An open letter
Editor's note: The following is an open letter from 287
economists, law-school professors and other academics
to Congress, regarding gun-control legislation before the
House of Representatives. Some but not all of the names
of the signatories appear here. This was originally published in The Washington Times
6/16/99.
After the tragic attacks at public schools over the last two
years, there is an understandable desire to "do
something." Yet, none of the proposed legislation would have
prevented the recent violence. The current debate focuses only
on the potential benefits from new gun control laws and ignores
the fact that these laws can have some very real adverse
effects. Good intentions don't necessarily make good laws.
What counts is whether the laws will ultimately save lives,
prevent injury, and reduce crime. Passing laws based upon
their supposed benefits while ignoring their costs poses a real
threat to people's lives and safety.
These gun control laws will primarily be obeyed by
law-abiding citizens and risk making it less likely that good
people have guns compared to criminals. Deterrence is
important and disarming good people relative to criminals will
increase the risk of violent crime. If we really care about saving
lives we must focus not only on the newsworthy events where
bad things happen, but also on the bad things that never
happen because people are able to defend themselves.
Few people would voluntarily put up a sign in front of their
homes stating, "This home is a gun-free zone." The reason is
very simple. Just as we can deter criminals with higher arrest or
conviction rates, the fact that would-be victims might be able to
defend themselves also deters attacks. Not only do guns allow
individuals to defend themselves, they also provide some
protection to citizens who choose not to own guns since
criminals would not normally know who can defend themselves
before they attack.
The laws currently being considered by Congress ignore the
importance of deterrence. Police are extremely important at
deterring crime, but they simply cannot be everywhere.
Individuals also benefit from being able to defend themselves
with a gun when they are confronted by a criminal.
Let us illustrate some of the problems with the current
debate.
The Clinton administration wants to raise the age at which
citizens can possess a handgun to 21, and they point to the fact
that 18- and 19-year-olds commit gun crimes at the highest
rate. Yet, Department of Justice numbers indicate that 18- and
19-year-olds are also the most likely victims of violent crimes
including murder, rape, robbery with serious injury, and
aggravated assault. The vast majority of those committing
crimes in this age group are members of gangs and are already
breaking the law by having a gun. This law will primarily apply
to law-abiding 18-to-21-year-olds and make it difficult for
them to defend themselves.
Waiting periods can produce a cooling-off period. But they
also have real costs. Those threatened with harm may not be
able to quickly obtain a gun for protection.
Gun locks may prevent some accidental gun deaths, but
they will make it difficult for people to defend themselves from
attackers. We believe that the risks of accidental gun deaths,
particularly those involving young children, have been greatly
exaggerated. In 1996, there were 44 accidental gun deaths for
children under age 10. This exaggeration risks threatening
people's safety if it incorrectly frightens some people from
having a gun in their home even though that is actually the safest
course of action.
Trade-offs exist with other proposals such as prison
sentences for adults whose guns are misused by someone
under 18 and rules limiting the number of guns people can
purchase. No evidence has been presented to show that the
likely benefits of such proposals will exceed their potential
costs.
With the 20,000 gun laws already on the books, we advise
Congress, before enacting yet more new laws, to investigate
whether many of the existing laws may have contributed to the
problems we currently face. The new legislation is ill-advised.
Sincerely,
Terry L. Anderson, Montana State University; Charles W.
Baird, California State University, Hayward; Randy E. Barnett,
Boston University; Bruce L. Benson, Florida State University;
Michael Block, University of Arizona; Walter Block, Thomas
Borcherding, Claremont Graduate School; Frank H. Buckley,
George Mason University; Colin D. Campbell, Dartmouth
College; Robert J. Cottrol, George Washington University;
Preston K. Covey, Carnegie Mellon University; Mark Crain,
George Mason University; Tom DiLorenzo, Loyola College in
Maryland; Paul Evans, Ohio State University; R. Richard
Geddes, Fordham University; Lino A. Graglia, University of
Texas; John Heineke, Santa Clara University; David
Henderson, Hoover Institution, Stanford University; Melvin J.
Hinich, University of Texas, Austin; Lester H. Hunt, University
of Wisconsin - Madison; James Kau, University of Georgia;
Kenneth N. Klee, UCLA; David Kopel, New York
University; Stanley Liebowitz, University of Texas at Dallas;
Luis Locay, University of Miami; John R. Lott, Jr., University
of Chicago; Geoffrey A. Manne, University of Virginia; John
Matsusaka, University of Southern California; Fred
McChesney, Cornell University; Jeffrey A. Miron, Boston
University; Carlisle E. Moody, College of William and Mary;
Craig M. Newmark, North Carolina State University; Jeffrey
S. Parker, George Mason University; Dan Polsby,
Northwestern University; Keith T. Poole, Carnegie-Mellon
University; Douglas B. Rasmussen, St. John's University; Glenn
Reynolds, University of Tennessee; John R. Rice, Duke
University; Russell Roberts, Washington University; Randall
W. Roth, Univ. of Hawaii; Charles Rowley, George Mason
University; Allen R. Sanderson, University of Chicago; William
F. Shughart II, University of Mississippi; Thomas Sowell,
Stanford University; Richard Stroup, Montana State
University; Robert D. Tollison, University of Mississippi;
Eugene Volokh, UCLA; Michael R. Ward, University of
Illinois; Benjamin Zycher, UCLA; Todd Zywicki, George
Mason University.
