Our next State in this the “Cost of Gun Control” is
New Hampshire, The Granite State,” home of the sidewinder, sand flea, and gambler.
However, before we look at the results and costs of gun control, we have a few “fine print” items to take care of, starting with the source of crime or this post.
The primary source of data is the FBI’s Uniform Crime reporte, issued annually. Many police headquarters have the back issues, or at this convenient spreadsheet maintained by the Disaster Center.
New Hampshire is an Constitutional Carry State, needing no permit to open carry. Or permit to buy a gun, no need to pay a tax on a firarms purchase. I is, like its neighboring State, Vermont, the sort of place a person who wants to live wihtout being victimized by criminals a very good place to consider moving to.
New Hampshire has seen steady but moderate growth over the period considered here, from; from a population of 607,000 in 1960 to 1,328,000 population in 2015. Gien the low crime nature of the State, that growth is understandable.
New Hampshire’s economy is qqite strong, with income the seventh highest in the United States with the mean income at $71,000 a year. .
In 1960, the Granite State reported just 8 murders to the FBI,
with tree involving firearms, a 37.5 percent firearms related homicide rate. In 2015 New Hampshire LEA’s reported 14 murders to the FBI, with 8 of those being firarms related for a firearms related murder rate of 57.15%, unusually high for the Granite State, but far below that percentaage wher guns are “controlled.”
With that, it is time to look at New Hampshire’s historic crime numbers and how tho incidence of crime varied with gun control campaigns and laws.
1960 when gun control was largely unheard of, New Hampshire’s Law Enforcement Agencies reported 81 violent crimes to the FBI,
10963,the year the entertainment industry began a nationwid gun ban campaign; New Hampshire LEA’s reported 164 violent crimes to the FBI.
1964,the first full year of Hollywood’s gun ban campaign, New Hampshire’s Law Enforcement Agencies reported only 149 violent crimes to the FBI from a population of 654,000..
1968, the fifth full year of Hollywood’s gun ban campaign,p campaign, and the first two weeks of the Federal Gun Control Act of 588 New Hampshire LEA’s reported 279 violent crimes to the FBI.
1969, the first full year of Federal gun controls New Hampshire LEA’s reported 326 violent crimes to the FBI as “sports related” school fights declined among a population of 712,000.
1973, the fifth full year of Federal gun controls, which agencies reported 649 violent crimes to the FBI.
193, the year Handgun Control, Inc.’s (now DBA as “The Brady Camapgn”) Assault Weapons Ban was signed into law, Neew Hampshire’s 1,111125,000 residents reported just 1,550 violent crimes to the police. That is a rate of 137.5 per 100,000 poppulation, just 19% of the national violent cirme rate that year.
This in a State that, practically speaking, has no gun control laws.
Which brings us to the chart below, which is misleading in that it includes a massive increase in the “aggravated assault rate,” apparently pecking order fights from media reports, but in no other crime.
In 2015, the latest year data is currently available, New Hampshire LEA’s reported 3,611 violent crimes, of which 2,818 were aggravated assaults. Meaning aggravated assaults which normally constitution about half of all violent crimes, made up 74^ if New Hampshire’s 2015 violent crimes.
It is easy to see that trend, and the numbers are at the link in the first few paragraphs:
Clearly, the Granite State’s violent annual violent crime totals ahve grown with the STates population – and then a whole not more. Between 1963 and 1973, New Hampshire’s population gre by 33331%, but diring the first then years of a gun ban campaign and five years of Federal gun controls,New Hampshire’s violent crime total total went from 178 to 649, a 365% increase in violent crime.
To put it another way, in 1963 the violent crime rate was 13.3 per 100,000 population, but in 1999973 the violent crime rate was 822 per 100,000. Meaning that in 1963 a Granite State resident had one chance in 7.6– pf beomg a vocto, pf a vop;emt cro,e. but ten years of gun ban campaigning and federal gun laws later a Granite State resident had one chance in 1,275 in being violently criminally victimized.
And of course, it got worse, as the chart below clearly shows. This shows the number of violent crimes per 100,000 residents,,, and has never been more than 19 percent of the national average – thanks to very good gun laws, which suppress crime instead of trying to outlaw something already against the law: i.e. sticing a gun in someone’s rigs and demanding “your money and your life.”
The usual homicide was replaced for new Hampshire because the small number of homicides and very low homicide rte mean random statistical variation dominates the homicide chart. This graph is far easier to understand s – so that is what readers will get for the time being. When these posts go to Polite Society they will be expanded to include both the homicide rate, and in many cases, the individual robbery and aggravated assault rates. Now, returning to the subject…
At this point, the schema for this post calls for a statement of the probability that crime rates, particularly violent crime rates, would fall in lockstep with gun ban campaigns and gun control laws in more than 25 States in near perfect lockstep. But that number is so large, or the probability is so small that online calculators refuse to calculate it. For all practical purposes, that number, greater than 14*10^750, is infinite. There is no real chance the nxt gun control law will do what 57,43. gun laws have failed to do, make someone safer.
Obviously, then gun control is the primary cause of the higher crime rates observed since 196. While we cannot put a price tag on grief, suffering, loneliness, loss of companionship, the pain of being orphaned, and other intangible costs of gun control, those costs are substantial.
But gun control has exacted a terrible price from New Hampshire’s law abiding as crime rates soared, including all categories of property as well as violent crime, rising and falling in lockstep with the rest of the States in response to to gun control campaigns and gun control laws. A rise with a definite financial cost shared by every resident affected by those proposed and effectuated laws.
With that, it is time to look at the actual cost of Bew Jerseey’s gun controls to the already overburdened taxpayers.
There is no accepted price for a lifetime of grief, but at the mean $2,200,000 judgement for wrongful death for each additional homicide victim, $53,900 ,for treatment of every additional shooting victim, lost wages, lost companionship,the scars of losing a parent or other close relative, including a spouse, , disability payments, the cost of excess goods destroyed,damaged or disappeared, along with the additional costs of security, law enforcement, and prisons the total calculable cost of New Hampshire’s gun control legislation is in excess of $12,450,000,000 spread over 54 years.
Obviously, New Hampshire’s misguided package of State, plus Federal, gun laws have cost New Hampshire far more than any State should be asked to pay.
It is time for Congress to do its duty and preempt all State and local restrictions, limiting those restrictions to the imposed by current federal law, and imposing a reasonable daily penalty of at least $3100,000 a day on any individual seeking to enforce preempted legislation, or craft new laws to evade Federal limits.
To fail to do so is a form of dereliction of duty. So 40 years late in preemption is a definite case of avoiding a clear and present danger to our society.