Princeton University Study Links Gun Violence to Deer Hunting Season
“Deer Hunting Season and Firearm Violence in US Rural Counties”
This is so dumb. Hunters are some of the most responsible gun owners there are.
The College Fix reports:
Princeton study links gun violence to start of deer season
A Princeton University study linking gun violence to the beginning of deer hunting season recently attracted criticism from a leading Second Amendment organization.
Published recently in the American Medical Association’s JAMA Network Open journal, the study is “bogus” and “inherently-biased,” according to a National Rifle Association writer.
In the study led by Princeton researcher Patrick Sharkey, the authors said they looked at gun violence data from 854 rural counties across the U.S., comparing the numbers at the start of deer hunting season to those of the week prior.
Their findings, published in “Deer Hunting Season and Firearm Violence in US Rural Counties,” are similar to previous research “showing that firearm prevalence is associated with an increase in the risk of firearm violence,” according to the authors.
“This study suggests that the start of deer hunting season is associated with a substantial increase in shootings, highlighting the role of firearm prevalence in gun violence,” the authors wrote.
Across seven years of data, they found “that the start of deer hunting season was associated with a substantial increase in shootings,” according to the study.
“The findings highlight the role of firearm prevalence in gun violence and suggest the need for focused policies designed to reduce firearm violence in areas with substantial hunting activity during the first weeks of deer hunting season,” the authors wrote.
Other researchers involved in the study came from the University of California at Irvine and Rutgers University.
But NRA writer and Second Amendment advocate Mark Chesnut called their conclusion “laughable.”
“In my 25-plus years of reporting on bogus, inherently-biased anti-gun studies meant to turn the public, via the so-called “mainstream” media, against private firearm ownership, I’ve never seen one quite as laughable …” Chesnut wrote Wednesday in a column at NRA Hunters’ Leadership Forum.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
In this sort of “study,” they start off with the results they want, then massage the data to fit. Even if the data were correct, association does not show causation.
See, for many examples, https://tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
Too many Fudds are entirely willing to sell out defensive gun owners because they’re confident that their own ox will never be gored. Anything that promotes a gnawing uneasiness in their bellies is fine by me.
To be fair, there is a correlation, and allow me to explain. Joe, who is schtuping Larry’s wife, likes to go deer hunting. This involves sitting up in a tree stand, making Joe a perfect target for Larry, who solves his domestic problems with a single shot. Later that day, Joe is found by his family and it is concluded that an errant shot shot killed a Joe, a tragedy. For a long time this was overlooked, but at some point it was noticed that none of these dozen or so victims in tree stands were ever shot in the hand, foot, etc, which a random shot distribution would indicate. It was always a fatal hit in the torso.
So, statistically, one could easily manufacture a story that deer hunting causes murder. But it is more that deer hunting permits an opportunity for it to happen. I am unsure whether correlative or causitive describes the phenomen accurately.
The lesson here: if you deer hunt in a stand, don’t make enemies.
OK, just for fun let’s assume the study is correct? So what? Deer hunting isn’t what the 2nd Amendment is about. It’s about providing a deterrence to a tyrannical government, and self defense.
Hmmm. According to the FBI, less than 2% of murders are committed with rifles of any kind.
So, somehow, the start of hunting season where people use bows, shotguns and rifles to stock their meat freezer somehow prompts thugs to shoot each other with handguns?
I’m thinking they probably missed some important factors in this “study”.
This is a great study to put in a research design book in the chapter on correlational studies and false causal conclusions. The shootings can be compared in terms of location (urban vs rural zipcode) or population density, type of weapon (shotgun, hand gun, rifle), legal gun ownership and race of shooter. The latter comparison would probably not be allowed at a university these days.
BTW there is a strong correlation between shootings and sales of rakes and leaf blowers. Maybe the sound of those blowers is driving people crazy.
But if we outlaw hunting in South Chicago, won’t the rat herd get out of control?