Podcast Summary
Steve Levitt's research on crime and its causes: Economist Steve Levitt found that while certain factors can impact crime rates, the economy generally doesn't. Mass shootings, despite the availability of guns, remain relatively low in number.
Economist Steve Levitt, a co-author and friend, has spent years studying crime and its causes. He's found that while factors like more police and prisons, and the legalization of abortion, can impact crime rates, the economy generally does not. Levitt and Dubner were working together when the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting occurred, and while it was a horrific event, Levitt, given his knowledge of crime, wasn't entirely surprised. He's more surprised by the relatively small number of mass shootings considering the availability of guns. According to Mother Jones' database, there have been approximately two mass shootings with an average of 16.5 fatalities per year since 1982. This is a small fraction of the 11,000 annual gun murders. Despite the prevalence of guns in the US, the number of mass shootings remains relatively low.
Mass shootings vs overall gun violence: Though mass shootings have increased, overall gun violence has decreased, with most incidents stemming from drug-related crimes, domestic disputes, and suicides. Policies addressing new guns won't reduce overall gun supply, effective measures include gun buybacks.
While mass shootings with multiple fatalities have been increasing in the U.S., it's important to put this in context of the significant decrease in overall crime and gun violence over the past few decades. Most gun violence is not from mass shootings but from drug-related incidents, domestic disputes, and suicides. The U.S. has more gun violence than other rich countries due to higher crime rates and greater gun availability. However, guns are durable goods, and policies addressing only new guns won't reduce the overall gun supply. Effective measures could include gun buybacks, but their efficacy is debated, as taking care of guns well means they can last for decades.
Gun buybacks ineffective in reducing gun violence: Gun buybacks primarily attract individuals with unwanted or inherited guns, not those involved in criminal activities. Resources would be better spent addressing root causes of gun violence.
Gun buybacks are an ineffective solution to reducing gun violence. These programs, which offer small sums or therapy in exchange for guns, primarily attract individuals who no longer want or need their firearms. The guns turned in are often inoperable or inherited, and they're not the ones used in criminal activities. Furthermore, the risk of a gun causing harm is significantly lower than other common household items, such as swimming pools. Despite common beliefs, a swimming pool poses a higher risk to child safety than a gun does. The resources spent on gun buybacks would be more effectively used addressing the root causes of gun violence.
Focusing on gun control may not yield substantial results: Economist Steve Levitt suggests addressing motor vehicle fatalities and implementing heavy penalties for gun-related crimes for greater impact on saving lives
While gun violence is a significant issue with thousands of lives lost each year, the political solutions proposed to address it may not be effective. Economist Steve Levitt argues that the focus on gun control legislation may not yield substantial results, and suggests instead that efforts be directed towards addressing motor vehicle fatalities, where policies related to drunk driving and seat belt use have had a greater impact on saving lives. Levitt emphasizes the importance of heavy penalties for gun-related crimes to deter their usage. Overall, the discussion highlights the complexity of gun violence and the need for innovative and impactful solutions.
Understanding the complex relationship between gun availability and gun violence: Focusing on reducing the use of guns for violent crimes, rather than targeting the guns themselves, may be more effective in reducing gun violence.
The relationship between gun availability and gun violence is complex, and efforts to reduce gun violence through gun control policies may not result in a one-for-one decrease. Steven Levitt suggests that the focus should be on reducing the use of guns for violent crimes, rather than targeting the guns themselves. He also argues that gun violence may be a hidden cost of living in a very free society, where individuals have the right to go almost anywhere and do almost anything. However, according to Levitt, the treatment of guns in modern America is largely due to historical accidents, such as their inclusion in the Constitution, and the fact that alcohol and cigarettes are legal while marijuana is not. He does not advocate for turning the country into a police state, but encourages a more nuanced understanding of the role of guns in society.
Gun control debate rooted in personal values and perceptions of risk: Despite efforts to curb gun violence, deeply entrenched beliefs and values make progress challenging. Focusing on mental health and access to care could be more effective.
The gun control debate is deeply rooted in personal values and perceptions of risk. Those who advocate for gun rights and those who advocate for gun control hold strong, opposing views. For those who don't own guns and view them as repugnant, the risk of gun violence is perceived as extremely low. The Obama administration's efforts to curtail gun violence through initiatives like "Now is the Time" may not be effective due to the deeply entrenched beliefs and values on both sides. If invited to lead the administration's anti-violence czar team, I would decline due to the challenging nature of the problem and the difficulty of making significant progress in a cost-effective manner. Instead, I believe that addressing mental health issues and improving access to mental health care could be a more productive approach to reducing gun violence.
Mental health and gun violence: Complex issue with potential unintended consequences: Policymakers must consider potential consequences of any changes in mental health and gun violence policies, as some solutions may limit therapeutic relationships or worsen situations
Addressing mental health and gun violence is a complex issue with potential unintended consequences. While some mass shooters may have mental health issues, it's unclear if they would have been institutionalized before committing their acts. A potential solution suggested was revisiting the policy of institutionalizing severely mentally ill individuals. However, a mental health reporting law, like New York's SAFE Act, which requires therapists to report dangerous patients to the county, could have unintended consequences. Some mentally ill individuals might withhold information from therapists, fearing gun confiscation and institutionalization. This could limit the therapeutic relationship and potentially worsen the situation. Ultimately, it's crucial to consider the potential consequences of any policy changes in the context of mental health and gun violence.
Guns can increase uncertainty and potential for violence: The presence of guns can lead to more conflict and uncertainty, contradicting the belief that they deter violence
The presence of guns can have the opposite effect of deterrence and instead increase uncertainty and potential for violence. In the past, disputes were often resolved through physical fights where the outcome was clear, reducing the need for fights. However, with the introduction of guns, anyone can potentially win a fight, leading to more uncertainty and potential for conflict. This idea, explored in the book "Fistic Night's Gun," challenges the common belief that guns reduce violence through deterrence. Ultimately, the tragic reality of gun violence, as seen in incidents like school shootings, affects us all regardless of our stance on guns.
Addressing gun violence: Focus on individuals, not guns: Instead of debating gun control, focus on better parenting, empathy, and creating a more compassionate society to address the root cause of gun violence
To address the issue of gun violence, it's essential to focus on the root cause: the individuals committing violent acts. While political debates and gun control proposals may seem appealing, they often lack the ability to bring about significant change. Instead, efforts should be made towards better parenting, promoting empathy, and creating a more compassionate society. These solutions may not be easy, but they address the underlying cause of gun violence. As the number of guns in the US is likely to increase, it's crucial to adapt and find alternative ways to tackle this issue within the given constraints. Tune in to the next episode of Freakonomics Radio for a discussion on who pays for our highways and bridges, and how advances in fuel efficiency and electric vehicles impact transportation funding.
