by Jim Rose in law and economics Tags: arms races, gun control

Gun control is not going to happen in the USA because of the poor incentives for law-abiding individuals to retreat from high levels of legal private gun ownership when criminals will keep their guns. Harry Clarke pointed out that:

The political popularity of guns is strengthened by Prisoner’s Dilemma disincentives for individuals to retreat from high levels of gun ownership. Accepting a gun buyback would be unattractive to citizens who would recognize high levels of overall gun ownership in the community and, hence, their own personal increased vulnerability if those with criminal intent acted rationally and kept their weapons.

The U.S. Department of Justice’s National Crime Victimization Survey showed the risk of serious injury from a criminal attack is 2.5 times greater for women offering no resistance than for women resisting with a gun.

The key to the success of Australian and New Zealand gun laws was low levels of gun crime and minimal use of guns for self-defence.

There was no arms race as compared to the USA where criminals and civilians are both armed. It is easy to control an arms race that has not started.

The New Zealand, Australian and even the British police rarely have to discharge their weapons.

The Police do not normally carry guns where I live. Economics explains why. There is no arms race.

Self-defence is not a valid reason to possess firearms in New Zealand. The law does not permit the possession of firearms ‘in anticipation’ that a firearm may need to be used in self-defence.

The last time of a gun was fired in self-defence by a civilian in New Zealand may have been in 2007.

John Lott was subject to a witch hunt for saying rather straight forward arguments as:

Criminals are deterred by higher penalties. Just as higher arrest and conviction rates deter crime, so does the risk that someone committing a crime will confront someone able to defend him or herself.

Ready access to guns in moments of despair increases suicide rates. Suicides in the Israeli Defence Force fell 40% when young soldiers were not allowed to take their guns home at the week-end. On the other hand, Palestinian terrorists switched from mass shootings to suicide bombings because too many Israelis carry guns.

Getting rid of gun free zones would be a good start because they attract spree killers. Spree killers overcome their delusions and the voices in their heads for just long enough to invest much time finding places filled with defenceless victims. (Virginia Tech was a gun free zone).

America hasn't gone more than 8 days without a mass shooting bit.ly/1MLiaNF (via @washingtonpost) https://t.co/lDZQzFvh5P—

Catherine Mulbrandon (@VisualEcon) October 01, 2015

The last thing spree killers want is to be quickly shot down like the dogs they are such as at that American church in 2007. The Church later fired the guard when they found out she was a lesbian.

Found this interesting report here

At Columbine High School, the attack coincided with the “school resource officer” (a sheriff’s deputy) being off-campus. The officer returned during the start of the attacks, and fired some long-distance shots at the killers. Those shots drove the killers into the school building, and saved the lives of several students who had been wounded. The officer failed to pursue the killers into the building. Dozens of additional officers arrived within minutes, but none of them entered the building either, even though an open 911 line indicated that killings were taking place in the library, while police stood outside just a few feet away. At least 11 of the 13 Columbine deaths could have been prevented if the police had acted promptly. Since Columbine, police tactics have changed drastically, to emphasize that whoever is at the scene should immediately and aggressively counter-attack an active shooter.

Penn and Teller suggested that any gun controls should apply only to men and that all guns must be pink in colour.

I agree. Guns do not kill people, people do not kill people, men use guns to kill men and women. In the USA, why stop women from owing guns for protecting themselves from men.

in 1996, Texas repealed its 100-year old law prohibiting concealed weapons after a restaurant massacre. One of the survivors left her gun in her car parked outside because of this law. She lost her parents in the massacre. She was a good shot.

This story is an example of trade-offs. It shows that there is more than one side to gun control especially when trapped in an arms race with a high gun ownership equilibrium . The New Zealand, Australian and even British arms race are in low gun ownership equilibriums.