Originally Posted by anticipation (Post 1211195)

Yeah but you have to look at this in context. All of these states have relatively small populations that artificially inflate their murder rate, with the exception of Georgia, that most big cities in the U.S. surpass in terms of people murdered or injured by gun violence. In this country, places like Chicago, Baltimore, and D.C. have more people killed due to gun violence than most of those states will in total. So far, the city of Chicago has had over twice as many people killed (228) this year alone than the entire state of Alaska had in 2011, yet the murder rate in the latter is nearly 3 times higher. Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, with handgun bans and automatic/semi-automatic bans in place for the better part of the last decade. So then why do we consistently rank among the most violent cities in the country? People will kill each other regardless of whether the laws are strict or lax. There already is a huge illegal gun market, and further restricting the supply only serves to fuel that market. It's kind of like you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1211158)

I think that probably depends on how you frame the statistics I guess, because the state with the highest murder rate in the US is Louisiana, which also happens to be a conservative state with loose law guns. In fact if you look at the top ten with the highest murder rates...

1. Louisiana
2. Maryland
3. Missouri
4. Mississippi
5. New Mexico
6. Arizona
7. South Carolina
8. Nevada
9. Georgia
10. Alabama

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211221)

I've noticed that 50% of those states mentioned are southern states, so the socio-economic situation in those states could be the main reason for gun crime, regardless of whether they are conservative or liberal controlled states.

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1211224)

Yeah, it's hard to say really. There are obviously a lot of factors at work. For me that list doesn't so much confirm a correlation between crime and conservatism as it does refute the notion that liberalism or stricter gun laws somehow lead to more crime. If you look back, I was posting the list in response to someone claiming that conservative states had lower crime rates.

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211227)

Also some of the other states on that list are what I think of as either frontier type states or back waters. The only state that stands out on the list is Maryland (its the odd man out)

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211227)

Now what are the safest states to live in?

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1211239)

In what sense does Maryland stand out to you? Level of income?


According to the source I used for the other list, the states with the lowest murder rates are:

1. New Hampshire
2. Vermont
3. Iowa
4. Idaho
5. Wyoming
6. North Dakota
7. Minnesota
8. Hawaii
9. Maine
10. Utah

Kind of a mixed bag. The safest state is a true swing state, New Hampshire, neither liberal nor conservative. Vermont, Iowa, Minnesota and Hawaii are all pretty liberal. Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota and Utah are all fairly conservative. Maine is a bit like New Hampshire, though it tends to lean liberal.

Another interesting thing is that, while the states with the highest murder rates tended to be some of the poorest states in the union, the states with the lowest murder rates aren't the necessarily the richest.

Originally Posted by duga (Post 1211240)

Singapore (VERY strict gun laws)... Deaths per 100,000 due to gun violence... 0.17.

Chicago (the US city with the closest population and population density)... Deaths per 100,000 due to gun violence... 15.6.

Courtesy US crime statistics (just search for the website... It's easy to find).

I'll let those numbers speak for themselves.

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1211239)

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211253)

Maryland because its not a southern state or a frontier type state. That's why I think it stands out.

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211253)

The two states at the top of your list are New England states, all I'm trying to do is find some kind of pattern. Its not obvious but I'm sure there is a pattern in all this somewhere.

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1211257)

Maryland actually is a southern state, technically, because it was south of the Mason-Dixon line. But Michigan, which is also on the list, is neither a southern nor "frontier-type" state.


Two New England states at the top and another, Maine, a little further down. Beyond that and the fact that there are no southern states on the list, there isn't much of a pattern. Iowa, North Dakota and Minnesota are all northern midwest states known for having bleak winters and a "let's all work together" kind of culture. Idaho and Wyoming definitely fall in your "frontier-type" category. Hawaii is obviously a pretty unique state so they're hard to group with anyone. And Utah actually has a lot in common with a couple of the states on the "worst" list.

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211253)

Singapore is a very ordered society and quite wealthy, I'm guessing your point is an economically sound society is nearly always going to have far lower rates of crime.

Originally Posted by bob. (Post 1211263)

really....i mean there was certainly an odd and rather vicious crime there recently....but for the most part Florida comes in the news due to weather....

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211262)

Didn't see Michigan on either list, did you forget to type it? But I know its different to the others on the list.

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211262)

Surprised Florida wasn't on the high crime rate list, as that is the state we most get to hear about here for crimes.

Originally Posted by duga (Post 1211266)

If by ordered you mean stricter gun laws, then yes that is exactly what I mean. Nothing they do is beyond the scope of what the US could accomplish.

Originally Posted by bob. (Post 1211263)

really....i mean there was certainly an odd and rather vicious crime there recently....but for the most part Florida comes in the news due to weather....

Originally Posted by bob. (Post 1211263)

really....i mean there was certainly an odd and rather vicious crime there recently....but for the most part Florida comes in the news due to weather....

Originally Posted by duga (Post 1211266)

If by ordered you mean stricter gun laws, then yes that is exactly what I mean. Nothing they do is beyond the scope of what the US could accomplish.

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1211269)

No, for some reason reason I thought I remembered it being on the list. Nevermind :p:

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1211269)

Up until recently Chicago had really strict gun laws though and still had high crime. I'd imagine the fact that Singapore is separated from their neighbors by water probably helps them have more control over what comes into the country than a city like Chicago could.

Originally Posted by duga (Post 1211277)

List of countries by firearm-related death rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ok, how about a country that isn't surrounded by water? Chile also had incredibly low gun related deaths. I'm sure the reason Chicago still had crime was because it is still surrounded by states with lax gun laws. More reason to have stricter laws on a country wide basis.

Originally Posted by duga (Post 1211277)

List of countries by firearm-related death rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ok, how about a country that isn't surrounded by water? Chile also had incredibly low gun related deaths.

Originally Posted by duga (Post 1211277)

I'm sure the reason Chicago still had crime was because it is still surrounded by states with lax gun laws. More reason to have stricter laws on a country wide basis.

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211280)

The reason why Chile has such low crime rates, is because of decades of dictatorship and everybody was scared shitless of committing crimes. Also since the end of the dictatorship, the economy has been booming and they are a modern economic success story.

Originally Posted by duga (Post 1211282)

So your point is poor countries should be allowed to all have guns? I don't get your focus on economic success. The US had a successful economy in the past and the crime rates were still there. You are not convincing me that gun laws should lighten up.

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211285)

No I don't agree with guns at all, I'm just looking at the correlation between crime and economics. The two often go hand in hand, but in the case of the USA that doesn't seem to hold true and its something of exception. My only take on it, is that the USA was built up on guns and superior armaments over the indigenous population and gun culture developed and has been present ever since. In Europe we've never had the same historical parallels, so gun culture is totally alien to us.

Originally Posted by Eyrothath (Post 1211127)

Don't forget though that they are also the states with the most gun restrictions, we might be doing more harm than good in those more populated states, notice that crime has gone up over the years as guns have been outlawed in those states, even as the population barely changes, but there is also more laws to break, more things are illegal in today's society..

Example; the drug cartels were a result of the war on drugs, the war on drugs and prohibition turned more people into hardened criminals than it did doing anything good for them, rather than having family, friends and churches solve these social medical problems. We send more people to jail than any other country..

When you look at the charts, California hit a peak of 4,000 in the early 90's and from there crime went down at a steady pace.. I don't think it makes much of a difference if you outlaw guns or not, people will still commit crimes, strap bombs to themselves, or get them smuggled in.. Tons of people were killed in a Norway bombing, it can happen anywhere..

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211285)

No I don't agree with guns at all, I'm just looking at the correlation between crime and economics. The two often go hand in hand, but in the case of the USA that doesn't seem to hold true and its something of exception. My only take on it, is that the USA was built up on guns and superior armaments over the indigenous population and gun culture developed and has been present ever since. In Europe we've never had the same historical parallels, so gun culture is totally alien to us.

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1211287)

I think, despite how it may look from the outside, there's a really big division of opinion about guns and gun control in the US. Like I said earlier, I believe 45% of the population favors stricter gun laws.

Originally Posted by duga (Post 1211289)

That's a fair point. It's more complicated than anything we are pointing out... It's a big mash up of all these issues. I'm just trying to get people to see that no matter the cause, all signs point to stricter gun laws.

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211298)

Next point of issue, has got to be states with the death penalty. Do states with the death penalty have less gun crime? Or it makes no difference at all to gun crime?

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1211300)

Why would there be a correlation to "gun crime"? Not all capital offenses involve guns and not all gun crimes are capital offenses.

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211302)

I'm only talking about gun crime here and not other types of crime.

You mean some gun crimes are not capital (I guess that means state) crimes in some states?

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1211323)

"Capital" means they are punishable by death. What I'm saying is that most gun crimes (i.e. possession of an illegal firearm, robbing someone at gunpoint, etc.), even in states with the death penalty, are not punishable by execution. That's why I don't really see the connection to whether or not the state has the death penalty, which is generally reserved for murder, gun or no gun.

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211491)

What I'm referring to is this question.

If a person murders somebody with a firearm, are the statistics for this type of crime higher, lower or more or less the same in a state that has the death penalty? I'm just trying to fathom if capital punishment is any type of deterrent here. I know murder is murder gun or no gun, but as we're talking gun crime here, I'm just restricting it to guns.

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1211492)

Okay, well here's the breakdown...

The ten states with the highest rate of gun murder are:

1. Louisiana
2. Maryland
3. Mississippi
4. California
5. Nevada
6. South Carolina
7. Illinois*
8. Michigan*
9. Arizona
10. New Mexico*

The ten states with the lowest rate of gun murder are:

1. New Hampshire
2. Vermont*
3. Hawaii*
4. Wyoming
5. North Dakota*
6. Maine*
7. Iowa*
8. South Dakota
9. Utah
10. Idaho

States without the death penalty are marked with asterisks. Not too much of a pattern here, although if you look at the top five in each category, you notice that all of the worst states for gun murder have the death penalty, while only 2 out of 5 of the best states have it. It should also be pointed out that, even though New Hampshire has the death penalty on the books, they haven't executed anyone in over 35 years. Similarly, Wyoming hasn't executed anyone in 20 years.

(death penalty source, murder by gun source)

Originally Posted by Ki (Post 1211574)

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1211285)

No I don't agree with guns at all, I'm just looking at the correlation between crime and economics. The two often go hand in hand, but in the case of the USA that doesn't seem to hold true and its something of exception. My only take on it, is that the USA was built up on guns and superior armaments over the indigenous population and gun culture developed and has been present ever since. In Europe we've never had the same historical parallels, so gun culture is totally alien to us.

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1211577)

Did anyone else see the same set of links at the bottom of that page as me? One of these things is not like the others:

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...4at62802PM.png

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop (Post 1211600)

No. If this were true we'd see higher rates of gun violence in the more recently settled territories of this country; we don't. Were your theory true the Dakotas, Wyoming, & Idaho wouldn't be among the least violent states when it comes to gun crimes. You're forgetting that this nation isn't monocultural, monoracial, or ethnically homogenous. We see disparities in violent crime amongst these various groups, most notably amongst the so-called "nams", which means non-asian minoritys, as they are over-represented in violent crime.

There is a neat survey of victims of violent/property crime which includes breakdowns by race/ethnicity of the attacker & victim link.

Originally Posted by Burning Down (Post 1211604)

The link actually took me to the mobile site... but I'm on my laptop? lol

Originally Posted by Ki (Post 1211611)

Sorry about that. I'm on my mobile during the day.

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop (Post 1211600)

No. If this were true we'd see higher rates of gun violence in the more recently settled territories of this country; we don't. Were your theory true the Dakotas, Wyoming, & Idaho wouldn't be among the least violent states when it comes to gun crimes. You're forgetting that this nation isn't monocultural, monoracial, or ethnically homogenous. We see disparities in violent crime amongst these various groups, most notably amongst the so-called "nams", which means non-asian minoritys, as they are over-represented in violent crime.

There is a neat survey of victims of violent/property crime which includes breakdowns by race/ethnicity of the attacker & victim link.

Originally Posted by Ki (Post 1210663)

I was having a discussion about this earlier today. I may be alone in this opinion, but I think if a person is allowed to wield a firearm, they should undergo psychiatric check ups every few months