Gun Ownership and Murder Rates
Lindsey Schreiner
University of Phoenix
Introduction to College Algebra
MT/219
Laura Carbajal
April 14, 2013
Gun Ownership and Murder Rates In this world there are many problems. Violence and danger surrounds us even in the places we consider the most safe and sacred. From events such as what occurred in Aurora, Colorado to the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut people all over are questioning how safe we really are. Sometimes in the realm of over reaction, people look at the tool as the culprit of the events, here is a look at how the tool appears to be used in the rest of the world. The above chart notes the gun ownership percentage per 100,000 people as compared to the murder rate percentage per 100,000 people. The relation between these numbers can be represented by the formula y=.0919x2+0.3676x, which is would be considered an approximate representation of the above graph. While it’s not exact, the overall point is the number of guns owned by a population does not necessarily affect the murder rate in a society. Slovenia, for example, has a gun ownership rate of 5% per 100,000 people and a .001% murder rate per 100,000 people. Many would think that with a higher rate of ownership, the rate would be higher; however the rate does not appear to rise with the number of guns owned. On this list, Moldova has the highest rate of murder (.008% per 100,000 people), where-as it also has the one of the lowest gun ownership totals at 1% per 100,000 people. The same relation, or lack there-of can be identified in the other points on the graph (Kates & Mauser, 2013). There are examples of the same lack of relation between these two number here in the United States. For example, North Dakota has one of the lowest mortality rates due to firearms, and, but has some of the loosest gun laws in the country. Conversely, New York has a very strict set of gun laws, ranked fourth strictest in the country, was also in the top 10 of firearm homicide rates in 2011 (Sherfinski, 2013). When dealing with such a hotly debated topic, it can be very difficult to know what information to trust. It’s virtually impossible to come up with any hard and fast explanation for these events, let alone an exact equation that will tell us if we do x, then y is going to occur, but as a species the human race is programmed to look for pattern inside of the chaos. Certain types of gun control do work, and others seem to leave people more in danger. There is often the idea presented that if all guns are outlawed, the public will finally be safe, the unfortunate side of this is that the complete removal of guns from the hands of law abiding citizens is not the way to go. Researchers Mr. Kleck and E. Britt Patterson are quoted as saying “There do appear to be some gun controls which work, all of them relatively moderate, popular and inexpensive. Thus, there is support for a gun-control policy organized around gun-owner licensing or purchase permits (or some other form of gun-buyer screening); stricter local dealer licensing; bans on possession of guns by criminals and mentally ill people; stronger controls over illegal carrying; and possibly discretionary add-on penalties for committing felonies with a gun.” (Sherfinski, 2013) One of the major things that can be done is to enforce the laws that are already on the books, as Kleck and Patterson said, steps such as screening, enforcing permits, carry laws, and adding penalties for those crimes committed with a gun both provide a lower cost way of handling things and is very effective in reducing the number of crimes committed with guns. Written in the New York Times, Professor Eugene Volokh notes that there is evidence that denying those that would use the guns in defense, often by doing nothing more than showing them, you increase the crime rates. There is evidence suggesting that many criminals would rather not face a victim potentially holding a gun. There’s also the consideration that most criminals don’t actually follow the laws set forth, which tends to have a disproportionate effect on the law-abiding citizen. “For the typical gun control law,” Professor Volokh said, “you’ll have very little positive effect but a possible negative effect.” (Liptak, 2008) While there may be a relation between the guns and the crime, it’s virtually impossible to pin down any absolutes. In the end it’s not through the statistics and relationships that the human race will eventually find the solution to the problem. The deep down truth is that it’s not a problem that can be permanently solved, but one that we can one day hope to minimize.
Kates, D. B., & Mauser, G. (2013). The American Civil Rights Union. Retrieved April 14, 2013, from Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
Liptak, A. (2008, June 29). Gun Laws and Crime: A Complex Relationship. Retrieved April 14, 2013, from The New Your Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/weekinreview/29liptak.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Sherfinski, D. (2013, January 24). States' crime rates show scant linkage to gun laws. Retrieved April 14, 2013, from The Washington Times: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/24/states-crime-rates-show-scant-linkage-to-gun-laws/?page=all