Now on ScienceBlogs: Open Lab: Time is Ticking!

Seed Media Group

Collective Imagination

Deltoid

Kellermann’s case-control study on gun ownership and homicide

Edgar Suter writes: Dr. Kellermann's subsequent research "finding" that a gun in the home increases risk used a method that cannot distinguish between "cause" and "effect." Kellermann's illogical conclusion would be like finding more insulin in the homes of diabetics...

Search

Profile

Tim Lambert Tim Lambert (deltoidblog AT gmail.com) is a computer scientist at the University of New South Wales.

Wikio - Top Blogs - Sciences

Deltoid Facebook Group

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Full archives

Links

Blogroll

16th

« Edgar Suter’s dishonesty | Main | Kellermann’s case-control study on gun ownership and homicide »

Kellermann’s case-control study on gun ownership and homicide

Category: Kellermann
Posted on: May 14, 1996 1:06 PM, by Tim Lambert

Edgar Suter writes:

Dr. Kellermann's subsequent research "finding" that a gun in the home increases risk used a method that cannot distinguish between "cause" and "effect." Kellermann's illogical conclusion would be like finding more insulin in the homes of diabetics and so concluding that insulin "causes" diabetes. Interestingly Kellermann's own data show that when a homeowner is killed only rarely is the "gun in the home" the instrument of the homeowner's death.

Untrue. See table 1 of the paper.

How then can the gun "cause" the death? Does the gun magnetize murderers to the homeowner's doorstep? Does the gun emit magic rays that cloud the mind of otherwise good people? Of course not.

Amusing speculation, but these bear no relation whatsoever to the actual content of the paper

If we put Kellermann's research in context with all the other scientific evidence, all we can conclude is that fear of crime causes people in high-risk areas to buy guns for protection -- hardly a momentous finding.

The study found that gun ownership was associated with a higher risk of gun homicide and was not associated with a higher risk of homicide by other means. This is inconsistent with your explanation unless you believe that people don't think that guns will protect them against assailants who don't have guns.

Even the National Crime Victimization Survey, one of the studies most cited by the anti-self-defense lobby, shows that guns are the safest and most effective means of protection - safer than not resisting or resisting with less powerful means. All this explains why the 28 states that allow law-abiding, mentally-competent adults to protect themselves outside the home with concealed handguns have lower rates of crime for every category of crime indexed by the FBI.

You have apparently found the method for distinguishing between cause and effect that eluded Dr Kellermann. Can you tell us how you were able to eliminate the possibility that injured crime victims may find it more difficult to resist? Or the possibility that high crime rates might cause states to enact controls on handgun carry?

Share on: Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/93384

ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Enter to win a free copy of The Monty Hall Problem
Visit the Collective Imagination blog
Advertisement
Collective Imagination

© 2006-2009 Seed Media Group LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of Seed Media Group. All rights reserved.

Sites by Seed Media Group: Seed Media Group | ScienceBlogs | SEEDMAGAZINE.COM