States with Weak Gun Laws and Higher Gun Ownership Lead Nation in Gun Deaths

http://www.vpc.org/press/states-wit...ion-in-gun-deaths-new-data-for-2015-confirms/

There really does seem to be a very clear link between gun ownership and more gun violence. Alaska, Louisiana, Montana, Alabama, and Mississippi have the highest gun death rates. Massachusetts, Hawaii, New York, Rhode Island, and Connecticut have the lowest gun death rates.The report says that the nationwide gun death rate in 2015 was the highest since 1997. I wonder what the 2016 data will say. The gun death rate may have increased even more since 2015.

 

Why are you including suicides? Are there laws in the other states that prohibit gun ownership?

Why do states like Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire have such low homicide rates?

 

None of which changes that the state of California has more firearm-related deaths than any other state in the entire nation, despite having strict firearm-related laws, and low firearms ownership. The discussion of rates is nothing more than a diversion to this fact.

 

but are those gun deaths suicides or pos's that we're much better off without? yes, they are.

 

Because those are gun deaths. Suicide is illegal in nature. You are not allowed to kill yourself.

Now as a general rule of thumb, there's obviously more that leads to gun deaths than just laws. What that is is beyond me, but one of the correlations does seem to be gun laws. As for why the rural northeast? It's rural, not a lot of gun deaths and there's going to be lots of training for hunting. So not as many accidents.

 

Wait till president Trump sends the guard into Chicago, and other sanctuary cities and cleans out the criminals . The sun is going to be so sunny.

 

Suicide is not a crime at the federal level, nor in most states. In the states where it is still a criminal act, it is technically illegal, but the punishments have been removed.

Even assisted suicide is at various stages in different states.

Moreover, the countries with the highest suicide rates in the world have little or no access to firearms. Even France has a higher suicide rate than the US.

There is no gun law you could pass that would stop someone from killing themselves anyway.

Just another useless, baseless, fact-less post by the OP.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, just for fun, how do you think we should penalize people who kill themselves?

Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

To that I say, sure? Japan also has high suicide rates though they don't have access to fire arms. That's comparative though and that's its own mess. As for me, the point there is simple, it's a gun death and the style of death does matter if we want to understand what programs work and what don't. If we think about why people kill themselves with guns, then we can stop that. That being said, why are white poor, rural people killing themselves

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36116166

and then ask yourself, do you really want to give that person a gun? I'll give you a hint,
https://everytownresearch.org/reports/guns-and-violence-against-women/

based on the research, the answer is no.

This is why we look at gun death suicide rates. Because it's part of the larger problem.

As for what to do about suicides, I don't know, investigate and determine what caused it and charge those responsible as accomplices?

 

Hanging and suffocation suicides have increased by almost 100% since 1999, reaching overy 12k in 2015. Do we arrest the employees of REI for selling rope?

 

Ok great.

Let's say someone wants to kill themselves. How do you stop them from doing it with a gun, or with anything else for that matter.

Would you fight suicide by trying to regulate rope? It's ridiculous.

France has a higher suicide rate than we do. So does Belgium, Iceland, Finland and Poland.

Our suicide rate is about 1.5 per one hundred thousand people higher than Australia. That is a negligible difference, especially when you're comparing firearm ownership metrics.

Are you suggesting that a country swimming in guns like the US compared to Australia where firearms are difficult to obtain, that more stringent firearm laws will make any kind of difference whatsoever?

Guns don't "cause" suicide, guns don't "influence" suicide.

The only thing that affects suicide rate is how many people are feeling suicidal.

Also, people aren't being charged with a crime for attempted suicide.

Let's apply some common sense here. What's that going to do, make them feel better and stop trying to kill themselves?

 

Nice post hoc fallacy you have there.

Now, tell us why you believe gun control has anything to do with suicides, 2/3 of all gun-related deaths.

 

And here it is, the monthly regurgitation of the same claim by the same poster citing the same many times refuted source.

Apparently the gun banners have abandoned all pretense of being factual and rational and have taken the old approach of "the Big Lie" - repeat a lie often enough and eventually people will believe it (at least the gun banners hope so).

 

Really? He does this every month?

 

I don't know about every month on the dot, but its a recurring theme and it seems to be monthly.

 

Suicides are unproven table. Exhibit A: Japan has a higher suicide rate than us and they have a near outright gun ban.

 

As usual, you are wrong and focus on the wrong things. What about violent crime in general?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IUUIGf4ll4g

 

If they knowingly sell to someone who is about to commit suicide.

 

What happens when you narrow the data down to cities by size and political affiliation of their leadership?

 

Pray tell how would one actually go about proving such to be the case? What would the charges be once the arrest is actually made?

 

What? I'm not too sure what you're saying?

 

The message being presented is that the presence of firearms, or the lack thereof, play absolutely no part in matters pertaining to whether or not someone chooses to commit suicide. If someone wishes to end their existence, they are going to do such regardless of what their available options and methods are. The only individuals who would refrain from committing suicide if firearms were not readily available, are those who were not truly suicidal in the first place, and were merely seeking the attention of others.

 

First problem with any study like this is knowing the number of guns since no registry is kept so reading one study they estimated it by how many gun magazines were purchased. There is simply no way to know. If gun laws are the measure then Chicago proves strong gun laws produce more gun deaths.

The increase in gun deaths recently are in only a few inner cities and more likely due to the drug trade and recent increase in cheap heroin. Gun deaths are not increasing nationwide and are still much lower than the 90s.

VPC is a gun control organization and has an agenda.

 

Not really my point now was it? The point was would you want to give a mentally ill person a gun? Assuming that France, Belgium, etc. have higher rates, then all that means is that the expression of it is different. Same problem, different expression. Is it any surprise that there's also a rise in extremism going on at the same time in these countries? Would you really want to give people access to firearms when you know that there's also going to be a chance for general violence to occur?

 

I noticed your link does not provide any information about their claim of states with more guns. No method of determining that is given so basically this is click bait.

 

Then if it's a question of costs, then it would obviously matter who access to them. Think of it like a spectrum. Someone who commits suicide on one extreme, with gun related violence on the spectrum. A person doesn't have to commit suicide to hurt their loved ones, all they have to do is wave a gun around and beat them with it. Rope doesn't have the same effect.