Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with fast, free delivery
Amazon Prime includes:
Fast, FREE Delivery is available to Prime members. To join, select "Try Amazon Prime and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery" below the Add to Cart button.
Amazon Prime members enjoy:- Cardmembers earn 5% Back at Amazon.com with a Prime Credit Card.
- Unlimited Free Two-Day Delivery
- Streaming of thousands of movies and TV shows with limited ads on Prime Video.
- A Kindle book to borrow for free each month - with no due dates
- Listen to over 2 million songs and hundreds of playlists
- Unlimited photo storage with anywhere access
Important: Your credit card will NOT be charged when you start your free trial or if you cancel during the trial period. If you're happy with Amazon Prime, do nothing. At the end of the free trial, your membership will automatically upgrade to a monthly membership.
$14.95$14.95
Ships from: Amazon.com Sold by: Amazon.com
$10.00$10.00
Ships from: Amazon Sold by: Alfar Deals
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
OK
Gun Control Myths: How politicians, the media, and botched "studies" have twisted the facts on gun control Paperback – July 3, 2020
Purchase options and add-ons
- Print length187 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- Publication dateJuly 3, 2020
- Dimensions6.69 x 0.47 x 9.61 inches
- ISBN-13979-8663221535
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Frequently bought together
Similar items that may deliver to you quickly
Product details
- ASIN : B08C95PD1K
- Publisher : Independently published (July 3, 2020)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 187 pages
- ISBN-13 : 979-8663221535
- Item Weight : 11.2 ounces
- Dimensions : 6.69 x 0.47 x 9.61 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #403,621 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #359 in Social Sciences Research
- #1,252 in Criminology (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author
Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonReviews with images
-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
John sometimes uses relatively simple but logical criticisms of others’ claims about gun violence, such as distinguishing between justifiable homicides and murders, or gun ownership versus gun possession. At other times, he uses more sophisticated techniques and arguments such as noting the statistical problems with simple cross-sectional or time-series analysis. For example, if it is true that Australia had a declining firearms homicide and suicide rate prior to its gun buyback program, then simply comparing before and after rates and attributing any difference to the buyback program is illogical. Not content with just criticizing, John also works to correct the errors in the claims and studies he reviews. In Chapter 6, for instance, John details the results of his intensive data collection on mass public shootings to show that the United States’ relative standing in that ranking is not as bad as media stories and some politicians would have us believe. He includes an appendix with documentation of mass shootings cases that were not included in other studies and therefore affected the findings. His Chapter 8 on the differences in beliefs between economists, criminologists, and public health researchers is very intriguing. While I am not surprised by the findings (given the different training that these researchers get), I had not seen any previous study on the issue. This is another example of John bringing his creativity and willingness to collect unique data to the discussion. Chapter 4, “The Heroes that the News Media Doesn’t Cover” is another example of John’s predilection for data-collection. While these stories of people using guns in self-defense or to stop a crime are anecdotes, the totality nonetheless impresses. Even more instructive is how many of these stories are either neglected by the media or reported selectively.
This book should be read by anyone concerned about gun violence and, most importantly, by anyone who writes about gun violence. The book might not change many opinions, as positions in the gun violence and control argument are set pretty hard…but perhaps even those with the firmest-held beliefs will be forced to reflect and think carefully about some of John’s data, analysis and conclusions. They should, if they are truly interested in the truth.
There are some things I would quibble with in this book, and some areas where I would want more data or analysis. But John Lott has always made me think more carefully about my positions, and this book is no exception to that rule. I hope that many will read the book and engage in the argument.
From the forward by Andrew Pollack to the exposé of the lies on mass murders to the unethical practices of some in academia, John Lott presents a volume that is not only easy to read but filled with facts that can allow anyone to challenge misinformed and biased statements!
This book will certainly roil the anti-gun community because it exposes the soft underbelly of their arguments with incontrovertible fact. Once you read this volume you will also come to grips with the very real fact that gun control is a killer of innocent citizens and that any responsible legislator should reconsider their support for these violations of citizens’ rights!
We have seen how Americans have responded to the turmoil in America by choosing to exercise their Second Amendment rights in an unprecedented level! While at the same time, we have seen how some politicians have overtly sought to eliminate, restrict, and, in some cases, confiscate the property and rights of law-abiding citizens. Examining these issues in the light of the facts in this book will add new meaning to everyone who reads Gun Control Myths.
We owe John Lott a debt of gratitude for putting this information together during this challenging time in our society but it is a must read for every Second Amendment advocate!
Kim Stolfer
President, Firearms Owners Against Crime (Pennsylvania)
An important illustration of the point involves Lott’s Chapter 4. It lists a series of cases where a concealed-gun permit holder helped to thwart a crime. Lott describes about two dozen such cases. All, I thought, were interesting and important enough to be described on a national newscast. Yet, I had heard of only one or two of them. Here’s one that’s fairly representative of Lott’s list:
“A shooting at a back-to-school event was quickly stopped by a concealed handgun permit holder. Approximately 200 people, mostly children, were present at the event. ‘Based on the information that we’ve gathered, this person stepped in and saved a lot of people’s lives,’ Titusville [Florida] Police Sgt. William Amos told reporters. The Sergeant also told another paper: ‘He’s a hero. This park was filled with families and children, and, at that time, it was an active shooter situation for him and he was trained enough to deal with it—and he did.’”
Lott opines with an understatement: “The entire gun control debate would likely be dramatically different if the national media would cover some of the heroic actions of permit holders.”
Top reviews from other countries
I find the language of this book very clear, so I think that everyone could read this book, to have strong argument and know about the facts.
Chapter 2: Fig's. 7 to 12 all have outliers, so they should show 2 trendlines with and without the outliers with an explanation of the nature of the outliers and why without is the best presentation - it is not reasonable for 3 or 4 data points to warp the trend represented by 30 others.
However, that data and much of the rest is not relevant to the issue. You can only compare like with like. Most of the international comparisons mentioned for pro/anti-gun don't. You might compare USA with Norway which both have large numbers of guns in the hands of citizens but not with the UK which does not, unless your objective is to show what can be achieved with different gun laws (not changes to gun laws).
Few of the data comparisons are reliable since they vary markedly in what events are included/excluded.
Much of Chapter 8 is 'my data collection methods are better than yours' - you can almost hear the reply - 'oh no they aren't'.
Although there is much well referenced work there are many general statements of fact that have no supporting evidence.
Being British I will look at data that relates to the UK.
The data presented in the graphs referenced to 'crimeresearch.org' - 'murder-and-homicide-rates-before-and-after-gun-bans' in '/2016/04/' are misleading. The left-hand axis does not go to zero so visually magnifies the changes. The 'Did homicide rate fall after Britain Banned Handguns' chart is not relevant since only about 6% of UK homicides are by handguns - see the chart below it. Handgun homicides are almost exclusively by illegal handguns held by gangs and reflect gang warfare and so is not a target for general gun legislation. Legislation targeting homicides is designed for the 94% - knives, domestic violence etc. involving strangulation, blunt force trauma. The time lines for that chart and the one below are slightly different to make them appear to reflect one another but you can see years when gun homicides go down when homicides go up. The 2003/04 peak of homicides, up about 50%, is when gun homicides are plummeting down. The data is better shown by searching for 'Firearm Crime Statistics: England and Wales - Commons Library', Click on 'Download Full Report' for CBP-7654.pdf, scroll to '2. Homicide by shooting'. You can see that massive % changes occur e.g. 1979-1980-1981, 50 to 15 to 30, 70% decrease then 100% increase. This is because the numbers are so low a few incidents, usually of gang warfare, have a large effect.
Lott does not consider the reason for the 1997 legislation. It followed the 1996 Dunblane massacre of 16 children and a teacher with handguns. The purpose of the legislation was to assuage the public's view that 'something must be done' and to prevent any similar massacre. It has been completely successful. The only subsequent massacre in 2006 involved files/shotguns.
It is notable that the 50% increase in UK homicides that Lott refers to above is stated as a 5 to 6 fold increase in Chapter 9 - Conclusion. This represents the accuracy of some of Lott's work.
Für alle deutschsprachigen Interessenten dieses leider nur auf Englisch erhältlichen Buches mache ich hier eine ausführliche Inhaltsangabe:
Kapitel 1 spricht eine größere Zahl von Themen rund um den Waffenbesitz der amerikanischen Bürger an. Unter anderem geht es um die Tricks, mit denen die Mainstreammedien den privaten Waffenbesitz immer wieder in ein schlechtes Licht rücken. Es geht um waffenfreie Zonen, in denen seit 1950 94% aller Amokläufe stattfanden. Außerdem berichtet Lott, wie 2019 seine Twitterkonten ohne nachvollziehbaren Grund für 2 Monate gesperrt wurden.
In Kapitel 2 befasst sich Lott mit drei Beiträgen der Waffengegner, die im Internet eine hohe Clickzahl haben, immer noch abrufbar sind und auch immer noch aktualisiert werden Sie stammen von Vox, der New York Times und der BBC. Auf 90 Seiten, unterteilt in 21 Abschnitte macht sich Lott daran, die Märchen der Waffengegner zu zerlegen. Meistens ist es nicht besonders schwierig zu beweisen, dass Tatsachen verdreht wurden (z.B. die Waffenbesitzrate in der Schweiz und Israel), dass man sich auf dreiste Weise nur die Rosinen herausgepickt hat (Folgen der Aufhebung eines Waffengesetzes in Missouri und Verschärfung eines Waffengesetzes in Connecticut) oder dass man falsche Vorstellungen erzeugt hat indem man Dinge weglässt (z.B. dass die Tötungsrate in Australien bereits viele Jahre vor dem Gun Buyback deutlich fiel).
Das dritte Kapitel befasst sich mit dem, was man in den USA Mass Public Shooting (MPS) nennt. Die Übersetzung „Amoklauf“ ist nicht wirklich treffend, wird aber relativ oft korrekt sein. Ein MPS ist laut Definition des FBI eine Schießerei im öffentlichen Raum (also nicht auf Privatgelände) bei der mindestens 4 Personen ums Leben kamen. Ausgeschlossen sind hier tödliche Schießereien zwischen Gangs und Raubmorde. Es sollen nur jene Fälle erfasst werden, in denen jemand im öffentlichen Raum möglichst viele Menschen töten will. Winnenden und Erfurt in Deutschland wären typische MPS.
In diesem Kapitel wird das MPS unter verschiedenen Gesichtspunkten beleuchtet:
Welche Rolle spielen sog. Assault Weapons (militärisch aussehende Halbautomaten) und sog. High Capacity-Magazine? Weitere Fragen sind: Welche Rolle spielen waffenfreie Zonen? Was weiß man über die geistige Gesundheit der Täter? Wie alt sind die Täter im Schnitt, wie ist ihre politische und religiöse Überzeugung usw?
Kapitel 4 widmet sich den unbekannten Helden des Alltags. Gemeint sind die amerikanischen Waffenscheinbesitzer. Etwa 20 Millionen US-Bürger, haben eine CCL, eine Concealed Carry License, also einen Waffenschein. [Zum Vergleich: in Deutschland sind es ca. 9.500 (kein Schreibfehler!)] Sie werden von den Mainstreammedien zu Unrecht immer wieder als Gefahr für die öffentliche Sicherheit dargestellt. Nicht selten retten sie aber anderen Menschen mit ihrer Waffe das Leben. Dabei setzen sie immer auch ihr eigenes Leben auf das Spiel. Genau diese Fälle werden von den Medien konsequent verschwiegen. Daher findet sich in Kapitel 4 eine Sammlung solcher Fälle. Würden die Medien darüber berichten, würde das die Waffendebatte in USA in eine ganz andere Richtung lenken.
In Kapitel 5 nimmt sich Lott das FBI vor. Er wirft ihm vor, dass es sich politisch nicht neutral verhält. Oft werden Daten zur Kriminalität so erhoben und verarbeitet, dass sie für eine waffenfeindliche Agenda nutzbar werden. Sind die Demokraten an der Macht, verschlimmert sich das Problem. Mich persönlich hat dabei besonders erstaunt, dass das FBI Teile seiner Daten offenbar mit Google sammelt anstatt die Daten zur Kriminalität ausschließlich selbst zu erheben.
In Kapitel 6 geht es um den alten Vorwurf, die USA würden im Hinblick auf Amokläufe im internationalen Vergleich besonders schlecht dastehen. US-Medien berichten regelmäßig sehr ausführlich, wenn sich ein MPS in USA ereignet, über MPS, die sich im Ausland ereignen, wird aber wenig oder gar nicht berichtet. Schon dadurch entsteht bei vielen Amerikanern der Eindruck, die USA wären das „Land der Massenschießereien“. (Linke) Politiker versuchen diesen Eindruck zu verstärken und auch Akademiker haben oft keine Hemmungen, die passenden Studien zu liefern. Lott untersucht in diesem Kapitel stellvertretend die Studie des Kriminologen Adam Lankford, da sie große mediale Aufmerksamkeit bekommen hatte und fördert ihre Fehler zu Tage. Im Anschluss daran ermittelt Lott eigene Zahlen für MPS in den USA und weltweit. Lott kommt zu einem ganz anderen Ergebnis wie Lankford und die Mainstreammedien: Die USA liegen bei MPS entweder im globalen Durchschnitt oder darunter, auf keinen Fall weit darüber wie die Waffengegner in den USA immer behaupten.
Kapitel 7 geht der Frage nach, ob es wahr ist, dass der medizinische Sektor in USA nicht ausreichend zu Waffen forschen kann, weil ihm die hierzu notwendigen Geldmittel vorenthalten werden. Immer wieder behaupten Waffengegner, die National Rifle Association (NRA) verhindere, dass Mediziner zu Waffengewalt und Waffensicherheit forschen. Es stimmt nicht. Die NRA kann nur staatliche Zuschüsse an medizinische Einrichtungen beeinflussen. Sie hat keinen Einfluss auf die zahlreich fließenden privaten Spenden von Stiftungen und Milliardären, mit denen (in der Regel) waffenfeindliche Arbeiten unterstützt werden. Auch Arbeiten im Bereich Kriminologie und Ökonomie zum Thema Waffen kann die NRA gar nicht beeinflussen. Der Einfluss der NRA in diesem Bereich ist sehr gering, wird aber von der Gegenseite mächtig hochgespielt.
Kapitel 8 geht einer interessanten Frage nach, die ich mir auch schon mehrfach gestellt habe, nämlich warum in der amerikanischen Waffendebatte so viele Studien aus dem medizinischen Bereich kommen. Um das herauszufinden, hat Lott Akademikern aus den Bereichen Medizin, Kriminologie und Wirtschaftswissenschaften eine Reihe von Fragen zu Waffen gestellt, die die Amerikaner besonders bewegen. Aus den Antworten war klar ersichtlich, dass Mediziner Waffenbesitz kritischer sehen und vermehrte Kontrolle stärker befürworten als Kriminologen und Ökonomen. Damit ist die Frage beantwortet, warum Studien von Medizinern zu Waffen bei der Förderung Vorrang haben und warum sie in den Mainstreammedien so oft eine Rolle spielen.
Kapitel 9 – Schluss
Das Buch schließt mit dem Beispiel Mexiko, einem OECD-Land. Mexiko hat eines der strengsten Waffengesetze der Welt. Seit 1972 gibt es in Mexiko nur noch ein einziges Waffengeschäft. Nur 1% der Mexikaner besitzt eine waffenrechtliche Erlaubnis. Dennoch hatte Mexiko in den ersten acht Monaten des Jahres 2019 unfassbare 23.063 Morde zu verzeichnen. Das ist das 6-fache der US-Rate.
Mexiko zeigt es (neben anderen Ländern) in aller Deutlichkeit: Strenge Waffengesetze sind kein Allheilmittel zur Bekämpfung von Kriminalität. In der Realität werden dadurch immer die gesetzestreuen Bürger entwaffnet, während die Kriminellen weiterhin bewaffnet sind, in Mexiko nicht selten sogar mit Vollautomaten, also Kriegswaffen.
ENGLISH TRANSLATION
Lott provides all those facts that the media and politicians are not telling you
Lott's books are among the most important and best in the American gun debate. You can easily see it in the number of reviews and stars awarded.
Chapter 1 covers a wider range of issues surrounding gun ownership by American citizens. It addresses, among other things, the tricks that the mainstream media repeatedly use to make private gun ownership appear in a bad light. It's about gun-free zones, where 94% of all shooting rampages have taken place since 1950. Also, Lott recounts how in 2019 his Twitter accounts were suspended for 2 months for no understandable reason.
In Chapter 2, Lott looks at three posts by gun opponents that have a high click count on the Internet, are still retrievable, and are still being updated. They come from Vox, the New York Times and the BBC. In 90 pages divided into 21 sections, Lott sets out to dismantle the myths of gun opponents. For the most part, it's not particularly difficult to prove that facts have been distorted (e.g., gun ownership rates in Switzerland and Israel), that people have brazenly cherry-picked (consequences of repealing a gun law in Missouri and tightening a gun law in Connecticut), or that misconceptions have been created by leaving things out (e.g., that homicide rates in Australia dropped significantly many years before the Gun Buyback).
The third chapter deals with what is called Mass Public Shooting (MPS) in the US. [...] An MPS is defined by the FBI as a shooting in a public space (i.e., not on private property) that resulted in the deaths of at least 4 people. This excludes fatal shootings between gangs and robbery homicides. Only those cases in which someone wants to kill as many people as possible in a public space should be recorded. Winnenden and Erfurt in Germany would be typical MPS.
In this chapter, the MPS will be examined from different points of view:
What role do so-called assault weapons (military-looking semi-automatics) and so-called high capacity magazines play? Other questions are: What role do gun-free zones play? What is known about the mental health of the perpetrators? What is the average age of the perpetrators, what are their political and religious beliefs, etc.?
Chapter 4 is devoted to the unknown heroes of everyday life. We are referring to American concealed carry permit holders. About 20 million US citizens have a CCL, a concealed carry license. [For comparison: in Germany there are about 9,500 (no typo!)] They are unjustly portrayed by the mainstream media again and again as a danger to public safety. Not infrequently, however, they save other people's lives with their weapons. In doing so, they inevitably put their own lives on the line as well. It is precisely these cases that the media consistently conceal. Therefore, a collection of such cases can be found in Chapter 4. If the media reported on them, it would take the gun debate in the U.S. in a completely different direction.
In Chapter 5, Lott takes on the FBI. He accuses it of not being politically neutral. It often collects and processes crime data in ways that make it useful for an anti-gun agenda. When Democrats are in power, the problem worsens. Personally, I was particularly struck by the fact that the FBI appears to be collecting parts of its data with Google rather than collecting crime data exclusively itself.
Chapter 6 deals with the old claim that the U.S. compares particularly poorly with the rest of the world when it comes to shooting rampages. U.S. media regularly report in great detail when an MPS occurs in the U.S., but little or no coverage is given to MPS that occur abroad. This alone creates the impression among many Americans that the U.S. is the "land of mass shootings". (Leftist) politicians try to reinforce this impression, and academics often have no inhibitions about providing the appropriate studies either. In this chapter, Lott examines criminologist Adam Lankford's study by proxy, since it had received considerable media attention, and brings to light its flaws. Lott then produces his own figures for MPS in the U.S. and worldwide. Lott comes to a very different conclusion than Lankford and the mainstream media: the U.S. is either at or below the global average for MPS, definitely not far above as gun opponents in the U.S. always claim.
Chapter 7 explores the question of whether it is true that the medical sector in the U.S. cannot conduct sufficient research on guns because it is denied the funding necessary to do so. Gun opponents repeatedly claim that the National Rifle Association (NRA) prevents medical professionals from conducting research on gun violence and gun safety. It isn't true. The NRA can only influence government funding to medical institutions. It has no influence over the numerous private donations flowing from foundations and billionaires that (usually) support anti-gun work. Nor can the NRA influence work in criminology and economics on guns at all. The NRA's influence in this area is very small, but is played up mightily by the opposing side.
Chapter 8 explores an interesting question that I have also asked myself several times, namely why so many studies in the American gun debate come from the medical field. To find out, Lott asked academics in the fields of medicine, criminology, and economics a series of questions about guns that particularly concern Americans. From the answers, it was clear that medical professionals are more critical of gun ownership and more supportive of increased control than criminologists and economists. This answers the question of why studies by medical professionals on guns are prioritized for funding and why they feature so often in the mainstream media.
Chapter 9 - Conclusion
The book concludes with the example of Mexico, an OECD country. Mexico has one of the strictest gun laws in the world. Since 1972, there has been only one gun store in Mexico. Only 1% of Mexicans hold a gun permit. Yet Mexico had an incredible 23,063 murders in the first eight months of 2019. That's 6 times the U.S. rate.
Mexico (among other countries) shows it very clearly: strict gun laws are not a panacea for fighting crime. In reality, it always disarms the law-abiding citizens, while the criminals continue to be armed, in Mexico frequently even with fully automatic weapons, i.e. weapons of war.
Translated with DeepL com (free version)
"La France interdite" de Laurent orbertone parle lui de pas mal de raisons (de chancespour la Galaxie..) de s'armer...