Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US STATES WITH MORE GUN OWNERS HAVE MORE MURDERS
Reuters ^ | 12/04/02 | Reuters - Charnicia E Huggins

Posted on 12/04/2002 10:58:29 AM PST by ServesURight

US States with More Gun Owners Have More Murders

By Charnicia E. Huggins

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Homicides in the United States are more common in states where more households own guns, according to researchers.

The study findings imply "that guns, on balance, lethally imperil rather than protect Americans," lead study author Dr. Matthew Miller of Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts, told Reuters Health.

"This inference is consistent with previous...studies that have found that the presence of a gun in the home is a risk factor for homicide, and starkly at odds with the unsubstantiated, yet often adduced, notion that guns are a public good," he added.

Miller and his team investigated the association between homicide and rates of household firearm ownership using 1988-1997 data collected from the nine US census regions and the 50 states.

They found that household gun ownership was linked to homicide rates throughout the nine census regions. At the state level, the link between rates of gun ownership and murder existed for all homicide victims older than age 5, according to the report in the December issue of the American Journal of Public Health.

In fact, the six states with the highest rates of gun ownership--Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Wyoming, West Virginia and Arkansas--had more than 21,000 homicides, nearly three times as many as the four states with the lowest rates of gun ownership--Hawaii, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New Jersey.

Further, people who lived in one of the six "high gun states" were nearly three times as likely to die from any homicide and more than four times as likely to die from gun-related homicide than those who lived in "low gun states," the report indicates. Their risk of dying in a non-gun-related homicide was also nearly double that of those who lived in states with the lowest rates of gun ownership.

On average, about half of households in high gun states had firearms, according to data reported by three of the six states, in comparison to 13% of households in low-gun states.

Although homicide rates were higher in poor areas and in states with higher rates of non-lethal violent crime and urbanization, the association between household firearm ownership and homicide remained true when the researchers took these and other factors into consideration.

Still, Miller's team notes that it is not clear whether the higher rates of household gun ownership caused or resulted from the increased number of homicides.

"It is possible, for example, that locally elevated homicide rates may have led to increased local gun acquisition," they write.

SOURCE: American Journal of Public Health 2002;92:1988-1993.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: banglist; guncontrol; propaganda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181 next last
To: ServesURight
My family has more guns than just about anyone outside of gun dealers, but we have never once reported having guns to any government agency, census worker, or other information gatherer. Where's this data REALLY coming from? The mind of a professor?
61 posted on 12/04/2002 11:50:24 AM PST by SoDak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRWCmember
Here's what it means: Over 10 years, the total number of murders in SIX "high gun ownership" states (21,000) was nearly three times the number of murders in four "low gun ownership" states. No per capita calculations, or other adjustments to make a valid comparison.

I added up the populations, and it turns out that the "top six" and "bottom four" states as groups have about the same total populations, roughly 17 million each.

So the per capita comparisons would be about the same.

However, since the tables I was using to find state populations also had population breakdowns by race, I did a few more calculations. What's interesting is that the "top six" states have 3.9 million blacks, while the "bottom four" states have only 1.6 million.

This is not an insignificant observation since on average blacks commit homicides at a rate roughly ten times that of whites.

If the authors haven't already factored out the *known* demographic contributors to homicide rate, then they're dishonestly attributing all the higher rates to gun ownership alone.

Apparently the authors of this "study" are following their PC prejudices instead of the data. They conclude that it "must" be gun ownership which drives the homicide rate differential, since it "can't" be due to differing mixes of cultures/races.

And no, my pointing out the racial breakdown of the states is not a "racist" observation. Quite the contrary. It's the PC authors of the "it's the guns" conclusion who are in fact being racist, since they are implicitly claiming that since guns are the "cause" of the murder rates, then the higher black homicide rate must necessarily be because black people are more apt to go wild when guns are available than white people are (since, the authors assert, socioeconomic factors aren't really a key factor after all).

62 posted on 12/04/2002 11:51:13 AM PST by Dan Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
Well done.....they took a few Southern states with epidemic minority homicides and high gun ownership (largely due to that fact and hunting) and lumped them together with WY and WV to make a faulty political statement.

Incredible.
63 posted on 12/04/2002 11:55:53 AM PST by wardaddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

Comment #64 Removed by Moderator

To: ServesURight
studies that have found that the presence of a gun in the home is a risk factor for homicide,

That's right....anyone coming into my home with bad intent risks getting their head blown off by a 12 gauge. ....And this risk factor is indeed very high.

65 posted on 12/04/2002 12:01:38 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord
Rhode Island also has a higher murder rate than Vermont similar (sized populations). I further question how they determined the gunownership rates. This study directly contradicts John Lott's conclusions so I really do question the statistics and even the raw numbers. as to the quatity of murders.

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

66 posted on 12/04/2002 12:04:39 PM PST by harpseal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
"I don't see any BS in the article at all."

You are not looking too closely at it then.

It is (or should be) known that any anti-gun article, poll etc is looking to fulfill their belief that guns kill people.

Other people here have pointed out the flaws of the article; it does not distingush suicide, self-defense, domestic violence etc from homicide..it combines them, makes uneducated guesses on non-existant information (how many gun owners and guns there are).
67 posted on 12/04/2002 12:05:14 PM PST by Pintobean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
Nice job.
68 posted on 12/04/2002 12:07:25 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: ServesURight
Main Entry: ho·mi·cide
Pronunciation: 'hä-m&-"sId, 'hO-
Function: noun
Etymology: in sense 1, from Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin homicida, from homo human being + -cida -cide; in sense 2, from Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin homicidium, from homo + -cidium -cide Date: 14th century
1 : a person who kills another
2 : a killing of one human being by another

Homicide does not necessarily equate to murder. Reuters can't even get their definitions correct. I'm not a statistician by any means, but this is the most skewed study I've ever seen.

69 posted on 12/04/2002 12:10:11 PM PST by A Navy Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ServesURight
Still, Miller's team notes that it is not clear whether the higher rates of household gun ownership caused or resulted from the increased number of homicides. "It is possible, for example, that locally elevated homicide rates may have led to increased local gun acquisition," they write.

Translation: we don't have any clue how to interpret our own statistics, but it makes for great axe-grinding material for anti-rights axis house organs like Reuters.

70 posted on 12/04/2002 12:10:30 PM PST by RogueIsland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
So, with the exception of West Virginia, the poverty rate has a fair correlation to the relative murder rate.

The reason West Virginia is an exception is that it looks like only one person a year is murdered. Everything in the state is named "Robert C. Byrd."

71 posted on 12/04/2002 12:10:37 PM PST by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
The article didn't say that they used census data, just that they used census regions. (Perhaps in order to get reliable population data.)
72 posted on 12/04/2002 12:14:09 PM PST by Doctor Stochastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ServesURight
Miller and his team investigated the association between homicide and rates of household firearm ownership using 1988-1997 data collected from the nine US census regions and the 50 states.

Gun ownership data from the Census? I didn't answer any gun questions.

73 posted on 12/04/2002 12:16:24 PM PST by hattend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnMosesBrowning
Exactly! Do they actually think that illegally-owned guns are being reported?
74 posted on 12/04/2002 12:19:15 PM PST by SoDak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Dan Day
The study might also be a commentary on law enforcement effectiveness in the given states.
75 posted on 12/04/2002 12:21:52 PM PST by Doctor Stochastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: ServesURight
The study findings imply "that guns, on balance, lethally imperil rather than protect Americans," lead study author Dr. Matthew Miller of Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts, told Reuters Health. "This inference is consistent with previous...studies that have found that the presence of a gun in the home is a risk factor for homicide, and starkly at odds with the unsubstantiated, yet often adduced, notion that guns are a public good," he added.

Complete twaddle. These "researchers" make the exact same mistake the "previous studies" (all by anti-gun nut Arthur Kellermann) made -- and yes, I've read them.

Their error is to presume that if guns "on balance" produce a net protective effect, then states (or in the prior studies, homes) which have more guns would see fewer homicides than states/homes with fewer guns.

But this presumption is *only* true if there are *no* other correlations between guns and homicide.

If homicides themselves can drive up gun ownership rates (or if some other factor ties the two together), then it's easily possible for the presence of a gun to *always* increase safety and yet for guns *still* to be correlated with homicide rates (i.e., more guns, more homicide).

For example, a 100% increase in homicide rate may cause citizens to arm themselves for safety, and even if this actually reduces the homicide rate down to a mere 50% increase (over the original base), that would *still* show a 50% higher homicide rate correlated with increased gun ownership.

And yet, the authors of this study would have us believe that this "proved" that a) guns cause homicide, *and* b) guns don't protect anyone.

These people are idiots. Their very premise is flawed, even *before* they start looking at the data.

76 posted on 12/04/2002 12:22:00 PM PST by Dan Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Capitalist Eric
"...lead study author Dr. Matthew Miller of Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts..."

Here is another one of Dr. Miller's research interests: "the association of cigarette smoking to suicide."

No, I am NOT making this up!

77 posted on 12/04/2002 12:24:22 PM PST by Boss_Jim_Gettys
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: ServesURight
Where's the FReeper who usually posts that "Man on the lifeboat" BS graphic??

There are several Freepers who post it
I'm one of them....
But
This article needs more than just the "BS Meter"

! !

78 posted on 12/04/2002 12:25:58 PM PST by Fiddlstix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ServesURight
Of course, they're conveniently avoiding the real question: Does gun ownership in and of itself cause more homicides, or is it merely that people in pro-gun states are more likely to use a gun to kill somebody, instead of a baseball bat, a knife, poisoning, etc?

Not that we can even trust what little they claim in this article without seeing the entire study.

79 posted on 12/04/2002 12:26:51 PM PST by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ServesURight
The study findings imply "that guns, on balance, lethally imperil rather than protect Americans," lead study author Dr. Matthew Miller of Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts...

Stopped reading this article right there.

80 posted on 12/04/2002 12:27:28 PM PST by JPJones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson