A Medial Press item reports on a ‘study’ that claims confiscating guns from ‘domestic abusers’ will save lives and cut the murder rate.
Since I am “somewhat” familiar with the results of State “Lautenberg Laws” I an say with assuarnce that such laws do not dut the homicide rates. for the most part, homicide is driven by criminal on partner or rival in crime murders, not by domestic partner abuse. The usual result is a number of domestic partners who make unjustified complaints to get an unwanted domestic partner out of the house 0 followed by POSSLQ’s who want the partner, but propaganda has turned them against firearms.
On the other hand, it would be possible for a legitimate study of the effects of stealing a domestic partners firearms without a warrant, denying the victim their Constitutionally guaranteed right of due process.
To be sound enough to provide valid results, it would only take a thousand or more victims of State Lautenberg Laws, an equal or larger number of people with no history of domestic abuse of any kind, but who do won firearms, a competent researcher who understands statistics, and a very patient source of funding.
If most cases of real domestic violence were not spur of the moment affairs using any weapon available, the number of victims could be reduced but the relatively large number of victims is necessary so those who perpetrate domestic violence can be studied from a variety of standpoints.
Given that, I am reasonably sure that if an actual study had been conducted, I would have heard of it. But neitgher I nor any of my contacts in the northeast hae heard anything.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics survey, linked immediately above, would have you believe that more than America’s 115 million family units have more than four million instances of “domestic violence” a year.
The actual number of serious physical abuse between domestic partners or children in a home appears to be between 300,000 and 450,000, which is still a serious problem. Further, the person who complains of domestic violence to the police is quite often the abuser, and finally, a majority of hoomicides and “assaults with intent to kill” involve people who are either rivals or jointly engaged in some criminal enterprise. so the situation is more complex than it seems.
Any serious study must have must be large enough, and take all these factors into consideration. Particularly since a surprising percentage of domestic partners are jointly engaged in a criminal enterprise.
But for the most part, the weapon most commonly used in those “domestic assaults” is the most convenient at hand, starting with hot tongue. Ill chosen words can and do hurt as deeply as so many hurled bricks, but we have not reached the point of cutting out an offenders tongue.
Nor have we reached the point of confiscating the most common actual weapon used in domestic conflicts, hands and feet. Nor blunt objects, cords including electrical cords, and knives. All far more commonly used in domestic violence than firearms.
There is a definite need for a real study of domestic violence, but on the basis of present evidence this does not seem to be what we need. An honest and unbiased survey on the causes and effects of domestic violence.
So when we go down the numbers