What's new

The results of loosening gun restrictions

I was unaware they had changed their laws. Did they not expect this?

Keep safe One Brow.
 
cause and effect?
hmm...


what were the population trends during that time?

Interesting that he points out Missouri:

https://law.marquette.edu/facultybl...penalty-uncovering-the-key-role-of-geography/


Their thesis is simply stated. A vastly disproportionate number of federal death sentences come from counties with high minority populations that are located in districts that are heavily white overall. Think diverse urban cores surrounded by lily-white suburbs. Given that federal juries are typically drawn from the entire district, this means that capital trials in these districts are apt to involve minority defendants being judged by white-dominated juries. Having minimal racial diversity on the jury means that black defendants have little protection from the unconscious racial biases that most of us carry around. This, in turn, drives both the racial and geographic disparities in federal death sentences.

The patterns are striking.

For instance, both federal districts in Missouri display the racial demographics that are of interest to Cohen and Smith (racially diverse urban county surrounded by heavily white suburban counties), and Missouri has returned more federal death sentences than New York, California, and Florida combined (p. 436). In fact, Cohen and Smith contend that all eight of the districts that have returned more than two federal death sentences exhibit pronounced county-district racial disparities.


Clearly the removal of guns should not be considered completely causal in this circumstance-- and this comes from an advocate of gun-control, I might add.
 
Wasn't there a post a while back about a study that showed just having a minority in the jury pool influenced the jury?

I believe it was actually an epic thread in which you posted a cartoon treatise regarding white privilege.
 
Missouri Murder Rates per 100,000 (US rate in parentheses)

2003 5.05 (5.7)
2004 6.15 (5.5)
2005 6.93 (5.6)
2006 6.30 (5.7)
2007 6.55 (5.6)
2008 7.66 (5.4)
2009 6.46 (5.0)
2010 7.00 (4.8)
2011 6.09 (4.7)
2012 6.46 (4.7)

missouri.jpg

This would be a lot more compelling had the law been passed in 2003. Or if the conclusion wasn't largely based on a one-year spike (maybe the bad guys forgot about the new laws after a year). Or if there was more statistical significance. Or if there weren't a hundred other variables to control for in such a study. I'm curious why they chose Missouri and not Michigan or California.
 
How can they compare Missouri to New York when NY does not allow the death penalty?

I assume you meant the link offered by dalamon. That was about federal trials, and (as I understand it) you can get the death penalty anywhere in the US at a federal trial.
 
Back
Top