Quote of the day—Gary Mauser

No methodologically sound study has found any important effect on homicide, suicide or violent crime rates from Canadian gun laws.

Gary Mauser
Professor emeritus at the Institute for Canadian Urban Research Studies Beedie School of Business at Simon Fraser University.
October 29, 2014
Did Parliament Shooting Change Canada’s Gun Control Debate?
[The same is true in the U.S.

So why do some people still advocate for more gun control? I can only think of the following possible reasons:

  1. Evil intent
  2. Power (this could be considered a special case of evil intent)
  3. Money
  4. Attention and/or fame
  5. Peer acceptance
  6. Ignorance
  7. Stupidity
  8. Bigotry
  9. Mental issues

Or some combination of the above.—Joe]

10 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Gary Mauser

  1. Should Hoplophobia be considered as a separate category from your definition of Mental Issues? It’s rare, but I have met a couple of people who can Logically Process all the reasons FOR the RKBA, and do support others who use it, but will go absolutely NUTS with Panic if a Firearm is placed in THEIR hands.

    Trust me, it’s NOT a Pretty Sight.

    • Hypnotic state. Implanted thoughts and emotions. They’re victims. Once they realize that, they can easily overcome it.

  2. To say that restrictions or encumbrances on gun ownership have “no effect” on crime is to defend those restrictions and encumbrances. I could see that defense being used in a court of law on behalf of a U.S. politician defendant in an 18 USC 242 case. It is somewhat like saying that slavery has no effect on the general welfare of the slaves, being that good slave masters see to it that their (rather expensive) slaves are housed, fed, trained, cared for, and so on.

    So there is the issue of crime rates, and then there is the issue of the violation of the right to keep and bear arms for purposes including self defense, and there is no trade-off between the two as the Progressives would have us believe. Far from it.

    The recognition and protection of all rights is the best way to discourage crime. It’s the only way, ultimately, but rights protection is not at the top of the list of reasons why people get into government.

    When Progressives claim “no effect” on crime, what they should be saying is that their gun restrictions failed to reduce crime rates. Failing to reduce is very different from having “no effect”, and it’s a way of letting them off the hook for their role in encouraging violent crime through their wholesale violation of a human right.

    From your list of reasons people support rights violations, I think number five is the pivotal one, and it then leads to all the others through number nine.

    • The evidence doesn’t support “no effect on crime rates”. What it does support is that gun control increases crime. This is quite evident when comparing US vs. European crime rates, as reported by the UN (not exactly a friendly organization). And of course this makes perfect sense given the minds (such as they are) of violent criminals, and the incentives they respond to. John Lott’s results were not exactly a surprise to those who can think logically.

  3. I’d offer “Perpetual Victimhood” as a reason, but I think it’s more of a tactic, and falls under #4 and #5: Announcing one’s victimhood tends to generate attention/fame, and gains the “victim” some measure of acceptance; it’s not politically correct to shun a victim, even a self-proclaimed one.

    Also, Lyle’s analysis is making my Quote of the Day list tomorrow. 🙂

    • Victimhood is a powerful tool of the left in garnering support from other leftists. Your wife, for example, is wrong until she cries, no? If you or I do it though, we’re just being pathetic. It’s totally different.

      On a not altogether unrelated note (it’s still on the subject of manipulation, or the lack thereof); it is said that behind every good man is a good woman. I heard a variation on that this morning; “Behind every good man is a surprised woman.” It’s a clever way of saying that if your wife cannot manipulate you using her charms, sexual allure and/or victimhood, she’s surprised. After that she will resort to unpleasantness and if that fails, she’s really surprised. Ideally of course, neither spouse is attempting to manipulate the other. It’s a secret so don’t tell anyone, but THAT’S a pre-requisite of love.

      Family life makes a good analogy of politics and international affairs, if you look at it the right way.

      • “Family life makes a good analogy of politics and international affairs, if you look at it the right way.”

        The family is the smallest functional unit of society. Intra- and inter-familial relationships are identical to politics and international affairs, just on a smaller scale. Individuals group to form families, families group to form communities, communities group to form towns/cities/states, and towns/cities/states group to form countries, but the basics are true regardless of the scale you’re examining. Each successively smaller unit, if it’s not built on and held together by mutual values and respect, will fail to support the larger units.

        So my wife and I don’t manipulate each other through tears or anger. We’re young, but we’ve moved past that. If one of us is wrong, we can admit it and not lose any value to the other. She’s a wonderful woman, I think I’m a pretty OK guy (she’d say I’m selling myself short), but to paraphrase: Behind every good spouse is another good spouse, watching his/her back.

        We’re not victims. We refuse to be. Willingly accepting (or seizing for oneself, in some cases) the role of “victim” means giving up a part of yourself – disempowering yourself in the process – to gain … what, exactly? Attention? Fame? Acceptance? All of the above?

        I don’t mean to wax philosophical/religious, but if you need to excise and sell a portion of your soul to gain these things from your peers, then you need to rethink your choice of peer groups.

  4. Pingback: SayUncle » Gun laws and crime

  5. Pingback: Gun laws have no effect on violent crime in Canada. Water still wet. - The Gun Feed

Comments are closed.