I went to the source "study" cited and it is hardly rigorous. It is part of the "Demand a Plan" website discussed here http://www.okshooters.com/showthread.php?159519-Demand-a-Plan.
The heart of their claim is that seven of the top ten states for strictest gun laws also have the lowest gun death rates. Correlation does not prove cause. These strict gun states are mostly urban so they are going to have fewer gun owners than more rural states. So the difference in gun death rates could well be explained by fewer guns per capita. - less potential for hunting accidents etc.
"Lowest gun death rate" is not defined. It could mean in the bottom 10% or bottom 40%. Is the difference between low gun death rates states and other states statistically significant? These details are left out and the media is given more psuedoscience to repeat.
The heart of their claim is that seven of the top ten states for strictest gun laws also have the lowest gun death rates. Correlation does not prove cause. These strict gun states are mostly urban so they are going to have fewer gun owners than more rural states. So the difference in gun death rates could well be explained by fewer guns per capita. - less potential for hunting accidents etc.
"Lowest gun death rate" is not defined. It could mean in the bottom 10% or bottom 40%. Is the difference between low gun death rates states and other states statistically significant? These details are left out and the media is given more psuedoscience to repeat.
From the aforementioned link:
"Connecticut has more restrictions on gun ownership than most states, so gun-rights advocates argue the Dec. 14 schoolhouse massacre there illustrates the futility of gun control.
But a new study by a pro-gun control San Francisco organization reaches the opposite conclusion: States with the most restrictive laws, including Connecticut and California, have lower rates of gun-related deaths, while states with few limits on firearms have the highest rates."
It has long been established that poll, surveys and studies can be skewed by the process of using carefully crafted questions so as to get the answer desired for the survey.
I certainly wouldn't trust a "pro-gun control" organization to conduct an unbiased study, poll, or survey.
"Connecticut has more restrictions on gun ownership than most states, so gun-rights advocates argue the Dec. 14 schoolhouse massacre there illustrates the futility of gun control.
But a new study by a pro-gun control San Francisco organization reaches the opposite conclusion: States with the most restrictive laws, including Connecticut and California, have lower rates of gun-related deaths, while states with few limits on firearms have the highest rates."
It has long been established that poll, surveys and studies can be skewed by the process of using carefully crafted questions so as to get the answer desired for the survey.
I certainly wouldn't trust a "pro-gun control" organization to conduct an unbiased study, poll, or survey.
Just FYI:
National Academy of Science's Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review
Center for Disease Control's First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws
Both indicate that there is no evidence to suggest that gun control has a causal link with reduced homicide.
National Academy of Science's Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review
Center for Disease Control's First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws
Both indicate that there is no evidence to suggest that gun control has a causal link with reduced homicide.
Lies, damn lies & statistics. Nuff said!
Comparing gun control and gun death is disingenuous. One of the big arguments of pro-gun people has always been that if criminals cant get guns, they will commit crimes with other weapons, and that it just keeps their victims from protecting themselves. The overall murder rate, or violent crime rate, makes a lot more sense. But those stats don't cast the major urban centers with heavy gun regulations in nearly so positive a light.
Less guns = less gun deaths. I'll buy that.
Less guns ≠ less crime.
Gun deaths ≠ all crime.
Less guns ≠ less crime.
Gun deaths ≠ all crime.
I call Elmer.......
Similar threads
