6 ms·
No problems? Look at the science. https://www.pnas.org/content/117/26/14906 https://www.pnas.org/content/117/26/14906 "In a hypothetical situation in which ther
by herodotus 5y ago
No problems? Look at the science.
https://www.pnas.org/content/117/26/14906 https://www.pnas.org/content/117/26/14906
"In a hypothetical situation in which there are 39,000 firearms deaths nationally under the permissive combination of these three laws, we expect 4,475 (80% CI, 1,761 to 6,949) more deaths nationally than under the restrictive combination of these laws."
- Grakel 5y agoAs usual the "science" on this issue is garbage politics. Gun violence by legal gun owners is statistically near zero despite owning hundreds of millions of guns in the US.
- igetspam 5y agoBut our state government is bought and paid for by church and guns. The governor shamed us for buying fewer guns than California: https://www.statesman.com/news/20171106/in-15-greg-abbott-embarrassed-texans-bought-fewer-guns-than-others https://www.statesman.com/news/20171106/in-15-greg-abbott-em... We're trying to get more guns in more hands and we've lowered the bar. This isn't about rights. Abbot seems to generally want to kill us, by any means necessary.
- chmod600 5y agoThis is an interesting chance to support or refute the theory you cite. Watch the homicide rate in TX over the next five years and see if it goes up 11% (maybe after adjusting for national/regional chnages) or not.
- chmod600 5y agoFor a study like this, I would expect some connection between the mechanisms and the results. For instance, if carrying laws are changed, is there an associated change in the types of deaths that could plausibly be attributed to that (i.e. lawful carriers shooting people)?