Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Most dangerous states - gun law comparison

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Superstition Mountain, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    424

    Post imported post

    Saw this article in the news today, and found it interesting.

    Ariz. is third-most dangerous state, report says Associated Press
    Mar. 22, 2007 10:26 AM

    PORTLAND, Maine - Arizona is ranked as one of the most dangerous states in the nation in an annual analysis that came out today.

    The Kansas research firm Morgan Quitno Press says Nevada is the most dangerous state, with New Mexico at No. 2 in that category, followed by neighboring Arizona, and then Maryland and Tennessee.

    The safest states, according to the report, are North Dakota, Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire and Wyoming.

    Morgan Quitno bases it rankings on a formula using crime rates in six crime categories.
    Arizona is a pretty gun-friendly state, but it is listed as the 3rd most dangerous. On the other hand, Vermont and NH (isn't one of those even more gun-friendly than AZ?) are amont the safest states.

    I found it interesting that Arizona and Maryland are among the most dangerous, in spite of the fact that they are diametrically opposite in regards to gun laws.

    IS there any correlation between gun laws and relative safety?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Bristow, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    491

    Post imported post

    In VA and most other gun-friendly states you will see low crime rates as opposed to restrictive states . The crime problem out West can mostly be traced to the criminals pouring over the Southern border . If the police have these stats. separated out it is unlikely they will be published as this would not be politically correct.

  3. #3
    Regular Member VAopencarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The 'Dena, Mаяуlaпd
    Posts
    2,147

    Post imported post

    I don't pay much attention to any/many studies without seeing the criteria used. 'Six' crime categories does not tell me anything
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    450

    Post imported post

    mzbk2l wrote:
    Saw this article in the news today, and found it interesting.

    Ariz. is third-most dangerous state, report says Associated Press
    Mar. 22, 2007 10:26 AM

    PORTLAND, Maine - Arizona is ranked as one of the most dangerous states in the nation in an annual analysis that came out today.

    The Kansas research firm Morgan Quitno Press says Nevada is the most dangerous state, with New Mexico at No. 2 in that category, followed by neighboring Arizona, and then Maryland and Tennessee.

    The safest states, according to the report, are North Dakota, Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire and Wyoming.

    Morgan Quitno bases it rankings on a formula using crime rates in six crime categories.
    Arizona is a pretty gun-friendly state, but it is listed as the 3rd most dangerous. On the other hand, Vermont and NH (isn't one of those even more gun-friendly than AZ?) are amont the safest states.

    I found it interesting that Arizona and Maryland are among the most dangerous, in spite of the fact that they are diametrically opposite in regards to gun laws.

    IS there any correlation between gun laws and relative safety?
    To answer your last question.

    No... because GUNS do not cause CRIME.... PEOPLE do. The only conclusion which can be drawn from this study, is that there are more violent criminals in certain states.

    I personallythink there is much more of a correlation between Arizona being on the border with Mexico, and thus inhabited by a large number of desperate 'assault ********',than because the state is more lenient towards 'assault weapons'... The largely urban states have their own out-of-controlproblems (inner city issues... gangs, poverty/welfare, drugs... combined into a glorious mess called the democratic voting base)

    Big 'duh'.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Superstition Mountain, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    424

    Post imported post

    All good answers, and true about the study being vague.

    I just posted it for some discussion. One state with very open gun laws, and one state with VERY restrictive gun laws compare similarly in rates of crime.

    Guns would seem to be neither a deterrant nor a cause of crime, based only on that study.

    Similarly, one state that is very "dangerous" and one state that is very "safe" have similar open attitudes toward guns.

    Again, guns would seem to be neither a deterrant nor a cause of crime, based only on that study.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Mesa, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    36

    Post imported post

    True, studies can be swayed how ever you want by omitting data or re-grouping the stats. When they show crimes commited with guns, and show that it is in a state that has less strict gun laws they assume its the laws. I would like to see how many of those had legal guns or were carrying them legally. i good study that was up here somewhere was from the FBI, basics of it were that guns carried in holsters, ahrdley if ever were used in a crime.

  7. #7
    Regular Member VAopencarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The 'Dena, Mаяуlaпd
    Posts
    2,147

    Post imported post

    You could also say states that are 'may issue' or guns are illegal, represent 27% of all states and cities in those states represent 36% of Most Dangerous cities.

    I also noticed Pine Bluff AR. #3 most dangerous metroplolitan area but the city doesn't make the top 25, how's that? Are 'suburbs' of Pine Bluff overrun with rapist and murderer's?

    ABout Morgan Quinto, the group who compiles this 'ranking'

    • Morgan Quitno's "Most Dangerous Cities" ranking has been criticized as a statistical half-truth, since it does not adjust rankings of cities with wide area city limits (Houston, Jacksonville) compared to cities with inner core limits (St. Louis, Atlanta). Houston's city crime statistics, for instance, are diluted by lower crime in affluent areas within its broad city limits, whereas almost all the low crime affluent areas of St. Louis are outside its city limits, which constitute only 12.5% of its metro area.
    • The FBI recommends against use of its crime statistics for the direct comparison of cities as Morgan Quitno does in its "Most Dangerous Cities" rankings. This is due to the many variables that influence crime in a particular study area such as population density and the degree of urbanization, modes of transportation of highway system, economic conditions, and citizens' attitudes toward crime.
    • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_...ngerous_Cities
    • EDIT: ARGH!! won't let me clean this up!

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    I believe it's a race issue more than a gun issue because just looking at guns alone doesn't explain the connection, and there probably isn't one re: just guns (and as the OP already mentioned).

    Look at the population demographics (race) of the so-called "safe" states compared tothose of the "unsafe" states. Of course, by saying this I am automatically branded a racist and bigot, but it doesn't matter though...I'm not, and race IS a bigissue re: street-crime/gangs whether people want to admit it or not.

    So I say it's a race issue, not a gun issue, and also yes, it's the people criminally using the guns who are causing the trouble.

    We all represent our race whether we want to or not.

    -- John D.



    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Mesa, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    36

    Post imported post

    Wow, ranked 21 on the top 25, not sure why they only put Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale together, Phoenix-Mesa-Tempe-Chandlet-Gilbert-Scottsdale even Queen Creek are all starting to run together. It should just all be renamed as one big city. I worked in Mesa, but if I went across the street I was in Gilbert. Are there actually any place or agency that has the actual stats on crime in a city? That the public has access to.

  10. #10
    Regular Member VAopencarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The 'Dena, Mаяуlaпd
    Posts
    2,147

    Post imported post

    FBI has the raw data.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Arlington, ,
    Posts
    46

    Post imported post

    My thought about level of violence vs. gun laws is this (if I weren't both lazy and completely lacking in free time, I'd look at compiling/analyzing the stats) - the only place the effect of gun laws on crime is very evident is in border areas (especially, of course, where laws are diametrically different).

    The biggest example, obviously is where I live, the DC area - we've got a subway system that serves 3 distinct jurisdictions (the subway in NYC doesn't even do that). Moreover, of course, VA has reasonable gun laws, with MD a distant 2nd, followed closely thereafter by DC. I'll go out on a limb and say that if DC ever, whether forced or otherwise, starts allowing carry of any kind, crime will obviously drop in DC. But I'd bet it will also go up in VA and MD (probably moreso in MD, if they're able to keep their restrictive gun laws).

    But it only stands to reason - if the thugs don't gain any safety benefit in commiting their criminal acts in NW DC or Georgetown, why not head to Arlington (which is closer/easier to get tothan those neighborhoods to the worst parts of DC via the Metro, and is generally and more consistently wealthier than DC)?

    The only areas that I can think of that could potentially come close as far as border areas with drastically differing laws are a bit of a stretch - Boston area (NH being commuting distance nowadays), Vegas perhaps. One might list New Orleans given the mayor's heavy handed gun confiscation as compared to the burbs there, but he's been thoroughly rebuffed by the state legislature.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Bristow, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    491

    Post imported post

    One big deterrent VA has is the "No Parole" laws , with longer prison time almost a certainty . Operation Exile helps also . The thugs will stay in DC as long as the standard punishment is : Extend hand for wrist slap .

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •