Home » Opinion » Editorials
January 19. 2013 11:23PM
During his Wednesday press conference announcing portions of his gun-control agenda, President Obama said we had to confront the "epidemic of gun violence in this country." That is a curious way of referring to a problem that has been in steady decline for years.
According to FBI data, the number of murders committed by firearms in this country is falling, not rising.
In 2011, the latest year for which full data are available, 8,583 people were killed by firearms. That is down from 10,225 in 2006. Murders committed with rifles, which includes "assault rifles" such as the Bushmaster AR-15, fell from 453 in 2007 to 323 in 2011.
Overall, the murder and violent crime rates in the United States have been declining for decades. Citing FBI data, New York University professor Patrick Egan wrote last July, "we are a less violent nation now than we've been in over forty years. In 2010, violent crime rates hit a low not seen since 1972; murder rates sunk to levels last experienced during the Kennedy Administration."
This is hardly suggestive of an epidemic that screams for immediate government correction. What about mass shootings, though?
As widely reported after the tragedy in Newtown, Conn., those are not on the rise. Northeastern University criminologist James Alan Fox wrote in The Boston Globe after the Aurora, Colo., shootings last summer, "the facts say clearly that there has been no increase in mass killings, and certainly no epidemic" over the last 30 years.
Surely, though, we have to do something to stem the dangerous rise in gun ownership. The problem there is that gun ownership has fallen dramatically in the United States since the 1950s. Then, about half of Americans said they owned guns. Today, it is about a third, as professor Egan has noted.
In the last few years, gun ownership has experienced an upward swing. That increase coincided with the drop in gun-related homicides mentioned at the beginning of this editorial.
The idea that the United States is experiencing a rising tide of gun violence is simply false. That does not mean that we should pursue no legislative actions to curb mass killings. But those actions should be guided by facts, not emotional impulses.
Gun violence: Surprise, it's not rising
According to FBI data, the number of murders committed by firearms in this country is falling, not rising.
In 2011, the latest year for which full data are available, 8,583 people were killed by firearms. That is down from 10,225 in 2006. Murders committed with rifles, which includes "assault rifles" such as the Bushmaster AR-15, fell from 453 in 2007 to 323 in 2011.
Overall, the murder and violent crime rates in the United States have been declining for decades. Citing FBI data, New York University professor Patrick Egan wrote last July, "we are a less violent nation now than we've been in over forty years. In 2010, violent crime rates hit a low not seen since 1972; murder rates sunk to levels last experienced during the Kennedy Administration."
This is hardly suggestive of an epidemic that screams for immediate government correction. What about mass shootings, though?
As widely reported after the tragedy in Newtown, Conn., those are not on the rise. Northeastern University criminologist James Alan Fox wrote in The Boston Globe after the Aurora, Colo., shootings last summer, "the facts say clearly that there has been no increase in mass killings, and certainly no epidemic" over the last 30 years.
Surely, though, we have to do something to stem the dangerous rise in gun ownership. The problem there is that gun ownership has fallen dramatically in the United States since the 1950s. Then, about half of Americans said they owned guns. Today, it is about a third, as professor Egan has noted.
In the last few years, gun ownership has experienced an upward swing. That increase coincided with the drop in gun-related homicides mentioned at the beginning of this editorial.
The idea that the United States is experiencing a rising tide of gun violence is simply false. That does not mean that we should pursue no legislative actions to curb mass killings. But those actions should be guided by facts, not emotional impulses.
- No curbside collections in Manchester on Monday - 0
- Suit: Claremont's North Country Smokehouse claims $606,011 spent on diamond, SUV, more - 9
- Winnipesaukee watershed association looking to raise its profile - 0
- New Ipswich cemetery’s future is anybody guess after state objects to graves - 1
- Goffstown artisan gives new face to Wolfeboro tower - 0
- Town may have to fix grave error - 3
- Updated: Winning Powerball ticket sold in Fla.; 2, $1M tickets sold in NH - 0
- No more Winni whoppers: Fishing Derby winner will have to take lie detector test - 11
- Learning the way of the gun in Wakefield - 2
Nashua librarian reports E-books flying off virtual shelves
READER COMMENTS: 0- Warwick Mills scores $94.3 million contract from Army for body armor - 0
- Senate OKs medical pot, with plenty of restrictions - 0
- Rangers win in overtime, stay alive for Game 5 - 0
- Hanefeld shoots 74 at Senior PGA - 0
- Bishop Libasci to ordain 2 at St. Joseph Cathedral - 0
- Price tag to restore chimney about $1m - 0
- Officials disallow Woodmont slide show - 0
- Officials question Nashua parking proposal - 0
- House bill lowers emissions cap to meet RGGI standards - 1
Boy Scouts of America vote ends gay scout ban
READER COMMENTS: 0| Follow us: | ||
 |
 |
 |
Sorry, no question available