2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,220
- 52,455
- 2,290
Yep.....more crime, not less when they first banned rifles for 18 year olds...
Here's why raising the gun possession age could cost some crime victims their lives
Fortunately, we don’t need to guess. This isn’t the first time that the government has raised the age requirement for rifle purchases. In 1994 the first federal limits required buyers to be 18 years of age. Prior to that law, there was no federal age requirement for buying a rifle.
Thomas Marvell has done the only peer-reviewed study on this change. It was published in the Journal of Law and Economics, and concluded: “Where the 1994 laws seem to have an impact, the suggestion is almost always that crime increases; thus, there is no evidence that these bans had their intended effect.”
Marvell found that the 1994 age requirement was associated with a 5.1 percent increase in the homicide rate, and a 6 percent increase in firearm homicides. Beyond that, there was no real effect on crime rates.
But Marvell notes that if “juveniles are more vulnerable targets, the result is likely to be more crime, especially violent crimes involving juveniles.”
A ban on gun sales to anyone younger than 21 won't keep people who are determined to be mass killers from getting weapons. These killers often plan their attacks more than six months in advance, and sometimes as much as year or two ahead of time.
Young people have shown themselves to be highly capable of obtaining illegal drugs, and they can often buy illegal guns from the same sources. After all, the same people who sell drugs have guns to protect their valuable property.
The actual paper by Thomas Marvell......
https://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Marvell-age-restriction-guns.pdf
The results are almost uniform with respect to the pre-1994 state laws banning juvenile gun possession: they have no discernible crime-reduction impact, and there is only very slight evidence of an increase, mainly with respect to total gun homicides (Table 5). The results for the 1994 law variables are more uncertain because the results might be influenced by substantial federal efforts commenced that year to regulate guns and reduce crime generally. Where the 1994 laws seem to have an impact, the suggestion is almost always that crime increases; thus, there is no evidence that these bans had their intended effect. There is some slight support for the theory that the bans increase homicides because juveniles appear more vulnerable. With aggregate law variables, this effect appears mainly for state 1994 laws and it is usually counterbalanced by negative results for the federal 1994 law
Here's why raising the gun possession age could cost some crime victims their lives
Fortunately, we don’t need to guess. This isn’t the first time that the government has raised the age requirement for rifle purchases. In 1994 the first federal limits required buyers to be 18 years of age. Prior to that law, there was no federal age requirement for buying a rifle.
Thomas Marvell has done the only peer-reviewed study on this change. It was published in the Journal of Law and Economics, and concluded: “Where the 1994 laws seem to have an impact, the suggestion is almost always that crime increases; thus, there is no evidence that these bans had their intended effect.”
Marvell found that the 1994 age requirement was associated with a 5.1 percent increase in the homicide rate, and a 6 percent increase in firearm homicides. Beyond that, there was no real effect on crime rates.
But Marvell notes that if “juveniles are more vulnerable targets, the result is likely to be more crime, especially violent crimes involving juveniles.”
A ban on gun sales to anyone younger than 21 won't keep people who are determined to be mass killers from getting weapons. These killers often plan their attacks more than six months in advance, and sometimes as much as year or two ahead of time.
Young people have shown themselves to be highly capable of obtaining illegal drugs, and they can often buy illegal guns from the same sources. After all, the same people who sell drugs have guns to protect their valuable property.
The actual paper by Thomas Marvell......
https://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Marvell-age-restriction-guns.pdf
The results are almost uniform with respect to the pre-1994 state laws banning juvenile gun possession: they have no discernible crime-reduction impact, and there is only very slight evidence of an increase, mainly with respect to total gun homicides (Table 5). The results for the 1994 law variables are more uncertain because the results might be influenced by substantial federal efforts commenced that year to regulate guns and reduce crime generally. Where the 1994 laws seem to have an impact, the suggestion is almost always that crime increases; thus, there is no evidence that these bans had their intended effect. There is some slight support for the theory that the bans increase homicides because juveniles appear more vulnerable. With aggregate law variables, this effect appears mainly for state 1994 laws and it is usually counterbalanced by negative results for the federal 1994 law
Last edited:
