Yes let's just remove all the major cities period, that will give us a very good measure of a useless statistic.
Printable View
Yes let's just remove all the major cities period, that will give us a very good measure of a useless statistic.
I doubt that the statistic would be useless, it might be inconvenient, but certainly not useless.Quote:
Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore
While events like this get headlines they are statistic blips. Don't just look at numbers, look at distribution. There are plenty of places in the US where guns are common yet gun crime is low. The numbers are skewed by concentrations of certain types of violence in certain areas.
Are you saying its fondue's fault?Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
In Washington D.C., which has THE lowest percentage of gun owners in the country, there are approx. 16 murders committed with firearms per 100,000 people per year. In Wyoming, which has THE highest percentage of gun owners in the country there is less than 1 murder involving a firearm per 100,000 people per year (.91 to be exact).Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
According to the Washington Post 3.8% of people in DC own guns. On the same chart it shows 59.7% of people in Wyoming do. The chart doesn't say it, but my guess is that the extremely low percentage of people who (legally) own guns in DC is due to them having some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country.
The firearm homicide rate in DC is almost 18 times what it is in Wyoming. Gun ownership in Wyoming is almost 16 times what it is in DC. Hmmm. So what conclusion could you draw from that information...
1. The legal gun owners in DC shoot an awful lot of people.
2. We should all move to Wyoming because its a happy place.
3. People in DC are better shots than people in WY.
From a slightly different angle, the three states with the lowest homocide by firearm rates are Vermont (.32 deaths per 100,000), New Hampshire (.38) and North Dakota (.61). The percentage of gun onwers in those states are 42%, 30% and 50.7% respectively. Not exactly restrictive, aye? Allow me to add other choices...
4. There are a lot of illegal guns behind the mischief in DC.
5. Maybe its not the legal guns that are the problem at all...
I think you're right Alan, that would be inconvenient.
You might want to take a look at who it is who is actually committing crimes of violence, too:
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...rsons-arrested
Some subset of the demographic is more equal than others. Perhaps looking into that would be of benefit.
I believe that #4 is the winner, and thank you for doing the legwork I was hoping a few of the other posters would do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregg
In the United States, those regions which have very strict gun control laws also generally have the highest incidences of gun related violence. I don't understand why anyone would advocate more of the same.
By the same token, virtually all incidents of mass murder involving some crazy with a gun occur in locations which have exercised their lawful right to ban weapons on their property. And why not? What better target than the defenseless?
Because Washington DC and Wyoming are some how comparable in any way, shape, or form. They might as well be different countries. Talk about comparing apples and well ... ahi tuna?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore
Maybe DC should try and figure out why they're not shooting each other in Wyoming.
You miss the point AMN. The point is exactly that they ARE so different.Quote:
Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore
DC has THE most restrictive gun laws in the country and the smallest number of guns per capita. At the same time they have the highest gun homicide rate in the country.
Wyoming has among the least restrictive gun laws in the country and the largest number of guns per capita. At the same time they have one of the lowest gun homicide rates in the country.
There was no attempt at apples to apples regarding anything except their respective gun laws and the end results of those laws. The approach to guns in the two places goes 180* from each other. Opposite. Polar opposite, in fact. That makes the comparison a custom made case study all in real life. You don't have to assume anything because there are decades of data to back up the conclusions. That is what should give you some insight.