"I am generally skeptical of gun laws," says Eugene Volokh, a law professor at UCLA. "The theory is that gun laws may prevent crimes of passion—domestic crimes, altercations over traffic incidents, or committed by someone who is otherwise law-abiding but has an anger problem… gun-control laws can potentially do something, but the kind of crime by which they can do the least is a mass shooting."
#1, Mississippi Gun deaths per 100,000: 18.3 Permissive gun laws: 4th out of 50
#2, Arizona Gun deaths per 100,000: 15 Permissive gun laws: 1st out of 50
#3, Alaska Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6 Permissive gun laws: 11th out of 50
#4, Arkansas Gun deaths per 100,000: 15.1 Permissive gun laws: 7th out of 50
#5, Louisiana Gun deaths per 100,000: 19.9 Permissive gun laws: 23rd out of 50
#6, New Mexico Gun deaths per 100,000: 15 Permissive gun laws: 6th out of 50
#7, Alabama Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6 Permissive gun laws: 27th out of 50
#8, Nevada Gun deaths per 100,000: 16.2 Permissive gun laws: 22nd out of 50
#9, Montana Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5 Permissive gun laws: 10th out of 50
#10, Wyoming Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5 Permissive gun laws: 8th out of 50
It doesn't take a scientist to draw some obvious conclusions from this list. The only question is how can pro-gun folks deny the obvious. Do some of them actually believe what they say. It's hard to imagine.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
"It doesn't take a scientist to draw some obvious conclusions from this list."
ReplyDeleteYou're right. It doesn't. That's because any idiot should be able to see that there is no correlation between gun deaths and permissive gun laws.
Where is #2, #3 and the rest of the Top 10 most permissive? Why are they not there? If there were a correlation, wouldn't the top 10 most permissive also be the top 10 in gun deaths?
ReplyDeleteFWM: No. A correlation means the preponderance, or majority, of available data supports a conclusion.
ReplyDeleteFor example, we know smoking leads to various lung ailments. We also know that not everyone who smokes gets a lung ailment.
http://newtrajectory.blogspot.com/2011/01/important-data-trends-nra-doesnt-want.html
ReplyDeleteMike: “It doesn't take a scientist to draw some obvious conclusions from this list. The only question is how can pro-gun folks deny the obvious.”
ReplyDeleteI don’t deny obvious, I deny relevancy. Yes, if you don’t have guns, people won’t get shot by guns, and countries with low car ownership have low automobile fatalities. What you are not saying is whether it is a better place. Show me this graph: strength of gun laws vs. total violent crime rates, murder rates, and you can even through in suicide rate. Do it.
Thanks to Luci for posting the link.
ReplyDeleteClearly there IS a strong correlation between lax gun laws and increased gun deaths, by state. There is also a correlation between percent of firearms ownership and gun deaths, by state. This makes it really hard for the pro-gun group to make their hollow arguments about more guns and less regulation = safer community. The opposite is shown by the data.
Let’s look at some basic arguing stances between the two sides: You say too many people are dying. This is because there is too easy access to guns/too many people with guns/too many guns period. We say that people are the problem, and if you take away guns/access to guns, that those people will substitute a different tool (or means of suicide). You in turn say that those tools will be less effective, so therefore overall deaths would be reduced. So… prove it. Prove it by linking total guns/gun access/gun laws to total deaths/murders/crime rates/suicides, etc. Linking guns to “death by gun” doesn’t prove us wrong.
ReplyDeleteUm TS, did you look at the graphs in the link I posted? They show just that.
ReplyDeleteYes Laci, I did. And they both showed "gun deaths". Is there another graph?
ReplyDeleteIt seems crystal clear to me. I think many gun owners agree too but just won't admit it.
ReplyDeleteTS: You said
ReplyDeleteShow me this graph: strength of gun laws vs. total violent crime rates, murder rates, and you can even through in suicide rate. Do it.
Well, it's been done: complete with a description of the methodology. Now you say you're not satisfied.
Me: "Show me this graph: strength of gun laws vs. total violent crime rates, murder rates, and you can even through in suicide rate"
ReplyDeleteI asked for total rates, not just with guns. It would show how reducing access to guns benefits society because fewer people died, as opposed to simply fewer people dying by gun but doesn’t mean fewer people are dying overall. Should be easy.
TS, I think you are proving something that i have begun to suspect.
ReplyDeleteFirearms are the new relgion of the right.
Believe in the gun and you will have eternal life!
Believe in the gun and there will be no evil in society.
Believe in the gun and you will have freedom.
That's even sillier than what you claim we say.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html
ReplyDeleteThis covers countries not states, but you can see that several countries with much stricter gun laws have much higher violent crime rates than the US.
Apples and oranges, Jim. What GB considers a "violent crime" is often a misdemeanor in the US, and so on and so on.
ReplyDelete