Your article makes an almost ironclad argument for...gun control.
America's violent crime rate has been decreasing in the past decades, while England's has been rate increasing. The English rate has increased to to changes in English criminal policies and procedures:
Langan and Farrington found that in England and Wales in the early-1990s, criminals faced a lower risk of punishment compared with the USA. Moreover, the risk had fallen between 1981 and 1995. Why did the risk of punishment fall in England and Wales and increase in the US? The study suggests three causes of diminishing conviction rates in England and Wales. First, there was an increased use of cautions and unrecorded warnings.(3) (This policy has subsequently been changed for young offenders.) Second, the Police and Criminal Evidence Act of 1984 increased the procedural safeguards for the accused. And third, the Crown Prosecution Service was established in 1986, leading to an increased tendency to drop cases.(4)
civitas.org.uk
In other words, unrelated to gun control policies.
Now, given that the English crime rate is rising, you would expect to see a high rate of gun crimes, and gun murders, or at least a climbing rate. Guess what? English gun homicides are DOWN, even as their violent crime rate RISES.
So, your article proves the point: gun control works, in that even in an environment of rising crime, gun murders decrease when guns are restricted.
Thanks for proving my point. |
