Steve Verdon comments on the Ayres and Donahue study I cited yesterday. Unfortunately he doesn't seem to have understood what their conclusions were. Try reading the abstract, Steve:
"Estimating more statistically preferred disaggregated models on more complete county data, we show that in most states shall issue laws have been associated with more crime and that the apparent stimulus to crime tends to be especially strong for those states that adopted in the last decade."
Now this study is correlational, so it certainly doesn't prove that carry laws cause more crime, but if you believed that Lott's correlational study proved that more guns caused less crime you should also believe that Ayres and Donahue have now proved that more guns caused more crime.
More like this
Steve Verdon has responded to my critique of More Guns, Less Crime.
Verdon starts by claiming that Lott's argument doesn't depend on their being more guns or less crime. He argues that you just need "more people carrying (concealed) existing guns legally" and that Lott found a…
This is a long post, so I'll start with two summaries. One sentence summary: It looks as if Lott might have been caught cooking his "more guns, less crime" data.
One paragraph summary: Ian Ayres and John Donohue wrote a paper that found that, if anything, concealed carry laws lead…
Mark Kleiman has posted some comments from John Donohue about the Stanford Law Review controversy. Donohue isn't even sure what the changed word was that caused Lott to withdraw his name. (Details are here if you are interested.) And like the rest of us, Donohue is puzzled as to…
On July 12 The Columbus Dispatch published a letter from Paul van Doorn replying to an earlier letter from David Mayer that I commented on. Here is an extract (hyperlinks added by me):
Mayer claimed the research of economist John Lott establishes that "violent-crime rates fall after right-to-…