Yet Another Refutation of the More Guns, Less Crime Hypothesis – With Some Help From Moody and Marvell
Abstract
Moody and Marvell’s recent article in this journal examines a regressionbased calculation in Ayres and Donohue (2003a) that indicated, based on statespecific estimates that were generated using county data from 1977-1997, that right-to-carry concealed handguns (RTC) laws were associated with higher overall crime costs. Moody and Marvell criticize that calculation for not extrapolating our trend estimates further, but since we had limited post-passage data for roughly half of our states, we were uncomfortable projecting crime trends far beyond our data. Our caution has now been validated, as the sharp crime declines of the 1990s disappeared after 2000. Moody and Marvell now repeat our state-specific regression-based calculation using county data through the year 2000 (but with a slightly altered specification), which finds that RTC laws have increased crime costs by $3 billion (in total) for 23 of the 24 jurisdictions they evaluated (Florida is the exception). Nonetheless, they conclude that RTC laws are “generally beneficial†because they claim that the Florida RTC laws (inexplicably) reduced crime costs by $31 billion. But the one paper to focus on the impact of Florida’s RTC law – of which Marvell was a coauthor! – found that the law had no impact on crime. If Marvell’s Florida paper is correct, then the Moody and Marvell findings are reconciled with Ayres and Donohue’s Table 14 showing RTC laws increase crime costs (Ayres and Donohue 2003a). We also show that estimating aggregate (rather than state-specific) effects of RTC laws using the same data and same specification of Moody and Marvell provides statistically significant evidence of increases in aggravated assault, and no evidence of crime decreases. Similarly, Ayres and Donohue (2003b) showed that, after we corrected some coding errors in John Lott’s data set used in Plassmann and Whitley (2003), their aggregated analysis on 1977-2000 county data also showed statistically significant evidence only of crime increases from RTC laws.Download Info
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.Bibliographic Info
Article provided by Econ Journal Watch in its journal Econ Journal Watch.
Volume (Year): 6 (2009)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
Pages: 35-59
Contact details of provider:
Postal: MSN 3G4, Fairfax, VA 22030
Phone: (703) 993-1151
Fax: 703.993.1133
Web page: http://econjwatch.org/
More information through EDIRC
Related research
Keywords: Law and economics; criminal justice policy; guns and crime;Find related papers by JEL classification:
- K14 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Criminal Law
- K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law
References
No references listed on IDEASYou can help add them by filling out this form.
Citations
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.Cited by:
- Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2011.
"Econometric Estimates of Deterrence of the Death Penalty: Facts or Ideology?,"
Kyklos,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 448-478, 08.
- Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2011. "Econometric Estimates of Deterrence of the Death Penalty: Facts or Ideology?," CESifo Working Paper Series 3443, CESifo Group Munich.
- Kirchgässner, Gebhard, 2011. "Econometric Estimates of Deterrence of the Death Penalty: Facts or Ideology," Economics Working Paper Series 1115, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
Lists
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ejw:journl:v:6:y:2009:i:1:p:35-59For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jason Briggeman) The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Jason Briggeman to update the entry or send us the correct address.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

