The NY Daily News is at it again. In an editorial posted on Sunday, the paper once again trotted out the same old party line that “more guns cause more gun related death.” Which is true. Yes, you heard me right — their statement is accurate. Kinda. But not in the way the NY Daily News wants it to be, and it’s still the dumbest, most hysterically biased, semi-scientific argument that could possibly be made on the topic. Three seconds considering their point reveals that it’s a complete waste of ink, paper and electrons . . .
From the article:
A new report verifies what New Yorkers already know: Guns kill — and the more guns available, the more lives they take.
They kill far more often — through homicides, yes, but also suicides and accidents — in states that have more guns and weaker gun laws, according to a study by the Violence Policy Center, one of the many groups conducting the research the federal government continues to neglect.
All five of the safest states — Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island — have gun ownership rates below 20%. It’s no coincidence that New Yorkers are less than half as likely to die at the end of a gun than the national average.
There’s an important distinction here. The report the NY Daily News cites is compares the proportion of “gun violence” deaths to the national average, not a weighted average. That makes it useless.
Let me re-state the same paragraph, using 100% accurate information, showing how ridiculous their argument actually is.
A new report verifies what New Yorkers already know: Alligators kill — and the more alligators available, the more lives they take.
They kill far more often — through homicides, yes, but also suicides and accidents — in states that have more alligators and weaker animal control laws, according to a study by the Gator Policy Center, one of the many groups conducting the research the federal government continues to neglect.
All five of the safest states — Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island — have alligator population rates below 20%. It’s no coincidence that New Yorkers are less than half as likely to die at the mouth of an alligator than the national average.
Firearms are a deadly weapon. So are knives. And cars. And sharp pointy sticks. And even alligators. But their mere existence doesn’t inherently equal an increase in overall deaths. Focusing on one specific type of death (“gun violence” or “alligator violence”) presents an extremely narrow view of the world to the exclusion of all other variables and threats, excluding any context for the information. Just because one manner of death is more prevalent does not automatically make it more dangerous.
A basic understanding of statistics is all that’s required to see what’s going on here. If a population has a higher proportional ownership of a certain deadly object, it is natural that the object will be used more often. That does not, however, prove that the mere existence of the object led to those incidents. For example, the idea that a firearm makes suicide more likely has already been thoroughly debunked.
The prevalence of firearms doesn’t impact the probability of being murdered or committing suicide. Let me directly use the example from the article, comparing New York to Wyoming. The NY Daily News was shocked (SHOCKED!) that people in Wyoming were three times more likely than New Yorkers to be killed by a gun. But in reality, even though guns are much more available in Wyoming, people in new York are still more likely to be murdered.
Murder Rate (2013):
New York: 3.3/100,000
The Daily News editorial staff seems convinced that firearms are a talisman of evil, their mere presence in an environment will drive people to murder. The facts simply don’t align with their political beliefs. So in order to advance their point of view, they dress up every pseudo-scientific study they can find that agrees with them and shove it down their readers’ throats.
Fact checking and logical thinking. They should try it sometime.
More people, more death. Ban people!
Ban Dems! If we could ban all Dems, we wouldn’t need the “evil gun lobby” or that 2nd Amendment thing. They’ve been against people owning guns since Mr. Lincoln took away their slaves.
I like to use: More Hospitals, more hospital deaths.
No one wants people to die in hospitals. We can stop all hospital deaths by banning hospitals!
Of course, the overall death rate will then rise….
It is exactly the same principle.
Yes, that ^^^^^^^!
So your saying we should ban alligators? For the children? Well I read it on the internet so it must be true. Is there a Moms Demand Action Against Alligators organization I can like on facebook so that I can show how supportive I am of this cause?
How many people, horses, cows have been shot by Manhattan ‘hunters’?
In a one-tag one-animal state there’s no limit to the number of each taken by car bumper on the Northway.
NY is broken, residents are damaged and wrong. Play ’em out to Billy Joel’s Miami 2017.
“All five of the safest states — Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island — have gun ownership rates below 20%.”
Why am I suspicious that the definition of “safest states” that was used here was “have the lowest gun ownership rates”, and absolutely nothing else?
Because that’s exactly what it means. 2010 Murder rates from wikipedia, since it’s the easiest to get to:
Do a sort by murder rate per 100,000. Oddly enough Indiana and Kansas sit right next to Connecticut and Massachusetts in terms of overall murder rates despite having much higher murder rates by gun. Also note that Vermont, New Hampshire, Iowa, North Dakota, Idaho, Wyoming, South Dakota, and Minnesota all have lower murder rates than Hawaii (which is the lowest of the group they mentioned) despite having anywhere from 30-60% gun ownership, as compared to Hawaii’s 6.7%.
Good point. To put a name to what they are doing with the data, it is Cherry Picking Fallacy.
“Description: When only select evidence is presented in order to persuade the audience to accept a position, and evidence that would go against the position is withheld. The stronger the withheld evidence, the more fallacious the argument.” From logicallyfallacious.com
That is so true… and in addition to that, the less the hard working citizens own guns, the more the criminals will have guns; as a matter of true facts: criminals love gun control laws because they know you will not have one to defend yourself when they break into your home or point their guns at you on streets…
Another pathetic fact: people who support gun control, will be the first to call someone else with a gun to defend them when a criminal points another at them… how pathetic!!!
Cars have killed more people than guns have… so, let’s ban cars too… suicidals uses ropes to hang themselves; let’s ban ropes too… cigarettes have killed more than guns… how about we ban all cigarettes manufacturers… and please Mr. Fucking pathetic loser Obama shithead, please please please, shed your crocodile tears on national TV asking us to agree upon banning cars, cigarettes, cancer, contaminated water, ropes, aircrafts, and don’t forget drunk drivers and “texter” drivers as well!!!
Data analysis 101: correlation does not prove causation.
No, the statement is not accurate; not even “kinda”.
I think that stating “more people equals more death” would be the most correct and obvious conclusion.
Murder just measures part of the moral disposition of a culture. If guns are available, then they will be used more often because they make it easier to kill. What the anti gun crowd will always ignore is history, where we can cite times and places where there were no guns and frightening rates of murder, rape, and plunder. They will also ignore contemporary examples, like Brazil.
I keep hearing people mentioning pointy sticks, which reminds me that when John Cleese was demonstrating how to defend yourself against someone armed with a banana, he used a GUN. That’s right; GUNS are a vital part of preparation for defense against fresh fruit!
(If that sounds like insane gibberish to you, you need to lookup the Monty Python sketch on Self-Defense Against Fresh Fruit)
Same old propaganda with Goonberg influence/money
Sure none of the $ came from overseas?
Wonder where all those murders in Wyoming take place. Probably the few liberal cities like Cheyenne and Jackson Hole. I live in a county with about 5,000 population, and we had exactly 1 murder in the last ten years, best I can figure. The lady did not defend herself, as happens even here, and the killer followed her here from Texas. I have to assume he brought his own gun…
If statistics are going to be useful, they must be in context as well as accurate.
Is that the same “study” behind this report in Slate?
Liars, idiots and statistics don’t mix. If guns cause suicide, then tall buildings and bridges should be torn down.
Ban rebreather use in scuba because statistics.
“All five of the safest states — Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island — have gun ownership rates below 20%.” — New York Daily News
If their idea of “safe” means the lowest violent crime rate, they are dead wrong. The states with the lowest violent crime rates are:
1. Maine: 122.7 violent crimes per 100,000 people
2. Vermont: 142.6 violent crimes per 100,000 people
3. New Hampshire: 187.9 violent crimes per 100,000 people
4. Virginia: 190.1 violent crimes per 100,000 people
5. Wyoming: 201.4 violent crimes per 100,000 people
6. Utah: 205.8 violent crimes per 100,000 people
7. Idaho: 207.9 violent crimes per 100,000 people
8. Kentucky: 222.6 violent crimes per 100,000 people
9. Minnesota: 230.9 violent crimes per 100,000 people
10. Hawaii: 239.2 violent crimes per 100,000 people
Of course Hawaii managed to make it to the number 10 position. However, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island are nowhere to be found in the top 10. So much for those states being the “safest” states in the U.S.
Did anyone notice that 8 of the 10 states with the lowest violent crime rates have very strong gun cultures, commonplace firearm ownership, and substantially less prohibitive laws for firearm ownership and possession compared to New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island?
Funny how that works ain’t it.
Of course, what is included in those statistics and how they are reported are not consistent everywhere, even inside a single state. Then there is the agenda of those collecting the statistics, of course.
Murder rates in cities controlled by democrat dominate city councils have substantially higher murder rate than those when the city council is dominated by republic/libertarians.
Therefore democrats cause murder.
The counties that voted for Al Gore has an average murder rate >13. The average murder rate for counties that voted for Bush is <3. Therefore Voting for Gore causes murder.
You find the same difference in every election so one can extrapolate the voting democrat causes murder.
“Fact checking and logical thinking. They should try it sometime.”
I’m sure these are difficult things to do when Bloomberg’s hand is up your a$$ working your mouth like a puppet.
Lets just take their ammo away. It is well proven now that most studies on ” Climate Warming Change ” are / were bogus and rigged from the start.
Anti – Gun ” reports ” are no different. They will keep throwing bogus expert opinions to the willing old guard media and pandering politicians … until they know we will FACT CHECK
everything , and call BS . More Brian Williams’ will follow.
Why do you think the newspaper is called The New York Daily Snooze?
More pools, more death
More bees, more death
More pizza rolls, more death
Boys and girls, you are wasting your breath. Black is white. Left is right. The chocolate ration has been increased to 25 grammes. That is all.
Indeed, suicide is a completely different thing. Should certainly never be counted with murders or even negligent discharges.
I’ve known two people here who killed themselves, both very sad. Their deaths were personal tragedies for those who cared about them, and nobody else’s business. They owned their lives… and their deaths, regardless of the tool they used to accomplish it.
I knew two people who committed suicide. I tried to help, but I couldn’t. One hung himself and the other jumped off a tall building. They didn’t use guns. I can’t help but think that if they were absolutely determined to go and couldn’t be deterred or helped then maybe, maybe, they would have gone easier if they had a bottle of pills or a gun.
The right answer to this is “…and?” That’s their queue to cut to the artsy montage of “the first 48” clips, interspersed with images of gun shows and shooting ranges and a breathy, subdued monologue concerning “gun culture.” They’re making a soap opera here.
I have to wonder what they would make of a Franklinator. (Even better if you could convince them it was in use somewhere…)
I guess the NY Daily News thinks you are more dead when shot by a gun than when killed by a knife, club or bare hands. (Maybe the people ISIS beheaded aren’t really dead after all.) Read the comments following the editorial. They are uniformly critical.
Notice how suicides are always slipped in to the gun violence category. Funny how suicide only counts as violence in the United States. You will always here the gun grabbers cite Japan as a peaceful disarmed country even though their suicide rate alone is higher than the combined murder + suicide rate in the Untied States.
That picture of a bunch of elected criminals signing New York’s garbage SAFE Act is like syrup of ipecac for my brain.
MORE GUNS — LESS CRIME:
Click on the FAR RIGHT COLUMN — *ALL* of these state by state comparisons are fraudulent.
They buffer their numbers by conflating ANYTHING that involves a gun into a bogus concept called “gun violence” — murder, self defense, accident, police shooting, suicide, etc. BTW: No one can commit suicide in VT by jumping out the window. We do not need less “gun violence” we need LESS VIOLENCE. Or we could be become like the UK and lead the world in stabbings & beatings. A society where only young strong men in groups are safe — is not a civil society — but a society where the LAW OF THE JUNGLE prevails.
” according to a study by the Violence Policy Center, one of the many groups conducting the research “ As soon as I read that, I knew the quoted statistics would be bogus and invalid. Subsequent analysis by Leghorn and Posted Comments proved that conclusion was correct. ‘Nuff said.
More cars = more drunk driving deaths. Can’t drink and drive without cars, ban cars!
Misrepresenting data to further one’s political goals? Say it isn’t so!
They LOVE to pose for pictures and promote they are important. It’s ridiculous. The unSafe Act supporters literally say, if 100 people were in a room, and 100 guns were hanging on the wall, a fair number of these lawful citizens could not resist the temptation to run for the wall grab a gun and begin killing people. The laws are always attached to lawful people as they never ever ever address the criminal element or address the cause of misuse. I despise these liars as we all should.
MORE BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!
Considering New Haven, Hartford, and Bridgeport always make the top 10 most dangerous cities, I doubt CT is really the safest state to live.
If anything I would think AK is the safest state since there are so few people there…
The safe act , is has done absolutely nothing except punish all law biding citizens , it has not deterred any crime at all , they make us all feel like a ten year old kid with a bad report card when we did nothing wrong at all.
This reason alone is why I’m looking to move outta this state and never return.
I hate it here !!!