Firearm Background Check Study

A recent study by the John Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research found that firearm related homicides have increased 23% since Missouri repealed the state's universal background check law in 2007. This has meant an increase of 55 to 63 murders annually in the years between 2008 - 2012. Homicides have been relatively flat in neighboring states and decreased 5% nationally during that same time period.

"Webster and colleagues found that the spike in murders in Missouri following the PTP handgun law repeal only occurred for murders in Missouri committed with a firearm and was widespread across the state's counties. F­­ollowing the change in Missouri's gun laws, none of the states bordering Missouri experienced significant increases in murder rates and the U.S. murder rate actually declined by over five percent. The researchers also analyzed annual data from death certificates through 2010 compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and determined that the repeal of Missouri's PTP law was associated with a twenty-three percent increase in firearm homicides rates."
http://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases ... rders.html

So the sudden upswing in Chicago murder stats is due to them adding Firearm Owner Identification cards in Illinois?
And the upswing in Chicago homicides are much bigger statistically than the Missouri numbers.
Watch next year, the murder rate in Chicago will decline at the same time the state finally gets legal concealed carry. Will that convince you that concealed carry saves lives, or will it more likely mean that the drug war is over?

Dog, you have to stop it with the junk science studies. Murder rates rise and fall for many reasons and trying to equate them to one factor is idiotic at best. It takes only one serial killer to skew everything up or the meth wars in rural Missouri.

Right, John Hopkins, one of the premier research universities in the world is a purveyor of "junk science". As opposed to your non sequitur babble. In this study, there were no "serial killing" by meth heads mentioned. Instead it used a five year sample, compared it with neighboring states to arrive at the study. 23% increase is sizable compared with flat if not declining trends in neighboring states and nationally.
No one other than yourself even mentioned concealed carry. The subject, if you are reading challenged, is universal background checks.

Is there any doubt that universal background checks will inhibit the flow of firearms to criminals compared to zero background checks?

Someone is math challenged. From 55 to 63 is an increase of about 14.5%, not 23%.

And like I said, run the numbers in Illinois. Murder rates are very inconsistent and hard to get a general pattern from. Most likely the liberals at John Hopkins came in with a pre-determined outcome and worked the numbers to get a result.
Lets run the same numbers in Colorado five years after background checks are required on all private firearm transactions. Think we will see a big change in the murder rate?

PrintSmith wrote: Someone is math challenged. From 55 to 63 is an increase of about 14.5%, not 23%.

Someone is reading comprehension challenged. The increase ranges from between 55 to 63 homicides annually from pre repeal of the background checks.

PrintSmith wrote: Someone is math challenged. From 55 to 63 is an increase of about 14.5%, not 23%.

Someone is reading comprehension challenged. I did not state that there was an increase FROM 55 to 63. I stated that there was an increase OF 55 to 63 annually.

FredHayek wrote: And like I said, run the numbers in Illinois. Murder rates are very inconsistent and hard to get a general pattern from. Most likely the liberals at John Hopkins came in with a pre-determined outcome and worked the numbers to get a result.
Lets run the same numbers in Colorado five years after background checks are required on all private firearm transactions. Think we will see a big change in the murder rate?

We can certainly hope. What we do know is that it is a good thing to inhibit the flow of firearms to criminals. Don't we?

I suppose it depends.

Are we talking about increasing the number of firearms going to known criminals?
(that's what's hypothesized, here?)

Unfortunately, a lot of murders involve people that are NOT known criminals.

I get that we're talking about an increase that ranges between 55 to 63 ---- but that forecast could be just random noise, too.

I'm not entirely against person-to-person transfers ---- no am I against reasonable checks.

I'd likely look into the dynamics of the crime before I attribute it all to gun checks.

Something the Dog Said wrote:

FredHayek wrote: And like I said, run the numbers in Illinois. Murder rates are very inconsistent and hard to get a general pattern from. Most likely the liberals at John Hopkins came in with a pre-determined outcome and worked the numbers to get a result.
Lets run the same numbers in Colorado five years after background checks are required on all private firearm transactions. Think we will see a big change in the murder rate?

We can certainly hope. What we do know is that it is a good thing to inhibit the flow of firearms to criminals. Don't we?

Given the inability to determine that a background check, "universal" or otherwise, has inhibited the flow of firearms to known criminals, how do you propose to determine whether or not the primary purpose for which the law was instituted is being achieved? All the data from the checks will tell you is how many belonging to a prohibited class were prevented from legally purchasing a firearm. Given the large number of criminals that use illegally obtained firearms (Columbine, Sandy Hook and the murder of Tom Clements come immediately to mind) and the number of criminals that passed background checks prior to becoming criminals to obtain their arms (Aurora Theater, Virginia Tech and others), on what rational basis do you plan on using to give merit to the argument that background checks inhibit the flow of firearms to criminals?