"you will know that such specifications are very tricky and often lead to suspect results because there really is no way to know that your specification is the right one.""Trying to figure out whether gun rights (CCW as well as others) on net increase or decrease crime is a fruitless excercise, so arguments should instead be based on principle."
Precisely. The testimonial of a Social Security recipient or a handicapped person as to their freedom of movement issues positively effected by CCW should be weighed into any equation. These "scientific studies" are highly suspect at best.
Precisely. The testimonial of a Social Security recipient or a handicapped person as to their freedom of movement issues positively effected by CCW should be weighed into any equation. These "scientific studies" are highly suspect at best. Right. Consider two scenarios:
- Scenario #1: Someone in a bad neighborhood can't go out in the evenings or at night, for risk of being robbed or worse. That person stays at home and still has a 5% chance yearly of being robbed or worse.
- Scenario #2: The person has a gun, and the training to use it reasonably effectively. They go out in the evenings, whether to errands, movies, or whatever, and their risk of being successfully robbed or worse is 5% yearly.
In both cases, the victim's likelihood of tangible victimhood is about the same; the gun didn't improve it. On the other had, I would argue that the gun may still have vastly improved the person's life.