Download - Iowa gun control response
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
1/20
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Murder and nonnegligent Manslaughter
Iowa Gun Control Data
Compiled and submitted by Edward Crowell
Just so there are no surprises, I do not favor gun control. Quite the opposite.
I believe my life has value, as do the lives of my family and especially my child. I have a
right to defend myself from assault and a duty to protect my child. In the absence of police or
soldiers, unless they happen to be right there when something bad happens, there is nobody else
who must provide for that protection. At the very least, I am responsible for myself and my child
until the police arrive. And when they do arrive, police do not have an affirmative duty to protect
me (Castle Rock v Gonzales, US Supreme Court, 2005). They have other priorities that may
increase my safety, but they are not required to keep me safe. Protection of self and defense of
my child is my job. Protection and defense are the reasons police and military have the tools they
have. And they have the tools they have because they are the best for the job. Those tools are
guns. Since were doing the same job for the same reasons I want the same tools, the best tools.
I want extended magazines for the exact same reasons police want them. I want assaultrifles for the same reasons the military want them.
But thats not going to happen today. Today Im going to present a range of data Ive
developed to provide some perspective and some basic information to form a basis for deciding
about gun control in Iowa.
First, lets talk about where Iowa is, right now. I think thats important before we talk
about where to go.
Iowa ranks number 6 in the US for lowestmurder rate at 1.5 per 100,000 population in
2011. Ahead of us is Hawaii at 1.2, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont in a three way
tie at 1.3, and Minnesota at 1.4 per 100,0001. Thats something to be proud of. What that means
is that in 2011 there were 46 murders and non-negligent manslaughters. For the whole year. Forthe whole state.
In the time from 1960 to 2010, Iowa has not had more than 80 murders in a year2. Lets
see what that looks like, shall we?
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
2/20
That spike at the right? 2008. Flood. Natural disasters will do that.
So thats our first bit of perspective: Iowa does not have a lot of murder (and non-
negligent homicide).
For comparison it is better to use rates. That way we dont get lost in the difference
between a state with ten million citizens and a state with one million. So heres that in a chart:
At the worst, during the late 70s and early 80s, the murder rate topped 2.5 per
100,000. For perspective, that is the 2011 murder rate for #13 South Dakota. So, at our worst wewere about as bad as South Dakota today.
No matter how you slice it, Iowa is only dealing with 1.5 per 100,000 or about 46
murders a year. And thats ALL murder and non-negligent homicide. The FBI data says 19 of
those were with firearms3
(7 handguns, 0 rifles, 2 shotguns, 10 firearms (type unknown), 10
knives or cutting instruments, 10 other weapons, 5 hands/fists/feet/pushed/ect).
Thats something to be proud of. I think it is fair to say Iowa is doing something right
with numbers like that.
FIRST POINT: IOWA DOES NOT HAVE A GUN PROBLEM
We have the sixth lowest murder rate in the nation (and thats only because of a three
way tie for second). The difference between us and #1 lowest murder rate Hawaii is: .2 per100,000. Thats about or less than the year to year variation in murder rate. The only thing
separating us from #1is the random variation of year to year. And only 19 involving guns at all
(by the way, since there were zero rifles, that means no murders by assault weapons).
Please dont mess that up.
Iowa does not need gun control or changes to reduce murders, we already have among
the lowest murder rates in the nation. The data is there for the comparison with other crime
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter rate
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
3/20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Brady Rank
MuderRate(per100,00
0)
statistics, but murder is the big one, so lets not make that more complicated than Im already
going to make it.
Overall the nation is talking about a gun problem. I think Ive shownIowa doesnt have
one. But lets go ahead and assume there is a gun problem in the US. Further, lets simplify the
talk to what has really set this all off: firearm murders. Specifically the shooting at Newtown.
Let me be clear, that massacre by a lone madman was and will remain a tragedy. The
emotional response should be dramatic when so many children are killed. However, that is a
poor basis for legislation. Legislation should be based on reasonable means to achieve realistic
goals and based on the best information available.
I put forth that gun control does not fit those criteria. And Ill demonstrate that several
ways as we go along.
First, in the debate about gun control there are a lot of numbers and statistics talked
about. Crime rates, murder rates, different states, different countries, different years. There are a
lot of regulations proposed, bans, magazine limits, background checks, tests, training. In an
effort to get something that doesn't require advanced mathematics to understand, I wanted tocompare the amount of gun control in each US state with the murder rate in that state.
Crime data for each state is collected and published by the FBI and murder rates for each state in
2011 are available1. Measuring the overall gun laws of a state would be difficult for one person,
but The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence ranks each state on the basis of their gun
control laws. Those rankings are available online as well4. By comparing a state's gun control
rank and their murder rate we should be able to see more gun control leading to less murder.
CHART 15
Looking at the chart, which plots the Brady Rank against the Murder Rate, there is no
trend. The points are all over the place. Looking at the numbers themselves5, the 10 states tied at
39th by Brady Rank have murder rates from 2.5 to 7.5 per 100,000. For comparison, the national
average is 4.71. The data also shows that California, rated best for gun control, has a murder rate
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
4/20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Brady Rank
MurderRank
of 4.8, more than double of worst rated Utah's 1.9. Californias murder rate is four times that of
the lowest murder rate (Hawaii, 1.2 per 100,000).
In order to have easier numbers to compare I used the murder rate from the FBI Uniform
Crime Report for 2011 to rank each state by murder rate from 1, lowest murder rate, to 50,
highest murder rate6.
CHART 26
If gun control works, better gun control should mean less murder. In that case, the Brady
Rank and the Murder Rank should be similar. This would be seen in the chart as the dots
following some sort ofline. Ideally, low Brady Rank (indicating good gun laws) would also
have low Murder Rank (meaning low murder rate). If that were the case, we would see a line
starting in the lower left and sloping upwards to the upper right of the chart. That just isnt what
the data shows. Number one Brady state California is 32nd for murder rate. Dead last Brady state
Utah is seventh best in the nation for murder rate. The Brady Rank and Murder Rank just don't
match up.
If gun control works, it should save lives and reduce crime. If anyone can reliably
evaluate a state's gun control, The Brady Campaign should be able to. If anyone can provide
useful murder rates, the FBI should be able to. Using what should be reliable numbers, a state'sgun control doesn't seem to have any relation to murder rate.
If it doesn't reduce murder, should we be seriously considering gun control?
I don't know if gun control has worked for other countries or other times, but I think
comparing gun control ranks and murder rates shows gun control doesn't work now, here.
However, the Brady Rank could be subjective. I dont think so as they use a fairly
specific and detailed scorecard to get their ranking numbers. One of the numbers I see relating
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
5/20
to gun control claims that with increasing gun ownership you get increasing murder. So, we can
plot that as well.
No relationship. Really, thats scattered all over the place. States with very close gun
ownership have widely varying murder rates. For that to happen gun ownership must not be a
measurable factor in murder rates.
Now, a side foray into some statistics. When two things tend to show up together they
are related and this can be calculated as a correlation. Really all that means is they tend tohappen together (whatever together maybe in the data youre talking about). The more one
happens at the same time as the other, the more correlated they are. If they always happen
together that would show high correlation. For the charts above, if the two things we are
interested in are related there would be some kind of line (and maybe not a straight one) or a
pattern. The better the data fits a line the more reliable that is. A measure of how accurately a
line fits the data is the R2 (coefficient of determination). The math to get it is a pain, but most
spreadsheet programs will calculate it for you. R2 ranges from -1 to 1. The closer that value is to
1 or -1, the better your line is for predicting data (the better it fits). The closer to 0 it is, the less
your data fits the trend.
0.000 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000 50.000 60.000 70.000
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Gun Owner % vs Murder Rate
Gun Ownership %
M
urderRateper100,0
00
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
6/20
Shall we see what that can look like?
The Brady Rank is the same as before, and so is the Gun Owner %. Even without the line
in there we can see this data is much less scattered. We can also see the R2is .507. This isnt 1
and isnt 0, it is somewhere between. If we really wanted to make a model to predict new data
we could evaluate exactly what that means. We dont need that much detail. For our purposes,
its enough to say that Brady Rank and the percent of homes owning a gun are correlated, though
not perfectly. This isnt terribly surprising. The Brady Rank is based on gun control laws, gun
control laws make getting guns harder, so fewer people own them.
This is a good time to consider another statistical truism: Correlation is not causation.
What this means is that just because two things are related that doesnt mean one causes the
other. Sometimes they have the same cause, sometimes it really just is co-incidence (they happen
to occur together). In this case, it would be unreasonable to claim the Brady Rank causes people
to own or not own guns. However, the Brady Rank is based on gun laws and gun laws would
affect how many people get guns.
While correlation is not causation, causation must have correlation. Basically that
summarizes as two things that are related need not cause each other (one leading to the other),
but if two things do cause each other then they will be related because they are related.
So, does murder rate increase as gun ownership increases?
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0.000
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
60.000
70.000
f(x) = 0.6115180795x + 21.0887814916
R = 0.5074959296
Brady Score vs Gun Measures
Brady Rank
GunOwner%
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
7/20
Nope. Very low R2, meaning that a line is a bad fit. This data shows no relationship to the
murder rates8. Basically, gun ownership is a bad predictor for murder rate (at least this set of
owner data and the 2011 murder rates).
To be fair the above ownership data came from a website that claimed uscarry.com as the
source of its data. I couldnt find it there and couldnt track it back to an original source. So, I
used another source as well9. Pediatrics is hardly gun friendly so their data should not be
biased in any way favoring less gun control. When plotting their gun ownership % to Murder
Rate for 2011 we get10:
0.000 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000 50.000 60.000 70.000
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
f(x) = 0.0142916808x + 3.6684613016
R = 0.0087552909
Gun Owner % vs Murder Rate
Gun Ownership %
MurderRateper100,0
00
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
f(x) = 0.0134473364x + 3.6803705151
R = 0.0087186561
pediatrics 2002 ownership data plots
% any houshold firearm
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
8/20
Not any better. However, the Pediattrics data is from 2002, so let us see that with 2002
murder rates:
Hmmmaybe a years delay, better check 2003.
Not any better. I havent put in trend lines because its obvious that this is too scattered to
be useful. The Pediatrics article included more than just a percent of households with a gun of
any type. They also listed percent of households with loaded guns. Gun control advocates would
likely say thats a pretty dangerous situation and someone could go off the handle and grab a
loaded gun at any time. Thats bound to increase murder, right?
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
pediatrics 2002 ownership data plots
% any houshold firearm
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
pediatrics 2002 ownership data plots
2003 Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
% any houshold firearm
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
9/20
2011 murder rate:
2002
2003
0 5 10 15 20 25
0
10
20
30
40
50
60f(x) = 1.573638638x + 13.13749486
R = 0.2586434732
LOADED (LOCKED OR UN) IN HOME
brady rank
Linear Regression for brady
rank
% loaded firearm in home
0 5 10 15 20 25
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14f(x) = 0.2429041899x + 2.745744684R = 0.1887040225
LOADED (LOCKED OR UN) IN HOME2002 Murder and nonnegligentmanslaughter rate
Linear Regression for 2002Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
% loaded firearm in home
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
10/20
To be fair, it does show a positive slope indicating a trend of higher murder rates in states
with higher percentage of homes containing a loaded firearm. However, the best R2
of .25 is still
not a good fit. Thats being generous; typically Id say thats not a statistically relevant
relationship. There are too many points that vary too much for loaded firearms in the home to be
a good predictor of murder rates. No relation, again.
The Pediatrics data does give some relationships, for instance, across all states, homes
with a loaded firearm correlates to percentage of homes with a loaded and unlocked firearm very
well. Just so we can see what a trend would look like if we had one.
0 5 10 15 20 25
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14f(x) = 0.2555186773x + 2.7506452709
R = 0.2236802841
LOADED (LOCKED OR UN) IN HOME2003 Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
Linear Regression for 2003
Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
% loaded firearm in home
0 5 10 15 20 25
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
f(x) = 0.6162716111x + 0.0185702232
R = 0.9607340708
LOADED (LOCKED OR UN) IN HOME
Loaded and unlocked
Household Firearm,Linear Regression for Loaded
and unlocked Household
Firearm,
% loaded firearm in home
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
11/20
Which makes sense. If you have a lot of homes with loaded guns, a number of them are
going to not be locked up (and the relation is remarkably stable across different states and overall
ownership, meaning people will either keep them locked or not without influence from much
anything else. Like gun control laws).
Since we have numbers for the percentage of homes with loaded and unlocked guns and
murder rates, surely having unsecured, loaded firearms relates to higher murder!
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
0
2
4
6
8
10
12f(x) = 0.305270748x + 2.7223841645
R = 0.1962320455
2011 murder rate per 100k
Linear Regression for 2011
murder rate per 100k
loaded and unlocked %
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14f(x) = 0.3499209155x + 2.9533843506
R = 0.15480753
2002 Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
Linear Regression for 2002Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
loaded and unlocked %
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
12/20
Wow, no relation again. Some upward slope, but the R2values are low, so its not
reliable. Beginning to look like having guns and even unsecured guns hasnothing to do with
murder.
Since I had the 2011, 2002, and 2003 murder rates for all the states handy, I decided to
take a look at what comparing those would show. Here it is:
2002 vs 2003
2011 vs 2003
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14f(x) = 0.3756419799x + 2.9323799777
R = 0.1911048803
2003 Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
Linear Regression for 2003
Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
loaded and unlocked %
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14f(x) = 0.9326534609x + 0.4174307928
R = 0.9317767528
2003 Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
Linear Regression for 2003
Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
2002 murder rate
2003murderrate
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
13/20
2011 vs 2002
2002 and 2003 murder rates are fair predictors of 2011 murder rates, R2
greater than .8.Whats both interesting and a bit obvious in hindsight is that the 2002 murder rates are very good
predictors of the 2003 rates. What can we conclude? Places that have high murder tend to have
high murder and tend to have high murder rates even a decade later. Same for low murder rate
states. What makes this especially interesting is how much has changed since 2002 and how
different the states are from each other, but the murder trends are pretty stable.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
f(x) = 1.1255063227x + 0.0241204066
R = 0.8147415502
2003 Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
Linear Regression for 2003
Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
2011 murder rate per 100,000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
f(x) = 1.1719445046x - 0.2751985863
R = 0.824644605
2002 Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rateLinear Regression for 2002
Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter rate
2011 murder rate per 100,000
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
14/20
Almost like expiration of the Assault Weapon Ban, changes in state laws, increases in
concealed carry, and other changes in gun laws has no relation at all to murder rate.
I am not claiming that more guns means less crime. I dont see that in this data. I also
dont see that less guns means less crime. What I see is that murder rates show no relation over
time or within 2011 to Brady Rank (as a measure of gun control), gun ownership (as reported by
the usliberals.about.com or the Pediatrics data), having loaded guns, or even loaded and
unlocked guns in the home.
One more. I saw it argued that murder was higher in states with no large cities AND
claimed by some that states with large cities have more murder. So, what about murder rates and
population density?
0.013? Thats pretty conclusive that population density isnt the issue.
Now, I do think that this repetitive comparison of different measures with murder rates
makes the argument for gun control as a means to reduce murder essentially disproven. Using
simple data, murder rates, brady ranks, crime rates, and gun owner ranks we can see there is no
trend or pattern. We can give it a number of how good the fit is. Some things do relate, but
nothing about guns here relates to murder.
SECOND POINT: GUNS DO NOT RELATE TO MURDER
Therefore, regulating guns will not reduce murder. If there is a reduction in murder after
gun regulation it cannot be attributed to the regulations consistently.
One more nail in that coffin, bear with me.
Even if you could showperfectcorrelation between gun ownership and murder rates, that
doesnt mean gun control would reduce murder. Even if the data showed, conclusively, that
states with high murder rates also had high gun ownership and that states with low ownership
always had low murder rates, gun control is still sunk.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0
2
4
6
8
10
12f(x) = -0.016062425x + 4.6155918367R = 0.0131579775
Population Density vs 2011 Murder Rate
Population density (square miles)
murderrateper100,0
00
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
15/20
Correlation is not causation, remember? Heres an example:
Suppose that in high murder rate areas, always, there is high gun ownership.
Suppose that in low murder rate areas, always, there is low gun ownership.
Suppose that all in between states for murder rate are also in between for gun ownership.
Now, with that correlation being given, is there a way to explain them where gun control
would be completely ineffective?
How about this: what if people in high murder rate areas are more likely to own guns
because they are in high murder rate states. What if people in low murder rate states are less
likely to own guns precisely because they are in a place with low murder rates?
In that situation changing gun laws do nothing for murder rates, murders are not caused
by gun ownership, gun ownership is caused by murders.
Just what if: guns dont cause crime and death, but crime and death cause people to own
guns to defend themselves with? Wouldnt that turn this whole thing on its head.
People are not entirely random or idiots. Where there is danger, people want to protect
themselves. Guns are the tools for that.Simple thought experiment, apply Occams Razor, what makes more sense:
1. Guns cause crime and make people more violent and deadlyOR
2. Where there is crime, violence, and death, people get themselves a gunFINAL POINT: EVEN IF GUNS AND CRIME / DEATH / MURDER ARE RELATED,
YOU CANNOT CONCLUDE GUNS CAUSE CRIME
If we cannot, even with a perfect correlation between guns and crime, reliably conclude
that guns cause crime, why would regulating guns be an answer to a crime problem?
I thank you for taking the time to read this and consider the numbers. I hope this helps
you make a decision on gun control11.________________
Edward Crowell
PO Box 216
Cedar Rapids, IA 52406
Footnotes:
1. FBI Uniform Crime Report data for 2011 murder rates was downloaded on January 5,2013, fromhttp://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-
2011/tables/table-4
2. Uniform Crime Reporting Statistics - UCR Data Online,http://www.ucrdatatool.gov/.Sources: FBI, Uniform Crime Reports, prepared by the National Archive of Criminal
Justice Data . Date of download: Jan 11 2013.
3. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-4http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-4http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-4http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-4http://www.ucrdatatool.gov/http://www.ucrdatatool.gov/http://www.ucrdatatool.gov/http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20http://www.ucrdatatool.gov/http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-4http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-4 -
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
16/20
4. Brady Campaign state rankings were copied from the Brady Campaign reportdownloaded January 5, 2013, from
http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/stateleg/scorecard/2011/2011_Brady_Campaign_
State_Scorecard_Rankings.pdf
5. The data used for Chart 1 is below (shown in order of best to worst Brady Rank)State Brady Rank Murder Rate (per 100,000)
California 1 4.8
New Jersey 2 4.3
Massachusetts 3 2.8
New York 4 4
Connecticut 5 3.6
Hawaii 6 1.2
Maryland 7 6.8
Rhode Island 8 1.3
Illinois 9 5.6
Pennsylvania 10 5Michigan 11 6.2
North Carolina 12 5.3
Colorado 15 2.9
Oregon 15 2.1
Washington 15 2.4
Alabama 17 6.3
Minnesota 17 1.4
Delaware 18 4.5
Virginia 19 3.7
Georgia 22 5.6
South Carolina 22 6.8
Tennessee 22 5.8
Iowa 25 1.5
Maine 25 2
Ohio 25 4.4
New Hampshire 27 1.3
Vermont 27 1.3
Nebraska 29 3.6
Nevada 29 5.2
Arkansas 39 5.5
Indiana 39 4.8
Kansas 39 3.8
Mississippi 39 8
Missouri 39 6.1
New Mexico 39 7.5
South Dakota 39 2.5
Texas 39 4.4
West Virginia 39 4.3
http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/stateleg/scorecard/2011/2011_Brady_Campaign_State_Scorecard_Rankings.pdfhttp://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/stateleg/scorecard/2011/2011_Brady_Campaign_State_Scorecard_Rankings.pdfhttp://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/stateleg/scorecard/2011/2011_Brady_Campaign_State_Scorecard_Rankings.pdfhttp://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/stateleg/scorecard/2011/2011_Brady_Campaign_State_Scorecard_Rankings.pdfhttp://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/stateleg/scorecard/2011/2011_Brady_Campaign_State_Scorecard_Rankings.pdf -
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
17/20
Wyoming 39 3.2
Florida 41 5.2
Wisconsin 41 2.4
Idaho 47 2.3
Kentucky 47 3.5
Louisiana 47 11.2Montana 47 2.8
North Dakota 47 3.5
Oklahoma 47 5.5
Alaska 50 4
Arizona 50 6.2
Utah 50 1.9
The Brady Rankings set states scoring the same as tied at the same rank, using the
lowest number in the tied series as the rank.
6. The data for Chart 2 is below, in order of lowest to highest Murder Rank (1 is lowestmurder rate, 50 is highest).
State Brady Rank Murder Rank
Hawaii 6 1
Rhode Island 8 4
New Hampshire 27 4
Vermont 27 4
Minnesota 17 5
Iowa 25 6
Utah 50 7
Maine 25 8
Oregon 15 9
Idaho 47 10
Washington 15 12
Wisconsin 41 12
South Dakota 39 13
Massachusetts 3 15
Montana 47 15
Colorado 15 16
Wyoming 39 17
Kentucky 47 19
North Dakota 47 19
Connecticut 5 21
Nebraska 29 21
Virginia 19 22
Kansas 39 23
New York 4 25
Alaska 50 25
New Jersey 2 27
-
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
18/20
West Virginia 39 27
Ohio 25 29
Texas 39 29
Delaware 18 30
California 1 32
Indiana 39 32Pennsylvania 10 33
Nevada 29 35
Florida 41 35
North Carolina 12 36
Arkansas 39 38
Oklahoma 47 38
Illinois 9 40
Georgia 22 40
Tennessee 22 41
Missouri 39 42
Michigan 11 44
Arizona 50 44
Alabama 17 45
Maryland 7 47
South Carolina 22 47
New Mexico 39 48
Mississippi 39 49
Louisiana 47 50
The Brady Rankings set states scoring the same as tied at the same rank, using the
lowest number in the tied series as the rank. I have done the same for Murder Rank.
7. http://usliberals.about.com/od/Election2012Factors/a/Gun-Owners-As-Percentage-Of-Each-States-Population.htm
8. Data for the chart is below.BRADY RANK GUN OWNER % MURDER RATE
Hawaii 6 6.700 1.2
New Hampshire 27 30.000 1.3
Rhode 8 12.800 1.3
Vermont 27 42.000 1.3
Minnesota 17 41.700 1.4
Iowa 25 42.900 1.5
Utah 50 43.900 1.9
Maine 25 40.500 2
Oregon 15 39.800 2.1
Idaho 47 55.300 2.3
Washington 15 33.100 2.4
Wisconsin 41 44.400 2.4
http://usliberals.about.com/od/Election2012Factors/a/Gun-Owners-As-Percentage-Of-Each-States-Population.htmhttp://usliberals.about.com/od/Election2012Factors/a/Gun-Owners-As-Percentage-Of-Each-States-Population.htmhttp://usliberals.about.com/od/Election2012Factors/a/Gun-Owners-As-Percentage-Of-Each-States-Population.htmhttp://usliberals.about.com/od/Election2012Factors/a/Gun-Owners-As-Percentage-Of-Each-States-Population.htmhttp://usliberals.about.com/od/Election2012Factors/a/Gun-Owners-As-Percentage-Of-Each-States-Population.htmhttp://usliberals.about.com/od/Election2012Factors/a/Gun-Owners-As-Percentage-Of-Each-States-Population.htmhttp://usliberals.about.com/od/Election2012Factors/a/Gun-Owners-As-Percentage-Of-Each-States-Population.htm -
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
19/20
South Dakota 39 56.600 2.5
Massachusetts 3 12.600 2.8
Montana 47 57.700 2.8
Colorado 15 34.700 2.9
Wyoming 39 59.700 3.2
Kentucky 47 47.700 3.5North Dakota 47 50.700 3.5
Connecticut 5 16.700 3.6
Nebraska 29 38.600 3.6
Virginia 19 35.100 3.7
Kansas 39 42.100 3.8
Alaska 50 57.800 4
New York 4 18.000 4
New Jersey 2 12.300 4.3
West 39 55.400 4.3
Ohio 25 32.400 4.4
Texas 39 35.900 4.4
Delaware 18 25.500 4.5
California 1 21.300 4.8
Indiana 39 39.100 4.8
Pennsylvania 10 34.700 5
Florida 41 24.500 5.2
Nevada 29 33.800 5.2
North Carolina 12 41.300 5.3
Arkansas 39 55.300 5.5
Oklahoma 47 42.900 5.5
Georgia 22 40.300 5.6
Illinois 9 20.200 5.6
Tennessee 22 43.900 5.8
Missouri 39 41.700 6.1
Arizona 50 31.100 6.2
Michigan 11 38.400 6.2
Alabama 17 51.700 6.3
Maryland 7 21.300 6.8
South Carolina 22 42.300 6.8
New Mexico 39 34.800 7.5
Mississippi 39 55.300 8
Louisiana 47 44.100 11.29. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content-nw/full/116/3/e370/10.I have included the actual data for the first charts. I do not for the rest. The data is easily
available and putting the numbers in just adds length without purpose. Anyone wanting
my numbers or any sources not cited can feel free to contact me at
[email protected] Ill provide them.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content-nw/full/116/3/e370/http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content-nw/full/116/3/e370/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content-nw/full/116/3/e370/ -
7/30/2019 Iowa gun control response
20/20
11.In the interest of being thorough, I dont actually find the numbers dispositive. Mydecision is based on the fact that my life has value and I have the right to defend my life
from assault. Self-defense is a right supported even by Ghandi. With the right to self-
defense comes a right to the tools to defend myself. There is no reason to deny me the
best tools for my family and myself. The best tools for stopping violent criminals are the
ones police and military use, which is why they use them. Therefore, I deserve the best
tools to defend myself and my family from assault, be it a lone criminal, gang, mob, riot,
invading army, or domestic tyranny, now or in the future, real or potential.
However, I frequently see numbers used to support gun control so it seemed worthwhile
to dispute those numbers in the simplest way I could conceive. If gun control works at all
like I see claimed, there should be at least some effect on murder rates. There is none.
There is not even a large enough effect directly on firearms murders to show up in the
overall murder rate. I mention this because if gun control even just affected gun murders,
given the large percentage of murders committed with guns, it should be apparent in theoverall murder rate. Again, it is not.
Finally, rights exist against the government. If someone is giving a talk, exercising their
freedom of speech, I can stand around telling them to shut up and yell over them, blast an
air horn, wave around a flag and generally be infringing on the exercise of their right as
all get out. I can kick them right off my property because I dont like what they have to
say. None of which triggers protection of freedom of speech because I am not a
government actor. I have a right to arms, protected from acts of the State. There is no
right to safety, for one. For two, the hazards and fears they claim are not from the
government, theyre from individuals. Between individuals the ruling law of interactionare things like harassment, negligence, assault, battery, wrongful death, reckless
endangerment, that sort of thing. No second amendment action needed unless the State
wants to insert itself.