Firearms-Related Homicides: Democratic vs. Republican Affiliation

TIL I learned that 52.5% of murders are committed by 14.3% (really 7.15%, and really much smaller than that) of the population.

This post is great if you want to circlejerk over how bad democrats are, which is fine. But this methodology is SOOOOO terrible with so many holes, suppositions, and logical fallacies, its essentially useless for anything else. We (correctly) rail against the anti-gun folks when they use such bullshit analyses to “prove” their points. We should be equally intolerant of our own when they do the same. Especially since with most of the arguments to be made in the gun debate, we ACTUALLY have facts on our side. There’s no reason to go torturing numbers to draw untenable conclusions to fit our narrative, and it makes us look shitty when we do.

Just my two cents though. What the hell do i know.

Seems legit. If we deport the democrats, this leaves California, Oregon, Washington, Illinois, New York, Mass., New Jersey, Connecticut, and a few other states open for re-colonization. I’m in.

Here’s to you Robert!
https://youtu.be/IUK6zjtUj00
Mr statistician

“Guns aren’t the problem, Democrats are.”

We already knew that. But it is nice to have the actual data that proves it.

How many high-profile murders were committed by Democrats?

How many murders committed by professed Conservatives?

Democrats want to tax firearms and ammunition sales and give the money to Planned Parenthood to kill nearly 50% of everyone who passes through their doors.

The U.S. State Dept. through ITAR regulations, tax firearms and ammunition manufacture, and they use it in programs overseas, one of which is the promotion of abortion.

“Poop to that” – Marvin Boggs

America in 2016 is basically where Weimar Germany was in 1932, morally speaking.
Healthy societies don’t need to regulate firearms. Most of Europe had virtually no gun control in 1900. Millions of small, concealable firearms were being churned out by factories in Britain, France, Belgium, Germany and Spain between the late 1800’s and the middle of the 20th century.

Leave statistical analyses to Leghorn. Please.

As much as I loathe gun-grabbing national-office Democrats, I’m trusting that this “analysis” is presented “tongue-in-cheek” style.

This isn’t firearm homicides by party affiliation, this is firearm homicides by race, multiplied by party affiliation by race. I’m sorry, the two aren’t the same, no matter how convenient it is to calculate.

Them other races, not black or white, is some peacefull mofos according to this fellow. We ought to let them be in charge for a while.

Good grief.

You can’t just assume that out of the population of blacks, exactly 90 percent of murders are committed by democrats because 90 percent of registered blacks are democrats.

You’ve not even established that murders are committed only by registered voters. In fact, I’d bet good money that that’s not only something you can’t establish, it’ll be possible to establish it is NOT true.

So given you’ve listed no percentage for murderers who aren’t registered to vote, this so-called “study” is a valueless, festering, rancid piece of shit that should be given no credence–and will discredit anyone who does.

Just be glad I didn’t tell you what I *really* think.

“If Democrats stopped shooting people, we could reduce our firearm related murders by almost 70%

Guns aren’t the problem, Democrats are.”

I have to say, I like this guy!

His stats seem to be equally as valid as the rabid gun-grabbers…

This was touched upon by youtuber Stefan Molyneux in one of his videos, not specifically party lines but demographics. The reason why most large cities have problems with homicides is their demographic downtown. I feel that RF’s use to show party affiliation is correct with the demographic race breakdown. If you try to find that specific Stefan Molyneux video be forewarned his videos are often too long and wordy. I normally can’t sit through them but the one I am referring to I did and found it informative.

So can we get a homicide watch list started and put all the dems on it? Ban them from firearms ownership. You know, for the children.

Way too many assumptions and correlation without supporting evidence of causation. That said, there’s something that tells me the author was aware of that and trying to make some point. I just can’t figure out what that point is. Maybe the point is that this is exactly the kind of research scientists are given multi-million dollar grants of my money to do. If so, we’ll done!!

You are not allowed to make sense on this topic. Just ask the dems

People are saying this is stupid and inaccurate… I thought it was satire to be honest.

Sure I guess…

Mr. Farago:

You should send that over to The Trace. ?

It seems anti-gun, so they might publish it before they read it.

Sounds on par with anti gun studies.

The Article is a fine example of how referenced statistics are manipulated to achieve a desired result. This is a common practice by anti-gun politicians, groups and “scholars” .

A reference is needed that reflects murderers social or civic desire to take part in the political process. Lol

This is skewed

Good work. Remember, however, that the govt fraudulently includes nonwhite Mestizos and Arab/Islamic people as “whites.” Probably half of your white crimes are probably committed by nonwhite Hispanics/Arabs who vote Democrat. (This also means that if a nonwhite Mestizo/Arab kills a white person out of hate, it’s considered a white-on-white crime.)

I don’t intend to discuss politics/religion/sexual preference/national origin with anyone trying to kill me, and with damn few that aren’t.

There was a similar, and probably more accurate analysis, done in 2014 with the same conclusion.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/01/guns_dont_kill_people_democrats_kill_people.html

Gun control has nothing to do with race ,sex, nationality , the people that want gun control don’t give a shit about who dies they kill thousands of people each day for money and power.They want your freedoms and you must be their slave. If you give them all they will want more .IT’S TIME THAT THEY DIE.

This would be even more interesting if adjusting for ethnicity, also. Since 2013, the FBI has resumed tracking Hispanic/Latino which allows separation from non-Hispanic ‘White’.

And all the ppl said…. Amen.

This would be equivalent to me saying 80% of the asian population eat, so if 1000lbs of beans are sold 80% of it must be eaten by asians, when in reality they probably only eat rice. There is no correlation of party affiliation to gun purchase or crime committed unless you polled the shooters. It also completely ignores issues like education level, poverty level, or any other factors that could affect crime due to long term discriminatory practices.

Most perpetrators are male, and most males vote Republican, therefore most of them must be Republican.

Same exact reasoning.

Really, really stupid.

According to data compiled by Mother Jones magazine, which looked at mass shootings in the United States since 1982, white people — almost exclusively white uneducated men — committed some 64% of the shootings.

And since white uneducated men voted for Republican or Libertarian 76% of the time, we can say that non-white, educated, female Democrats committed murder by guns 0.000001% of the time.

Your calculations are stupid and irrelevant.

Guns don’t kill people. The bullets destroying skulls and internal organs kill people.

…..Let’s Cut the Crap, shall we?

Conservatives are NOT running around SHOOTING and KILLING Americans. MOST Homicides are committed in Big Cities; Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, Houston, Miami, New York, Philadelphia, etc…..The overwhelming percentage of Criminals are (in this order, per FBI Stats) ; Blacks, Hispanics, Whites, Asians, other. …..Some criminals vote, some don’t, but the overwhelming number of criminals that vote….VOTE DEMOCRAT.

These numbers are wrong. The assumptions made lump hispanics with whites. Hispanics vote 67% democrat and commit 27% of the murders. Whites vote 26% democrat and commit 23% of murders. If you extrapolate whites from hispanics you find that democrats commit 73% of the murders. Check for yourself but understand that when they claim black vs whites it really means black vs whites/hispanics.

There is one GAPING Hole in this calculation. The calculations were based off data from THE ONLY TIME IN U.S. HISTORY THAT WE HAD AN AFRICAN AMERICAN PRESIDENT. That makes the 90+% of black voters casting a vote for the democrats an anomaly and thereby disqualifies your calculations. I suspect your original hypothesis that democrats commit more murders than republicans is probably correct, but if so, it is most likely at a much smaller margin. It certainly is not a 2/3 vs 1/3 margin

Mattg, I suspect that your numbers understate the case against democrats. Quite badly. Your methodology assumes a relatively pure Gaussian distribution of murders across party lines.

Without doing some heavy math, my guess would be that in excess of 90% of murders are committed by people who identify as or associate themselves with democrats. It wouldn’t even surprise me if it were 95%.

70% of people in the U.S. a Christian.

Therefore 70% of all mass shootings are committed by Christians.

Also 70% of all rapes are too.

Also 70% of all Terrorist attacks.

And 70% of all telemarketing calls.

70% Of all attendees of Synagogue must be Christian.

And 70% of all homeless people are Christian too.

70% of all people with Diarrhea are Christian.

100% of your calculations are useless.

This is the most illogical thing I’ve ever read. I’m neither a Republican or a Democrat and wanted to see if an actual study was done on this. This was not even worth a hemorrhoid on a dolphin.

Wow, that is some impressively bullshit statistical analysis there. Did you ever take High School math?

Firstly, yes 93% of African Americans who vote do vote Democrat, but voter turnout among African Americans is not 100% and there’s no reason to think that African Americans who commit gun crimes are a representative sample of all African Americans.

This article actually acknowledges their completely flawed methodology, but because they’re trying to sell you a false narrative they blatantly ignore it. Here’s an ACTUAL quote from the article you just sent.

“[We assume] there is a 1:1 political party affiliation to each perpetrator ratio (we also know this isn’t completely correct because it assumes that every perpetrator belongs to one of these 2 political parties). We have to make this assumption because there is no other data to go off of for this portion of the analysis and I believe that any error caused by it would only be +/- a few percentage points (hardly enough to have any substantial influence over the outcome).”

No, you DON’T have to assume that. Less than half of the population belongs to either of the two parties and it’s HIGHLY likely that violent criminals are not politically active. I bet that a very small minority of people who commit gun crime are Democrats OR Republicans. Most criminals are probably neither.

Democrats are centrists, not Leftists. The short list of terrorist attacks (terrorism has to be politically motivated) is almost entirely made up of religious fanatics, who occupy the right side of the political spectrum. Most attacks are not politically motivated, however. Republicans aren’t shooting people, but far-right radicals are. Democrats aren’t shooting people, and neither are far-left radicals. That’s why the FBI considers right-wing terror to be the biggest terrorist threat.

Suppose that your flawed analysis were correct.

Then tell me WHY you want to keep firearms so readily available to everyone ? ?

This is a great example of the irrationality of the Gunnie outlook ! !

Oh dear, this is the most illogical, convoluted article I have read in a long time. Amazing that someone would spend their time manipulating numbers in that manner. Anyone with any education can see right through your attempt to justify your BS. But then that is not your target audience is it?

This article is a good example of stastical jerrymandering. I guess all those people committing suicide on Alaska were Democrats.

This is a duplicate comment, I just figured that it deserved being in a larger forum.

Let’s begin with me, I am not a liberal, I am not a Democrat, I have no stake in the data being proved or disproved. I simply want it to be known that this article is insignificant and bigoted. also, I want it known that I Love my second amendment rights, I’m an avid target shooter and I average around 750 shots down range a week; I’d average more if my budget allowed. The statistics are not calculated correctly and the racial data is not correct. The comparative times are wildly at odds and so even if the numbers Were correct, and they aren’t, this page would be utterly worthless mathematically speaking. Furthermore, the correlation between gun crime and racial statistics is only useful for representing current inmate populations.

OK I will tell you why I think the numbers are wrong. The formula that is used here is expressed as the populations total murders over a given time multiplied by the proportion of the population which fits a category such as 10,945 x .525 and then diluted into a further calculation of the same problem, such as 5746.12 x .93. This method is completely flawed, not only does it increase in inaccuracy the more you continue this calculation (seeing as we have no numbers to confirm that the original calculation or the secondary calculation bears out into reality) but it is not the correct equation. A statistician doesn’t use n x n(2)=y and then y x n(3)=z they use this y = y1 + (x – x1) x [(y2-y1)/(x2-x1)] there is a website that will do this calculation for you. https://www.easycalculation.com/analytical/linear-interpolation.php but you need to go here https://www.bjs.gov/rawdata.cfm and get Actual Numbers. The percentages are not statistically important without the raw data.

after you have finished that equation you need to calculate the skew of the statistics, account for variable change, account for human error and errors in the raw data set. after all of that you will have a statistically meaningful number. There is not a single word of this whole article that is mathematically correct in any way, including but not limited to comparative time sets, comparative data sets comparative population numbers, political assossiaction numbers calculations, skew or any other factor.

This entire premise of your numbers is heavily faulty. You forgot to mention that using the political affliction of the general populace of Blacks and Whites as representative of the political affliction of murderers of those races is highly erroneous. Even if 40% of Whites votes for Democrats in general, it could be 10% of White murderers who vote for Democrat. If it made sense to treat the political demographics of Black/White people in general and Black/White murderers as the same, you might as well treat the political affiliation of the general population as a whole and the political demographics of murderers as the same.

According to your data, WHITE REPUBLICANS ARE TWICE AS LIKELY to commit a gun crime than white democrats. No surprises here.

Democrats are to blame for most of the murders in this country and almost all of the murders in large cities. Democrats are most likely to get killed by other Democrats. No surprises here.

So by your logic 61% of white murderers are republican. Which means white republicans are more dangerous than white democrats. But of course this is bullshit logic because it doesn’t take into account gender (most murderers are male so including female voting % throws ur numbers off) and there’s really no correlation in these numbers. For all we no all white murderers are republican or they could have no political affiliation or it could be any ratio really. Bottom line just because 61% of whites vote republican and 39% vote Democrate does not mean murderers will be split by the same ratio

The mental gymnastics required to conclude this analysis is even remotely valid would make even Stephen Hawking’s brain hurt.

“There is absolutely no evidence to show that mass killings are motivated by political ideologies of any type. All of the mass killings we’ve seen have been motivated by a lethal combination of a small subgroup of mental illnesses, and easy accessibility to weapons of mass killing during the peak symptomatology of those illnesses.”
http://www.politifact.com/new-york/statements/2018/feb/23/claudia-tenney/do-many-mass-shooters-end-being-democrats-rep-tenn/

Typical right wingers spewing out stats that mean nothing. Hey moron, did you know there are more Democrats than Republicans and did you also know more Democrats live in big cities. It’s less likely that a murder will be committed by a republican when his nearest neighbor is a mile away.

Liberals commit more crime, more violence, and more sexual abuse. They are less moral because they reject God and the morality that goes with Him. They also see lying as a matter of course and have no qualms knowingly deceiving others. The far left merges into Satanism.

Interesting coorelation. We already know that over %50 of murders are committed by one demographic, black males which make up 6-7% of the population. And again, most of those are committed in high-crime areas dominated by democratic politicians and policies. This was a simplistic approach to get an idea of crime by ideology. Is it flawed? Most certainly. But I wouldn’t say any more so than the polls taken by news organizations that survey 800-1200 people and extrapolate that to the entire US population. In fact, I would argue their methodology is much less accurate.

Landed on this page while searching the web for some factual data on this very subject. I like the work that went in to it and there is no doubt that a lot of time was spent on research. As much as I want to know what the real the numbers are, without them being evidence based, the true message will be lost by the fact that there is no way to substantiate the numbers. As you stated in your article, there are many assumptions. Like that the gun murder rates across political and racial lines actually line up with the voting numbers. The numbers for dems could be better or far, far worse. The whites that committed these crimes could have been 98% democrat instead of the 39% number used or it could be less. Not to mention that it also assumes that all of the black perps, for example, are voters or say that they would identify with a particular political party. Again, what you presented is very thought provoking and I’m not trying to pick it apart, as you already disclosed your assumptions, I just wish there was a way to obtain good numbers. In the end, I believe that your numbers are very conservative which is a safer way to lean. Thanks for your hard work!!!

I like your conclusion that guns aren’t the problem, Democrats are.

I was a Democrat and converted to being a Republican once I discovered what the Democrat party was up to. I don’t agree with your analytical method but your conclusions are probably correct. The Democrats are generally soft on crime and want to take away guns from the honest person make it impossible for them to protect themselves. Look at Detroit, Chicago, San Francisco and other Democratic control cities where crime is bad.

Here’s the fallacy that makes this article a waste of time:
You assume that 9/10 blacks are Democrats and 9/10 murders are committed by blacks;
What stops you from assuming that all 9 of those murders were committed by the 1/10 black guy that was conservative?
This analysis simply does not pass even the most basic level of scrutiny.
Totally useless.

Facebook sensorship is blocking this from being reposted. The liberal banning of fact based studies that are against their liberal agenda is frightening.
I can only hope conservatives or the Supreme Court can force Facebook to allow all views to be posted

We queried the Cruz campaign, but didn’t hear back. CNN reported that Cruz’s campaign, when asked, cited research by two academics, Marc Meredith, of the University of Pennsylvania, and Michael Morse, then of Stanford University. They published a paper in the January 2014 edition of the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science titled, “Do Voting Rights Notification Laws Increase Ex-Felon Turnout?” (After we published our item, Cruz defended the statement to ABC News on the basis of that study.)…Cruz’s claim relies not on the general thrust of the paper but on some of the data contained within it.

For instance, in New York, about one-third of felons released from prison registered to vote after their release. Of those, about 62 percent registered as Democrats and 9 percent registered as Republicans, with 26 percent registering as independents or with other parties.

In North Carolina, about a quarter of those who were released registered after their release. Of those, 52 percent registered as Democrats, 19 percent as Republicans and 22 percent as independents or with other parties.

And in New Mexico, 41 percent of those who were released registered to vote. Of those, 55 percent registered as Democrats, 10 percent as Republicans and 18 percent as independents or with other parties.

Well, looking at the way groups like BLK, ANTIFA, and other democratic leftists are doing in the US, we don’t need statistics to see reality at play. You don’t see Republicans out hurting people, burning cities down, destroying people’s livelihood, and so forth. Democrats are in support of it. none of them are trying to stop these terrorists. so, I agree that the vast majority of violent crimes {including gun crimes} are by people outside the Republican community.