ANOTHER STUDY (this one from Canada) says that gun laws don’t reduce crime:

Vancouver, BC – Restrictive firearm legislation has failed to reduce gun violence in Australia, Canada, or Great Britain. The policy of confiscating guns has been an expensive failure, according to a new paper The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales, released today by The Fraser Institute. . . .

Disarming the public has not reduced criminal violence in any country examined in this study. In all these cases, disarming the public has been ineffective, expensive, and often counter productive. In all cases, the effort meant setting up expensive bureaucracies that produce no noticeable improvement to public safety or have made the situation worse.

Here’s a link to the study itself. Add this to the CDC study mentioned here earlier (which “found no conclusive evidence that gun control laws help to prevent violent crime, suicides and accidental injuries in the United States”) and the case for gun control seems to be growing steadily weaker.

UPDATE: Michael Last has posted a critique of the Mauser study. I don’t know much about the statistical criminology stuff, but I believe that Mauser is a reputable guy. Last is apparently a statistician, but admits he didn’t read the whole study — he stopped when he saw a graph whose layout looked deceptive to him. Read it and draw your own conclusions. The fact that I haven’t gotten an angry email from Tim Lambert, however, suggests that the study’s probably pretty strong overall. . . .