The latest "study" from Cook and Ludwig


PDA






cuchulainn
August 3, 2005, 03:18 PM
http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2005/08/cookrelease.html

Focus on Felons Ignores Large Part of Homicide Threat, Study Finds

Only about 30 percent of of homicides are committed by felons

Tuesday, August 2, 2005

Note to Editors:
Philip Cook can be reached for additional comment at (919) 613-7360 or pcook@duke.edu. A copy of the paper is available by contacting Karen Kemp.

Durham, N.C. -- Conventional wisdom suggests that repeat offenders commit most serious crimes, so strategies aimed at them, such as stiffer prison sentences, are the key to reducing homicide rates. Yet a new study in the latest issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) indicates that approach could address only about 30 percent of the homicide cases, at most.

“Sure, ex-convicts are much more likely to commit homicide than the average guy,” said Duke University public policy professor Philip J. Cook, the study’s lead author. But the researchers’ analysis of all arrests and felony convictions in Illinois from 1990 to 2001 showed that while more than 70 percent of adult homicide arrestees had been arrested at least once, only a third had been convicted of a felony.

‘I’m not saying programs targeted at felons are a bad idea,” Cook said. “But it would be a mistake to think that’s the whole answer, or to suggest that still harsher penalties for felons would have much effect on the homicide rate.”

The research report, titled “Criminal Records of Homicide Offenders,” was published in the Aug. 3 issue of JAMA. The study’s co-authors are Jens Ludwig of Georgetown University and Anthony Braga of Harvard University. Cook and Ludwig are co-authors of the book “Gun Violence: The Real Costs” (Oxford University Press, 2000).

Cook, a professor at the Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy at Duke who has been researching gun control, alcohol abuse and violence for more than 25 years, said the study’s results are relevant to the regulation of firearms as well. Federal law prohibits firearm possession by convicted felons and domestic violence offenders.

“These categories leave a large part of the homicide problem untouched,” he said.

“Broader prevention strategies, including general deterrence and the regulation of firearms, alcohol and drugs, are important as part of a comprehensive approach to reducing the homicide rate.”

There were 17,638 homicide victims in 2002 in the United States.

For more information, contact: Karen Kemp, Sanford Institute of Public Policy | (919) 613-7394 | kkemp@duke.edu

If you enjoyed reading about "The latest "study" from Cook and Ludwig" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Graystar
August 3, 2005, 03:32 PM
There were 17,638 homicide victims in 2002 in the United States.The UCR says there were 14,054 murders. I wonder where that number came from....

cuchulainn
August 3, 2005, 03:36 PM
Graystar,

I just checked. Those are CDC data.

Run them here: http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate.html

Bartholomew Roberts
August 3, 2005, 03:48 PM
The difference in the CDC and UCR data is that the UCR relies on reports from law enforcment jurisdictions and these are not always filed by the deadline. So when the FBI reports the UCR numbers they report two numbers - the number of reports actually filed and their estimate of what the jurisdictions that didn't report had homicide-wise. The 14k number is the actual report number from the UCR.

CDC relies on deaths reported and is generally more accurate, although it doesn't report types of crimes causing injury as well. It also counts all homicides by law enforcement as "legal intervention" whether they are later determined to be justified or not and counts all homicides by citizens as 'homicide" even if it is later ruled justifiable.

Andrew Rothman
August 3, 2005, 03:57 PM
Thanks, Bartholomew. That's key info I didn't know.

fourays2
August 3, 2005, 04:02 PM
17K homicide victims.... how many people do doctors kill every year?

geekWithA.45
August 3, 2005, 04:08 PM
So...if they are arguing for the inneffectiveness of the felon firearms disability, aren't they really arguing that the prohibition should be removed?

Oh, wait.

That'd make sense, and not be in alignment with their dogma.

AZ Jeff
August 3, 2005, 04:22 PM
I already know the answer, so this question is rhetorical: *** is the Journal of the AMA doing publishing studies on Criminology? They should only being doing that once the International Wound Ballistics Association starts publishing articles on communicable diseases. :rolleyes:

Henry Bowman
August 3, 2005, 05:27 PM
So...if they are arguing for the inneffectiveness of the felon firearms disability, aren't they really arguing that the prohibition should be removed? No, they mean that all misc. convictions should be a firearms disability as well. Just for good measure, let's make all potential criminal unable to own firearms. That ought to do it. :rolleyes:

scout26
August 3, 2005, 06:03 PM
Here's where the first flaw in their study.....

all arrests and felony convictions in Illinois

Art Eatman
August 3, 2005, 09:58 PM
Homicide refers to one person killing another, without regard to any justification or a lack of it. Whether murder or self defense, they're both homicides.

Art

beerslurpy
August 3, 2005, 10:39 PM
I love how their sample size consists of the state of IL, which arguably has the most nearly totalitarian gun laws and then proceeds to talk about US-wide trends in homicide.

Admittedly, Chicago has an enormous share of the nationwide murder rate, but it is a tad misleading.

GEM
August 3, 2005, 11:06 PM
JAMA has a clear antigun preference in studies. However, it is prestigious so that would be attractive to them. I would think that Criminology would be a better journal. It does seem a touch far afield for JAMA.

Zundfolge
August 3, 2005, 11:10 PM
Focus on Felons Ignores Large Part of Homicide Threat


read my sig :scrutiny:


the goal of the left is to achieve the following formula; citizen=criminal

beerslurpy
August 3, 2005, 11:13 PM
The only way to acheive the sort of society they want is by causing all citizens to be moved into what would normally be considered the category of "fugitive" or "convicted felon" where your only hope for continued freedom is to not draw the attention of the government and to not cause trouble.

In many ways and in many places in this country, they have already succeeded.

Kim
August 3, 2005, 11:42 PM
Since I am a physician I can assure you I gave up reading the JAMA many years ago. (all medical students are automatically enrolled in the AMA-now isn't that special) Just as I am very skeptical of any feel good sociological, psychological type finding. Give me hard science but not this stupidity. The problem is some maybe most believe this stuff. I still have 2 partners who site Kellerman as to why they oppose handgun ownership. Coarse they know they can KMA. They also believe if someone smokes a cig withing 1000 feet of someone else they are hurting someones health. But like I have said one of these fine liberals is KNOWN to smoke Cigs when he drinks his whiskey. And that is just one of his vices. :evil:

Standing Wolf
August 4, 2005, 12:36 AM
...a new study in the latest issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) indicates...

More leftist extremism masquerading as medical "science." I wouldn't believe a word of it.

If you enjoyed reading about "The latest "study" from Cook and Ludwig" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!