Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Dredimus

Gun Laws Vs. Homicides By State

107 posts in this topic

I am posting this to further the current discussion on fire arms control laws and issues that seems to be a huge topic since the Sandy Hook slayings. I was digging for information that would conclude the effectiveness of gun control laws per state vs gun related homicides in those states... I find it interesting that its just about tied when all is taken into account. Look at Illinois for instance, according to my research that state is thought to have the second most strict gun control law in the United States yet it ranks second with the most gun related homicides in the country.... and on the other end of the spectrum you have Vermont who has very few fire arms laws on the books yet they rate as the lowest in the country for Gun Related Homicides...

Please note the best and most complete data I could find is from 2004 so that is where ALL of the statistics come from. Interestingly enough its also when the federal assault weapons ban was lifted LINK GOES TO GOOGLE DOCUMENT BECAUSE I COULDN'T MAKE IT LOAD CORRECTLY ON THIS FORUM FROM SPREADSHEET.

Sources: State-level homicide characteristics database

Bureau of Justice Statistics

WIKI - Thank you for the charting

Smart Gun Laws

Christian Science Monitor

Edited by Dredimus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are tons of factors that goes into that as well.

For instance, maybe Vermont has had traditionally low gun crimes, so there has never been a need to address it in their state government.

Illinois has been plagued by high gun crime rates for decades, thus the laws trying to curb that.

I wonder how much of that Illinois gun crime is centered around Chicago? States with large urban areas probably have harsher laws, but decidedly more gun violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does by state matter. Ort is it for numerical value ?

This is homicide rate by state for the past 15 years.. Note I dont care for gun control and that is not part of this equation.

http://www.deathpena...and-state#MRord

[media=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_profilepage&v=y9OpyWORHK4[/media]

Edited by AsteroidX
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The analysis is pretty much useless when you can buy a gun in any state and drive across the border. Gather data from different countries, where you can't just cross a border with a Glock

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this thread is going to be about other nations then America I will leave it now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are tons of factors that goes into that as well.

For instance, maybe Vermont has had traditionally low gun crimes, so there has never been a need to address it in their state government.

Illinois has been plagued by high gun crime rates for decades, thus the laws trying to curb that.

I wonder how much of that Illinois gun crime is centered around Chicago? States with large urban areas probably have harsher laws, but decidedly more gun violence.

There are several things to consider here. First as you have already noted, the homicides in Vermont are quite low in number (I think it was 2 in 2010, and only one of them with firearms and 4 in 2011) so they would not be a concern to the legislative (the index remained below 3 per 100,000 since the 80s and never got any higher than 5.5since the 70s). There were people handle their guns responsibly you don't need laws.

And yes, you are right, of the 721 murders in 2011 641 were committed in Chicago, and most of the rest in the suburban area of Chicago. For Illinois at large you would not need harsh laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what do these numbers mean. Are they going to go up or are they going to go down ?

Static numbers are useless except for putting on your fridge,

Edited by AsteroidX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are several things to consider here. First as you have already noted, the homicides in Vermont are quite lowin number (I think it was 2 in 2010, and only one of them with firearms and 4 in 2011) so they would not be a concern to the legislative (the index remained below 3 per 100,000 since the 80s and never got any higher than 5.5since the 70s). There were people handle their guns responsibly you don't need laws.

And yes, you are right, of the 721 murders in 2011 641 were committed in Chicago, and most of the rest in the suburban area of Chicago. For Illinois at large you would not need harsh laws.

There are other factors as well. I believe Vermont is a open carry state. How much of that contributed to thier low crime rate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could have interpreted it wrong, but it seemed to me that the level of gun control had no statistical effect on the percentage of homicides caused by guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this thread is going to be about other nations then America I will leave it now.

God damn that rest of the world!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the Feds live in Vermont. Of course its safer. I don't need a statistic to tell me when like minded people live and cohabitate near each other that it would be safer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could have interpreted it wrong, but it seemed to me that the level of gun control had no statistical effect on the percentage of homicides caused by guns.

correct, what does have an affect is letting brain amputated possess guns and that guns are passed uncontrolled to criminals by the same.

Which is why in most states some form of effective control is desperately needed. Just banning this or that type of weapon leads nowhere. Effectively avoiding idiots to have them does.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who do you consider a criminal. Is someone that needs to steal for food a criminal in your eyes today >?

play nice now

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9OpyWORHK4&feature=player_embedded

Edited by AsteroidX
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who do you consider a criminal. Is someone that needs to steal for food a criminal in your eyes today >?

Somebody who steals food is mostly a failure of good governance, yet we cannot let it happen habitually. So, I would say that I consider the person habitually stealing a criminal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a shame. I dont imagine youve been left hungry much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may also want to compare ,number of people shot by a crazed mass shooter in the USA ,and the number of people wrongfully killed by a police officer .

You will find,you're more likely to be killed by a cop,than a crazed gunman .

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may also want to compare ,number of people shot by a crazed mass shooter in the USA ,and the number of people wrongfully killed by a police officer .

You will find,you're more likely to be killed by a cop,than a crazed gunman .

Yet we hear nothing about disarming the police, hmm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone compares Switzerland to the US when it comes to health care laws. Anyone fancy looking at their gun laws?

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone compares Switzerland to the US when it comes to health care laws. Anyone fancy looking at their gun laws?

you will find that, while every army reserve person has his assault rifle and/or ordinance pistol and one clip at home that is to be returned after the service ends, the possession of private weapons is not as easy as you would think.

Among others it contains following passages:

Citizens from South European countries are banned from possessing any kind of weapon.

For the purchase of a weapon you need consent from the police (exception is only .22 rifles)

The law for weapons has been extended to "dangerous implements", that include kitchen knifes and clubs, and they cannot be carried overt or concealed.

Munitions are only allowed to those who have a license to purchase a gun, and only for that type of gun

To buy a gun you need a reason, without a reason you cannot and you can only buy a gun of a type you have a reason to posses.

Shooting out of shooting stands or hunting areal during season is prohibited.

and on, and on, and on.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you will find that, while every army reserve person has his assault rifle and/or ordinance pistol and one clip at home that is to be returned after the service ends, the possession of private weapons is not as easy as you would think.

Among others it contains following passages:

Citizens from South European countries are banned from possessing any kind of weapon.

For the purchase of a weapon you need consent from the police (exception is only .22 rifles)

The law for weapons has been extended to "dangerous implements", that include kitchen knifes and clubs, and they cannot be carried overt or concealed.

Munitions are only allowed to those who have a license to purchase a gun, and only for that type of gun

To buy a gun you need a reason, without a reason you cannot and you can only buy a gun of a type you have a reason to posses.

Shooting out of shooting stands or hunting areal during season is prohibited.

and on, and on, and on.

But these are intelligently implemented laws, not ones rushed through because we're panicking because 'ohnoes our gun culture is making our children violent'.

http://en.wikipedia....d#Carrying_guns

Edit: Heck! I wish we had a law that required everyone to learn how to operate a gun safely and know what to do with one. With great power comes great responsibility, Uncle Ben told Peter, while Peter has super strength and spider skills, our gun laws are our great power, the citizens can protect themselves when need be, but we also need to be responsible, we need to learn to use these powers, be trained with them.

Edited by Hasina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But these are intelligently implemented laws, not ones rushed through because we're panicking because 'ohnoes our gun culture is making our children violent'.

http://en.wikipedia....d#Carrying_guns

If it was not for a brake block called NRA (which should really rename itself Lobby Organization for Weapon Manufacturers or LOWM) we could implement some useful laws too.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was not for a brake block called NRA (which should really rename itself Lobby Organization for Weapon Manufacturers or LOWM) we could implement some useful laws too.

Very true. I do dislike the NRA, if they're not willing to compromise then the other side won't see the need either. That's the problem when it comes to the perception of 'freedoms'. Some believe we should all be handed fireworks and a match and have the freedom to see how it works, while others will hand us the firework and the match, tells us everything about the firework and the match and what could happen and then let's us go. The NRA is the former, how I would like it is the latter. While some people, it would seem, would rather hide the firework and the match and pretend they didn't exist.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really dont get the whole NRA thing. They have no power to compromise anything. They dont represent gun owners, nor do they have power to change the second amendment in any way. Lawfully neither does the US government. People who demanded the president of the NRA should have to watch his kids get shot, and calling them murderers who's hands are bloody from these kids at Sandy Hook are scum bags as far as Im concerned. Gun grabbers/haters problem is with the constitution alone. The highest law in the land. If you dont like it there are pleanty of other countries where you can go to live under tyranny.

Edited by preacherman76
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we be sure those numbers are 100% accurate. How important are they. The trend oI can see. if a number is of murders is steadily climbing in one place then there is likely a problem. But why wouldnt scream Bloody Murder if there was a problem. Not enough to start a papamilitary police force. And just because in one place it happens do you then put that same organized armed force in every city state in America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we be sure those numbers are 100% accurate.

If someone ever claimed their numbers were 100% correct, I'd slap them and tell them it's 99%.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.