|
GCN ARCHIVE
Letters from GCN Members
Gun Crime Misconceptions
GCN's Peter Squires wrote the following letter to
the Guardian in March 2004 to highlight some current misconceptions about the level
of gun crime in the UK
"Although fascinating and insightful, Andy Beckett's
article, 'Anatomy of a killing' (G2, 11.3.04), particularly the
subheadings and commentaries, reinforced some of the myths of British
gun crime. References to 'spiralling' gun crime only plays into the
media hype and misinterpretation that much of the article itself
disputes. I went to the US criminology conference in Denver back in
November 2003 with a paper analysing gun crime trends in Britain since
1998. This was to challenge a broadly held perception in the USA , no
doubt fostered by the powerful US gun lobby, that British gun control
policies had 'failed' (and, ipso facto, would fail everywhere).
While recorded gun crime did appear to rise steeply between 1998 and
2001 in England and Wales (but figures considerably inflated by replicas
and air weapons), the latest available statistics suggest it to be
falling during the past year in both the London and Manchester
'hotspots', while offences involving handguns are falling nationally.
Moreover, gun crime has been falling even more sharply in Scotland.
Where the absolute numbers of offences are relatively low, trends are
likely to be volatile so there is no case for complacency. However, we
need to be wary of another message, eagerly seized upon by those intent
on dismantling our current gun laws (and their American friends) that
'gun control is counter-productive'. On the contrary, as Beckett makes
clear, the sawn-off shotgun used in the Woolwich murder was an unusual
gang gun. This, and the considerable numbers of replicas, conversions
and reactivated weapons unearthed by police investigations might
indicate that supplies of full-calibre illegal handguns have become a
little harder to access. Gun control may be working."
Letter to The Guardian
from Dr Peter
Squires
19 July 2001
Your recent correspondents are writing the most errant nonsense about guns
and gun control laws. Firstly “Cracked Shots” (19.7.01),
flogs, once again, the old dead horse of the Kings College research
suggesting that gun crime has risen by 40% since the handgun bans were
introduced. No-one doubts that the underlying trend in firearm involved
crime is rising, and has done so for over 30 years, but the solution does
not lie in the relaxation of our gun control laws - and certainly not based
upon questionable research using inadequate data.
The increase in criminal handgun use was 142% during the decade prior to
Dunblane. The Kings College research is about as newsworthy as the relief
of Mafeking. Back in February I helped prepare a commentary for the Gun
Control Network commenting on the latest release of crime figures showing a
37% increase in handgun-related crime. That statement qualified the figures
by referring to replica guns, improved and more consistent police recording
and initiatives like the Met's Operation Trident which have targeted gun
crime. But despite all this the pro-gun lobby still peddle their story that
UK gun laws have failed. This is quite wrong.
Then we have the argument (Letters, 19.7.01) that the handgun ban
was unfair (compared to what, the murder of 16 children?) and advocating
guns for citizen self-defence. Not even the most wild-eyed shooter
seriously made that case public during the UK's own gun control debate
(though there are grounds for suspecting that a fair number thought it).
America permits firearms for civilian self-defence, and has a gun homicide
rate approximately 150 times greater than our own. Is that what we want?
Have your correspondents swallowed the Philip Morris line on population
economics rather too literally?
|
|
