More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sort customer reviews by: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Show All Reviews on Page
Hide All Reviews on Page
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Does allowing people to own or carry guns deter violent crime? Or does it simply cause more citizens to harm each other? Directly challenging common perceptions about gun control, legal scholar John Lott presents the most rigorously comprehensive data analysis ever done on crime statistics and right-to-carry laws. This timely and provocative work comes to the startling conclusion: more guns mean less crime. In this paperback edition, Lott has expanded the research through 1996, incorporating new data available from states that passed right-to-carry and other gun laws since the book's publication as well as new city-level statistics.
"Lott's pro-gun argument has to be examined on the merits, and its chief merit is lots of data. . . . If you still disagree with Lott, at least you will know what will be required to rebut a case that looks pretty near bulletproof."—Peter Coy, Business Week "By providing strong empirical evidence that yet another liberal policy is a cause of the very evil it purports to cure, he has permanently changed the terms of debate on gun control. . . . Lott's book could hardly be more timely. . . . A model of the meticulous application of economics and statistics to law and policy."—John O. McGinnis, National Review "His empirical analysis sets a standard that will be difficult to match. . . . This has got to be the most extensive empirical study of crime deterrence that has been done to date."—Public Choice "For anyone with an open mind on either side of this subject this book will provide a thorough grounding. It is also likely to be the standard reference on the subject for years to come."—Stan Liebowitz, Dallas Morning News "A compelling book with enough hard evidence that even politicians may have to stop and pay attention. More Guns, Less Crime is an exhaustive analysis of the effect of gun possession on crime rates."—James Bovard, Wall Street Journal "John Lott documents how far 'politically correct' vested interests are willing to go to denigrate anyone who dares disagree with them. Lott has done us all a service by his thorough, thoughtful, scholarly approach to a highly controversial issue."—Milton Friedman |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Multiple regression analyses are rarely the subject of heated public debate or 225-page books for laypeople. But John R. Lott, Jr.'s study in the January 1997 Journal of Legal Studies showing that concealed-carry weapons permits reduced the crime rate set off a firestorm. The updated study, together with illustrative anecdotes and a short description of the political and academic response to the study, as well as responses to the responses, makes up Lott's informative More Guns, Less Crime.
In retrospect, it perhaps should not have been surprising that increasing the number of civilians with guns would reduce crime rates. The possibility of armed victims reduces the expected benefits and increases the expected costs of criminal activity. And, at the margin at least, people respond to changes in costs, even for crime, as Nobel-Prize winning economist [TAG]Gary Becker showed long ago. Allusions to the preferences of criminals for unarmed victims have seeped into popular culture; Ringo, a British thug in Pulp Fiction, noted off-handedly why he avoided certain targets: "Bars, liquor stores, gas stations, you get your head blown off stickin' up one of them." But Lott's actual quantification of this, in the largest and most comprehensive study of the effects of gun control to date, a study well-detailed in the book, provoked a number of attacks, ranging from the amateurish to the subtly misleading, desperate to discredit him. Lott takes the time to refute each argument; it's almost touching the way he footnotes each time he telephones an attacker who eventually hangs up on him without substantiating any of their claims. Lott loses a little focus when he leaves his firm quantitative base; as an economist, he should know that the low number of rejected background checks under the Brady Bill doesn't demonstrate anything by itself, because some people may have been deterred from even undergoing the background check in the first place, but he attacks the bill on this ground anyway. But the conclusions that are backed by evidence--that concealed-weapons permits reduce crime, and do so at a lower cost to society than increasing the number of police or prisons--are important ones that should be considered by policymakers. --Ted Frank |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Reader Reviews 1 - 22 of 22 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Review Date |
Review Rating(5 High) |
Review Helpful to: |
Customer Review | Reviewer Info |
Permanent Link |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Reader Reviews Below Sorted by Newest First | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 03-24-08 | 5 | 1\1 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
After finishing this book and a number of others on both sides of the gun argument, I would rate this book 10 stars if possible. Lott leaves no doubt whatsoever after his careful, most detailed analysis of state by state, county by county statistical analyses of crime rates both before and after the introduction of "right to carry" laws in each of the 40 states that now have such laws. THANK GOD I HAD A GUN, is another worth reading of a case by case analysis of actual incidents of self protection wherein mostly home intrusions were stopped just by the occuupant having a gun. Most incidents did not even require a shot; just the presence of a weapon stopped the intrusion. I have personally experienced three (3) incidents (I am wheel chair bound) of attempted robbery, or worse, merely by presenting my concealed weapon. I have NEVER had to fire a shot, and I hope I never will. My local police dept. and sheriff dept. highly commend the armed citizens. "They are the ones most likely to help an officer in trouble and never even draw a weapon unless absolutely necessary, and they follow the officer's guidance. We welcome them."
(Review Data Last Updated: 2008-07-05 02:28:12 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 03-17-08 | 5 | 2\2 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Great book, very heavy on statistics and imperical data. Amusing that the New England Journal of Medecine reviews books on firearms as opposed to reviewing books on bullets and the wounds they inflict, would that not make more sense?
(Review Data Last Updated: 2008-03-24 22:48:09 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 07-26-07 | 5 | 1\2 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
John Lott puts up a persuasive argument for the notion that the best way to combat gun crime is to increase the general availability of arms. This may seem like a crazy notion to many but, when looking through his economic graphs and socio-political analyses, an alternative yet persuasive perspective comes across. While I disagree with his call for the relaxation of the law preventing juveniles from carrying concealed firearms, I too came to the conclusion that a legal obligation for citizens to be armed would be for the force of greater good. Food for thought includes the account of the parking-violation that was successfully thwarted (with deadly force) by a gun-toting civilian who was no longer willing to sit back and let crime happen. If there were more common-sense thinkers like John Lott in the world, we should all be far safer. Guns for peace!
(Review Data Last Updated: 2008-03-17 16:17:20 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 07-08-07 | 5 | 1\1 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The book is full of informative arguments about why gun control increases violent crime. It is well written and very enjoyable to read.
(Review Data Last Updated: 2007-07-26 13:50:54 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 07-01-07 | 5 | (NA) |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On an average day in the United States, guns kill some 100 unarmed citizens and are used in about 3000 serious crimes against unarmed citizens.
Imagine how low the numbers if the would be victim was an armed citizen and pulled out a glock. As the stats from this book show the numbers would approach zero. (Review Data Last Updated: 2007-07-09 01:48:19 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 06-14-07 | 5 | 1\1 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Lott's masterpiece documents how violent crime skyrocketed in municipalities where gun bans went into effect, and conversely declined everywhere so-called right-to-carry laws were enacted. There's no magic here - Lott merely cites the statistical evidence to prove what people with common sense have known all along - criminals fear armed citizens and avoid them whenever possible.
For those who doubt this fundamental truth, I have a challenge: Place a large "GUN FREE HOME - WE DEPEND ON 911" sign in your front yard or on your front door. If you truly believe that widespread and ANONYMOUS gun ownership isn't a deterrent to crime - one which provides protection to the armed and unarmed alike - then, have the guts and the intellectual honesty to try to live your politics...put your life (and your family's) where your mouth is and post that sign in your front yard...I dare you. (Review Data Last Updated: 2007-07-09 01:48:19 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 05-02-07 | 5 | 6\7 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This book is usually derided by people who haven't even read it- they have a philosophical aversion to firearms and just assume what the content must be.
One of Lotts more compelling arguments is the data presented regarding "multiple victim public shootings"- like the one that occured at VT. It was shown, using very simple statistics provided by the FBI and the Department of Justice, that incidences of MVPS were lower in states that permit law abiding citizens to obtain carry permits (keep in mind, citizens with carry permits exhibit a rate of crime at a grossly lower rate than the population at large. In some places, their rate of criminal infraction is lower than the police) How does this pertain to VT? Earlier this year the Virginia General Assembly failed to act on House Bill 1572. This bill would have allowed college students and employees to carry handguns on campus -with appropriate permits, of course. It died in subcommittee. Larry Hincker, a spokesman for Virginia Tech, said "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus." I wonder how safe the students at VT "feel" now? John Lotts book gets into these hard facts and philosophies. (Review Data Last Updated: 2007-07-09 01:48:19 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 04-24-07 | 1 | 2\34 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
John Lott is a first class wack job. His research is questionable and he even invented a person (a woman named Mary Rosh) to defend him on various websites and blogs. How sad is that?
Hey John, FYI guns kill innocent people. (Review Data Last Updated: 2007-07-09 01:48:19 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 04-21-07 | 5 | 9\11 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
My family and I could easily have been included in Prof Lott's database. Once I was almost robbed by two blacks in Detroit (shortly after moving there from Europe) - however, the crime was prevented when another gentlemen, who happened to spot the crime in progress, pulled out his .38 cal handgun and ordered the two to stop or he would "blow their brains out" - I shall be forever grateful to him.
Years later, my wife was almost robbed and rapped (and probably murdered) - again by blacks (3 of them) except for the fact that she had a "Lady Smith" .357 Magnum in her car. As soon as they took one look at her "piece" - they ran away. In both cases, a shot did not have to be fired - the mere presence of the guns prevented the crime. (Review Data Last Updated: 2007-07-09 01:48:19 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 12-06-06 | 5 | 26\30 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I read this book , here in Brazil.I'm an agronomist(jobless) and I like to read books.
The main idea of this book is simple.When the citizens have more guns, they become more safe and free.The so called "politically correct" puts this book and this believe, in a devilish thinking. Well, here in Brazil, we have terrible and draconian gun-control laws.Every year, there's more selling of air travels Brazil-Japan, than gun's sells to brazilian population.To have the right to carry any gun, is so dificult, that there's LESS than 1 to more than 2,000,000 souls in Brazil.To buy any ammunition is a nightmarish task, full of burocracy and dozens of papers.Almost all brazilian gun-shops are over. The result is that there's MORE crimes in Brazil, than any other coountry in the world.Iraq has LESS crime than Brazil.Venezuela who has gun control laws similars to Brazil's laws, also has big crime rates.Argentine and Uruguay, who have more liberal gun-control laws also have less crime than Brazil or Venezuela. This book shows that main victims of gun-control, in USA, were the poors, women, old people and colored people.This is the same who happens , here in Brazil and in everyplace and everytime.The criminals aren't heroes robbering from the richs and giving goods , to the poors.They robber and muder, exactly the poors and powerless people.This is right both in USA as in Brazil and everyplace in the world.When the bigoted government stoles the right to have/carry guns, the criminals, not the good people have advantages.My congratulations to the author of this excellent book. (Review Data Last Updated: 2007-07-09 01:48:19 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 01-14-06 | 5 | 6\8 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have a concealed carry permit and am a member of a number of gun rights organizations. However, I simply am not one to use utilitarian arguments for such positions and so would normally not be interested in econometric modeling to defend something like the right to keep and bear arms. Nevertheless, as I began to find all these attacks on Dr. Lott -- even by miscellaneous gun rights advocates on USNET, I just had to see what it was all about.
I have a fairly good technical background, especially in statistics. (I have an MS in Math which has included a fair amount of probability and statistics as well as having gone into actuarial science professionally.) And, I thought the book was pretty good, in fact, perhaps the best I have seen (for someone that doesn't typically buy such books), especially for what I would tend to expect out of social scientists. Furthermore, I think most of what I have seen in terms of criticisms of his methods on the internet are ridiculous pseudo-science. And finally, the source of his data seems pretty solid -- pretty much just various governmental agencies' data on crime, concealed carry laws, and so on. I suppose if I really wanted to know just how right he is or isn't, I would go independently collect the data and perform his regressions myself, but I do have a day job. Also, having read his book and many criticisms of it, I think the recent data for states having long since enacted concealed carry laws is not nearly as important as many seem to think it is. The issue is what happens when concealed carry laws are implemented. It is an interesting *separate* question as to the ongoing effects of having concealed carry laws on the books. If you include too much data from times distant from the event in question, you are likely to cloud the model and tests of such an hypothesis with all sorts of other factors that no one can realistically have accounted for in any model of something like crime rates. (Review Data Last Updated: 2006-02-12 23:10:20 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 01-12-06 | 4 | 4\5 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
You won't really understand the virtue of a gun until you need one. I hope no one ever reaches a situation that perilous, but it happens to thousands of innocent people. My husband has had a concealed carry permit and a semi-automatic on his hip for years. This book finally convinced me it was something I needed to do too.
That perilous time did come for me and my little pistol was there to back me up. The police are a helpful lot, but they can't be with you all the time or at the moment you need them most. Minutes away is sometimes too long when someone is trying to get into your house. Nothing is more frightening, especially when I thought of my baby sound asleep a room away. I don't live in fear anymore because I am no longer a helpless victim. The second ammendment is very clear. Requiring a waiting period or banning certain "scarey" looking guns does not seem unreasonable at first. But you give legislators an inch and they will go all the way. Why do you think our taxes are so high? (Review Data Last Updated: 2006-02-12 23:10:20 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 10-25-05 | 2 | 7\18 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This book is in many ways a landmark effort and I recommend it to scholars who are doing a lit review on the gun wars. However, I cannot recommend it to the average reader who is simply looking for a clear statement on the current state-of-the-art. It gives a false picture. If you haven't had a course in advanced statistics you will not be able to comprehend the study itself and will be dependent on the author's interpretation of the data. And there's the rub. Lott's credibility as a disinterested scientist has been severely eroded by his constant clamor for more hidden guns in practically all situations. He advocates concealed weapons for everybody, from high school teachers to airline passengers. He refers in this book to how the Israelis have been able to control terrorism with hidden guns. Yes, I said the Israelis. In my opinion, he has lost all credibility as a serious social scientist. He has become a spokesperson for the armaments industry and the gun lobby. The easiest way to summarize the collapse of Lott's thesis is to look at the findings by the National Research Council, which is a branch of the National Academy of Sciences. It sets the gold standard for scientific rigor and integrity. They convened a fifteen member blue-ribbon panel to study the relationship between concealed weapons and crime (Firearms and Violence, 2005). Specifically, they examined the works of Lott and his critics. They found that the scientific evidence does not show a significant relationship between concealed carry (CCW) legislation and crime rates. In other words, John Lott's thesis of more guns less crime is wrong! (Review Data Last Updated: 2006-02-12 23:10:20 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 06-03-05 | 5 | 14\22 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The majority of social conditioning in this nation is contrary to the obvious that John Lott presents in his book. There are three kind of people in this world, predators, victims and the fortunate. Predators will always be with us--the unprincipled have always existed. Victims are the uneducated and unaware. The fortunate are neither of the above. They are the PREPARED.
Truly an educational book, fact driven and soundly researched. No wonder the gun control lobby hates him (it). (Review Data Last Updated: 2006-02-12 23:10:20 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 05-09-05 | 5 | 12\21 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is definitely the best book on the subject of gun control available. Prof. Lott is fact-based and unemotional. First class research methodology as well.
(Review Data Last Updated: 2006-02-12 23:10:20 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 05-04-05 | 5 | 9\18 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is a must have book, i think everybody that does care about the truth and the wright to have guns should read and more get their friends and relatives to read it too. Serious data and facts that smashes the myth about guns causing violence and crime.
(Review Data Last Updated: 2006-02-12 23:10:20 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 03-25-05 | 5 | 11\17 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The other reviews are exceedingly efficient at hitting the highs and lows of this book, but here goes nothing . . .
Dr. Lott writes in a gifting manner, provoking a thought, describing data and situations, and finally providing a conclusion. It's a classic Toulmin example. Dr. Lott's contention that increses in concealed handgun carry deter criminals and lower crime rates stands true. As a math major with a heavy interest in Calculus, not that French Probability and Statistical crap, I used random samplings of John Lott's raw data in a set of equations describing scenario(s) in question. Mathematics proves Dr. Lott's aforesaid contention. For those flaming this book with surpassing enthusiasm because of questionable post publishing actions of the author, realize numerous statistics and experiments have proved Dr. Lott's contention; flaming the work in no way reflects flaming the author. Regrettably, Dr. Lott has given hypocrites something to do with themselves. Perhaps the ability to unequivocally answer a simple set of questions holds nowhere near as much importance as simply raising your hand and walking to the chalkboard, which Dr. Lott has done well. (Review Data Last Updated: 2006-02-12 23:10:20 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 11-23-04 | 5 | 8\14 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Facts, facts, facts. The stricter the gun control laws are, the greater amount of violent crimes will be committed, period. And John Lott gives you EXTENSIVE research and facts to back it up.
Unfortunately, gun controls are one of those issues that people get overly emotional about. So much so that they are blinded by the facts. Read the first chapter and I guarantee it will knock some sense into you about gun control, about shootings and how so many of us have this misleading view of guns thru the media. It's simple, an accidental shooting will make the local news, a man detering a violent crime from happening with a gun will not. Though John Lott's second book on gun control deals more with Media Bias, this book deals with the overwhelming research on the benefits of gun possesions. If guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns. (Review Data Last Updated: 2006-02-12 23:10:20 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 06-06-04 | 2 | 5\81 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Not all gun regulations are bad. Use your head, otherwise we just hurt our cause.
"It's just plain common sense that there be a waiting period to allow local law enforcement officials to conduct background checks on those who wish to buy a handgun." - Ronald Reagan *endorsing* the Brady handgun control bill, at a March 1991 event commemorating 10th anniversary of the assassination attempt. (Review Data Last Updated: 2006-02-12 23:10:20 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 02-06-04 | 5 | 20\27 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
An absolute must read for anyone interested in this topic, regardless of position on firearms.
The world is full of myths and misquoted information. All too often you hear made up statistics over this issue - on both sides. This book takes a scholarly look at the issue using open information and sources that can be verified and indepently analyzed to verify the results - something usually sorely missing from all discussions on this topic. This does however make it a pretty dry read - if you are looking for the grandstanding theatrics usually associated with both sides of gun control, look elsewhere. If you are for the free ownership of firearms, it provides you with solid information and statistics to back your position. If you are against firearms ownership, and have a rational and reasoning mind, this book will give you some great food for thought, if you don't throw it away and you actually do read it. I have suggested and given this book to a few people with strong feelings about this topic, and they usually just ignore this book's information, as it is so much easier to just blindly charge on with nothing more than emotionally based sound bites as a substitute for reason and thought. (Review Data Last Updated: 2006-02-12 23:10:20 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 12-17-03 | 5 | 12\21 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This book backs what common sense would expect. If people take the responsibility for their own protection, we will all be better off [safer]. To some that makes perfect sense, to others it takes this proof. There will be those who will find fault in the conclusion, not because it is not true, but because they don't LIKE that conclusion.
I Loved the book and recommend it to anyone considering work as a legislator! (Review Data Last Updated: 2006-01-12 20:54:31 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 12-13-03 | 5 | 9\19 |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is a book that sends gun control advocates packing. Some of the statistical jargon is, I admit, over my head. But the conclusions are easy-to-read. The questions deserved to be asked, and Lott & Mustard bring shock and awe with their answers.
(Review Data Last Updated: 2006-01-07 16:40:33 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Reader Reviews 1 - 22 of 22 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| All Books | Arts | Biography | Click Here For An A-Z Index Of All 213 Best-Seller Subjects | Business | Children's | Comics | ||||||
| Computers | Cooking | Engineering | Entertainment | Health | History | Home | Horror | Humor | Law | Fiction | Medicine | Mystery |
| Nonfiction | Outdoors | Parenting | Professional | Reference | Religion | Romance | Science | Sci-Fi | Sports | Teens | Travel | |
