively, however with the exception of those whose candidates were not elected, weekends after paydays, holidays, and election days are all times in which people would be in a better mood. I'm unclear about the methods in this one with respect to "...comparing the rates of homicides on days with and without the restriction". Does this mean comparing to weekends after paydays, holidays, and election days, or just like "those days were banned, lets look at the rest of the week?" If it's the former, super cool that that worked for two Colombian cities. If it's the latter, I don't think that's a good control.

Then there is the gem which is Table 2: A laundry list of things that are wrong with any of the given (unspecified as to which) studies' methodologies.