STUDY: States With Loose Gun Laws Have Higher Rates Of Gun Violence - Polidicks

[quote]The National Rifle Association (NRA) and its allies in Congress frequently claim that gun violence is highest in places with the toughest crime laws. But a new study from the Center for American Progress (CAP) suggests something closer to the opposite is true — [b]the states with laxer gun laws tend to be the ones contributing the highest shares of national gun deaths and injuries.[/b][/quote] Article: [url]http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/04/03/1811311/study-states-with-loose-gun-laws-have-higher-rates-of-gun-violence/[/url] Study (pdf): [url]http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/AmericaUnderTheGun.pdf[/url] [img]http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Screen-shot-2013-04-03-at-8.03.53-AM-e1364990755473.png[/img] I know Think Progress is not exactly objective in its reporting, but it certainly is no Mother Jones in its exaggerating. This is still a legitimate study. Let's poke holes in it, Facepunch!

have you considered that only outlaws don't kill people, guns kill umbrellas?

[QUOTE=Fourm Shark;40150559]Wouldn't Texas be at the top?[/QUOTE] It doesn't work for Texas due to being a border state and having more problems than some other non-border state. We have drug cartels doing drug running and weapons smuggling on the borders, no amount of gun legislation is going to affect that.

welp there goes automerge

What about Oregon? They have some rather loose gun laws and they're marked as one of the "lowest"

[QUOTE=QueenSasha24;40150696]What about Oregon? They have some rather loose gun laws and they're marked as one of the "lowest"[/QUOTE] an exception or two don't disprove a correlation

Ok, now what about general violent crime?

[I]"It has been reported that Mr. Sherlock has been quoted for saying [b]"no shit"[/b] upon learning of this study. Mr Watson on the other hand was unavailable for comment."[/I]

[QUOTE=person11;40150508]Article: [url]http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/04/03/1811311/study-states-with-loose-gun-laws-have-higher-rates-of-gun-violence/[/url] Study (pdf): [url]http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/AmericaUnderTheGun.pdf[/url] [img]http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Screen-shot-2013-04-03-at-8.03.53-AM-e1364990755473.png[/img] I know Think Progress is not exactly objective in its reporting, but it certainly is no Mother Jones in its exaggerating. This is still a legitimate study. Let's poke holes in it, Facepunch![/QUOTE] According to data from MAIG and Brady. Totally not biased at all.

That doesn't really mean much... Countries with more motor vehicles have more traffic accidents, this is common knowledge. (more often) The real question is are there more homicides and suicides in the States with loose gun laws. Not this bullshit.

So why is the state which is in the top 5 of highest gun ownership(North Dakota) has some of the lowest crime rates? I mean seriously, the headline news of this state when I first moved here was about someone's race horse getting drugged and raped, and kids spray painting.

Just glancing over the study I can't really see how they got these results. They make them look better by using rate by 100,000. But the actual death count seems quite high in some of the green states like Illinois and California.

These red states also feature a high precarian population and much poverty. Income levels determine crime in general more than anything. Gun crime is higher because crime is higher, and crime is higher because incomes aren't.

[QUOTE=Sgt.Sgt;40150827]Just glancing over the study I can't really see how they got these results. They make them look better by using rate by 100,000. But the actual death count seems quite high in some of the green states like Illinois and California.[/QUOTE] that's because those states have more people living in them which is why you adjust results so they are per capita hence the "deaths per 100,000" thing this is how statistics work

"gun deaths and injuries" would include suicides and ND's, which has nothing to do with violent crime.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;40150747]an exception or two don't disprove a correlation[/QUOTE] correlations still shouldn't be cited as the be-all end-all discussion enders. correlation does not imply causation.

Proofs that guns are not related to crime are ok (even if them come from the NRA) yet other studies showing the opposite are biased and badly done shit that shouldn't be considered? Stay classy facepunch.

[QUOTE=Irkalla;40150857]These red states also feature a high precarian population and much poverty. Income levels determine crime in general more than anything. Gun crime is higher because crime is higher, and crime is higher because incomes aren't.[/QUOTE] And income is low because those businesses and individuals who are actually making money are moving away from the gun violence. Gotta stop the vicious cycle somehow, but then people would cry [I]"muh reeghts!!"[/I]

[QUOTE=Bliblixe;40150936]Proofs that guns are not related to crime are ok (even if them come from the NRA) yet other studies showing the opposite are biased and badly done shit that shouldn't be considered? Stay classy facepunch.[/QUOTE] oh wow another post classifying facepunch as a hivemind god damn these posts are old

The statement by the NRA and others was always more narrowly-focused than states. It's not just about states as a whole, it's about cities. Chicago has stricter laws than the rest of the state, but higher gun crime. Same with Philadelphia, DC, and New York City. In short, nothing here was in contention, but it's an extremely specific sample size. If you look at the level of cities or counties the correlation disappears, and if you look at the level of countries it disappears as well. It's only at the level of states that the data shows a trend, and even then there are some pretty significant outliers.

[QUOTE=Irkalla;40150857]These red states also feature a high precarian population and much poverty. Income levels determine crime in general more than anything. Gun crime is higher because crime is higher, and crime is higher because incomes aren't.[/QUOTE] This is a chart of gun deaths, not crimes exclusively. It's basically an stupidly obvious inevitability that people will use their guns when they muat and are at liberty to do so. Basically it's saying countries where more people buy cake tends to have more people eating cake.

[QUOTE=Van-man;40150939]And income is low because those businesses and individuals who are actually making money are moving away from the gun violence. Gotta stop the vicious cycle somehow, but then people would cry [I]"muh reeghts!!"[/I][/QUOTE] it's almost as if this is a multifaceted issue and that saying "guns have no correlation with gun crime" and attempting to discount literally any attempt to link guns with crime is just as absurd as blaming all crime on guns. maybe we could use this attitude to have a more reasonable discussion on the notoriously trigger-happy forum thathbbbbthahhahahahahahahahahahahaha

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;40150799]So why is the state which is in the top 5 of highest gun ownership(North Dakota) has some of the lowest crime rates? I mean seriously, the headline news of this state when I first moved here was about someone's race horse getting drugged and raped, and kids spray painting.[/QUOTE] There's also Maine and Utah. Utah is one of those evil places where people are allowed to carry guns in schools. This study is all over the place, and I still fail to see why gun violence specifically is more important than violence in general. Here in Idaho, just as many people were intentionally run over by cars in the time span this study is showing as those shot by those scary black rifles you hear about in the news.

[QUOTE=Van-man;40150939]And income is low because those businesses and individuals who are actually making money are moving away from the gun violence. Gotta stop the vicious cycle somehow, but then people would cry [I]"muh reeghts!!"[/I][/QUOTE] As if. Businesses just don't come here when they can do business in a tax haven or in a financial powerhouse like New York. That's the only vicious cycle here. Businesses not coming because businesses aren't here.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;40150989]it's almost as if this is a multifaceted issue and that saying "guns have no correlation with gun crime" and attempting to discount literally any attempt to link guns with crime is just as absurd as blaming all crime on guns. maybe we could use this attitude to have a more reasonable discussion on the notoriously trigger-happy forum thathbbbbthahhahahahahahahahahahahaha[/QUOTE] yeah, i mean, it's obvious you want to have a full on intelligent discussion when you post like this i'm not even taking a side, it's just funny to see that

[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;40151001]There's also Maine and Utah. Utah is one of those evil places where people are allowed to carry guns in schools. This study is all over the place, and I still fail to see why gun violence specifically is more important than violence in general. Here in Idaho, just as many people were intentionally run over by cars in the time span this study is showing as those shot by those scary black rifles you hear about in the news.[/QUOTE] Violence is not the head of the snake. Income inequality is. Cut the head off of the snake, and the ass will die. where's the automerge

[QUOTE=Fourm Shark;40150559]Wouldn't Texas be at the top?[/QUOTE] i live in dallas and it's illegal to show a firearm in public no matter what. concealed guns are fine

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;40151004]yeah, i mean, it's obvious you want to have a full on intelligent discussion when you post like this i'm not even taking a side, it's just funny to see that[/QUOTE] i gotta get my shitposts in early before this turns into another "post your favorite assault rifle" thread like all the rest of the gun control threads, forgive me if there's a drop in quality

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;40151062]i gotta get my shitposts in early before this turns into another "post your favorite assault rifle" thread like all the rest of the gun control threads, forgive me if there's a drop in quality[/QUOTE] it's like there's no recognition in your brain of what you're doing

[QUOTE=Irkalla;40151032]Income inequality is.[/QUOTE] No it isn't. Prove it.