Three key facts against strict gun control legislation

Every time a new massacre occurs in the United States, the debate on carrying firearms is fueled. Many opinions come from good intentions, but it is essential to understand the figures on armed violence if we want to advance legislation on the carrying of guns that truly leads to a reduction in crime. Otherwise, what is achieved is promoting ineffective measures that, in some cases, can worsen the situation. There are at least three vitally important issues to consider regarding gun control.

1- A higher number of firearms does not mean more violence

The first issue to keep in mind when addressing the issue of firearm ownership is that high rates of gun ownership are not associated with higher rates of violent crime. Places like Canada, Switzerland or Israel have much higher gun ownership rates than the United. However, the rates of homicides and crimes committed with firearms in these countries are lower than those experienced by Americans and those found in many other countries with quite restrictive policies regarding the carrying of firearms.

The data does not show that the more guns there are in a society, the more associated deaths occur, and this can not only be seen between countries but also by comparing different states in the United States. There are states in which there is a lot of freedom to have guns, and their levels of violence are very low, as is the case of New Hampshire and Maine. It is also the case that the rate of gun ownership is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but crime rates are higher in urban areas.

2- Strict gun control legislation does not mean lower crime rates

Countries like Mexico or Brazil have strict gun-carrying laws, and yet their crime rates are among the highest in the world and are, of course, much higher than those reported in the United States. In fact, the Crime Prevention Research Center notes that according to the data, countries with high gun ownership rates tend to have lower homicide rates, but cautions that this is not a causal relationship, as other factors influence the low homicide rates.

It should also be noted that it is difficult to compare countries because the way homicides and crimes are measured can vary. However, if we compare the different states of the United States, the conclusion is the same. Tightening gun laws does not translate into a decrease in crime rates. Maryland, Illinois and Delaware are extremely restrictive states with regard to carrying guns, yet their homicide rates are among the highest in the entire country.

3- In hundreds of thousands of cases, firearms are used for self-defense or to save others.

The issue of firearm ownership is one of those issues in which only the adverse effects are usually seen, and all the positive effects are ignored. People remember every massacre and every shooting and see the crime data every day, but very little is said about the cases in which people manage to save their lives or stop an attacker, thanks to having a firearm with them. In 2013, in a report ordered by Barack Obama, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that firearms are used defensively hundreds of thousands of times each year.

In fact, the report states that: "Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year."

Also, the CDC recognizes that self-defense can be an essential deterrent against crime. Of course, trying to commit a crime in a population that is known to be armed is not the same as doing so in a place where the carrying of guns is severely restricted. In another important aspect, the CDC also notes that victims who defend themselves with a firearm have consistently lower injury rates than those who protect themselves in other ways.

These are just some of the most important aspects to consider about gun control. The most basic and standard approach in this regard is to point out the ease of obtaining a firearms as the main reason for the crime, but as we have detailed, the facts do not show that tightening the requirements for carrying guns leads to a reduction in crime. Meanwhile, these types of laws, which make it more difficult for good citizens to obtain guns, possibly strip those who do follow the law of the ability to defend themselves. Most firearms-related crimes are committed with illegally obtained firearms.

Finally, the underlying problem is not the guns but the people who own them. The problem is how they are used. For example, more people are stabbed to death every year than killed with rifles, and no one can think of a law to ban knives. Policies aimed at reducing crime should consider, with extreme care, the data presented here but fundamentally focus on mental health and crime prevention problems in people with criminal records. According to studies, almost all mass shooters have a history of mental health problems.

The issue of crime and homicides must be addressed as seriously as possible; that means putting aside passions to analyze the data and implement measures that effectively save lives. Unfortunately, many politicians prefer not to address the issue sincerely and decide to stay on the side of political correctness instead of promoting truly effective measures.