On 2012-12-18, at 11:12 PM, Dennis Claxton wrote:
> This is excerpted from:
>
> American Homicide Supplemental Volume (AHSV)
> Maybe It Was My Fault:
> Responses to Misunderstandings by Reviewers of American Homicide
> Randolph Roth
>
> http://cjrc.osu.edu/researchprojects/hvd/AHSV/response_to_reviewers_of_AH.pdf
>
> Guns are not responsible for America’s high homicide rate, but
> widespread ownership of modern firearms has probably made the homicide rate worse
> than it would otherwise have been. The historical evidence on the relationship between
> guns and homicide is clearer than the contemporary evidence social scientists rely upon,
> because historical evidence allows us to study the transition from muzzle-loading
> firearms to breech-loading firearms with self-contained ammunition, a transition that
> occurred between the 1850s and World War I. By the end of World War I, the modern
> pattern of gun use in homicide in the United States was already set. I plan to draft an
> essay on the relationship between guns and homicide in American history, which I hope
> will clarify for readers the reasons why I believe firearms are not responsible for
> America’s homicide problem, even though I believe modern firearms have contributed to
> the problem.
Right. "The widespread ownership of modern firearms has probably made the homicide rate worse than it would otherwise have been" in the United States. That is not the case, and has historically has not been the case, in other capitalist societies where less accessibility to weapons has led to significantly lower homicide rates. Is this really in dispute?