Im always amazed to see causation-correlation fallacies. The author is happy to assume causation where the paper he refers to does not, it merely mentions correlation. The study is pretty clear about it in fact:
Furthermore, despite the use of panel data, this study cannot address the directionality of the association between firearm ownership and homicide rates because the statistical approach tested variation across states and not within states over time.
Instead of taking this to heart, the author just mentions it and then glosses over it.
There are hundreds of things that affect crime rate most are different aspects of socio-economic relationships and status. High poverty rate is a critical one of course, collective educational achievement is another, access to healthcare is yet another. Or as the study suggests itself:
A range of factors that could confound the association between firearm ownership and firearm homicide, including age, sex, race, high school completion, poverty, unemployment, alcohol consumption, nonhomicide violent and property crime, population density, urbanicity, region, and income inequality, were evaluated.
The study declares that it controls for these socio-economic aspects but it doesnt say how, for example in the tables they show victim rates, but not after the control happened. Why do the states with the higher changes in domestic homocide rates just happen to be the exact same states with poorer economies, alcoholism rates, and lower educational levels? Are guns also causing poorer schools?
But here again we have someone ignoring the well known socio-economic underlayment of why crime rates are higher and instead wants to point at an inanimate piece of metal as the problem.
The title claims “offers little for self defense”, but then goes to not defend that position even a little bit. The original Kleck study in the 90s has been panned widely, but not rebutted systematically, and when it was revisited recently using CDC data it found similar results. Saying guns arent used for defense simply ignores the fact that they are used for defense without firing a single bullet.
Due to how this study points out the the homicide rates in gun owning domestic relationships are heavily leaning towards female victims, I think the only conclusion we can come to from it, is that more women should own guns.
