NJGF Online Resource Compendium - Firearm & Crime Studies, Stats, etc.

[Mrs. Peel 7,156]

This article summarizes certain "truths" about crime that are seen across numerous studies - seen so consistently, in fact, that they reveal the underlying reality of criminal behavior. If you don't feel like clicking though (though I think you should - it's a good read!), here's a quick summary:

Crime is "concentrated" in 3 ways:

Place - 5 percent of the locations in a given city account for 50 percent of that city’s crime. 

People - 5 percent of the criminal offenders (not 5 percent of the "general population" mind you) in a given city commit about 50 percent of that city’s violent crime.

Time - criminal activity in crime hot spots and among chronic offenders tends to occur at night, during the weekends (Thursday night through early Sunday morning), and in the summer.

Why is this important?... take NJ, for instance... scan through the many gun bills that have been proposed over the past couple of years. Nine-nine percent focus on things that only affect legal gun owners - proposed changes to the firearm itself, or changes to permitting, increased fees, etc. Only rarely does a proposed bill address the actual realities of crime (and chronic criminality) as expressed by the 3 concentrations above. So, unless the bill is proposing a very targeted solution (either in a tough neighborhood or working with chronic offenders, etc.,  and again, those bills are rare), pretty much all the rest of these bills are politicized poppycock that are disconnected from reality and certain to have negligible impact (if any) on crime. (I know you already knew that! LOL. But it's always nice to see the science back up the gut instinct).

Anyway, here's the link: https://www.city-journal.org/three-facts-about-crime

[CMJeepster 2,777]

You're preaching to the choir.  Feel good legislation not based in reality.  Targeting is racist and no politician would be willing to admit it.  Wanna reduce or stop crime, use this:  Broken windows theory - Wikipedia

[Mrs. Peel 7,156]

1 hour ago, CMJeepster said:

You're preaching to the choir.  Feel good legislation not based in reality.  Targeting is racist and no politician would be willing to admit it.  Wanna reduce or stop crime, use this:  Broken windows theory - Wikipedia

Broken windows was HIGHLY effective, no doubt about it! And so was an innovative program in Chicago a few years back that used a sophisticated program to map social connections in gangs, so that if there was a gang shooting - the police could proactively reach out to the victim's fellow gang members to try to prevent a retaliatory strike.

What did these 2 programs have in common?... they were BOTH reducing crime... yet they came under fire from "activists" and thus politicians quickly backed away from them.    Sadly, that's too often the case.

As far as preaching to the choir, I hear you... I certainly know that most of the folks on here know stuff like this already! But, I still like to share this kind of article because I figure there are always some brand-new gun owners here who are coming in purely as hobbyists... and, they might not have too much grounding in topics like crime. And as we know, the media really sucks when it comes to sharing the realities of crime, DGUs, etc.

Honestly, that described my own situation... I consider myself to be fairly well-read, but when I started to kick around the idea of gun ownership, I was actually very torn because I bought into a lot of the hype. It was post-Sandy Hook and gun owners were being framed as part of a bigger problem. I did a TON of research (geeky, I know!), and I was frankly STUNNED, for instance, to learn just how common DGUs are, or what a big percentage of crime is committed by ex-felons, etc. Hell, I even went to a range meeting long before I joined just to check out the crowd - I don't know WHAT the heck I was expecting, a bunch of guys wearing swastikas perhaps?! Imagine my surprise when the guy next to me was a mild-mannered PhD who worked in pharma research and the guy on the other side was very clean-cut LEO... and EVERYONE was so nice! I laugh now when I think about it... people I've met at ranges have been OVERWHELMINGLY kind, helpful, generous, etc. - not at all what I'd expected after a lifetime of exposure to the mainstream media's description of "gun nuts". Hey... you live, you learn. 

[silverado427 10,667]

[Mrs. Peel 7,156]

I've never believed that more gun control laws actually CAUSE a reduction in the horrible, mass shootings that seize such media attention. I just don't think the evidence is there to show that. I think OTHER types of actions (like organized programs that pluck kids out of gang life) can save lives... but not gun control laws per se. As I recall, even the CDC study commissioned by then-President Obama showed no clear pattern between the assault weapons ban, for instance, and a reduction in shootings.

More recently, yet another study, this one by JAMA, again shows no correlation between gun control and mass shootings. Here's an article on AmmoLand (with link to the study): Mass Shootings Have ‘No Correlation to Gun Laws,’ says Report (ammoland.com)

And if you prefer viewing rather than reading, here's a good video with a synopsis of the study by the Washington Gun Law channel: Do Gun Laws Really Save Lives? A Real Look at the Numbers. - YouTube

[Mrs. Peel 7,156]

A good article on the changing demographics of gun ownership, with plenty of interesting data points: 

The changing face of gun ownership (msn.com)

[Mrs. Peel 7,156]

This is SUCH a good YouTube video! I really like this guy's videos (Tom Grieve) in general, but this one really jumped out at me. 

In this particular video, he makes the argument for potential victims to fight back with a firearm vs. acting compliantly. And he backs it up by an abundance of interesting statistical data from credible sources (that he links to) as well as anecdotal stories from his own considerable experience as a prior prosecutor and now defense attorney.

Now obviously, need I even say?... I would think that every case is different and people need to use their instinct/judgement in the moment... nonetheless, I think he makes some very compelling arguments here... certainly. one worth considering.

Now, I do realize I'm "preaching to the choir" for most of this crowd. The only reason I keep posting to this resource compendium section is because I think we all have people in our lives who are either anti-gun or on the fence. Videos like this one - presented in a calm and collected manner, chock full of solid data, etc. - are useful to share with folks like that. 

Happy viewing!

TRUTH Carry a gun and FIGHT BACK! Statistics on resisting attackers with violence vs compliance - YouTube

[Mrs. Peel 7,156]

Adding this post "Gun Crime Down" by @1LtCAP from General Discussion to here (hope you don't mind the housekeeping, OP! It fits better in here).... it shows an increase in concealed carry permits did NOT increase crime, in fact, it did the opposite.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

yep. they admitted it. i found this article by accident today. not this one in particular, but a different site.

<<Researchers analyzed data spanning from June 2021 to June 2023 – a year before and a year after the law took effect – focusing on crimes involving firearms, verified gunshot-detection alerts and the number of officers struck by gunfire.
 
Center for Justice Research Director Melissa Burek, who has a doctorate in criminal justice, led the research. 
 
The study showed significant decreases in the number of crimes involving firearms in Akron, Columbus and Toledo, and across all eight cities combined.
 
The rate of gun crime in Parma fell the most – by 22% – followed by Akron and Toledo, each with decreases of 18%. Rates for Dayton and Cincinnati increased by 6% and 5%, respectively.>>

https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Media/News-Releases/January-2024/Change-in-Concealed-Carry-Law-Did-Not-Drive-Violen

[Mrs. Peel 7,156]

Yet another case in point when the loosening of carry restrictions made anti-gunners heads exlode: "OMG... aaaaghhh... there'll be blood in the streets if this is passed!" - and reality (oh, that pesky reality) turned out to be entirely different.

Early indications are that Florida's permitless carry law has contributed to a DECREASE in shootings. Article: The Unexpected Impact of Florida’s Permitless Carry Law on Crime Rates (msn.com)

 

[1LtCAP 4,262]

On 1/3/2024 at 9:41 PM, Mrs. Peel said:

Adding this post "Gun Crime Down" by @1LtCAP from General Discussion to here (hope you don't mind the housekeeping, OP! It fits better in here).... it shows an increase in concealed carry permits did NOT increase crime, in fact, it did the opposite.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

yep. they admitted it. i found this article by accident today. not this one in particular, but a different site.

<<Researchers analyzed data spanning from June 2021 to June 2023 – a year before and a year after the law took effect – focusing on crimes involving firearms, verified gunshot-detection alerts and the number of officers struck by gunfire.
 
Center for Justice Research Director Melissa Burek, who has a doctorate in criminal justice, led the research. 
 
The study showed significant decreases in the number of crimes involving firearms in Akron, Columbus and Toledo, and across all eight cities combined.
 
The rate of gun crime in Parma fell the most – by 22% – followed by Akron and Toledo, each with decreases of 18%. Rates for Dayton and Cincinnati increased by 6% and 5%, respectively.>>

https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Media/News-Releases/January-2024/Change-in-Concealed-Carry-Law-Did-Not-Drive-Violen

don't mind at all.

 there's been more since then. florida.