Packed House Hears Lecture on Gun Control
Brandon Dudley
Philip J. Cook, a professor of economics and sociology at Duke University, spoke Thursday to a standing room only crowd about gun control. Cook lectured about different laws regulating gun control, problems with the laws and ways they could be improved.
One of the first things Cook said at the lecture was that the results he found in his study were actually damaging to the gun control movement, a movement that he is for.
The ineffectiveness of the Brady Act was one of the major findings of the study that Cook felt was damaging.
The Brady Act, established in 1993, is named after Ronald Reagan’s Press Secretary, who was shot in the head when Reagan was shot in 1984.
One of the most well known regulations of the Brady Act is the five day waiting period. During that five day period, those buying guns are subjected to background checks to determine if they are eligible to buy a gun. Those ineligible are convicted felons, those under indictment, illegal aliens, involuntary commitments to mental hospitals and those who have committed acts of domestic violence. These characteristics, according to Cook, "…probably covers the majority of people who commit murder."
What Cook found that hurt the Brady Act was the fact that it had little, if any, affect on gun-related crimes. The number of gun-related crimes did decrease in states that the Brady law affected (those that did not already have the rules in effect), but it also did in the control states (those that already had similar laws).
What it did change was the way that those who committed gun-related violence obtained their weapons. "[The Brady Act] is not stopping murder; it’s stopping interstate gun running," said Cook. Cook went on to say that the sources changed, but the availability and uses of guns remained the same.
Cook suggested changes to the Brady Act as a way to curtail these problems. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has been a lot more vigilant in the past few years, according to Cook. Tracing data to identify gun dealers who do not follow the laws and regulating the black market for guns was one suggestion. Another idea Cook proposed was personalizing guns so that they can only fire when the owner is handling them.
One major change could come around because of the general public, suggested Cook. One of the major problems has been that the public has not seriously demanded safer guns. A public demand would force the gun manufacturers to change the design of guns to make them safer.
After the talk there was a short question and answer period where one member of the audience got up and expressed that he had heard of evidence that the drop in gun-related homicides had nothing to do with gun control laws, but instead that the improvement of medical response has lowered it. According to the audience member, the number of gun-related deaths in Maryland dropped drastically after the opening of the Maryland Shock-Trauma Center. Cook agreed that this could have been a possibility but believed further study should be done before coming to a conclusion.
http://trw.umbc.edu/articles/3224?Newspaper_Session=2b5e1ea5426c682154f2b8594593aede
.....talk about living in an ivory tower!
Brandon Dudley
Philip J. Cook, a professor of economics and sociology at Duke University, spoke Thursday to a standing room only crowd about gun control. Cook lectured about different laws regulating gun control, problems with the laws and ways they could be improved.
One of the first things Cook said at the lecture was that the results he found in his study were actually damaging to the gun control movement, a movement that he is for.
The ineffectiveness of the Brady Act was one of the major findings of the study that Cook felt was damaging.
The Brady Act, established in 1993, is named after Ronald Reagan’s Press Secretary, who was shot in the head when Reagan was shot in 1984.
One of the most well known regulations of the Brady Act is the five day waiting period. During that five day period, those buying guns are subjected to background checks to determine if they are eligible to buy a gun. Those ineligible are convicted felons, those under indictment, illegal aliens, involuntary commitments to mental hospitals and those who have committed acts of domestic violence. These characteristics, according to Cook, "…probably covers the majority of people who commit murder."
What Cook found that hurt the Brady Act was the fact that it had little, if any, affect on gun-related crimes. The number of gun-related crimes did decrease in states that the Brady law affected (those that did not already have the rules in effect), but it also did in the control states (those that already had similar laws).
What it did change was the way that those who committed gun-related violence obtained their weapons. "[The Brady Act] is not stopping murder; it’s stopping interstate gun running," said Cook. Cook went on to say that the sources changed, but the availability and uses of guns remained the same.
Cook suggested changes to the Brady Act as a way to curtail these problems. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has been a lot more vigilant in the past few years, according to Cook. Tracing data to identify gun dealers who do not follow the laws and regulating the black market for guns was one suggestion. Another idea Cook proposed was personalizing guns so that they can only fire when the owner is handling them.
One major change could come around because of the general public, suggested Cook. One of the major problems has been that the public has not seriously demanded safer guns. A public demand would force the gun manufacturers to change the design of guns to make them safer.
After the talk there was a short question and answer period where one member of the audience got up and expressed that he had heard of evidence that the drop in gun-related homicides had nothing to do with gun control laws, but instead that the improvement of medical response has lowered it. According to the audience member, the number of gun-related deaths in Maryland dropped drastically after the opening of the Maryland Shock-Trauma Center. Cook agreed that this could have been a possibility but believed further study should be done before coming to a conclusion.
http://trw.umbc.edu/articles/3224?Newspaper_Session=2b5e1ea5426c682154f2b8594593aede
.....talk about living in an ivory tower!