ILA | Research Update: It’s [Still] Not the Guns

by admin 28 Comments

Gun News

[ad_1]

Much has changed since last summer. In July 2020, notoriously anti-gun researchers circulated a paper that alleged an association between what they deemed “excess” gun purchases early in the pandemic and violence. This year, the same researchers disproved their original findings with the addition of new data.

Doctor Garen Wintemute and his team at the University of California Firearm Violence Research Center at UC Davis found no association between what they dubbed “excess” firearm purchases and non-domestic firearm violence, and the association they found between excess purchases and domestic firearm violence through May disappeared when either state trends were included in the model or when June and July were added to the time frame.

The findings are buried in the UC Davis press release. ABC News dedicated an article to the original study, but there’s no mention of the newly published research. Bloomberg’s “reporters” at The Trace spent over 700 words on the original study. They added a brief note to that article with a single sentence about the new and contradictory research.

“News” outlets reported on the original non-peer-reviewed paper but spent little to no ink on the new research published in the journal Injury Epidemiology.

Instead, CNN published a piece entitled, “How crime stats lie — and what you need to know to understand them” that cited an anti-gun web scraper for statistics to show an increase in “gun violence.” CNN, of course, used the combined total of suicides, homicides, accidents, and every other intent but focused in on homicides and inserted this line:

“Gun sales also soared during the pandemic.”

That line could only be intended to suggest causality, as if the increase in firearm sales was responsible for the reported increase in homicides. This makes no sense on its face and certainly not considering the latest research from UC Davis. Reports from retailers indicated that self-defense was the primary reason for obtaining a firearm during an unprecedented year of civil unrest, inmate releases, and efforts to defund the police.

Thanks to Wintemute’s team at UC Davis, there is evidence of no association between “excess” firearm sales and increasing firearm-related violence during the early months of the pandemic.

One might say that Wintemute found a protective effect of firearms against non-domestic violence though the results may not be statistically significant. The finding related to domestic violence is what the anti-gun crowd will promote but it does not hold up to scrutiny.

Wintemute’s team claims that “Increases in purchasing may have contributed to additional firearm injuries from domestic violence in April and May.”

The researchers’ found a positive association for April and May when they included “COVID-19 cases and deaths, mobility [a supposed measure of social distancing adherence, using cell phone data], unemployment, baseline firearm purchasing rates, police violence during the George Floyd protests, stay-at-home orders, and average temperature” in the model.”

Take those out, and April no longer has an association between “excess” purchases and firearm-related domestic violence. Add in state-specific linear trends, and both April and May lose the claimed association.

The UC Davis findings are very much dependent on the model specification.

Also of interest is the decrease in effect as successive months of “excess” purchases are added to the model. How could there be an association between “excess” sales and domestic violence through April and May, but not through June or July?

Wintemute and his team claim there were more “excess” purchases in June and July than in any prior month in the study period. June 2020 had the highest number of NICS checks ever (until December 2020). There’s nothing to suggest that “excess” purchases in April and May should be associated with violence but not later “excess” purchases.

As each new month is added, the effect of so-called “excess” purchases on domestic violence perpetrated with firearms decreases. April and May saw a lower rate ratio – meaning a weaker effect – than April; April through June saw a lower rate ratio than April and May; and, April through July saw a lower rate ratio than April through June. One might reasonably expect any effect from “excess purchases” to increase as the excess stock increases in aggregate but that is not the case in this analysis. The final two time frames were not statistically significant – there was no association between “excess purchases” and domestic violence.

We debunked the notion of excess purchases last summer, when the original article came out  and now Wintemute and his staff at the Firearm Violence Research Center at UC Davis have rejected the theory of an association between the so-called “excess” purchases and violence.

Bloomberg-funded researcher Daniel Webster commented on the study for The Guardian and provided the sort of dizzying spin usually reserved for desperate politicians.

It seems Webster wanted a way to reconcile these findings with the anti-gun worldview. Webster offered that perhaps more Americans were willing to carry their firearms, or that the surge in sales was predominantly existing gun owners, or that the increase in homicides may be due to increased illegal carrying of firearms.

Well, he may be on to something with that last trial balloon. Webster referenced reports of an increase in weapons found during arrests in several cities even as the pandemic and other 2020 pressures reduced the overall number of arrests.  Key in on the phrase, “during arrests.”

In other words, criminals.

An increase in criminal behavior just so happens to coincide an increase in certain types of crime. Next, they’ll tell us that background checks don’t impact crime.

That’s right – both criminals and from Wintemute and Webster, whose previous research determined that California’s universal background check law had no effect on homicide rates, have already proved this.

It’s what we’ve been saying all along.

 

*update* – I took out the Bloomberg joke because it didn’t flow as well anymore.

[ad_2]

Source link

Articles You May Like

Lincoln Journal Star letters to the editor: Oct. 1-5
Yes, we can prevent school shootings – The Battalion
One Dead After Shootings at South Carolina State University
Would America Be Safer Without the Second Amendment?
Brett Kavanaugh Would-Be Assassin’s Mom Cites His Transgenderism

28 Comments

  3. 403172 894768This design is steller! You surely know how to maintain a reader entertained. Between your wit and your videos, I was almost moved to start my own weblog (nicely, almostHaHa!) Fantastic job. I truly enjoyed what you had to say, and far more than that, how you presented it. Too cool! 592842

    Reply

  6. 930649 503022One can undertake all sorts of advised excursions with assorted limousine functions. Various offer fantastic courses and several can take clients for just about any ride your bike over the investment banking location, or even for a vacation to new york. ??????? 593456

    Reply

  7. 177288 898413The next time Someone said a weblog, I hope that it doesnt disappoint me just as considerably as this. Come on, man, I know it was my choice to read, but When i thought youd have some thing intriguing to say. All I hear is genuinely a handful of whining about something you could fix within the event you werent too busy searching for attention. 429362

    Reply

  10. 971771 156149Cheapest player speeches and toasts, or perhaps toasts. continue to be brought about real estate . during evening reception tend to be likely to just be comic, witty and therefore instructive as nicely. greatest man speeches totally free 565081

    Reply

  13. 472695 288274Wow! This could be 1 specific of the most valuable blogs Weve ever arrive across on this subject. Basically Outstanding. Im also an expert in this subject therefore I can comprehend your effort. 735976

    Reply

  15. 618820 65379Hello there, just became alert to your blog through Google, and identified that its genuinely informative. Im gonna watch out for brussels. Ill be grateful should you continue this in future. Several people will be benefited from your writing. Cheers! 976372

    Reply

  17. 253634 451122This is a quite exciting post, Im searching for this know how. So you comprehend I established your web site when I was looking for sites like my own, so please look at my web web site someday and post me a opinion to let me know how you feel. 492123

    Reply

  18. 107224 247688Which is some inspirational stuff. Never knew that opinions may be this varied. Thank you for all of the enthusiasm to give such valuable information here. 422335

    Reply

  19. 894442 789134Considerably, the story is in reality the greatest on this noteworthy subject. I agree together with your conclusions and will eagerly watch forward to your next updates. Saying good one will not just be sufficient, for the great clarity within your writing. I will immediately grab your rss feed to stay privy of any updates! 430150

    Reply

  20. 74040 681646Thank you for this. Thats all I can say. You most definitely have created this into something thats eye opening and essential. You clearly know so considerably about the subject, youve covered so numerous bases. Fantastic stuff from this part of the internet. 923068

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *