Right-to-carry law: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Neutrality (talk | contribs) →Effects: wordy, undue weight on dissent, with promotionalism to boot ("pre-eminent") |
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Right-to-carry law closed as redirect (XFDcloser) Tag: New redirect |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ⚫ | |||
<!-- Please do not remove or change this AfD message until the discussion has been closed. --> |
|||
{{Article for deletion/dated|page=Right-to-carry law|timestamp=20180609111154|year=2018|month=June|day=9|substed=yes}} |
|||
<!-- Once discussion is closed, please place on talk page: {{Old AfD multi|page=Right-to-carry law|date=9 June 2018|result='''keep'''}} --> |
|||
<!-- End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point --> |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
{{Globalize|date=August 2017}} |
|||
{{Rcat shell| |
|||
In the [[United States]], a '''right-to-carry law''' (sometimes abbreviated '''RTC law''', also known as a '''shall-issue law''') is one that requires that governments issue [[concealed carry]] [[handgun]] permits to any applicant who meets the necessary criteria. Specifically, under such a law, a permit must be given to any applicant if they are an adult, have no significant criminal record, no history of [[mental illness]], and successfully complete a course in firearms safety training (if required by law).<ref name=nrc>{{cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4gdSAgAAQBAJ | title=Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review | publisher=[[National Academy of Sciences]] | author=[[National Research Council (United States)|National Research Council]] Committee on Law and Justice | year=2004 | pages=120–151}}</ref> |
|||
{{R to related topic}} |
|||
}} |
|||
==Effects== |
|||
In 1997, [[John Lott]] and David Mustard published an influential study analyzing data from all 3,054 United States counties in ''[[The Journal of Legal Studies]]''. The study concluded that right-to-carry laws deterred violent crime, "without increasing accidental deaths". In the study, Lott and Mustard also stated that right-to-carry concealed handgun laws were "the most cost-effective method of reducing crime thus far analyzed by economists."<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lott, Jr.|first1=John R.|last2=Mustard|first2=David B.|title=Crime, Deterrence, and Right‐to‐Carry Concealed Handguns|journal=The Journal of Legal Studies|date=January 1997|volume=26|issue=1|pages=1–68|doi=10.1086/467988}}</ref> The following year another study was published in the same journal which re-analyzed Lott and Mustard's data and concluded that there was "no basis for drawing confident conclusions about the impact of right-to-carry laws on violent crime."<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Black|first1=Dan A.|last2=Nagin|first2=Daniel S.|title=Do Right-to-Carry Laws Deter Violent Crime?|journal=The Journal of Legal Studies|date=January 1998|volume=27|issue=1|page=209|doi=10.1086/468019}}</ref> Also that year, a study in the ''American Economic Review'' found that the effects of concealed handgun laws on crime rates were much smaller than estimated by Lott and Mustard, and that these effects were not negative with respect to all types of crime. For example, the study found that such laws reduced murder only by, at most, a small amount, and that many states' robbery rates increased after these laws were passed.<ref>{{cite journal | jstor=116969 | title=Lives Saved or Lives Lost? The Effects of Concealed Handgun Laws on Crime | author=Dezhbakhsh, Hashem | journal=The American Economic Review | date=May 1998 | volume=88 | issue=2 | pages=468–474}}</ref> A 2003 study found that the Lott and Mustard study inappropriately used a [[dummy variable (statistics)|dummy variable]], leading to misspecification, and, based on a different method of analysis, concluded that the effects of these laws varies from county to county and from state to state and "are not crime-reducing in most cases".<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Rubin|first1=Paul H|last2=Dezhbakhsh|first2=Hashem|title=The effect of concealed handgun laws on crime: beyond the dummy variables|journal=International Review of Law and Economics|date=June 2003|volume=23|issue=2|pages=199–216|doi=10.1016/S0144-8188(03)00027-9}}</ref> |
|||
One study by Florenz Plassmann and Nicolas Tideman in the Journal of Law and Economics found that right-to-carry laws "appear to have statistically significant deterrent effects on the numbers of reported murders, rapes, and robberies."<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Plassmann|first1=Florenz|last2=Tideman|first2=T. Nicolaus|title=Does the Right to Carry Concealed Handguns Deter Countable Crimes? Only a Count Analysis Can Say|journal=The Journal of Law & Economics|date=October 2001|volume=44|issue=S2|pages=771|doi=10.1086/323311}}</ref> A paper in the American Economic Review by John Lott and Stephen Bronars found: "these results imply that concealed handguns deter criminals and that the largest reductions in violent crime will be obtained when all the states adopt these laws."<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lott|first1=John|last2=Bronars|first2=Stephen|title=Criminal Deterrence, Geographic Spillovers, and the Right to Carry Concealed Handguns|journal=American Economic Review|date=May 1998|volume=88|issue=2|pages=475-479}}</ref> A 2014 paper, in the Review of Economics and Finance found: "The evidence shows that RTC laws are socially beneficial."<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Moody|first1=Carlisle|last2=Marvell|first2=Thomas|last3=Zimmerman|first3=Paul|last4=Alemante|first4=Fasil|title=The Impact of Right-to-Carry Laws on Crime: An Exercise in Replication|journal=Review of Economics & Finance|date=2014}}</ref> |
|||
In 2004, a report by the [[National Research Council (United States)|National Research Council]] concluded that there was insufficient evidence to conclude whether there was a cause-and-effect relationship between RTC laws and crime rates.<ref name=nrc/> The NRC report studied over 100 different types of gun control regulations and concluded that none of these laws had a statistically significant effect on crime or suicide and only called for more research. Criminologist [[James Q. Wilson]] dissented, arguing that the data showed that "shall-issue laws drive down the murder rate" and objecting to the committee's classification of this finding as "fragile."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nap.edu/read/10881/chapter/13#270/|title= FIREARMS AND VIOLENCE: A CRITICAL REVIEW, Appendix A: Dissent |last=Wilson|first=James Q.|date=2005}}</ref> The NRC committee that authored the report responded to Wilson's dissent, stating, "While it is true that most of the reported estimates are negative, several are positive and many are statistically insignificant...The rest of the committee and Wilson agree that fragility does not prove that the results of any specific paper are incorrect. However, some of the published results must be incorrect because they are inconsistent with one another. The important question, therefore, is whether the correct results can be identified. The rest of the committee thinks that they cannot. Contrary to Wilson’s claim, the committee did assess the existing body of empirical literature on right-to-carry laws."<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.nap.edu/read/10881/chapter/14#273 |title=Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review, Appendix B: Committee Response to Wilson’s Dissent |date=2005 |website=National Research Council}}</ref> |
|||
A further study by [[Stanford Law School]] Professor [[John J. Donohue III|John Donohue]], released in June 2017, found that right-to-carry laws are actually associated with higher aggregate crime rates.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.snopes.com/2017/06/23/right-to-carry-crime-rates-john-donohue/|title=Right-to-Carry Laws Make Violent Crime Rates Worse, Law Professor Finds|last=Donohue|first=John|date=2017-06-23|website=Snopes.com|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=2017-06-26}}</ref> Donohue looked at data from 2000 to 2014, a fourteen-year period during which 11 states introduced right-to-carry laws, and found that violent crime levels were actually 13-15% higher than they would have been without the right-to-carry law. |
|||
An October 2017 [[Boston University]] study found that states with shall-issue laws had higher rates of overall, handgun, and firearm homicides.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Siegel|first=Michael|last2=Xuan|first2=Ziming|last3=Ross|first3=Craig S.|last4=Galea|first4=Sandro|last5=Kalesan|first5=Bindu|last6=Fleegler|first6=Eric|last7=Goss|first7=Kristin A.|date=2017-10-19|title=Easiness of Legal Access to Concealed Firearm Permits and Homicide Rates in the United States|url=http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2017.304057|journal=American Journal of Public Health|pages=e1–e7|doi=10.2105/ajph.2017.304057|issn=0090-0036}}</ref> |
|||
A study by researchers at Texas A&M that looked at 500 counties in four shall-issue states (Texas, Michigan, Florida, and Pennsylvania) found that concealed-carry permit rates had no effect (negative or positive) on violent crime or crime overall.<ref>Charles D. Phillips, Obioma Nwaiwu, Szu-hsuan Lin, Rachel Edwards, Sara Imanpour, & Robert Ohsfeldt, [https://www.hindawi.com/archive/2015/803742/ Concealed Handgun Licensing and Crime in Four States], ''Journal of Criminology''</ref> |
|||
==References== |
|||
{{Reflist}} |
|||
[[Category:Firearm laws]] |
|||
Latest revision as of 20:21, 16 June 2018
Redirect to:
This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:
When appropriate, protection levels are automatically sensed, described and categorized. |