Missouri gun murders 'rose after law repeal'

[Upchurch]

I can't find a primary source but...

The study isn't published, but here is a press-release from Johns Hopkins, which is probably about as good as your going to find prior to publication.

For firearm sales by federally licensed firearm dealers, federal law requires prospective purchasers to pass a criminal background check and sellers to maintain records of the sale. But federal law and laws in most states exempt these regulations when the firearm seller is unlicensed. The researchers suggest that universal background checks and firearm purchaser licensing affect homicide rates by reducing the availability of guns to criminals and other prohibited groups.

"Because many perpetrators of homicide have backgrounds that would prohibit them from possessing firearms under federal law, they seek out private dealers to acquire their weapons," said study author Jon Vernick, JD, MPH, deputy director for the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research. "Requiring a background check on all gun sales is a commonsense approach to reducing gun violence that does not infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners."

 

[Old man]

I think it is insignificant for another reason.

I am anti gun, but the article does not look good to me at least from the summary I read.

here is the Missouri murder rate :

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/mocrimn.htm

Now I did not find a split on how those murder were made, but here look at the variation :

1998 399
1999 359
2000 347
2001 372
2002 331
2003 289
2004 354
2005 402
2006 368
2007 385
2008 456
2009 387
2010 420
2011 366
2012 389

Plotted this looks like this :

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=526&pictureid=8610[/qimg]

There is so much variance on murder from year to year, that I have to question the claim on 60 murder being DUE to the law repeal. The law might have had an impact, but comparing 2004-2007 and 2008-2012 I see a huge variance and yet similar numbers nowhere near 60 more and yet 2011 had even less murder than all year in that decade.

In fact the rise started hugely in 2003 when it went 289 to 385 in 2007, when globally murder rate dropped.

Thanks for going to the trouble of looking up this info, Aepervius. It was on my 'to do list'.

 

[Dr. Keith]

A little more research on the nature of the law in question:

So, according to this, apparently this is not actually a fact:

It is possible that this is the effect the study examined.

Thanks for digging that out.

Another likely mechanism is that people who are unsure whether they will pass a NICS have no problem going to a gun shop, filling out the form, and seeing if they pass. The fact is that failing a NICS is likely crime, as has been pointed out here before, but the police don't prosecute.

Compare that with going to the police station to ask permission to buy a gun. If you have any question as to whether you will pass, or whether there is a warrant out on you, you won't even think of walking into the police station voluntarily.

So, there is a self selection that occurs when you move the point of contact from a private business to a police station. I think that self selection is a positive impact, even if it discourages some eligible gun owners from trying to get a permit. If you aren't comfortable walking into a police station I'm not comfortable with you having a gun.

If this study has been reported accurately, it indicates that reasonable firearm regulation can have a positive impact on violent crime. Correct? Is there honestly anything wrong with that?

Uhm, guns don't cause crime? Yeah, that's all I got.

 

[Kestrel]

Federal law does not require a background check for sale by a private party. Unless prohibited by state law, it is legal to sell a handgun at a garage sale with no questions and no records kept.

This loophole makes it easy for a prohibited person to acquire firearms. And provides cover for those who knowingly selling to criminals.

 

[jimbob]

The study isn't published, but here is a press-release from Johns Hopkins, which is probably about as good as your going to find prior to publication.

Thank you - that looks about as good as it will get until publication.

I think it is insignificant for another reason.

I am anti gun, but the article does not look good to me at least from the summary I read.

here is the Missouri murder rate :

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/mocrimn.htm

Now I did not find a split on how those murder were made, but here look at the variation :

1998 399
1999 359
2000 347
2001 372
2002 331
2003 289
2004 354
2005 402
2006 368
2007 385
2008 456
2009 387
2010 420
2011 366
2012 389

Plotted this looks like this :

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=526&pictureid=8610[/qimg]

There is so much variance on murder from year to year, that I have to question the claim on 60 murder being DUE to the law repeal. The law might have had an impact, but comparing 2004-2007 and 2008-2012 I see a huge variance and yet similar numbers nowhere near 60 more and yet 2011 had even less murder than all year in that decade.

In fact the rise started hugely in 2003 when it went 289 to 385 in 2007, when globally murder rate dropped.

In the BBC interview that I linked to in the OP there was some more information:

The [60] additional gun homicides was equivalent to a 23% increase in the gun homicide rate in Missouri with no increase in the non-gun homicide rate.

 

[Upchurch]

Thanks for digging that out.

Another likely mechanism is that people who are unsure whether they will pass a NICS have no problem going to a gun shop, filling out the form, and seeing if they pass. The fact is that failing a NICS is likely crime, as has been pointed out here before, but the police don't prosecute.

For reference:

Sections 922(g) and of the Gun Control Act prohibits certain persons from shipping or transporting any firearm in interstate or foreign commerce, or receiving any firearm which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, or possessing any firearm in or affecting commerce. These prohibitions apply to any person who:

• Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year
• Is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year
• Is a fugitive from justice
• Is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance
• Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution
• Is illegally or unlawfully in the United States
• Has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions
• Having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced U.S. citizenship
• Is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner
• Has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence

So, with the repeal of Missouri's permission-to-purchase law, anyone who might satisfy one of the above criteria would be able to purchase a firearm from a private individual without a going through a NICS check. This study reportedly finds a link between the repeal of that law an an upswing in gun homicides.

It doesn't take a huge stretch of the imagination to think that might be true.



eta: Just to clarify, repealing the law did not make it legal for any of the above to purchase firearms. It did, however, make it so private sellers don't have to check first.

 

[Dr. Keith]

For reference:

So, with the repeal of Missouri's permission-to-purchase law, anyone who might satisfy one of the above criteria would be able to purchase a firearm from a private individual without a going through a NICS check. This study reportedly finds a link between the repeal of that law an an upswing in gun homicides.

It doesn't take a huge stretch of the imagination to think that might be true.

Oh, I agree completely. There should be a NICS check for everyone who wants to posses a firearm in the USA. No matter the manner of transfer. This study seems to indicate that such a law would have real world implications.

But, there are also those people who are kinda on the fringes. Have had problems with the law, but not sure whether all of them would show up in a NICS check. May as well try, what's the harm?

But that same guy is less likely to walk into the Sheriff's office voluntarily.

That is why I think any gun possession permit or license needs to be based out of LEO offices, not hunting stores.

 

[LTC8K6]

NC has a "permission to transfer a handgun" law. Passed around 1995, I believe.

Any transfer of a handgun involves a background check of some sort. You cannot transfer a handgun to anyone in any way without a purchase permit or a concealed weapons permit.

It even includes inheriting a handgun.

How does NC's murder rate compare?

 

[Dr. Keith]

How does NC's murder rate compare?

I think the more meaningful question would be: is there any evidence that the law passed in NC had an impact on the gun murder rate in NC?

I wonder if there are any studies?

 

[LTC8K6]

It's hard to believe the purchase permit law does anything other than inconvenience people, when we know that criminals are perfectly willing to transport handguns across state lines to sell them...and that is certainly very illegal...

 

[LTC8K6]

I think the more meaningful question would be: is there any evidence that the law passed in NC had an impact on the gun murder rate in NC?

I wonder if there are any studies?

I figured 1995 was too long ago...

 

[LTC8K6]

BTW, NC's handgun purchase permit requires you to get one or two people to attest that you are of "good moral character"...

 

[Upchurch]

It's hard to believe the purchase permit law does anything other than inconvenience people

Well, presumably, that's why scientists perform studies so we don't have to believe one way or another. We have a chance of actually knowing.

 

[ben m]

There is so much variance on murder from year to year, that I have to question the claim on 60 murder being DUE to the law repeal.

The analysis doesn't have to be able to track the year-to-year variation. The analysis has to be able to test, essentially, whether the 1999-2008 average differs from the 2008-2012 average, and whether that difference is greater or less than expected given other phenomena at work.

There are lots of valid statistical methods for computing this sort of effect. One common one (used here, at least in part) appears to have compared Missouri's gun murder rates to neighboring states' murder rates. If there is some other phenomenon that can change the murder rate---a new meth recipe hits the market, etc.---it will show a common effect across several states. There is nothing about Aepervius's graph that suggests, to me, that there's anything obviously wrong with the numbers reported in the press release.

 

[jimbob]

The analysis doesn't have to be able to track the year-to-year variation. The analysis has to be able to test, essentially, whether the 1999-2008 average differs from the 2008-2012 average, and whether that difference is greater or less than expected given other phenomena at work.

There are lots of valid statistical methods for computing this sort of effect. One common one (used here, at least in part) appears to have compared Missouri's gun murder rates to neighboring states' murder rates. If there is some other phenomenon that can change the murder rate---a new meth recipe hits the market, etc.---it will show a common effect across several states. There is nothing about Aepervius's graph that suggests, to me, that there's anything obviously wrong with the numbers reported in the press release.

Especially as in the interview, the author points out there were 60 extra gun homicides (23% increase) but no change in non-gun homicides.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

In fact we all know more guns means less crime not to mention much more polite people.

I think that's only true if everyone has a gun. So the problem, as usual, is that not enough people have guns. Or something...

 

[ben m]

It's hard to believe the purchase permit law does anything other than inconvenience people, when we know that criminals are perfectly willing to transport handguns across state lines to sell them...and that is certainly very illegal...

From the BBC:

What was stark, added Prof Webster, was the rise in the number of handguns that subsequently found their way into the hands of criminals.

The team counted a doubling of handguns shortly after sale being recovered from scenes of crimes or from criminals.

From Hopkins:

data from crime gun traces revealed simultaneous large increases in the number of guns diverted to criminals and in guns purchased in Missouri that were subsequently recovered by police in border states that retained their PTP laws.

It looks like, prior to 2007, the law did "inconvenience" criminals enough to prevent many of them from having guns. Which is the point of such laws. There is low-hanging fruit here---there are some criminals who were left gunless by a comparatively-toothless gun law. But then they repealed the gun law, a bunch of suburban gun-hobbyists were freed of this "inconvenience", and so were enough criminals to commit an additional 60 murders per year.

 

[LTC8K6]

Were the murders linked to illegally obtained handguns/guns?

 

[LTC8K6]

This story is spreading like crazy. I wonder how accurate it actually is?

 

[LTC8K6]

This is from a gun nut board, don't know if it's accurate. I should clarify that my comments refer to NC's purchase permit law, and not whatever MO's law might have been. NC's purchase permit law is totally useless, and nothing more than an inconvenience and a tax, despite sounding like it's tough.

The article makes no mention of states like Vermont. Vermont has never had any permitting requirements for handguns, and has the 2nd lowest murder rate in the US (1.3 murders/100k), Missouri on the other hand ranks 45th (6.5 murders/100k). The gun ownership levels in both states are identical at 42%. So it can't be the number of guns driving the higher homicide levels.