Shooting Down the More Guns, Less Crime Hypothesis

John Lott and David Mustard have used regression analysis to argue forcefully that 'shall-issue' laws (which give citizens an unimpeded right to secure permits for concealed weapons) reduce violent crime. While certain facially plausible statistical models appear to generate this conclusion, more refined analyses of more recent state and county data undermine the more guns, less crime hypothesis. The most robust finding on the state data is that certain property crimes rise with passage of shall- issue laws, although the absence of any clear theory as to why this would be the case tends to undercut any strong conclusions. Estimating more statistically preferred disaggregated models on more complete county data, we show that in most states shall- issue laws have been associated with more crime and that the apparent stimulus to crime tends to be especially strong for those states that adopted in the last decade. While there are substantial concerns about model reliability and robustness, we present estimates based on disaggregated county data models that on net the passage of the law in 24 jurisdictions has increased the annual cost of crime slightly -- somewhere on the order of half a billion dollars. We also provide an illustration of how our jurisdiction-specific regression model has the capacity to generate more nuanced assessments concerning which states might profit from or be harmed by a particular legal intervention.

Proportionality trumps gentleness: reforming Block’s evictionism (part I)

This paper argues against the most important theoretical foundations which Walter Block uses to defend his thesis that Evictionism legitimizes indirectly deadly evictions of a progeny while simultaneously forbidding abortion. It begins by presenting Block’s Gentleness principle and Rothbard’s principle Proportionality separately. Then, it compares both principles to analyze how satisfactorily each of them deals with some important general problems of libertarian legal theory. The ‘bubble gum theft’ scenario is the main tool for this comparison because both authors uses ‘petty theft’ examples to illustrate their respective principles. This paper’s conclusions are as follows: First, every moment of crime is interconnected. Second, proportionality applies to every moment of crime. Third, that Block’s so-called ‘gentleness principle’ is not only redundant to proportionality, but also cannot be a libertarian principle for two reasons: (1) it implies positive rights and obligations; (2) it presupposes a deterrence penology. This paper is the first in a series of three in an attempt to reform the standard libertarian stance on abortion

Is It Sexual Harassment or Not - The Single Incident Exception

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits sexual harassment in the workplace. In a 2004 case of first impression, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals looked at an employer\u27s affirmative defense against a hostile work environment claim involving a single incident of sexual harassment committed by a supervisor. The Eighth Circuit modified the test handed down by the Supreme Court in this situation. After outlining the historical background and rationale for imposing liability on employers for the actions of their supervisors, this Note will explore the logic behind the Eighth Circuit\u27s interpretation of the Supreme Court test and analyze the implications of this interpretation on workplaces in the Eighth Circuit

Five Culprits of Food Poisoning

Some of the names of these culprits are real tongue-twisters- some of the others are more commonly known. This article isn\u27t designed to scare you away from the dinner or picnic isn\u27t designed to scare you away from the dinner or picnic table. But forearmed with some knowlwedge about these microorganisms, you can respect them, and they\u27ll cause you no more harm than the twisted tongue when you say them

Shooting Down the More Guns, Less Crime Hypothesis

In a remarkable paper published in 1997, John Lott and David Mustard managed to set the agenda for much subsequent dataset work on the impact of guns on crime in America by creating a massive dataset of crime across all U.S. counties from 1977 through 1992 and by amassing a powerful statistical argument that state laws enabling citizens to carry concealed handguns had reduced crime. The initial paper was followed a year later by an even more comprehensive and sustained argument to the same effect in a book solely authored by John Lott entitled More Guns, Less Crime (now in its second edition). The work by Lott and Mustard has triggered an unusually large set of academic responses, with talented scholars lining up on both sides of the debate. Indeed, a panel of the National Academy of Sciences has been convened to sort through the now large body of conflicting studies. But in the world of affairs rather than ideas, it did not take long for the National Rifle Association (NRA) and politicians across the country to seize upon the work of Lott and Mustard to oppose efforts at gun control and advance the cause of greater freedom to carry guns. For example, in the same year that the initial article was published, Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho) introduced The Personal Safety and Community Protection Act, which was designed to facilitate the carrying of concealed firearms by nonresidents of a state who had obtained valid permits to carry such weapons in their home state. Senator Craig argued that the work of John Lott showed that arming the citizenry via laws allowing the carrying of concealed handguns would have a protective effect for the community at large because criminals would find themselves in the line of fire. On May 27, 1999, Lott testified before the House Judiciary Committee that the stricter gun regulations proposed by President Clinton either would have no effect or would actually cost lives, and a number of Republican members of Congress have since included favorable references in their speeches to Lott\u27s work. Moreover, Lott has also testified in support of concealed gun laws before several state legislatures, including Nebraska (1997), Michigan (1998), Minnesota (1999), Ohio (2002), and Wisconsin (2002)

Front Matter

Front Matte

Special Program Issue October 11-14, 1995

Special Program Issu