Linoge is one of my most virulent critics, but he happens to be a guy I have a lot of respect for. I like his unwavering belief in his position and the certainty with which he describes it, qualities he shares with a number of other pro-gun bloggers I've had the pleasure of knowing.
His site, Walls of the City is a wonderful example of a pro-gun blog. The recent post entitled Graphics Matter, contains this chart, which might be better viewed on his site, I'm not sure if the magnifying function will work over here. The amount of work that went into this leaves me in awe.
After describing the various elements that went into this work, Linoge said this.
I know that the facts are the only things that matter, again, unlike the anti-rights advocates, and anything that can give us a better look at those facts is something we should pursue.
Facts, that's what we need. Who could argue with that? Certainly not I.
I pointed out to Linoge that the Brady Background Checks law and the Assault Weapons Ban, which he's marked on the top line called, Firearms Related Deaths, must be responsible for the decline which was quite drastic after those two events.
Actually, MikeB, there is absolutely no proof that the Assault Weapon ban affected crime, and, additionally, there is absolutely no proof that the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act affected crime either.
To support the claim of "no proof" he's kindly linked to two pro-gun sites. This is where I'm afraid the passion of the pro-gun argument blinds them to the obvious facts, facts which they themselves point out. For this there's "no proof," because obviously there are a number of other factors involved. This is where common sense and logic come in, attributes which are sometimes lost in the pursuit of "facts" and "proof."
Another idea I questioned is the oft-repeated statement that the number of guns is increasing while the number of violent incidents is decreasing. The green and blue lines, I pointed out, which represent total population and total guns look more or less parallel.
Not so, says Linoge, and to show that he added that last line showing total number of guns per 10,000 people, which clearly indicates an increase. It still seems minor to me, far different from what I've been told many times.
The best thing about this chart for me is, it refutes all those claims I've heard that after the Brady laws and the AWB, gun deaths increased. Linoge has clearly shown that that's just not true. The only question is, although as he points out, there's no proof, did those two laws help decrease the violence or not. To me the answer is clearly "yes."
What's your opinion? Is there a place for common sense and logic to work hand in hand with facts and proof? Is it fair for the pro-gun crowd to keep claiming exclusive ownership of the facts, when in fact they themselves are doing some interpreting? Do you think the Brady law and the AWB had nothing to do with the decline?
Please leave a comment.