A correlation does not prove the case. There are many such suggestive correlations: a study in Ontario showed that by township, the higher the gun possession, the lower the crime rate. But this could also be due to other factors: rural people tend to own more guns, and they also tend to be more peaceful. There is definitely also a cultural-ethnic difference.
In the USA, it is also true that counties which went Republican in the last election have lower crime rates than those which went for Gore. It is a very strong correlation. It again may show the deleterious effect of urbanism; the effect of minority groups who tend to have higher crime rates; and (perhaps) the different philosophies of the electorate.
A politician who appeals to wealth-redistribution is favored by people who act out wealth-redistribution themselves by committing crimes.
It is perhaps no accident that the Democrats want convicted felons to be able to vote: that class trends Democratic by a heavy majority everywhere in the country.
To make a correlation convincing, one must have a believable explanatory theory. I do think that the idea of gun ownership as a deterrent is very reasonable, because criminals are actually like other predators: they seek out easy prey. They often go after obviously defenseless people, and preferentially take the easy path by selecting local targets.
In my small town in NJ we have a moderate to low crime rate. Not even ten minutes away is the county seat, where property crimes are ten times as frequent per capita. I have been told that our town has a high number of pistol permits (but no carry permits here in NJ). That might be partly a cause,; but even more is the nature of the people in the two localities. Criminals find cheap quarters in many cities, and they like the conditions there: relative anonymity, easy targets, and a “night life” which favors the predator.
It’s a paradox: for as crime goes, relatively speaking, the city is a jungle, and the “hick” rural areas are civilized.
You and I agree on this. On the other hand...
After years of the left, the media, and the politicians making the case that more guns equals more violence, I say let them stew in this, what must be a very gut wrenching revolting development for them.
We shouldn’t go out of our way to air the same common sense we did while they ignored us and demagogued every act of gun violence over the last few decades.
For now, I think it’s reasonable to throw their argument right back in their face.
More guns doesn’t equal more gun violence after all lefties.
Your and my agreement on the intellectual component of this aside, I’m relishing the left having to eat their mantra, long long overdue.