My study vs. your study – but who's protecting the kids?
It happens every time we have a mass shooting. Within seconds, many people start posting this study or that study about gun violence in the U.S.
For example, the Economist has its opinion:
America's gun-related murder rate is 25 times higher than a group of 22 other developed countries, according to the American Journal of Medicine. This is mainly because America has so many more guns than those other countries. It has less than 5% of the world's population and almost half of the world's civilian-owned firearms.
Then I read this from Mises Institute:
To keep pressing the issue of gun control, it is necessary for advocates to push a narrative in which crime is especially bad, and in which the United States is somehow unique in the world in terms of crime. The actual historical data often contradicts their claims, however, so in order to push their narrative with greater gusto, advocates for gun control employ several different sleight-of-hand rhetorical tricks.
So what's a guy in Texas supposed to believe? These studies are written and researched by smart people with lots of degrees and letters after their names. I will further give them the benefit of the doubt that their conclusions are honest and well-intended. In other words, both sides are appalled to hear of a school shooting.
So what do we do when smart people reach different conclusions?
First, let's accept that there is evil around us. Furthermore, evil people do not respect laws. Evil people are not going to revise their plans because there are laws in place.
Second, you can pass all of the laws you want, but there is always a vulnerability. In other words, someone will always try to enter a school with the intention of performing an awful act.
Laws, or more laws, or more speeches, will not keep us safe. Only an armed guard at the door will protect my child or yours.