Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff you Should Know from how Stuff Works
Speaker 1: dot com. Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh Clark.
Speaker 1: There's Child's w Chuck Bryant, and uh, this is stuff
Speaker 1: you should know. Wow. Yeah, Uh you want to give
Speaker 1: like just a general ceoa out of the gate. Yes,
Speaker 1: this is a hot button issue guns right now in
Speaker 1: this country, in the United States. It's a very tough topic,
Speaker 1: and we are here to talk about do guns change
Speaker 1: your behavior and studies that they've done on that. We
Speaker 1: are not advocating for guns or advocating for gun control.
Speaker 1: We are just presenting evidence that some people have presented. Yeah,
Speaker 1: how's that. Well. We should say also that I think
Speaker 1: some especially people who are pro gun, um are they?
Speaker 1: I mean, your sensitivity might be a little um right now. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but I'm saying, like you, this, this particular podcast may
Speaker 1: strike you as as biased, even though it's not, simply
Speaker 1: because the studies have found things like you know, there
Speaker 1: are increased homicide rates and suicide rates associated with guns
Speaker 1: and things like that. So we're again we're just reporting
Speaker 1: some compiled body of work and we're presenting in an
Speaker 1: unbiased manner. Good job, thanks man. So um, we just
Speaker 1: kind of let the cat out of the bank. And
Speaker 1: if you are in the guns, if you are pro gun,
Speaker 1: you will probably point out that you own guns for sport,
Speaker 1: your own guns for home protection. Um. And you may
Speaker 1: point to a statistic that ownership of guns in the
Speaker 1: United States is higher than it ever has been at
Speaker 1: any point and not necessarily coincidentally, the homicide rate has
Speaker 1: dropped since that's right, So there's an inverse correlation, you
Speaker 1: could say, between gun ownership in the United States and
Speaker 1: just by a number of guns and the homicide rate. Yeah, which, uh,
Speaker 1: gun advocates will say, you know, like, give people more
Speaker 1: guns and it will be actually less violence because if
Speaker 1: everyone is armed, then there will be fewer people like
Speaker 1: invading your home because hey, I know you've got a
Speaker 1: gun in there, that kind of thing. Um. Now, the
Speaker 1: other side, people who are in favor of gun control
Speaker 1: would point out that, yes, the homicide rate has dropped, um,
Speaker 1: but there's actually fewer people who own guns than ever before,
Speaker 1: Fewer households, yes, with guns, but more the people that
Speaker 1: have guns have more guns. And yeah, as Mark Twain
Speaker 1: famously said, there are three types of lies, lies, damn lines,
Speaker 1: and statistics. And this is a pretty good example of that. Like,
Speaker 1: this is one statistic that can be looked at two
Speaker 1: different ways. Yeah, Like, there's more guns in the United
Speaker 1: States than ever before, and the homicide rate has dropped.
Speaker 1: There's also fewer people in the United States who own
Speaker 1: guns than ever before, and the homicide rate has dropped. Right,
Speaker 1: it's just fewer people owning more guns, right. Um, And boy,
Speaker 1: you were dead on with the statistic thing in this,
Speaker 1: uh topic, Because depending on how you want to research,
Speaker 1: you're gonna find statistics to support your way of thinking. Probably, Um,
Speaker 1: so what we encourage people to do, you probably have
Speaker 1: your mind made up anyway on this issue. A data,
Speaker 1: if a statistic, is going to change anyone in his mind.
Speaker 1: But go out and just look at all the non
Speaker 1: biased research, is what I say. Yeah, don't go to
Speaker 1: n r A and get your stats, and don't go
Speaker 1: to whatever the n r A equivalent and gun equivalent
Speaker 1: is and get your stats. Try and get them from
Speaker 1: like unbiased sources. Uh. Yeah. And one of the former
Speaker 1: um unbiased sources that used to put out a lot
Speaker 1: of UM gun violence studies unbiased you would imagine, is
Speaker 1: the CDC. Yeah, And the CDC used to put out
Speaker 1: a lot, a lot, a lot of stuff there there,
Speaker 1: and then there was a dearth of it beginning in
Speaker 1: which I didn't know about this until today. In the
Speaker 1: n r A successfully lobbied Congress to stop funding the
Speaker 1: CDC's work on gun violence. Yes. Um, And this is
Speaker 1: where it gets a little nitpicky with the wording. They
Speaker 1: didn't specifically say you can't research gun violence. What they
Speaker 1: did was they reduced the amount of funding by the
Speaker 1: exact dollar amount that they spent the previous year on research,
Speaker 1: and at attached this quote to it in the appropriations bill,
Speaker 1: none of the funds made available for injury prevention and
Speaker 1: control at the CDC may be used to advocate or
Speaker 1: promote gun control. So uh, pro gun folks would say,
Speaker 1: you know, and we never said they couldn't do any research.
Speaker 1: What we said was, you can't do research that has
Speaker 1: findings that support gun control. So if the findings support
Speaker 1: gun control, you can't do that, basically, right, And anything
Speaker 1: like any finding that showed that, you know, there's an
Speaker 1: increased risk of violence linked to guns, you could interpret
Speaker 1: under that sentence as advocating gun control. Yeah. And in
Speaker 1: two thousand three, the language is updated to include a
Speaker 1: whole or in part which expanded things, and then in
Speaker 1: twelve it expanded the restriction to all health and human
Speaker 1: service agencies. Although January of this year, President Obama has
Speaker 1: now hauled for funding specifically for he had I think
Speaker 1: it's twenty three point memo, Yeah, of what he wanted
Speaker 1: to get through in terms of research. Yeah, those were
Speaker 1: the executive orders that he could carry out that had
Speaker 1: to do with gun control. Basically ten million bucks for
Speaker 1: additional research, which is a lot more than they used
Speaker 1: to get it peaked at two point six millions. So
Speaker 1: throwing ten million dollars at this today, even adjusted for inflation,
Speaker 1: that's going to produce a lot more studies on um
Speaker 1: gun violence for the CDC and people. Before you get
Speaker 1: worked up, this is research. They are saying, we should
Speaker 1: do research on this. They're they're basically framing it as
Speaker 1: a public health epidemic because people are dying. And hey,
Speaker 1: we study how violent or how how automobiles kill people.
Speaker 1: We study how alcohol and drugs skill people, we study
Speaker 1: how everything is killed. Everything kills people except the guns, right,
Speaker 1: so we should start researching this just to get some
Speaker 1: current statistics on it. And if you want to get
Speaker 1: rolled up about anything, get rolled up about the idea
Speaker 1: that Congress banned scientific study period. Yeah, and you can
Speaker 1: basically from the research I found, you can lay this
Speaker 1: at the feet of Bob bar and new Gingrich's basically
Speaker 1: the two representatives from Georgia new Ingridg's head almost as
Speaker 1: much power as Clinton, and um, yeah, that was pretty
Speaker 1: much who was responsible for this. Well. J. Dicky, the
Speaker 1: the representative who sponsored the amendment back then, has now
Speaker 1: recanted and said, you know what, he's no longer in office,
Speaker 1: but he wrote an editorial stating that quote, scientific research
Speaker 1: should be conducted into preventing firearm injuries, and that ways
Speaker 1: to prevent firearm desks can be found without encroaching on
Speaker 1: the rights of legitimate gun owners. So basically he's come
Speaker 1: out and said, you know, we should research this stuff,
Speaker 1: not saying banned guns or go to people's houses and
Speaker 1: grab the guns, but at the very least, we should
Speaker 1: do the research so we know what we're talking about
Speaker 1: and so the American public can make their own informed
Speaker 1: decisions one way or the other. Right, that's right, Okay,
Speaker 1: So that's why there was a there's been a dearth
Speaker 1: of reliable statistics since Um, but CDC is not the
Speaker 1: only people carrying out um this kind of research. Other
Speaker 1: people have who are independent of Congress for funding. Yeah,
Speaker 1: not a ton though, because there's not a lot of
Speaker 1: funding period. So it's pretty sad, Like I read this
Speaker 1: one article on that a lot of the people that
Speaker 1: did this. It's not like you can just pick any
Speaker 1: old researcher and say research gun violence like you have
Speaker 1: to have it, like it has to be your specialty.
Speaker 1: And a lot of people have just don't do this
Speaker 1: anymore because of that band. So it's sadly it's hard
Speaker 1: to find people qualified enough to even do it now. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, no matter what it is, people go to
Speaker 1: where the money is, right, absolutely, Um, So the the
Speaker 1: stuff that we do have though, the studies we do have,
Speaker 1: reliable studies that we do have pretty much across the
Speaker 1: board point to an increased risk of death if a
Speaker 1: gun's present. But before, I guess, before we talk about that, yeah,
Speaker 1: I think now it's probably a good time for a message, Rick, Okay,
Speaker 1: let's talk about them the weapon effect. Yeah, this is
Speaker 1: a very touchy subject as well. Um. In nineteen sixty seven, Uh,
Speaker 1: these two dudes, Leonard Berkowitz and Anthony lapage Um did
Speaker 1: a little study where they brought people into a room,
Speaker 1: had UM the participants UH antagonized basically by someone else,
Speaker 1: just to get them rilled up, and then they left
Speaker 1: the room and were told that they could give them
Speaker 1: electric shocks. Some people had a gun in the room
Speaker 1: on the table and they said, don't worry about that,
Speaker 1: that's just here from a previous study. Some people had
Speaker 1: bad mitten rackets and they said, don't worry about that
Speaker 1: from a previous study. And they found that just the
Speaker 1: presence of guns in the room caused people to shock
Speaker 1: more and harder at a higher voltage. So they dubbed
Speaker 1: that the weapons effect, saying, just the mere presence of
Speaker 1: a gun in the room, even when told to ignore it,
Speaker 1: increased UM I grow behavior basically. And there's that's been
Speaker 1: backed up by other studies. There's one in two thousand
Speaker 1: six that showed that UM interacting with the gun actually
Speaker 1: increases the testosterone levels of men. Wow, that is a lot.
Speaker 1: That's a huge increase, right, UM. So this study basically
Speaker 1: they said, here, play with this gun and then UM,
Speaker 1: now we're gonna firstly, took a swab and tested the
Speaker 1: testosterone levels. Then they said, here, play with this gun,
Speaker 1: and afterward we're gonna take another swab. But in the meantime,
Speaker 1: we're also gonna let you put hot sauce in the
Speaker 1: water of somebody who's gonna have to drink it. And
Speaker 1: the the men who um handled the gun and messed
Speaker 1: around with the gun for a while put um far
Speaker 1: more hot sauce into the water than the men who
Speaker 1: didn't handle a gun, three times as much hot sauce.
Speaker 1: And the same two previous guys, Berkowitz and Lapage did
Speaker 1: another one that I found really interesting. Um they put
Speaker 1: a pickup truck in traffic with um, well different pickup trucks,
Speaker 1: some with guns in the rack and some without a
Speaker 1: gun rack at all, and made them sit at a
Speaker 1: traffic light that had turned green for twelve seconds to
Speaker 1: see how people behind them responded. And surprisingly, people were
Speaker 1: more likely to haunk their horns if there was a
Speaker 1: gun in the truck ahead of them, which they said
Speaker 1: that meant see, the presence of a gun just makes
Speaker 1: people more aggressive, Whereas I was kind of like, ah,
Speaker 1: that that's sort of weird that they would be more
Speaker 1: aggressive towards someone with a gun when you didn't have one. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: it's almost like possibly that people interpret that as a threat.
Speaker 1: Just the presence of a gun maybe someone else is
Speaker 1: flaunting to the rest of the world is just kind
Speaker 1: of some sort of veiled threat despite its very presence.
Speaker 1: We UM. We detect guns actually faster than we detect
Speaker 1: um snakes, spiders. These are things called fear relevant stimuli
Speaker 1: and guns, fall, guns, syringes they fall into this category
Speaker 1: as well. And humans are hardwired evolutionarily to to be
Speaker 1: able to pick out a snake out of a landscape
Speaker 1: faster than say, we can pick out like a wood chuck,
Speaker 1: a chipmunk or something like that, because we know from
Speaker 1: eons of of of evolution that these things are very
Speaker 1: dangerous to us. Studies have found that we can pick
Speaker 1: guns out faster than we can pick snakes out. So yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's very quick evolution. It's it's called the threat superiority effect,
Speaker 1: where we can we can identify threatening objects faster than
Speaker 1: non threatening objects. And apparently guns and syringes too, I
Speaker 1: think are topping the list these days. Uh. They also
Speaker 1: found that UM drivers who have a gun in the
Speaker 1: car were significantly more likely to UM do things like
Speaker 1: makeup scene gestures that other people compared to sixteen percent,
Speaker 1: UM follow too close aggressively four to eight percent, or
Speaker 1: both six point three percent to two point eight percent.
Speaker 1: So uh. And then they even found that even when
Speaker 1: guns weren't around, just the mere suggestion of aggressive words
Speaker 1: as opposed to non aggressive words like gun, Uh, people
Speaker 1: were more aggressive in these studies. So, you know, people,
Speaker 1: a lot of people have supported the weapons effect study
Speaker 1: and said no, it's perfectly valid. And a lot of
Speaker 1: people have said no, you know what the weapons effect
Speaker 1: is bs and that study is invalid. So, um, which
Speaker 1: one is? Which one is larger? Yeah? Right? Exactly? Which?
Speaker 1: I don't know? I mean I think, as with all things,
Speaker 1: that depends on who you're talking to, you know, I
Speaker 1: don't know if there's it's been broken down like that. Um. Okay,
Speaker 1: So it seems to there seems to be some sort
Speaker 1: of evidence at least that there's the potential for increased
Speaker 1: aggression um with the presence of a gun. Right. There's
Speaker 1: also um studies that show and this is the one apparently.
Speaker 1: I don't know why people aren't talking about this more,
Speaker 1: especially with the gun debate that's going on now. But
Speaker 1: if you want to talk about a correlation, talk about
Speaker 1: suicide and the presence of guns. I think that's one
Speaker 1: that's pretty much not been refuted. Um, there were a
Speaker 1: lot of gun deaths in the US and two thousand
Speaker 1: and eleven, UM, eleven thousand of them were homicides and
Speaker 1: nineteen thousand, seven hundred and sixties six were suicides, all
Speaker 1: with firearms. So twice as many people took their own
Speaker 1: lives with a gun then took someone else's life. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and not only that, you UM. And again I hate
Speaker 1: not having more recent research, but it's not our fault
Speaker 1: that we it point to a study from three years ago,
Speaker 1: you know. Um, but a nine study by the CDC
Speaker 1: said that if you have a gun in the home,
Speaker 1: you were five times more likely to commit suicide overall.
Speaker 1: And um, in two thousand three, there actually was another
Speaker 1: study that said access to a gun made someone more
Speaker 1: than three times more likely to commit suicide than without.
Speaker 1: UM and eight of people who shoot themselves succeed in dying, Which, well,
Speaker 1: that's why they think that the correlation is so strong.
Speaker 1: That then, so that's for people who really want to
Speaker 1: end it, not to cry for help. Yeah, but probably
Speaker 1: not gonna shoot yourself in the head if it's a
Speaker 1: cry for help. Right, but what the what what the
Speaker 1: people who are saying this is legitimate research are pointing
Speaker 1: to is that this is that suicide is frequently an
Speaker 1: impulsive act. Uh. And when you're in the midst of
Speaker 1: a crisis and you are, um, you've decided to end it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: if you do it, if you try hanging or pills
Speaker 1: or carbon monoxide or whatever, you are less likely to
Speaker 1: be successful than you are with a firearm. And so
Speaker 1: the presence of a firearm in the house during that
Speaker 1: time of crisis increases your likelihood of committing suicide by
Speaker 1: a firearm. Yeah, but also chuck there. There's another study
Speaker 1: that found that people who own a handgun and commit
Speaker 1: suicide are far more likely to use the handgun than
Speaker 1: another type of method. Oh right, even though that's available
Speaker 1: to them as well. Right right, Well, I guess, like
Speaker 1: I said, those people that probably really want to end
Speaker 1: it all. Um. Interestingly, the Israeli Defense Force found that
Speaker 1: their suicide rate dropped among its soldiers just by saying
Speaker 1: you can't take your weapons home this weekend, so they
Speaker 1: banned them from taking the weapons home over the weekend.
Speaker 1: Suicide rate drop. Regardless where you stand on this issue,
Speaker 1: it has pretty much been proven that guns in suicide.
Speaker 1: There is a direct correlation going on there. Okay, homicide,
Speaker 1: should we move on, Yes, let's move on. Um. So,
Speaker 1: there's study that found that UM family disputes that turned
Speaker 1: violent were three times more likely to result in death
Speaker 1: if the gun was present in the house. UM, and
Speaker 1: this was this was There was another study by the
Speaker 1: CDC that found that homicides are about three times more
Speaker 1: likely for family members in a house where there's a gun.
Speaker 1: Two studies have found virtually the same thing, the presence
Speaker 1: of a gun, at least in the nineties. The swing
Speaker 1: in nineties, having a gun in the house meant that
Speaker 1: each of the family members was three times more likely
Speaker 1: apparently to UM die by a homicide. Right, and that
Speaker 1: is the domestic dispute that gets out of hand. If
Speaker 1: a gun is around, then your chances are hired that
Speaker 1: it's going to be in and murder. Well, one said,
Speaker 1: a family dispute that turns violent, you're three times more
Speaker 1: likely to result in death. The other one, the CDC one,
Speaker 1: I think, was just plainly saying just having a gun
Speaker 1: in the house to three times more likely to die
Speaker 1: by homicide. Right, Okay, I guess it's fair to point
Speaker 1: out though that most murdered murders don't happen at your
Speaker 1: home unless, yeah, you're a woman, a child, or elderly.
Speaker 1: So basically, if you're a average age man, you're you're
Speaker 1: less likely to be murdered in your house. Everybody else
Speaker 1: is more likely. Right, So, but if you were killed
Speaker 1: in your home, um, the vast majority are people who
Speaker 1: knew the perpetrator. Like, basically, the cases of someone breaking
Speaker 1: into your house who you do not know and ending
Speaker 1: and death are are much lower than than here. It
Speaker 1: is right here, Fewer than of burglaries in the US
Speaker 1: occur when someone's at home, period, and and the seven
Speaker 1: percent where violence does occur, Uh, it's more likely to
Speaker 1: be someone you know. So five percent of all the
Speaker 1: crimes perpetrated by strangers occur, only five percent occur in
Speaker 1: the house. So you're basically what the saying is, the
Speaker 1: home is a pretty safe place by and large, and
Speaker 1: so just having a gun that you keep at home. Um,
Speaker 1: these studies then suggest actually increases your likelihood of you
Speaker 1: or someone you love who lives in that house killing
Speaker 1: one another, rather than somebody coming into your house and
Speaker 1: you're protecting yourself USA that. Yeah, and they even, uh,
Speaker 1: they went to the streets in night in two thousand
Speaker 1: nine in Philadelphia and looked at six and seventy seven
Speaker 1: shootings over a couple of years, and they found that
Speaker 1: people that carry guns were four and a half times
Speaker 1: more likely to be shot and four point two times
Speaker 1: more likely to be killed. And I guess the thinking
Speaker 1: there is, if you have a gun, you may just
Speaker 1: feel more aggressive or more um likely to act ra
Speaker 1: actually or put yourself in a bad part of town
Speaker 1: because hey, I've got this protection, or to be aggressive
Speaker 1: because you know you've got that protection. That kind of thing, um,
Speaker 1: if you And there's this really really great article, UM
Speaker 1: from two thousand ten that was in Harper's Magazine. It
Speaker 1: was in the August two thousand ten UM issue. It's
Speaker 1: called Happiness is a Warren Gun, and it's this guy's
Speaker 1: like this basically his life carrying a gun and like
Speaker 1: just what it's like. It's just a really great look
Speaker 1: at what it's like to have a gun on you
Speaker 1: at all times and like what that means. Um. He says,
Speaker 1: you're in condition white, which is basically you're constantly on
Speaker 1: high alert because if you're carrying a gun, you have
Speaker 1: a sense of responsibility not just for yourself, but you
Speaker 1: also need to protect everybody else if somebody starts shooting
Speaker 1: or if there's a robbery or something like that. That's
Speaker 1: why you have a gun on you. So you feel
Speaker 1: a sense of stewardship of just other people, strangers in public.
Speaker 1: Well sort you're the police all of a sudden. Yeah. Um.
Speaker 1: And so you live in this thing, this this state
Speaker 1: of called condition white, where you're just your threat response,
Speaker 1: You're you're is constantly on at some level, which can
Speaker 1: control Advocates I'm sure are all about condition white, right,
Speaker 1: They're like, yeah, that's exactly what we're looking for, is
Speaker 1: people to be alert and armed. Yeah. Um. This guy,
Speaker 1: believe came to the conclusion that he was tired of
Speaker 1: living in condition white as it's too exhausting, and I
Speaker 1: think he stopped carrying. Maybe I don't remember how it ends,
Speaker 1: but um, it's a really great article. I would recommend
Speaker 1: anybody on either side of the of the issue to
Speaker 1: read that Happiness is a Warren Gun in Harper's. I
Speaker 1: saw dude in the grocery store the other day with
Speaker 1: a piece on his hip, checking out in front of
Speaker 1: me by a six pack of beer. Yeah, and it definitely, like,
Speaker 1: I don't care who you are. When someone walks in
Speaker 1: the room with a gun on their hip these days,
Speaker 1: it changes the mood. I'm not saying it makes things
Speaker 1: bad or good. I'm just saying it changes things. I
Speaker 1: think it probably always has. Yeah, it's a weird thing.
Speaker 1: I mean, I definitely see where people get divided on
Speaker 1: the issue because here in Atlanta there's a lot of crime.
Speaker 1: You hear about a story where some dude went to
Speaker 1: carjack some guy and the dude had a gun in
Speaker 1: his car and shot the guy and now that guy
Speaker 1: is behind bars. I can see how people would be like, good,
Speaker 1: he stopped a criminal like a cop would have. Whereas,
Speaker 1: you know, cops generally investigate already happened crimes. Rarely does
Speaker 1: a cop like thwart a crime in progress. It's just
Speaker 1: right place whereyme time, right time, and so like random
Speaker 1: how that works out. Whereas if the citizens had the guns,
Speaker 1: they could do that themselves. So I can see how
Speaker 1: people get all up in arms and say, yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: there's a case of a person that defended themselves successfully,
Speaker 1: And then the other person might say, yeah, but what
Speaker 1: about that guy whose son accidentally shoots himself in the
Speaker 1: house when the guns out, Like it's two separate four
Speaker 1: year olds yesterday accidentally killed two different people in two
Speaker 1: different states. Yeah, the wife of a sheriff's deputy was
Speaker 1: killed by a four year old at her house. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Like there's with every story or with no matter how
Speaker 1: you feel about it, you can pick the cherry pick
Speaker 1: of story to fit your your beliefs. It's pretty like
Speaker 1: the issue is very, very far from clear cut, and
Speaker 1: it's yeah, it's just very hard to not see both sides.
Speaker 1: I agree with you. There's a guy named David hem
Speaker 1: and Way that wrote an article called Risks and Benefits
Speaker 1: of a Gun in the Home for the American Journal
Speaker 1: of Lifestyle Medicine in two thousand eleven. And this is
Speaker 1: a sort of a newer thing where they're starting to
Speaker 1: frame it. Like I said, it's a health issue, like
Speaker 1: when people are dying, you should look at it as
Speaker 1: a health issue. So he investigates it as such, and
Speaker 1: um came out on the side of the American Academy
Speaker 1: of Pediatrics, who officially have said do not have a
Speaker 1: gun in in the home if you're a parent, Um
Speaker 1: that they've they've the result of this study, at least
Speaker 1: from him, and Way says, the evidence is overwhelming that
Speaker 1: a gun in the house is more of a risk
Speaker 1: factor for completed suicide UH and general violence than the
Speaker 1: benefit side. There are fewer studies, UM that come out
Speaker 1: saying it's actually a benefit to have in the home.
Speaker 1: And kenne Saw George is a big uh. People point
Speaker 1: to kenness All out because it very famously had a
Speaker 1: law passed that mandated that you have a gun in
Speaker 1: your home, and people have always says, well, look at
Speaker 1: Kennessaw crime has gone down, he says him, and Way
Speaker 1: says that that is not true, and if you look
Speaker 1: at the evidence, it is not shown to decrease burglary
Speaker 1: reports at all. And also famously in Morton Grove, Illinois,
Speaker 1: that was a ban on handguns and uh, he points
Speaker 1: out him and Way says, a careful analysis points out
Speaker 1: that UM in Morton Grove, the banning of handguns actually
Speaker 1: followed was actually followed by a large uh significant decrease
Speaker 1: in burglary reports, so no one had guns and there
Speaker 1: were a fewer burglaries, which lies in the face of
Speaker 1: what Kinnesas is trying to do, saying guns in the
Speaker 1: household will prevent burglaries. Well, yeah, there's UM and I
Speaker 1: don't know the stats off the top of my head,
Speaker 1: but there's a there's a pretty good stat um like
Speaker 1: England has very very strict gun control and very low
Speaker 1: homicide rates um from guns. Uh. And I think a
Speaker 1: lot of people also point out like, Okay, well, if
Speaker 1: you don't have guns, you're still gonna have knives, and
Speaker 1: people are still going to kill each other. But I
Speaker 1: think that UM, if you are a gun control advocate,
Speaker 1: you would point out that, UM, it's kind of like
Speaker 1: the completed suicide thing, like, yeah, people are still getting
Speaker 1: to try to kill themselves, but they might not be successful,
Speaker 1: and afterward they might be glad that they weren't successful
Speaker 1: because their situation might improve. If you go to kill
Speaker 1: somebody in a fit of rage and you have a gun,
Speaker 1: you're more likely to be successful than say with a
Speaker 1: knife or a baseball bat or something like that. Um,
Speaker 1: And therefore not being able to complete this homicide, UH,
Speaker 1: this situation may improve for both people, especially the one
Speaker 1: who's not killed. UM. All right, well that's guns. I
Speaker 1: hope you guys made it through this one. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: I think we should do one on the n r A,
Speaker 1: just to learn a little bit more about that organization
Speaker 1: and round this thing out. Um. Okay, we'll look for
Speaker 1: that one in the future, I guess. Huh Uh. If
Speaker 1: you want to learn more about guns, type that word
Speaker 1: into the search part how stuff works dot Com and
Speaker 1: will bring up a bunch of stuff, uh, including how
Speaker 1: guns work. Uh. If I already said that whole spiel
Speaker 1: about the search par didn't I, it means, then, friends,
Speaker 1: it's now time for message break uh and Chuck take
Speaker 1: us out with some listener mail. Huh. Yeah, um, this
Speaker 1: is another Peace Corps email, and we we get a
Speaker 1: lot of these because we find that a we did
Speaker 1: one on the Peace Corps, but before that even we
Speaker 1: got a lot from Peace Corps folks because I think
Speaker 1: they're world travelers who are curious and like to listen
Speaker 1: to things on the Chicken bus. You know what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: I wanted to send you guys an email since I
Speaker 1: finally finished the long List of Stuff You Shnow podcast
Speaker 1: that I downloaded to pass the time while riding on
Speaker 1: Chicken busses throughout Ecuador, as a current Peace Corps volunteer
Speaker 1: in a gold producing region of your the world and
Speaker 1: a former outfitter in Yellowstone National Park. I really enjoyed
Speaker 1: the podcast on Peace Corps coffee, gold, Lison Geyser's and
Speaker 1: Thoroughbread's what I know about these topics. You guys are
Speaker 1: pretty much spot on, uh And I'm also a bit
Speaker 1: of a plant nerd, so I really enjoyed the Randy
Speaker 1: Moss joke on a Loss episode that that was a
Speaker 1: good one, well played. What I was really emailing about
Speaker 1: was see if you guys give a shout out to
Speaker 1: my long time friend Katherine Lifelong. Even she and I
Speaker 1: grew up in South Dakota together and have been friends
Speaker 1: since kindergarten. Even though we went to colleges across the
Speaker 1: country from each other, we managed to remain close friends
Speaker 1: the last twenty years. Unfortunately, due to being in the
Speaker 1: Peace Corps, was unable to make it back for her
Speaker 1: wedding and miss the opportunity to be her maid of honor.
Speaker 1: Although she doesn't have any hard feelings, I still haven't
Speaker 1: made that one up to her and she would love
Speaker 1: it if you guys gave her a shout She turned
Speaker 1: me onto the podcast in fact and saying she enjoys
Speaker 1: listening to it on our own way to work. I
Speaker 1: have been hooked on it ever since. So thank you guys,
Speaker 1: Chuck and Josh and Jerry for providing Katherine and I
Speaker 1: with another link in our friendship. Um, not to mention
Speaker 1: the fact that you provide me with weekly trivia effects
Speaker 1: that have plan on using the twenty something bar scene
Speaker 1: when I moved back to the States. So that is
Speaker 1: from Whitney and hello Catherine, And that's nice that you
Speaker 1: gave Whitney a break for not being your maid of honor. Yeah,
Speaker 1: she's in the Peace Corps after all. Yeah, it's much better,
Speaker 1: bigger than your little wedding. Geez, the Peace Corps just
Speaker 1: bigger than anybody's wedding. I'm sure Catherine would disagree with you,
Speaker 1: but um, that was very nice. Who who is the
Speaker 1: person who writeing Whitney? That's right, Thanks Whitney for writing in. Um.
Speaker 1: If you have a story that you want to share
Speaker 1: about how Chuck and I have brought you closer to somebody,
Speaker 1: we love those, let us know all about it. You
Speaker 1: can tweet to us at s Y s K podcast.
Speaker 1: You can join us on Facebook dot com, slash stuff
Speaker 1: you Should Know. You can send us an email to
Speaker 1: uh stuff podcast at Discovery dot com. He can join
Speaker 1: us at our home on the web that is www.
Speaker 1: Dot stuff you should Know dot com for more on
Speaker 1: this and thousands of other topics. Is it how stuff
Speaker 1: works dot com? Like a good neighbor state farm is
Speaker 1: there with eighteen thousand agents across the country who are
Speaker 1: ready to help you. Seven that's getting to a better state.