Deltoid

Frank Crary said:

[Kennesaw] was a response to Morton Grove’s gun ban. Guess which “worked” better?

If by “worked” you mean that crime rates were lower after the relevant law than before, the answer is Morton Grove.

I’d like to see some data to back up this assertion: Specifically, data concerning gun-related crimes in Morton Grove.

The only noticeable changes were a 45% reduction in with-gun robberies in Morton Grove, and a 100% increase in with-gun assaults in Kennesaw. The actual numbers were small, so this is not particularly meaningful.

The raw data is presented as graphs showing burglaries in Morton Grove and Kennesaw for the period 1976-86. The burglary rate in Kennesaw appears stable, while the burglary rate in Morton Grove is noticeably lower. The paper’s authors did an interrupted time series analysis on the data: the change associated with the Kennesaw ordinance was an insignificant increase of 0.2 burglaries/month,

This is consistent with the claim that the Kennesaw law was “largely symbolic” and almost anyone who didn’t want to own a gun was exempt.

the change associated with the Morton Grove ordinance was a statistically significant decrease of 4.5 burglaries/month,

This, however, is irrelevant, since burglars rarely use firearms: Access to weapons was not the factor in the reduction.

However, burglars often steal firearms, so it is not impossible that the Morton Grove ban caused a reduction in burglaries.

Clearly the Kennesaw ordinance had no effect. It seems unlikely that the Morton Grove ordinance caused the reduction (unless there a significant number of burglars who burgle primarily to get guns). The authors also considered the effect of the Evanston gun ban on burglaries and found a not quite significant (p=.13) decrease.

Which contradicts your earlier assertion that the Morton Grove ban was “effective.”

No it does not. I asserted that there was an reduction in burglaries associated with the ban.

The data does not support the theory that gun ownership deters burglaries.

This assumes that gun ownership was common before the ban, otherwise the change is from voluntary low ownership to mandatory low ownership.

In the US, a gun is used in defence in one out of every 220 burglaries (NCS data), so gun ownership does not directly affect the burglary rate. If it does deter burglary, it must because would-be burglars are worried about being shot by residents. What is important is their perception of the risk. Kleck claims that the publicity given to the Kennesaw law made criminals more aware of their chances of being shot. According to Kleck and Bordua, all the convicts in a poll conducted in an Illinois prison agreed that the Morton Grove ban would make it easier to victimize residents. Nonetheless, there was no decrease in Kennesaw, and no increase in Morton Grove.

Even were ownership common before the ban, it shows, that gun ownership in affluent suburbs with effective police forces and no major crime problem, is not a major factor. This has no real relation to gun ownership in high crime urban areas, or where the police do not respond quickly.

If you have evidence that criminals perceptions of risks are different in these other places, or indeed any evidence for a deterrence effect of gun ownership anywhere on the planet at any time in history, please present it.

bill nelson writes:

“Saturday Night Special” was a term dreamed up by the anti-gunners. Such weapons have not existed for many years.

Scot Thorstad writes:

You should be ashamed Bill, You usually do excellent research. The 1984 (latest edition) of the Random House dictionary defines Saturday Night Special as “a cheap, small caliber handgun that is easily obtainable” of which there are many around.

Andy Freeman said:

The Random House Dictionary is wrong on this one. They often lack the technical knowledge to “define” terms and go with something that sounds good, but is wrong or basically meaningless.

Now here’s an interesting argument. If Andy had claimed that the Earth was flat and standard references on the subject and most other people were wrong, it is conceivable, if unlikely, that he could be correct. However, when he tells us that the dictionary and everyone else is wrong about the meaning of the term “Saturday Night Special” he cannot possibly be correct. Usage defines meaning.

[Claims that last century “Saturday Night Special” referred to weapons owned by “niggers” to defend against racists]

Even if this is true, it only tells us something about what the term meant 100 years ago. Can you provide a current citation using the former meaning?

The usage and meaning of the term “saturday night special” hasn’t changed.

Can you provide a current citation using the former meaning?

After all, it’s still true that there’s nothing that scares white amerika more than a nigger with a gun.

Can you provide a current citation using the former meaning?

Random House’s definition doesn’t make any sense anyway.

Now Andy makes a new claim — not only is Random House wrong, but their definition is nonsense, something like a “square circle”. I can’t wait to see how he backs this up…

Why would a rational control policy encourage crooks to substitute high quality guns for low-quality ones?

Oh, I see, he doesn’t. Andy, this is irrelevant. Tell us what it is about the Random House definition that “doesn’t make sense”. Is it that small calibre handguns cannot be cheap? Or that they are not readily available anywhere? Or what?

The percentage of at-home burglaries is higher in the US (14%) than it is in Canada (10%). If guns account for the difference it is because US burglars are more likely to be armed and feel that they can take on the residents.

US data comes from the National Crime Survey 1979-87. In 14.7% of residential burglaries there was someone at home at the time. (Cited in “Crime and Justice: A Review of Research” v14 p56) The Canadian figure is for Edmonton in 1987 from “Canadian Urban Victimization Survey #9″. OK, the numbers are not strictly comparable, since one is for an Canadian urban area, while the other is the whole US. It is possible that the rate for Canada as a whole is higher than the US, if the rate for Canadian rural areas is much higher than for urban areas, but rural areas have higher levels of gun ownership, so either way we have more at-home burglaries where there are more guns.

Andy Freeman said:

The Random House Dictionary is wrong on this one. They often lack the technical knowledge to “define” terms and go with something that sounds good, but is wrong or basically meaningless.

If Andy had claimed that the Earth was flat and standard references on the subject and most other people were wrong, it is conceivable, if unlikely, that he could be correct. However, when he tells us that the dictionary and everyone else is wrong about the meaning of the term “Saturday Night Special” he cannot possibly be correct. Usage defines meaning.

That’s an interesting leap by Lambert. A dictionary has a definition so he assumes that “everyone” uses it that way. The dictionary’s definition is wrong BECAUSE usage does define meaning and the usage is “guns owned by niggers”.

Everyone I have seen has used the Random House definition. It would be simple to prove that not everyone uses the Random House definition — provide one single example where somebody has used it to mean “guns owned by niggers”.

Can you provide a current citation using the former meaning?

Sure. It’s in the distinction between “good handguns” and “bad handguns”, aka SNS, by people who make the distinction. Good handguns are used by nice people.

This is not a citation. Let’s see a properly referenced quote from someone using SNS to mean “guns owned by niggers”. Here is an example of a citation where SNS is used: (This is the posting that started this thread - note that Rich uses the Random House definition.) Rich Greenberg:

Even better. Have a cheap pistol (saturday nite special) handy. After you off the thief, wrap his hand around the gun and fire a shot or 2.

Andy Freeman said:

Why would a rational control policy encourage crooks to substitute high quality guns for low-quality ones?

Oh, I see, he doesn’t. Andy, this is irrelevant.

It’s quite relevant. SNS is tied to an argument. That argument is that getting rid of “them” will do some good.

It would be relevant if the Random House definition was “evil handguns that we should ban”. But it isn’t. It’s “a cheap, small caliber handgun that is easily obtainable”. There is nothing here about getting rid of them, and yet you claim that this definition is “doesn’t make sense” because “getting rid of them doesn’t make sense”. What doesn’t make sense is your argument.

Is it that small calibre handguns cannot be cheap? Or that they are not readily available anywhere? Or what?

That the characteristics offered don’t distinguish the guns. Large caliber guns can be cheap and available.

You can’t tell the difference between a cheap small calibre gun and a cheap large calibre gun? I’m no firearms expert, but I think I could figure that one out.

Guns for “niggers” are no more available than guns for anyone else.

Again, irrelevant. The Random House definition says nothing about “niggers”.

If Andy had claimed that the Earth was flat and standard references on the subject and most other people were wrong, it is conceivable, if unlikely, that he could be correct. However, when he tells us that the dictionary and everyone else is wrong about the meaning of the term “Saturday Night Special” he cannot possibly be correct. Usage defines meaning.

Andy Freeman writes:

That’s an interesting leap by Lambert. A dictionary has a definition so he assumes that “everyone” uses it that way. The dictionary’s definition is wrong BECAUSE usage does define meaning and the usage is “guns owned by niggers”.

Charles Scripter said:

An interesting (and correct) concept, Andy. I wonder if Tim can explain why my Webster’sUnabridgedDictionary calls “Saturday Night Special” SLANG.

Gee, Charles, is that the entire definition? I’m going to go WAAY out on a limb here and suggest that Webster’s defines it the same way as Random House, else you would have told us about it. Let’s just review what happened:

1. Andy claims that Random House definition is wrong. Check.

2. Charles looks up the definition in his Webster’s. Check.

3. Charles discovers that Webster’s gives the same definition as Random House. Check.

4. Charles concludes that Andy is right and Random House is wrong. Whee!

Hey Charles, you do realise that you could have saved yourself the bother of actually opening the dictionary? If the dictionary had agreed with Andy, you would have concluded that he was right. It didn’t agree with him, but still you concluded that he was right. Notice that what the dictionary actually says is irrelevant to your conclusion that Andy is right. So don’t just stop with Webster’s – you can cite every dictionary that you haven’t looked at in your proof that Andy is right.

Could it be because it’s definition is is not unique, or widely accepted?…

Gee, when you opened up the dictionary at the S’s, I think you should have looked up “slang” instead of “Saturday Night Special” (we already know that you were wasting your time when you looked up SNS). Since “slang” does not mean that the definition is not unique or widely accepted, the answer to your question is NO.

Does “cheap” mean “shoddy”, or “inexpensive”?

An interesting point is that when they were banning import of “Saturday Night Specials”, one of them included in the list was the Walther PPK. Now there is nothing SHODDY about Walther’s manufacture, and they make some very fine hardware; Likewise, there is nothing INEXPENSIVE about a Walther, either. They were generally some of the most expensive pistols on the market. Nor was the PPK “readily available”; It was quite popular (as fine equipment tends to be), and getting delivery was difficult. I can only assume that the PPK’s CRIME was that it is “small and easily concealable”.

Since you claim that a SNS is a handgun used by a black, this is irrelevant. Now if you could demonstrate that Walther PPKs were owned exclusively by blacks, you would be on to something.

Now, Tim, what exactly is a “Saturday Night Special”?…

a cheap, small caliber handgun that is easily obtainable