Iowa gun control response

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 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.