From: fcrary@ucsu.colorado.edu (Frank Crary) Subject: Re: Germans donot have firearms. Why need Americans? Date: Wed, 5 Jan 1994 19:35:11 GMT Lines: 133 Apparently-To: info-firearms-politics@uunet.uu.net >...Example 2: Colorado has virtually no gun control >laws, yet Denver suffered through an epidemic of gun shootings and >killings in 1993. This is simply not true. Denver's violent crime rate was down slightly from 1992; the homicide rate was up only by about 1%. There was no "epidemic of gun shootings". There was an epidemic of press coverage: Stories that, a year earlier, would have been on page 5, were suddenly front-page, headline news. That created a public impression that violent crime had increased tremendously, but in fact it had not. In reality, Denver has less violent crime than other cities of the same size. >...These are examples of the indirect costs >incurred due to the right to bear and use weapons. There is essentially no right to bear weapons in Denver (concealed carry without the unobtainable permits is a serious offense and open carry would invite police harassment.) Further, using a weapon for anything but self-defence is illegal. So not only has there been no "epidemic of gun shootings" in Denver, but what little crime there is, is not a result of a "right to bear and use weapons" since that right doesn't really exist in Denver. >You also imply that you have the right to carry firearms on your person as >a "fire extinguisher". I view this as a cost to me in personal security. >I don't want a person walking or driving down the street to be legally >armed. You prefer them to be illegally armed? Several states have started issuing carry permits to just about anyone who applies for one. From their statisitcs, people with permits are far less likely to committ a crime than the average person on the street. In contrast, most violent crimes are comitted by repeat offenders, who can not legally own a gun, let alone carry one. >...If I should accidently cut a person off in traffic, he may become >angry and shoot. In practice, this simply doesn't happen. >...If I go to a bar and get in an argument, an intoxicated, >armed person may choose to shoot. Nor does this. >...In today's world, a prudent person must >be concerned about capabilities, not just intentions. If you are carrying >a gun, you are capable of shooting me... Issuing carry permits to law-abiding citizens does not change this. There are already _thousands_ of armed criminals on the streets, who could shoot you. Therefore, your risk is not significantly increased by allowing 1-3% of the law-abiding population (the fraction that, to judge by other states' licensing programs, would apply for a permit) carry guns. While you are no the subject of capabilities, armed, law-abiding citizens also have the capability to get involved and save you from a criminal attack. Therefore, they enhance your personal security. >See statement above regarding Denver. Everything you said about the situation in Denver was incorrect; I doubt you are going to reach accurate conclusions from false assumptions. >...I do not question that guns have >prevented the commission of crimes. But I need facts. What is the >percentage of times that possession of a gun has prevented a crime? It depends on the crime. According to the Justice Department's National Crime Victimization survey, 65.4% of all robberies are "completed" (i.e. the criminal gets the money) and the victim is injured 33.2% of the time. If the victim uses a gun in self-defence the crime is completed only 30.9% of the time and the victim is injured only 17.4% of the time. This is safer and more effective that any other reaction, even cooperating with the attacker results in injury 24.7% of the time. The numbers are even more dramatic in the case of rape, where the completion rate drops from around 35% to 3% if the victim tries to use a gun in self-defence. >...What >is the percentage of times that innocent people have been shot mistakenly? Self-defence with a gun rarely involves shooting anyone: Only about 5% of the time are any shots fired; the rest of the time, the threat of a displayed weapon is enough to deter the criminal. Private citizens mistakenly shoot the wrong person 2% of the time (in contrast, police make this mistake 11% of the time.) So all in all, innocent people are shot at only 0.1% (2% of 5%) of the time. They are actually hit only about a fifth as often. >How often does the criminal get the gun and use it on the owner? Very rarely, judging from the NCSV data cited above: If a rape is prevented 97% of the time when the victim uses the gun in self-defence, then the criminal manages to take the gun away less than 3% of the time. >Mike SEZ: >I do not recall the numbers exactly, but U.S. government estimates show >the rate of violent crime in western Europe to be much lower than the >United States. That is why I question your assertion that rape rates are >lower in America. Rapes make up a small fraction of the violent crime rates: Aggravated assaults and robberies dominate the numbers. The violent crime rate is 600 per 100,000 population, but murders account for only 10 per 100,000 and rapes 35 per 100,000. A 100% change in the American rape rate would result in only a 5% change in the overall crime rate. >...Furthermore, American tourists do not worry about >getting shot on the German autobahn; foreign tourists do get shot on the >streets of Miami. You might look at the reason for that: Florida issues carry permits in much the same way driver's licenses are issued. About 2% of the population has a permit. So a criminal attacking a native has a chance of encountering an armed victim. Florida criminals are now apparently targeting people they know will not be armed (foreign tourists), so it looks like the risk of an armed victim is something criminals try to avoid. >...Are you suggesting that foreign tourists should apply >their "rights" as human beings to buy weapons upon landing on American >soil? Actually, Florida issues permits to out-of-state American tourists and I haven't heard anything about assaults on Texans... Frank Crary CU Boulder