states with the highest rate of gun deaths

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Jan 02, 2015 6:54 pm

the top 20:

http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/death-by-gun-top-20-states-with-highest-rates/21/

the state with the most dangerous toddlers makes the list.

by Hellsangel Fri Jan 02, 2015 7:06 pm

That's the beauty of statistics. If taken as a rate, states with low population will show a high rate.

In terms of sheer numbers, the stastics tell a different story.

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Jan 02, 2015 7:09 pm

Hellsangel wrote:That's the beauty of statistics. If taken as a rate, states with low population will show a high rate.

In terms of sheer numbers, the stastics tell a different story.

but rates are more important than absolute numbers. i know why the gun nuts like absolute numbers -- it gives them the freedom to easily shift the entire blame for gun violence to chicago (read gun toting inner city black gangstas).

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Jan 02, 2015 7:14 pm

for non-american readers, most of these states with the possible exception of DC are hardcore republican states.

by Hellsangel Fri Jan 02, 2015 7:15 pm

The cities with the highest crime rates are among the Democrats' strongholds.

So knock yourself out peddling the statistical koolaid.

by truthbetold Fri Jan 02, 2015 8:38 pm

Ha

Data is strong. None of the liberal big city states made it (except Georgia).

If we limit to homicides, big cities come on top. But Max's data is compelling.

by Propagandhi711 Mon Jan 05, 2015 12:05 am

truthbetold wrote:Ha

Data is strong. None of the liberal big city states made it (except Georgia).

If we limit to homicides, big cities come on top. But Max's data is compelling.

compelling my ass. if someone turns around and point out that democrats stronghold cities have the most amount of violent and petty crime and point they're caused by blacks, he will tout the standard line about poverty, racism, slavery...

statistics can be twisted to prove whichever narrative you find convenient. especially those that are cherry picked. our barchart admin was especially skilled in that regard

by truthbetold Mon Jan 05, 2015 4:59 am

Prop
Statistics can be manipulated. That does not mean we refuse to use the most analytical tool of statistics. Provide reasons to challenge the data or challenge the inferences drawn from the analysis.

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 05, 2015 10:35 am

gun control laws are enacted in congress and more importantly in state legislatures. cities don't have much control over those laws and can at best do good enforcement.

city data by absolute numbers and rates per 100,000 people:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/la-chicago-rank-1-and-2-gun-murders-no-has-highest-rate
the much maligned chicago is not even in the top 9 on a per capita basis.

by Hellsangel Mon Jan 05, 2015 10:44 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:gun control laws are enacted in congress and more importantly in state legislatures. cities don't have much control over those laws and can at best do good enforcement.

city data by absolute numbers and rates per 100,000 people:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/la-chicago-rank-1-and-2-gun-murders-no-has-highest-rate
the much maligned chicago is not even in the top 9 on a per capita basis.

Again, cities with low population rank nowhere in the top ten by sheer numbers:

Overall number of gun murders:

1. Los Angeles.......................1,141

2. Chicago..............................1,139

3. New York.............................1,101

4. Philadelphia...........................729

5. Houston..................................701

6. Detroit.....................................686

7. Miami.......................................594

8. Dallas......................................469

9. Washington.............................440

10. San Francisco......................439

Gun murders per 100,000 people:

1. New Orleans...........................19.0 - Not in the above list - This would amount to roughly 19*3.78 using census data or roughly 75 murders. That should give you an idea how statistics can be skewed.

2. Memphis...................................9.4 - Not in the above list 9.4 *6.53 = 61 again using census data.

3. Detroit.......................................8.6

4. Birmingham..............................8.4 - Not in the above list

5. St. Louis...................................8.1 - Not in the above list

6. Baltimore..................................7.7 - Not in the above list

7. Jacksonville..............................7.4 - Not in the above list

8. Kansas City..............................6.8 - Not in the above list

9. Philadelphia..............................6.2

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 05, 2015 10:53 am

thanks for showing us that you know how to convert between rates and absolute numbers. an impressive skill indeed. but it's still true that you're more likely to die by a gun in new Orleans than chicago.

by Hellsangel Mon Jan 05, 2015 11:11 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:thanks for showing us that you know how to convert between rates and absolute numbers. an impressive skill indeed. but it's still true that you're more likely to die by a gun in new Orleans than chicago.

When all else fails, libbies resort to sarcasm. Would you feel safer in Chicago or New Orleans? Detroit or St Louis?

PS: When it comes to gun-control, you lose all objectivity. You know that.

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 05, 2015 11:41 am

Hellsangel wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:thanks for showing us that you know how to convert between rates and absolute numbers. an impressive skill indeed. but it's still true that you're more likely to die by a gun in new Orleans than chicago.

When all else fails, libbies resort to sarcasm. Would you feel safer in Chicago or New Orleans? Detroit or St Louis?

PS: When it comes to gun-control, you lose all objectivity. You know that.

chicago of course which incidentally is a city i like very much for its architecture, the art institute, and pizza. seriously, why is the idea of rate as likelihood of occurrence difficult to comprehend? i also note that you completely ignored my comment on gun laws being made in state legislatures and that cities having little or no control.

by Hellsangel Mon Jan 05, 2015 11:46 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:thanks for showing us that you know how to convert between rates and absolute numbers. an impressive skill indeed. but it's still true that you're more likely to die by a gun in new Orleans than chicago.

When all else fails, libbies resort to sarcasm. Would you feel safer in Chicago or New Orleans? Detroit or St Louis?

PS: When it comes to gun-control, you lose all objectivity. You know that.

chicago of course which incidentally is a city i like very much for its architecture, the art institute, and pizza. seriously, why is the idea of rate as likelihood of occurrence difficult to comprehend? i also note that you completely ignored my comment on gun laws being made in state legislatures and that cities having little or no control.

Like you ignored Detroit or St Louis?

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 05, 2015 11:56 am

Hellsangel wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:thanks for showing us that you know how to convert between rates and absolute numbers. an impressive skill indeed. but it's still true that you're more likely to die by a gun in new Orleans than chicago.

When all else fails, libbies resort to sarcasm. Would you feel safer in Chicago or New Orleans? Detroit or St Louis?

PS: When it comes to gun-control, you lose all objectivity. You know that.

chicago of course which incidentally is a city i like very much for its architecture, the art institute, and pizza. seriously, why is the idea of rate as likelihood of occurrence difficult to comprehend? i also note that you completely ignored my comment on gun laws being made in state legislatures and that cities having little or no control.

Like you ignored Detroit or St Louis?

i didn't ignore it. i picked something more significant. you are 1.06 times more likely to get killed by a gun in detroit than in st.louis (8.6/8.1), i.e. much the same for all intents and purposes. however, you are 3.2 times more likely to get killed by a gun in new orleans than chicago (19/6). these are from the per capita rate data in the more complete CDC report (table on page 600).

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/wk/mm6230.pdf

by Hellsangel Mon Jan 05, 2015 11:58 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:thanks for showing us that you know how to convert between rates and absolute numbers. an impressive skill indeed. but it's still true that you're more likely to die by a gun in new Orleans than chicago.

When all else fails, libbies resort to sarcasm. Would you feel safer in Chicago or New Orleans? Detroit or St Louis?

PS: When it comes to gun-control, you lose all objectivity. You know that.

chicago of course which incidentally is a city i like very much for its architecture, the art institute, and pizza. seriously, why is the idea of rate as likelihood of occurrence difficult to comprehend? i also note that you completely ignored my comment on gun laws being made in state legislatures and that cities having little or no control.

Like you ignored Detroit or St Louis?

i didn't ignore it. i picked something more significant. you are 1.06 times more likely to get killed by a gun in detroit than in st.louis (8.6/8.1), i.e. much the same for all intents and purposes. however, you are 3.2 times more likely to get killed by a gun in new orleans than chicago (19/6). these are from the per capita rate data in the more complete CDC report (table on page 600).

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/wk/mm6230.pdf

And what is the likelihood you will die of a car crash as you drive into work? Why don't you stop driving to work:

http://www.livescience.com/3780-odds-dying.html wrote:Cause of Death Lifetime Odds
Heart Disease

1-in-5

Cancer

1-in-7

Stroke

1-in-23

Accidental Injury

1-in-36

Motor Vehicle Accident*

1-in-100

Intentional Self-harm (suicide)

1-in-121

Falling Down

1-in-246

Assault by Firearm

1-in-325

Fire or Smoke

1-in-1,116

Natural Forces (heat, cold, storms, quakes, etc.)

1-in-3,357

Electrocution*

1-in-5,000

Drowning

1-in-8,942

Air Travel Accident*

1-in-20,000

Flood* (included also in Natural Forces above)

1-in-30,000

Legal Execution

1-in-58,618

Tornado* (included also in Natural Forces above)

1-in-60,000

Lightning Strike (included also in Natural Forces above)

1-in-83,930

Snake, Bee or other Venomous Bite or Sting*

1-in-100,000

Earthquake (included also in Natural Forces above)

1-in-131,890

Dog Attack

1-in-147,717

Asteroid Impact*

1-in-200,000**

Tsunami* 1-in-500,000
Fireworks Discharge

1-in-615,488

BTW, do you think Boston has a gun problem?:

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2013/06/22/yes-boston-is-in-a-gun-violence-crisis/

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 05, 2015 12:40 pm

auto safety has been improving with every new generation of cars and the industry is much more regulated. it also has a strong insurance industry behind it. the data you posted is at odds with this report (http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/16/gun-deaths-versus-car-deaths/). perhaps the difference between the two is the period over which auto deaths are reported.

states with the highest rate of gun deaths 7162014gun-blog480

states with the highest rate of gun deaths 7162014gun-blog480

here is a graphic of all the states data that we have:
http://www.motherjones.com/files/ownership-death630.png

boston has a had recent problem but longer term data are still quite low.

by Hellsangel Mon Jan 05, 2015 12:44 pm

Your NY Times article raises the same point I was going to raise.

Release of this data in previous years has drawn criticism from opponents of gun safety regulation that the calculation of gun deaths included gun suicides in addition to homicides and fatal unintentional shootings.

by truthbetold Mon Jan 05, 2015 12:53 pm

Ha
Rush l argument on autos vs guns was debunked .
Automobiles are invented for a purpose. They fulfill their function very well. Accidents are a small price (risk) we take.

Guns are designed to snuff out life. The problems with guns are related to its intended function.

Even though automobiles are infinitely more useful to humans we regulate them and their drivers. Guns with not much positive utility cannot be regulated because of right wing nuts. ????!

by Hellsangel Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:06 pm

truthbetold wrote:Ha
Rush l argument on autos vs guns was debunked .
Automobiles are invented for a purpose. They fulfill their function very well. Accidents are a small price (risk) we take.

Guns are designed to snuff out life. The problems with guns are related to its intended function.

Even though automobiles are infinitely more useful to humans we regulate them and their drivers. Guns with not much positive utility cannot be regulated because of right wing nuts. ????!

Contrary to your flawed assumptions,most gun owners are reasonable people and quite a good number of them are Democrats and not "right wing nuts" as you want to claim.

Since we are binging on statistics, here you go:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/self-reported-gun-ownership-highest-1993.aspx

by truthbetold Mon Jan 05, 2015 2:39 pm

Ha
Why can't a dem be a right wing nut?

An otherwise reasonable person could be nuts on gun control due to the politics involved.

by Hellsangel Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:32 am

truthbetold wrote:Ha
Why can't a dem be a right wing nut?

An otherwise reasonable person could be nuts on gun control due to the politics involved.

Gun control proponents keep exercising their first Amendment on the second Amendment. Since they are not capable of repealing the second Amendment, they will keep moving the goal post. First it is automatic weapons. Then it is all guns. And so they go back and forth.

by MaxEntropy_Man Tue Jan 06, 2015 9:11 am

Hellsangel wrote:
truthbetold wrote:Ha
Why can't a dem be a right wing nut?

An otherwise reasonable person could be nuts on gun control due to the politics involved.

Gun control proponents keep exercising their first Amendment on the second Amendment. Since they are not capable of repealing the second Amendment, they will keep moving the goal post. First it is automatic weapons. Then it is all guns. And so they go back and forth.

that's a lie.

by truthbetold Tue Jan 06, 2015 10:43 am

Ha
Just as there are different opinions in gun lobby , the other side also has groups.

It is a common tactic to scare gun owners by presenting reasonable regulation of guns as a first step to total ban on guns. It is working well so far. That does not make it right.

by Sponsored content

states with the highest rate of gun deaths

states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths

Re: states with the highest rate of gun deaths