Home » Blogs » grapplingwithguns's blog

Sense and Nonsense

I started reading Samuel Walker's Sense and Nonsense about Crime and Drugs last night. It's the kind of book that should be required reading. Walker is a proponent of evidence-based policy making (p. xxiii), a concept I've brought up on my blog before. The book points to a number of propositions about crime that is surprising to both liberals and conservatives alike.

The evidence-based approach requires the existence of significant evidence that a policy practice actually says it does what it says it does. Policies are tested with empirical evidence through identifying a treatment group that receives a 'new' response to their crime (therapy, community based models, boot camps, etc.) and a control group that goes through the in-place response to crime. The treatment group must show a significant change in recidivism or other measures to indicate that the policy is sound. If measurements indicate that the policy may be successful, the practice must be tested in other communities to verify that it is replicable. Only then would a practice be used as a replacement for current procedure. (See Standards of Evidence-Based Crime Policy p. 10-11).

Walker primarily addresses violent crime and comes to some conclusions that may be startling to liberals and conservatives alike when it comes to firearms and violent crime.

Proposition 33. "Attempts to ban handguns, or certain kinds of guns, or bullets, are not likely to reduce serious crime."

Proposition 34. "Attempts to deny ownership of handguns to certain categories of "bad" people are not likely to reduce serious crime."

Proposition 35. "Focused, proactive enforcement strategies may be effective in reducing gun-related crime in targeted areas."

Proposition 36. "Right-to-carry laws will not reduce crime."

So, why are people still latching onto Brady-bill style programs to reduce gun ownership when such programs don't work to reduce crime, and if right-to-carry laws don't reduce crime what do they do for our society?

More to come... http://www.grapplingwithguns.com

Sense and Nonsense

I bought and read the Third Edition when it was published in 1994.

Why do people still fall for Brady-style programs? I recommend Yale's Link TextCultural Cognition Project, especially their paper "More Statistics, Less Persuasion: A Cultural Theory of Gun-Risk Perceptions" and "Overcoming the Fear of Cultural Politics: Constructing a Better Gun Debate". A snippet from the second:

But so long as statistics continue to fund the parties’ arguments, the gun debate, we believe, will remain bankrupt. Purely instrumental arguments lack the power to persuade because they ignore what really motivates individuals to favor or oppose gun control⎯namely, their cultural worldviews.3 Their prominent (and in many respects fabled) role in American history imbues guns with a surfeit of social meanings. For one segment of American society, guns symbolize honor, human mastery over nature, and individual self-sufficiency. By opposing gun control, individuals affirm the value of these meanings and the vision of the good society that they construct. For another segment of American society, however, guns connote something else: the perpetuation of illicit social hierarchies, the elevation of force over reason, and the expression of collective indifference to the well-being of strangers. These individuals instinctively support gun control as a means of repudiating these significations and of promoting an alternative vision of the good society that features equality, social solidarity, and civilized nonagression.

Thanks for the link!

Hi John,

Thank you for the link. The Cultural Cognition Project is fascinating. I haven't heard of it before. One of the reasons I've started blogging about guns is directly related to these ideas, because I'm coming at the issue from outside of both the myth of autonomy and the myth that banning guns will lead to an egalitarian society.

Thank you again. This is really powerful stuff.

  • By grapplingwithguns at 2007-05-16 07:42
  • Login or register to post comments

Thank you again. This is

Thank you again. This is really powerful stuff.

Interesting that you should phrase it like that.

As I'm sure you're learning, the true power of guns does not not flow down their barrels but up the arm of the person holding them.

A gun itself is merely an instrument of force. Properly used it allows you to make holes in things at a distance. Actually it generally does that even when improperly used, which can be a problem.

But the idea of a gun - that's where the true power lies.

The idea of a gun is that you can indeed change the world. You can defend yourself. You no longer need to cower under the bed from the demons of the night. It moves you from the group 'child' (powerless, requiring the protection of others) to the group 'adult' (not only able but required to influence the course of the world).

A gun is no more magic talisman than Dumbo's magic feather - and no less.

Enjoy!

KCSteve :-)

  • By KCSteve at 2007-05-16 15:30
  • Login or register to post comments

RTC laws

The Bradyites will probably latch onto the RTC laws don't prevent crime thing; the argument to make there is simply that your right to defend yourself isn't dependent or predicated in any way on crime stats.

  • By Pro Gun Progressive at 2007-05-16 17:53
  • Login or register to post comments