If you're anti-gun control, you're likely to accept this data point on it's face. No skepticism required!
If you're pro-gun control, you're likely to dig deeper. Research. Fact check. And if you can't scrape up a reason why it's false, then it doesn't matter anyway. Probably just the exception and not the rule.
And in places like Chicago, clearly it's violent despite gun control, not because of gun control. Without gun control Chicago would be even worse. Gun control works, but nobody said it works miracles. Right?
Washington DC, Detroit, and Chicago are all in the same category. They're places where the violence got so bad that we had to pass gun control. It's not like Gun control what made it bad in the first place. Right?
Now we're going to do a different slew of gun memes from the other side.
If you're pro-gun control, then of course this meme is persuasive. No need to check to see if it's true. Learn from Sweden!
But if you're anti-gun control, you're likely to check this fact out. Isn't Japan the one with the high suicide rate? I'll be they're not counting gun suicides and that's why they get such a low number for Japan. Right?
Looks like we have some homework to do. Gotta debunk this liberal logic. And why would they even think about bringing Germany into this? Right?
Apparently Australia is a spokescountry for both sides
I want to be generous, so lets just say numbers are hard for some people. But here's what I notice, numbers are really easy when they tell a story we like, and then numbers get complicated when they tell a story we don't like. That's because people are only compelled to investigate stories when they contradict our preferred conclusion.
This is how psychologists say we fool ourselves. Nobody chooses to believe something they know is false. They simply exercise more or less intellectual discipline based on what answers they want to find.
If it's something they like they do very little digging and give it a high benefit of the doubt.
If it's something they don't like they dig into the data and give it a high burden of proof.
So how should we think about all these data points being thrusted in our face on Facebook?
There's one possible answer that applies to all arguments about regulation, including gun regulation. It is that we're in a sub-optimal middle ground.
There's no reason why gun control and gun violence are either correlated or inversely correlated at every level. The curve could look something like this.
 |
| Dude, I made it in a kid's graphmaker website. Cut me a break. |
Low gun control countries like Israel and Switzerland are on the left of the graph. High gun control countries like Sweden and Japan are on the right side of the graph. Australia is that little green dot on the right because who knows what's up with them. And the United States is in the wishywashy middle ground, where there's too much gun control for a criminal to fear citizens, but still so little gun control that a criminal to easily obtain a weapon.
I don't think that's how things really are, but it's a totally possible position that nearly nobody takes. Gee, why I would nobody take this perfectly competent position? Did it sleep with their mom?
I also think that when we talk about more or less of any kind of regulation, we're missing the point. It seems clear enough that we want more good regulation, and less bad regulation. Not all regulation is the same, so wanting more or less bypasses thoughtful discussion about kinds of regulation.
There's another way of thinking about all these gun control memes; gun control matters, but it's not the only thing that matters. So Sweden's gun crime rate has more to do with Sweden being Sweden than Swedish gun control laws. Or Chicago's gun crime rates has more to do with Chicago being Chicago than Chicago's gun control laws. It's not like we could plop down Sweden's gun control laws on top of Chicago, and all of the sudden Chicago will see Swedish gun violence rates.
Culture matters. Saying that the United States has a culture of violence sounds vague, but I think it's true. You can start to see it when you look at the US's high non-gun violence rate. So to some extent it's not about gun control, but whether you're the kind of culture that supports gun control.
 |
| If it's not in a Meme it's like it didn't happen |
Some of these memes compare violence rates before and after gun control. For a skeptical mind, there's on obvious problem with this. Violence rates are going up and down no matter what. In the last 10 years the United State's homicide rate dropped dramatically while gun control has stayed roughly stayed the same. So with lots of possible countries or states to choose from, one can easily find some where gun control was followed by whatever you want it to be followed by.
I see these pics on Facebook and I wonder, do they know the other side is posting the exact same evidence to support the other side? And if you find your evidence so appealing, why is their parallel evidence so unconvincing?
I don't think left or right. I don't think pro or anti gun control. I think partisanship or openmindedness. There are people in this world who are actually trying to reason through the evidence, to build a solid argument, to respond to criticism, and to intellectually empathize with their opponents. And there are people who really don't care. They're trying to usurp the moral high ground so they can win the debate. They can't see past their "us vs. them" mentality to realize that some of this stuff really effects people. It's that tribal attitude that causes many times more damage than the sins of the "other side".
