Gun Crimes: State by State Analysis

[No Free Beer]

I tried looking up and comparing the data.

This is what I tried to find is this:

Are states with lenient gun laws safer than states with strict gun laws?

Does anyone have some stats or numbers?

I know that Nevada, Texas, Montana, Alaska, and Vermont are the most lenient.

Do they have fewer gun crimes than, say...Illinois, NY, or Mass?

Let me know!

[brushfire]

I tried looking up and comparing the data.
Do they have fewer gun crimes than, say...Illinois, NY, or Mass?

http://gunfacts.info may be of help

FWIW - Illinois, Chicago specifically, deliberately avoids the FBI data standards so that they dont land on the FBI rankings. They use a 3rd party to collect data and provide statistics, and do so to avoid FOIA. When there are murders, they'll classify it as a robbery or drug related. That's why you dont see Chicago as the murder capital of the world.

Here's a recent map which displays Chicago homicides for the year - people are aware of the shenanigans and are starting to independantly track Chicago's murders:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/violence

[fisharmor]

I know that Nevada, Texas, Montana, Alaska, and Vermont are the most lenient.

Texas is not the conservative paradise everyone thinks it is.

http://opencarry.org/opencarry.html
Texas is extremely restrictive of open carry.
Also, check out some concealed carry requirements in the Lone Star State:
http://www.txchia.org/getchl.htm

You can't be delinquent on any fines or fees when you get your permit? Yeah, really 2nd Amendment there....
Also the training requirement is much more restrictive in TX than in other states.
In Virginia, you can get a CHP after taking Hunter Safety - which is offered by groups like Isaac Walton here for free, and doesn't include a live fire component.

The only thing that Texas has on Virginia is that TX is a Castle Doctrine state, but that's not a 2nd Amendment issue.


But to answer your question: the answer is the Potomac River.
With few exceptions, everything on the VA side of the Potomac is nice neighborhoods and safe going.
With few exceptions, everything on the MD/DC side of the Potomac is a dangerous $#@!hole.

[Anti Federalist]

I tried looking up and comparing the data.

This is what I tried to find is this:

Are states with lenient gun laws safer than states with strict gun laws?

Does anyone have some stats or numbers?

I know that Nevada, Texas, Montana, Alaska, and Vermont are the most lenient.

Do they have fewer gun crimes than, say...Illinois, NY, or Mass?

Let me know!

Violent crime rate rankings of the most dangerous states in 2010 indicate no real correlation between gun laws and not.

There are very lenient and very restrictive states on the list.

Demographics and economics as always seem to play a larger role.

No. 1: NEVADA
Assault: 8
Burglary: 12
Murder: 13
Motor Vehicle Theft: 1
Rape: 8
Robbery: 1

No. 2: NEW MEXICO
Assault: 5
Burglary: 3
Murder: 6
Motor Vehicle Theft: 7
Rape: 2
Robbery: 23

No. 3: LOUISIANA
Assault: 4
Burglary: 9
Murder: 1
Motor Vehicle Theft: 14
Rape: 33
Robbery: 18

No. 4: SOUTH CAROLINA
Assault: 1
Burglary: 8
Murder: 7
Motor Vehicle Theft: 9
Rape: 13
Robbery: 16

No. 5: TENNESSEE
Assault: 2
Burglary: 5
Murder: 8
Motor Vehicle Theft: 15
Rape: 19
Robbery: 8

No. 6: FLORIDA
Assault: 6
Burglary: 7
Murder: 12
Motor Vehicle Theft: 13
Rape: 23
Robbery: 4

No. 7: DELAWARE
Assault: 7
Burglary: 18
Murder: 10
Motor Vehicle Theft: 19
Rape: 9
Robbery: 3

No. 8: MARYLAND
Assault: 10
Burglary: 23
Murder: 2
Motor Vehicle Theft: 4
Rape: 45
Robbery: 2

No. 9: ARIZONA
Assault: 21
Burglary: 15
Murder: 13
Motor Vehicle Theft: 2
Rape: 39
Robbery: 15

No. 10: ARKANSAS
Assault: 11
Burglary: 2
Murder: 18
Motor Vehicle Theft: 32
Rape: 4
Robbery: 28

No. 11: ALABAMA
Assault: 22
Burglary: 4
Murder: 5
Motor Vehicle Theft: 21
Rape: 16
Robbery: 11

No. 12: GEORGIA
Assault: 20
Burglary: 6
Murder: 8
Motor Vehicle Theft: 6
Rape: 42
Robbery: 7

No. 13: OKLAHOMA
Assault: 9
Burglary: 10
Murder: 16
Motor Vehicle Theft: 18
Rape: 10
Robbery: 26

No. 14: ALASKA
Assault: 3
Burglary: 39
Murder: 28
Motor Vehicle Theft: 29
Rape: 1
Robbery: 30

No. 15: CALIFORNIA
Assault: 18
Burglary: 25
Murder: 16
Motor Vehicle Theft: 3
Rape: 41
Robbery: 5

[Anti Federalist]

But, here's something that is more of an equal comparison.

NH v. Mass.

Border states, with similar demographics, income and ages.

Massachusetts, one of the most extremely restrictive on gun rights in the nation, New Hampshire, one of the most lenient or "constitutionally correct" in the nation.

In 2010 Massachusetts had a murder rate of 3.2 per 100,000 people.

In 2010 New Hampshire had a murder rate of 1.0 per 100,000 people.

These numbers come back roughly the same every year, for all violent crimes, making NH either the safest or one of the top five safest states in the nation, depending on the year, while Massachusetts varies from the middle to near the top ten of most violent states, depending on year and type of violent crime.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/macrime.htm

[NoOneButPaul]

Im curious... in what states do you have the right to just carry your gun on you at all times?

[Anti Federalist]

Im curious... in what states do you have the right to just carry your gun on you at all times?

Open Carry



Constitutional Carry



http://www.opencarry.org/index.html

[Acala]

Im curious... in what states do you have the right to just carry your gun on you at all times?

Arizona for one. Concealed or open. Private property owners can exclude you as can certain limited government buildings if they make provisions for storing your weapon.

[Zippyjuan]

Lets see. Population: New Hampshire- 1.3 million Mass.: 6.6 million
Percent 18 or younger: NH: 21.2% Mass: 21.3%
Education- Bachelor's degrees: NH- 32.9% Mass: 38.3
High school graduates: NH: 90.9% Mass: 88.7%
Home Ownership rate: NH: 72.6 Mass: 64%
Income- Median Household- NH: $63,000 Mass: $64,000
Poverty (percent below poverty line) NH: 7.8% Mass: 10.5%
Persons per square mile: NH: 147 Mass: 839

Source- Massachusetts: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/25000.html
New Hampshire: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/33000.html

Unemployment rate: New Hampshire: 5.1%
Massachusetts: 6.0

http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm/

So MA is bigger and has a higher poverty rate (though median income is virtually the same) and a somewhat higher unemployment rate. Perhaps the biggest thing to note is the population density- New Hampshire is only 147 people per square mile and Massachusettes is over 800. More density can mean more tensions and more opportunity for crimes. MA also has lower home ownership. People who own their own homes tend to care more about them and their neighborhood. There is more going on here than simply the respective gun laws.

[Anti Federalist]

Yup, as I noted in my prior post, there are many variables.

But, obviously, NH's "lenient" gun laws have not made it turn into an Albanian bloodbath, nor has Massachusetts' extremely restrictive laws turned it into a peaceful idyll of love and harmony.

I suggest you look at other states as well, and I think you'll find that there is not a closer comparison between a restrictive state and non restricted state that are as close in demographics anywhere in the country.

Lets see. Population: New Hampshire- 1.3 million Mass.: 6.6 million
Percent 18 or younger: NH: 21.2% Mass: 21.3%
Education- Bachelor's degrees: NH- 32.9% Mass: 38.3
High school graduates: NH: 90.9% Mass: 88.7%
Home Ownership rate: NH: 72.6 Mass: 64%
Income- Median Household- NH: $63,000 Mass: $64,000
Poverty (percent below poverty line) NH: 7.8% Mass: 10.5%
Persons per square mile: NH: 147 Mass: 839

Source- Massachusetts: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/25000.html
New Hampshire: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/33000.html

Unemployment rate: New Hampshire: 5.1%
Massachusetts: 6.0

http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm/

So MA is bigger and has a higher poverty rate (though median income is virtually the same) and a somewhat higher unemployment rate. Perhaps the biggest thing to note is the population density- New Hampshire is only 147 people per square mile and Massachusettes is over 800. More density can mean more tensions and more opportunity for crimes. MA also has lower home ownership. People who own their own homes tend to care more about them and their neighborhood. There is more going on here than simply the respective gun laws.

[Anti Federalist]

Here's another that show little impact one way or the other:

NY - 4.5

NJ - 4.2

PA - 5.2

The first two very restrictive, the last, relatively lenient.

Of course, nobody here, including myself since I've already been insulted enough this week on this subject, will talk about the 900 lb. statistical gorilla in the room WRT to violent crime rates.

[Lindsey]

Here's another that show little impact one way or the other:

NY - 4.5

NJ - 4.2

PA - 5.2

The first two very restrictive, the last, relatively lenient.

Of course, nobody here, including myself since I've already been insulted enough this week on this subject, will talk about the 900 lb. statistical gorilla in the room WRT to violent crime rates.

And that puts a monkey wrench in the population density theory. Looking at the entire states, New Jersey is significantly more densely populated than PA or NY.

[Lindsey]

When the police use firearms to kill civilians, do they count that in the "gun crime" statistics?

[Anti Federalist]

When the police use firearms to kill civilians, do they count that in the "gun crime" statistics?

You know, there is no accurate and reliable database of cops killing citizens available.

[No Free Beer]

But, here's something that is more of an equal comparison.

NH v. Mass.

Border states, with similar demographics, income and ages.

Massachusetts, one of the most extremely restrictive on gun rights in the nation, New Hampshire, one of the most lenient or "constitutionally correct" in the nation.

In 2010 Massachusetts had a murder rate of 3.2 per 100,000 people.

In 2010 New Hampshire had a murder rate of 1.0 per 100,000 people.

These numbers come back roughly the same every year, for all violent crimes, making NH either the safest or one of the top five safest states in the nation, depending on the year, while Massachusetts varies from the middle to near the top ten of most violent states, depending on year and type of violent crime.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/macrime.htm

to be fair though, Mass has a major US city, whereas NH doesn't...

[Anti Federalist]

to be fair though, Mass has a major US city, whereas NH doesn't...

Five years gone now...

And it's even more un-PC to say what Mass. has that NH does not.

[Krugminator2]

Five years gone now...

And it's even more un-PC to say what Mass. has that NH does not.

While the unspeakable difference probably plays a role, there is a clearly correct answer on the gun debate that no one seems to ever bring up.



Liberals always point out that the United States has the highest gun ownership rate and the highest murder rate in the Western world. But they don't bring up that the United States has only a fraction of the murders of South American and Central American countries who have much lower gun ownership rates.

The graph seems to pretty clearly indicate that murders are much more strongly correlated with where drugs are produced and trafficked than with gun ownership. The US borders on Mexico. Europe, Japan, and Australia do not. If drugs were legal, I predict the murder rate in the US would be equal to or lower than the Euro countries.

[oyarde]

Im curious... in what states do you have the right to just carry your gun on you at all times?

What kind of gun ?

[Anti Federalist]

The graph seems to pretty clearly indicate that murders are much more strongly correlated with where drugs are produced and trafficked than with gun ownership. The US borders on Mexico. Europe, Japan, and Australia do not. If drugs were legal, I predict the murder rate in the US would be equal to or lower than the Euro countries.

A valid point and it certainly would help.

If you were to remove the homicides from the ten most violent cities in the country, you would already have that low Euro crime rate.

And, almost universally, those cities are at the wrong end of the "difference that shall never be named".

[Krugminator2]

And, almost universally, those cities are at the wrong end of the "difference that shall never be named".

The problem is you really can't even have that argument and I am not sure there is much that can be done about it. Charles Murray, a guy with a PHD from MIT, gets booed and threatened with violence wherever he speaks. I would rather focus on bad government interventions, which can be fixed.