View Full Version : BI Article on Gun Ownership by State from IP
Saw these two (2) articles:
Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-ownership-by-state-2015-7)
Injury Prevention (http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/early/2015/06/09/injuryprev-2015-041586.full)
There is little question that prevelence of guns is the reason for high gun injuries.
Do you have data or just want to state that as fact, even though it's a false correlation, statistIatically.
Kind of like global warming, skip the debate, and move the goal post. We NEED TO start doing that. "You don't own a gun, you must be a corporate scab". Or something that drives them nuts. It doesn't matter if it's true, make them doubt everything they stand for. This.
Is.
War.
Edit. They mapped the whole USA using less than 5000 participants.. hardly a representative sample IMO.
I've been to Nebraska. There is no way that it is an anomalous <20% (percentage of citizens owning guns) and Minnesota is 38 percent or so.
SomeOtherGuy
07-05-15, 20:25
I've been to Nebraska. There is no way that it is an anomalous <20% (percentage of citizens owning guns) and Minnesota is 38 percent or so.
Ditto. Some of the rates stated aren't plausible. I suppose they are either rates of people willing to tell a surveyor that they own a gun, or simply defective data. It's not plausible that ownership in MT and WY is in the low 50's, that Idaho is 57%, that Michigan is far behind Wisconsin (probably ahead based on personal experience), that Illinois is nearly tied with Missouri, that California has a higher rate than Nebraska, etc.
MO @ 27%, MI @28%? - someone's clearly BSing someone here. Of course there's my standard answer, "um, I used to own guns 'til the tornado blew them away in 2011".
I've been to Nebraska. There is no way that it is an anomalous <20% (percentage of citizens owning guns) and Minnesota is 38 percent or so.
I live in Nebraska and can promise you it is ridiculous. As stated, it's a bogus poll, but to even attempt to say that states like Nebraska and Texas are on the lower side of ownership is ludicrous.
I call BS on Az only being 33 percent. Even my mother, a pretty stubborn liberal, owns a gun. As a matter of fact I dont think I have a single friend that doesnt own a gun.
Moose-Knuckle
07-07-15, 05:30
How to Lie with Statistics (http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728)
22% in Maine? Nope. It reminds me of the map showing support for gun control by state. Pretty sure it showed support for gun control in Maine. Then we legalized suppressors for hunting, expanded reciprocity, and passed constitutional carry.
wildcard600
07-07-15, 07:25
Either they are trying to make a political statement by playing with the stats or they got totally bogus info. I 'm leaning toward the second option as people are smarter/more cautious about telling pollsters they own guns these days for various reasons.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-07-15, 10:24
You have two things screwing with the reality here. One is a crappy survey. The other is the clumping of stats by states- a new tactic of the Progressive war on guns. The real issue is gun violence by city or even more specifically by zip code. You can't get tot the truth about gun violence until you look at with this specificity.
Downs state Illinois has nothing in common with the south side of Chicago. Even just looking at big cities isn't enough because the murder and assault rate for parts of Chicago vary greatly. By lumping stats by states (or even countries- but with out correcting for population size differences) they hide the fact gun violence is highly concentrated in certain areas.
In addition to that, you need to look at violence. Obviously gun violence will be higher if guns are more prevelent, all things being equal. It's already proven that guns don't cause violence, or really matter much. It's people, culture and influence. But the left focuses on "gun violence" because it gives an advantage. But it's still not enough. There are many places in the world teaming with firearms that have low crime/murder rate. High violence in Chicago is due to the high number of evil people that live there, not the objects these people can get ahold of. Last I checked Rwanda was done with machetes?
7.62WildBill
07-07-15, 11:05
You have two things screwing with the reality here. One is a crappy survey. The other is the clumping of stats by states- a new tactic of the Progressive war on guns. The real issue is gun violence by city or even more specifically by zip code. You can't get tot the truth about gun violence until you look at with this specificity.
Downs state Illinois has nothing in common with the south side of Chicago. Even just looking at big cities isn't enough because the murder and assault rate for parts of Chicago vary greatly. By lumping stats by states (or even countries- but with out correcting for population size differences) they hide the fact gun violence is highly concentrated in certain areas.
So true. I was just looking at the Illinois State Police UCR for 2013. Cook County had 473 murders,the second place county had 30, third had 16, etc...
This was never more apparent to me than when BO gave his lecture after the church shooting. You know he chooses his words carefully because he reads them off the TelePrompTer. "...this type of mass violence doesn't happen in other advanced countries." He might as well just say "shootings with 45 cal pistols in churches at approximately 8pm in Charlston South Carolina don't happen in other countries." Lunacy.
But the left focuses on "gun violence" because it gives an advantage. But it's still not enough. There are many places in the world teaming with firearms that have low crime/murder rate. High violence in Chicago is due to the high number of evil people that live there, not the objects these people can get ahold of. Last I checked Rwanda was done with machetes?
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-07-15, 13:06
Crazy drug problem. 60% of gun deaths crazies on drugs (mentally ill often on some kind of drug treatment) that usually commit suicide, but some decide to take a few others with them first- we call them active shooters. The other 40% of gun deaths are largely (80% cited in Baltimore) from crazy drug laws that have led to gang violence.
Those are the facts and the reality. Progressives decide to go after plastic boxes and thing-ys that go-up. They cannot even understand or identify the actual problem- so why are we listening to their solutions?
You have two things screwing with the reality here. One is a crappy survey. The other is the clumping of stats by states- a new tactic of the Progressive war on guns. The real issue is gun violence by city or even more specifically by zip code. You can't get tot the truth about gun violence until you look at with this specificity.
Downs state Illinois has nothing in common with the south side of Chicago. Even just looking at big cities isn't enough because the murder and assault rate for parts of Chicago vary greatly. By lumping stats by states (or even countries- but with out correcting for population size differences) they hide the fact gun violence is highly concentrated in certain areas.
Very true. Just for fun I just ran 2012s numbers for Chicago vs Phoenix. Chicago guns were pretty much outlawed and Phoenix I think had constitutional carry by that year.
Chicago 2.7 million people with 500 murders
Phoenix 1.5 million people with 123 murders
Chicago had 1.8 times the population as Phoenix but 4 times the murder rate.
"An unsophisticated forecaster uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts for support rather than for illumination." — Andrew Lang
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.