- Messages
- 45
- Reactions
- 22
Hi all,
I thought I'd share this.
Browsing my facebook feed, I found yet another "concerned mother about gun control" share. I typically ignore it as these articles have little facts and a lot of BS, but this time decided to read it and found rather bold statement in the article - "more guns = more homicide". I thought that should be easy to verify - as someone has already done my homework and all the numbers are here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
It's 2010 data though, and according to FBI national murder rate is down from 5.0 to 4.5 between 2010 and 2014, but whatever - numbers are numbers.
So the idea is simple - if I put gun ownership rate and murder rate on one graph, a positive trend line would prove that statement
So here is the graph, murder rate and gun ownership, by state:
while it's scattered all over, the trend line is that thin dotted one - and it's negative. Means statistically speaking, one is less likely to be murdered in a state with higher gun ownership rate.
Well, I thought - ok, that theory is busted, credibility of the article author drops to zero in my eyes.
But what if we build another graph - gun ownership and GUN murder rate? Gun is a tool, a very handy for someone planning a murder, right? So at least that trend gotta be positive - as convenient tools are more widely available, potential murderers are more likely to use them, right?
So here is another graph I built - gun murder rate vs gun ownership
Still a negative trend!
Anyway, I thought - at least some of the claims must be, well, not true maybe, but at least somewhat defensible. Let's say, in a state with fewer guns per capita, for a murder victim chances of being killed by a gun (rather than by something else) must be higher, right?
so here is another graph for ya
You see the dotted trend line? yes, according to 2010 statistics, in the United States chances that a murderer would use a gun in the murder are LOWER in states with higher per-capita gun ownership.
Btw, did you notice the dot in top left corner on first two graphs? Highest murder (including gun murder) rate with lowest gun ownership, with worldwide ranking somewhere between Myanmar and Guyana (yes, there are such countries), way higher than let's say Zimbabwe?
It is District of Columbia.
PS feel free to use the data in any way you like.
I thought I'd share this.
Browsing my facebook feed, I found yet another "concerned mother about gun control" share. I typically ignore it as these articles have little facts and a lot of BS, but this time decided to read it and found rather bold statement in the article - "more guns = more homicide". I thought that should be easy to verify - as someone has already done my homework and all the numbers are here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
It's 2010 data though, and according to FBI national murder rate is down from 5.0 to 4.5 between 2010 and 2014, but whatever - numbers are numbers.
So the idea is simple - if I put gun ownership rate and murder rate on one graph, a positive trend line would prove that statement
So here is the graph, murder rate and gun ownership, by state:
while it's scattered all over, the trend line is that thin dotted one - and it's negative. Means statistically speaking, one is less likely to be murdered in a state with higher gun ownership rate.
Well, I thought - ok, that theory is busted, credibility of the article author drops to zero in my eyes.
But what if we build another graph - gun ownership and GUN murder rate? Gun is a tool, a very handy for someone planning a murder, right? So at least that trend gotta be positive - as convenient tools are more widely available, potential murderers are more likely to use them, right?
So here is another graph I built - gun murder rate vs gun ownership
Still a negative trend!
Anyway, I thought - at least some of the claims must be, well, not true maybe, but at least somewhat defensible. Let's say, in a state with fewer guns per capita, for a murder victim chances of being killed by a gun (rather than by something else) must be higher, right?
so here is another graph for ya
You see the dotted trend line? yes, according to 2010 statistics, in the United States chances that a murderer would use a gun in the murder are LOWER in states with higher per-capita gun ownership.
Btw, did you notice the dot in top left corner on first two graphs? Highest murder (including gun murder) rate with lowest gun ownership, with worldwide ranking somewhere between Myanmar and Guyana (yes, there are such countries), way higher than let's say Zimbabwe?
It is District of Columbia.
PS feel free to use the data in any way you like.
Last Edited: