A linchpin of the argument of those who favor a disarmed population is the assumption that “More Guns = More Crime.” It was succinctly stated as an assumption in a recent paper. Psychopathy, Gun Carrying, and Firearm Violence:
Carrying guns increases the risk of injury and death…
This is a hotly disputed assumption. Several papers dispute the premise. If carrying guns does not increase the risk of injury and death, the pragmatic argument for strict restrictions on gun ownership and use collapses. There is some evidence that if guns are restricted in a draconian manner, homicides with guns may be reduced. However, the total number of homicides is not reduced by gun control.
If the substitution of other methods results in the same or more homicides, or if firearms are used to prevent homicides as well as facilitate them, the argument for restricting gun ownership is not viable.
Long-term data to test the premise is available. There is FBI data on homicide rates in the United States going back to 1910. Homicides are the most reliable crime figure because there is a body and an investigation. There is fairly good data on the number of firearms that are privately owned in the United States. If more guns equals more crime, an increase in per capita firearms ownership should be correlated with the homicide rate.
The number of cartridge firearms in the USA has not been calculated for dates before 1945. This was before records were commonly available. Serial numbers on firearms were generally not required before 1968. Firearms first sold to the military, then later sold as surplus, are not included in these numbers, nor are firearms made for personal use. Semi-automatic, bolt action, and single-shot rifles, revolvers, and semi-automatic pistols sold as military surplus could number as high as 19 million.
Similarly, firearms imported extralegally, such as “bringbacks” from foreign wars, or exported extralegally, such as a shotgun sent in pieces back to Tio Juan on his farm in Mexico, are excluded from these official numbers. The assumption is that the military arms sold as surplus and the personally crafted firearms are offset by the destruction of firearms and loss of firearms to extralegal export.
When the per capita numbers of firearms from 1945 to 2023 are compared to the homicide rate from the same years, there is no correlation. The homicide numbers have been recently “adjusted” for 2004 to 2023. Using those numbers, the correlation coefficient is .0107. The previous non-adjusted numbers give a correlation coefficient of -.0037. The correlation coefficient can vary from 1 to -1. 1 is a complete correlation. -1 is a reverse correlation. Small numbers near zero show there is no significant correlation. The correlation coefficient, calculated online, shows there is no correlation at p<.01, a 99% confidence level.
The lack of correlation is consistent with visual comparison of the graph. Homicide rates go up and down while the number of firearms per capita consistently increases, except for one year, at the end of World War II, when all manufacturing capability was going into the war effort.
A consistent increase in per capita firearms ownership is precisely what would be expected of a valuable, manufactured commodity whose constant dollar price is dropping as improved manufacturing techniques reduce the cost of production. The constant dollar cost of ammunition dropped along with the cost of firearms. From 1910 to 2022, the cost of ammunition dropped 96% in constant dollars. The cost of firearms dropped about 98% in constant dollars over roughly the same period.
The lack of correlation between the per capita number of firearms and the homicide rate is a strong indicator. More guns do not equal more homicides.
About Dean Weingarten:
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.
Hmm, lemme see if I have this correct (the antis ain’t ever gonna be right) if a higher number of guns makes one less safe then mine must all be defective. I got my first gun sixty years ago and have carried various ones for over 50 years professionally and as a legally armed Citizen yet I’m still around.
WatchForJoggers – Either you are an idiot Liberal troll on this site trying to make gun owners look like racists, or you are an idiot racist who has never heard of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership or the Black Gun Owners Association. Regardless of who you are, get lost. Jog your ass out of here. You are not one of ‘us’ and have no standing among honorable people.
Common sense says to me, the more guns, the less crime. More guns could mean more gun deaths but the ones dying should be the criminals but no one can deny that accidents don’t happen like cops shooting themselves in the leg or hand. University of California Davis did a study about 2 years ago that said more guns MAY lead to more gun deaths. Notice the operative word (MAY). I say it like this. More Ford Pintos on the road, MAY lead to more car explosions but not from the negligence of the driver=guy with the gun, but by… Read more »
Now do a similar study factoring for “liberal good intentions”.
The only real correlation is the more people who are allowed to carry legally the more dead criminals there are.
People have been killing each other using various instruments.
Long before firearms were invented