Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: VPC study on gun death rate

  1. #1
    Regular Member Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska, USA
    Posts
    1,224

    Post imported post

    Here is a study by the Violence Policy Center on gun death rates thatare notin our favor. However, there is no detail or definitionto what exactly they are terming a gun death.I am assuming they are lopping suicides, accidental discharges, etc. into the pot and are purposely attempting to skew the statistics for their benefit. Alaska for example has a high suicide rate due to the cabin feverish, depressive state that some are susceptible to during the long, dark, winter months..

    What do you all think?

    http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/st...2008,+03:21+PM






    'Pro-Gun' States Lead the Nation in Per Capita Firearm Death Rates




    Violence Policy Center Analysis of New Data Reveals Louisiana, Alaska,
    Montana, Tennessee, and Alabama Top List of Deadliest States in the Nation



    Blind Allegiance to the Second Amendment Takes Deadly Toll



    WASHINGTON, April 24 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- States in the South and
    West with weak gun laws and high rates of gun ownership lead the nation in
    overall firearm death rates according to a new analysis issued today by the
    Violence Policy Center (VPC) of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
    (CDC) data.



    The new VPC analysis uses 2005 data (the most recent available) from
    the CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. The analysis
    reveals that the five states with the highest per capita gun death rates
    were Louisiana, Alaska, Montana, Tennessee, and Alabama. Each of these
    states had a per capita gun death rate far exceeding the national per
    capita gun death rate of 10.32 per 100,000.



    By contrast, states with strong gun laws and low rates of gun ownership
    had far lower rates of firearm-related death. Ranking last in the nation
    for gun death was Hawaii, followed by Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New
    Jersey, and New York. (See list below or chart at
    http://www.vpc.org/press/0804gundeath.htm for states with the highest and
    lowest gun death rates. See http://www.vpc.org/fadeathchart.htm for a
    ranking of all 50 states.)



    States with the Five HIGHEST Per Capita Gun Death Rates



    Louisiana--Rank: 1; Household Gun Ownership: 45.6 percent; Gun Death
    Rate: 19.04 per 100,000.



    Alaska--Rank: 2; Household Gun Ownership: 60.6 percent; Gun Death Rate:
    17.49 per 100,000.



    Montana--Rank: 3; Household Gun Ownership: 61.4 percent; Gun Death
    Rate: 17.22 per 100,000.



    Tennessee--Rank: 4; Household Gun Ownership: 46.4 percent; Gun Death
    Rate: 16.39 per 100,000.



    Alabama--Rank: 5; Household Gun Ownership: 57.2 percent; Gun Death
    Rate: 16.18 per 100,000.



    States with the Five LOWEST Per Capita Gun Death Rates



    Hawaii--Rank: 50; Household Gun Ownership: 9.7 percent; Gun Death Rate:
    2.20 per 100,000.



    Massachusetts--Rank: 49; Household Gun Ownership: 12.8 percent; Gun
    Death Rate: 3.48 per 100,000.



    Rhode Island--Rank: 48; Household Gun Ownership: 13.3 percent; Gun
    Death Rate: 3.63 per 100,000.



    New Jersey--Rank: 47; Household Gun Ownership: 11.3 percent; Gun Death
    Rate: 4.99 per 100,000.



    New York--Rank: 46; Household Gun Ownership: 18.1 percent; Gun Death
    Rate: 5.28 per 100,000.

    VPC Legislative Director Kristen Rand states, "Blind allegiance to the
    Second Amendment comes at a deadly price. Many residents in pro-gun states
    cheer the possibility of a June Supreme Court ruling that could place gun
    controls across the nation at risk, never realizing that those states stand
    as proof of the need for such laws."

    The VPC defined states with "weak" gun laws as those that add little or
    nothing to federal restrictions and have permissive concealed carry laws
    allowing civilians to carry concealed handguns. States with "strong" gun
    laws were defined as those that add significant state regulation in
    addition to federal law, such as restricting access to particularly
    hazardous types of firearms (for example, assault weapons), setting minimum
    safety standards for firearms and/or requiring a permit to purchase a
    firearm, and have restrictive concealed carry laws.


    The Violence Policy Center (http://www.vpc.org) is a national educational
    organization working to stop gun death and injury.


    [/code]
    Peace through superior firepower

    Luke 11:21
    "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    Here's what jumps out at me (fairly screams there is something we aren't telling you that will point out that this is crappy research): In their chart of all 50 state's rate of gun deaths, they do not show the percentage of gun ownership. They only report the percentage of gun ownership in the state for the top and bottom 5 states. That eliminates the ability to perform more analysis or even do a quick statistical check to see if their conclusion is over generalized (which I can pretty much guarantee you).

    Furthermore, since they are calling it "gun deaths" it is for sure that they are including all firearm related deaths. They are not making any distinctions between or controlling for suicide rates, gang activities, legal v illegal use of firearms, etc. It doesn't even rise to the level of half-a$$ analysis. There is no analysis but rather only a reporting of 20% of general data.

    Their conclusions were safe and foregone. Not only would I expect that gun deaths would be higher in places with more gun ownership, I also would expect that swimming pool drownings are higher in places with more swimming pools, traffic accidents are higher in places with more cars, motorcycle accidents are higher in places with more motorcycles and incidents of half-a$$ research with bad statistical analysis are higher in places with more tree-hugging liberals.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    uTAH-life member: NRA, GOA, CCRKBA, ,
    Posts
    291

    Post imported post

    Deepdiver beat me to it, and covered it fully. Nice work.

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member Jim675's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Bellevue, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,037

    Post imported post

    Not to mention the inclusion of justifiable homocide for self-defense. In New York they're just "safely" raped and mugged and on their home to make supper for the kids.


  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    And not to mention that it shouldn't matter what the gun death rate is in "pro-gun" states.

    It's a right, like it or not. And rights aren't (or shouldn't be) subject to "safety" standards.

    If people are irresponsible enough to go about their lives unarmed in states where they could easily get and carry a gun, then I'm not shedding any tears for their deaths at the hands of criminals. What should be of more concern is the number of homicides in anti-gun states; in these states, the peaceable citizens have no choice in their fate, unless they want to break gun laws. The state is deciding that they can be martyred for the sake of others' "safety" instead of giving them the choice as to whether or not they want to be able to defend themselves against violent criminals.


    And that's pretty much why I like to stay away from the "safety" argument for guns. General crime rates will rise and fall, but having a gun (and training) will always decrease the victimization of the individual. Perhaps that criminal might see that OCer and choose an unarmed victim instead... while the crime rate would remain the same, the OCer is given the opportunity to ensure that he isn't a victim.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Huck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Evanston, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    647

    Post imported post

    imperialism2024 wrote:
    And not to mention that it shouldn't matter what the gun death rate is in "pro-gun" states.

    It's a right, like it or not. And rights aren't (or shouldn't be) subject to "safety" standards.

    If people are irresponsible enough to go about their lives unarmed in states where they could easily get and carry a gun, then I'm not shedding any tears for their deaths at the hands of criminals. What should be of more concern is the number of homicides in anti-gun states; in these states, the peaceable citizens have no choice in their fate, unless they want to break gun laws. The state is deciding that they can be martyred for the sake of others' "safety" instead of giving them the choice as to whether or not they want to be able to defend themselves against violent criminals.
    They're not being martyred for the sake of other's "safety" since no one's been made any safer, far from it. They're beingsacrificed to make others feel safe.

    I feel the same as you do about people who refuse to take measures to defend themselvesImp. My feeling is that there is only one person who's responsible for your safety, YOU!

    "You can teach 'em, but you cant learn 'em."

Posting Permissions

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