MSNBC
For Louisiana, the stakes could not be higher: it has the worst gun murder rate in the nation, and the highest rate of children killed with guns. Overall, guns have been used to kill more people in Louisiana in recent years than in any other state, according to a new analysis.
Between 2001 and 2010, 4,519 people were killed by guns here, more than a thousand more losses than U.S. combat troops suffered during the Iraq War. More than 75% of those victims were African-American. Haunted by the losses, members of the Black Caucus try again and again to introduce some measure of gun control legislation.
But their efforts are always thwarted while a far more powerful group of Republicans and white Democrats stokes Louisiana’s love affair with guns.
Guns are everywhere. On Mother’s Day, a shooting broke out at a New Orleans parade and two children were among 20 people wounded by gunfire. People were injured during a shooting after the Martin Luther King Day parade, and at another just before Mardi Gras festivities.
Yet the pro-gun beat is only getting louder.
“In Louisiana, as we’ve seen for a few years now, they are introducing legislation to allow more people to carry more guns in more places,” said Brian Malte, director of policy and advocacy for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
“If more guns mean a safer society, Louisiana would be the state with the lowest rates of gun violence. In fact, it has one of the highest because of a lack of gun violence prevention laws.”
Why is that? Why is Louisiana so much worse than the rest of the country if more guns make us safer?
Let me take a stab at that one? The "more guns make us safer" suggestion is a blatant lie propagated by the leaders of the gun-rights movement and repeated over and over again by the sheep-like followers who often don't even think for themselves. If they did, they'd immediately see the foolishness of such a position. Louisiana is proof.
Allow me to anticipate one of the common retorts we often hear. The above chart and its article is concerned with "gun" murders. When we remove the "gun" part, guess which state is still on top.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
From the article that you linked to, the states with the lowest murder rates:
ReplyDeleteHawai'i
New Hampshire
Vermont
Rhode Island
Minnesota
Iowa
Utah
Maine
Oregon
Idaho
Those are the ten lowest rates. Of those, Hawai'i has the laws that you demand, and Rhode Island is getting there. Oregon has a few silly laws. The rest are states that have what I call good gun laws. If gun control did what you claimed it does, there would be a strong correlation between the type of laws a state has and its murder rate. But there isn't. When seven or eight of the ten states with the lowest rates have laws that I am comfortable with, that questions your argument.
When Indiana and California have the same rate, that questions your argument.
When Virginia's rate is lower than those of New York or New Jersey, that questions your argument.
When the rates in Maryland and South Carolina are the same, that questions your argument.
When Illinois and Georgia have the same rate, that questions your argument.
In fact, given the evidence, your argument has nothing to stand on.
Greg,
DeleteIf we removed cars from the road (as they eventually should), would there be traffic accidents?
The same could be said about civilian gun ownership. Once firearms are removed from general circulation, people simply lose the means to effectively kill one another, while enhancing the power of the state law enforcement agencies to protect society.
The only failing of gun control is that police lack the ability to effectively enforce such laws under the current constitution. For more social control to be achieved, more things need to go besides guns.
Jade, at least you didn't copy and paste this time.
Deleteand if you look at the top 3 states 2 have some of the loosest gun laws in the country and the other is a vacation destination with a military base. Your fooling no one.
ReplyDeleteMike, Louisiana is one data point. What happens when you look at all 50 states? You know this because I showed it to you numerous times. Do you know what they call it when you exclude. 98% of the data? Cherry-picking. How do you explain all the states like Utah that have Louisiana's gun laws but not their murders?
ReplyDeleteWait a minute. I asked you first. How do you explain Louisiana?
DeleteMikeb, first off, weather may play a part. If you look at the color-coded maps of states and homicide rates, the warmer the climate, the more murders. I'm not pushing that idea hard, but it's an interesting loose correlation. Beyond that, we have to look at Louisiana's history of violence and corruption.
DeleteThe point is that Louisiana isn't unique in its gun laws. Lots of states have the same or similar. If your argument were correct, every state with good gun laws would have a high murder rate.
Come on, I've said this dozens of times. Louisiana is one data point where there is NO CORRELATION. I have never claimed that there is any relationship between gun laws and crime- as in I am not trying to claim that gun control causes crime. I do say that gun control is worthless because of this lack of correlation. What we have is this random scatter plot of gun laws to murder rates. And Louisiana is the worst example for our side. You just picked the best cherry for you and ignored all the rest.
DeleteThe other 49 states explain Louisiana. They show how gun laws have nothing to do with murder rates.
Well, it's a 100% more than one data point with Mississippi close on its heals. Looks like two data points.
DeleteOk, keep going. 48 more states to go.
DeleteYou can start with Louisiana, but the more states you add the closer you get to zero. When you did that "proof" average a few months ago with just 20 states the murder rates were almost on top of each other. Remember how I also showed you how of Louisiana had one more Brady point the average would be turned on its head? Louisiana is a really bad data point for us (which is why you focus on it), but we see that the more data we look at (adding good data for us, and bad data for you) that it has nothing to do with gun laws.
Regarding what Greg said, I recall reading an article on Chicago violence where they said the winter months have the fewest murders because it is so frickin cold outside so people stay indoors. The southern cities don't have that lull period.
Mikeb, you really should stop trying to analyze data. Would you get this: There is no correlation between gun laws and homicide rates. Plenty of things do correlate. Economic status. Education levels. Race relations. Population density.
DeleteLook at my first comment in this thread. Seven or eight of the ten states with the lowest homicide rates have good gun laws. If you're right, how can that be?
Hi, Mikeb! Wannna talk about restrictive Louisiana gun laws? The state had them once, you know, courtesy of the KKK. Laws like this one:
ReplyDeleteNo negro who is not in the military service shall be allowed to carry fire-arms, or any kind of weapons, within the parish, without the special written permission of his employers, approved and endorsed by the nearest and most convenient chief of patrol.
Like UCLA Constitutional law Professor Adam Winkler (no gun rights advocate) says, "The KKK began as a gun control organization."
Some might say that, "The people of the world are divided into two groups"--advocates of oppressive gun laws, and advocates of universal liberty.
I'd say we know in which group to put you--and those who advocated that Reconstruction-era "gun control" law.
That's a bit off topic, wouldn't you say? We're talking about the lax gun laws and proliferation of guns in LA TODAY and the resultant murder rate.
DeleteThis is a mild example of why most of your comments don't get posted. You wrote an off topic response designed to culminate in a remark about me, and a bizarre one at that. HAD I lived 150 years ago, I WOULD HAVE supported the KKK.
I told you a few times, your opinion of me personally is not the topic and your glib comments about me will not be posted.
My question is why are you so obsessed with me like that? Why can't you stay on topic? I wish you would try harder because I value your input very much. It's an example of the extreme cutting edge of the gun-rights movement, or should I say at the risk of breaking my own rule, excessive and laughable fanaticism.
I enjoy shooting. But when I learnt how to use a gun I quickly realized that guns are a dangerous thing in the wrong peoples hands and without the correct training and correct mindset under pressure. This has led me to the conclusion that I would happily never fire a gun again in my life if guns could be banned.
ReplyDeleteYou are correct in the only logical conclusion to the problem of civilian firearms and personal freedom. It is simply not the place of the mere subject of the State, to undermine the authority of such by using, proliferating, possessing firearms or any form of knowledge regarding such. All you need to know is that firearms are dangerous, and that it is not your station in life to use such outside of the context of a State-sanction force in one's official capacity.
DeleteThe mere civilian, with no ties to any law enforcement agency, no employment based armament need, and who conveys no public authority bears no interest in the preservation of domestic tranquility. If the U.S. government continues to allow individual non-State actors to obtain and possess firearms, the United States congress is in gross violation of the peoples right to Civilian Disarmament, as expressed in the preamble of the Constitution of the United States. You have no reasonable claim of any right to possess weapons, however you have the right to be disarmed. Congress bears the fundamental duty to fulfill this right.
The U.S. needs to allow Ex post facto prosecutions so they can punish those who have held firearms after prohibitive measures are taken, in order for the impending ban to become effective. Without proper enforcement, such a law has no meaning.
Well, you could look to other factors, say population density, to explain any "anomalies" in the numbers.
ReplyDeleteLouisiana's Population density is 105/sq mi (40.5/km2) and is ranked 24th in the U.S.
Utah, on the other hand, is the 10th-least-densely populated of the 50 United States at 34.3/sq mi (13.2/km2) and is ranked 41st in the U.S. We could also toss in Mormonism as another possible explanation.
Likewise, even though Vermont has lax gun laws--how many people actually own guns? Or could it be Vermont is 30th in the Population density category (67.73 inhabitants per square mile (26.15 /km2)) with no large cities?
Likewise, Greg uses Indiana at 16th (182.5 inhabitants per square mile (70.5 /km2)) and California (11th in density at 244.2 inhabitants per square mile (94.3 /km2)). Of course, in this comparison the number looks closer in size. On the other hand, California has the following large cities: LA (2nd) and San Francisco (7th) while Indiana doesn't really have any large metropolitan areas, but is close to Chicago and Louisville.
I wouldn't just blame it on gun laws as there might be other factors.
As for gun ownership, we can only guess at the numbers and whether there is an actual correlation.
But when I see that New Jersey's (the state with the largest populations density at 1,205 inhabitants per square mile (465 /km2) has a rate of murder equal to West Virginia (29th at 77.06 inhabitants per square mile (29.75 /km2))--I would like to know what might be the reason for that.
Gun laws?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population_density
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population_density
I think surveys are generally quite weak, but they are better than a "guess" for gun ownership. You have touted LCAV's gun ownership survey in the past, and when we compare it to murder rates we find there is no correlation. There is no correlation of murders to Brady scores either- something which we don't have to rely on a survey for.
DeleteYou guntards are so keen to make up facts as you go along.
DeleteEverybody but the gundorks know that people with guns (the fat, white, and stupid guntards themselves) are a shooting waiting to happen. With you it is just a matter of time.
You can invent all the lies that you want, but you can't change the obvious truth.
Laci, perhaps you haven't heard of Indianapolis, Fort Wayne, Gary, or South Bend? You should know about Fort Wayne, since Paul Helmke was once the mayor there.
Delete