What measures are states taking to reduce high rates of firearm fatalities?

Ummm has no one ever explained stats to you? They weren’t raw numbers they are “per 100,000 people”.

 

Failure of government to enforce law is no reason to suspend rights. in fact it is a reason to take charge of your own defense.

pointing out how incompetent the police and government are to stop an attack makes my case.

 

Yeah I understand. if a state has 100,000 people and 25 murders that makes their murder rate 25. if a state has 40 million people in it and 2300 murders they have a murder rate of 6.

but 25 is less than 2300, do you agree?

 

????

Okaaaaaay. This is a bigger misinterpretation than your previous post about the stats! I concede - you beat me! There is only so much I can actually hope to address especially when the level of misinterpretation reaches trolling

 

the phrase "School shooting" doesn't mean kids are killed. a man can commit suicide in the parking lot of a school at 2AM and that is considered a school shooting.

you should avoid using propaganda terms if you wish to be persuasive.

 

I will leave this for someone else - perhaps they can explain

 

You had over 288 people drive to school parking lots and commit suicide???


Word of advice

when the hole is that deep stop digging

 

I didn't misinterpret stats i actually explained how a murder rate of 6 in a state with 40 million people means a greater number of people are murdered than a state with much lower population with a higher rate. So there is no misunderstanding on my end I just don't buy that the lower the rating the fewer murders. it is that you failed to gaslight me. but blame me all you want for it

I haven't misinterpreted anything. you are gaslighting.

 

No need I already understand.

you are trying to pretend the lower murder rate equals fewer murders. and that isn't the case.

 

I didn't say that. i was pointing out that the phrase school shooting didn't mean school children or even anybody was shot. just that a gun was fired near a school.

It's like the murder rate thing. these shocking statistics only show part of the reality.

Is that why you posted the strawman above? do you hate when i destroy your arguments? be better than.

 

No, you don’t. That is the sad part

 

"Addressing societal problems" is certainly the role of government in the general betterment of American society, and eschewing permissiveness in firearm laws is obviously an essential aspect of that endeavor. It results in a far lower rate of firearm fatalities in states like Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island.

Indeed. There is no way of knowing how much higher Japan's suicide rate would be if it also had permissive firearm policies.

 

Denial is not a viable policy. The empirical data is irrefutable:

The US has experienced at least 314 mass shootings and more than 22,000 gun deaths overall in 2022. Firearm homicide rates increased by nearly 35% from 2019 to 2020, and firearm suicide rates remained high, per data from the CDC2. School shootings also rose from 10 in 2020 to 34 in 2021, and 27 in the first five months of 2022, including in Uvalde, Texas.​

 

You might take solace in the notion that there would be even more firearm fatalities in America if gunsters had better aim, but it's not very reassuring.

What are the states with the highest rates of firearm fatalities doing to reduce the gun carnage?

What measures have they taken that are effective?

 

Tradition. Suicide can be considered honorable there and the usual ritual methods of suicide date back centuries.

 

Irrelevant

 

Why?

Japans suicide rate is now below the USAs
https://ourworldindata.org/suicide

 

Well, you can reduce the availability of means. This is why some meds are only sold in blister packs and why locking guns up will reduce the suicide rate

 

Thank you for confirming you aren’t interested in real solutions. You didn’t even read the link. This program is not a government program.

SMH.

 

As an urban initiative, supported by legislative funding, it is highly commendable.

As noted in your article, gun licensing and permit-to-purchase legislation have been effective, as well.
"'With those laws, we have good evidence to show reduced gun violence across the board,' Abt said."

I inquired what state legislatures in the states with the highest rates of firearm fatalities are doing to reduce the gun carnage in their states.

What states have adopted Omaha 360?

 

Things that work are commendable. They don’t need to be top down government solutions.

The thing is, Nebraska hasn’t tightened restrictions on firearms. Yet this program has reduced firearm violence! Our firearms laws are far more permissive than Illinois yet our murder rate is about 1/3 that of Illinois. The claim such laws reduce gun violence across the board is of course far from true. If that were the case Illinois wouldn’t have higher firearm death rates than Nebraska. And if it’s all about firearms, Nebraska wouldn’t have murder rates almost 1/3 those of Illinois.

There are correlations to be found, both positive and negative when it comes to law and violence rates. That means if we are looking for causes, we must look elsewhere and not focus on the binary approach of gun law.

If saving the most lives is priority we should address suicide first and foremost.

I didn’t realize you were only interested in state legislature solutions. I was responding to this:

Attempting to protect anyone from firearms is a bit silly. My state focuses on protection from violent persons and on reducing suicides. We have been focusing on things like this bill.

https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=50436

Focusing on restrictions on type of firearms etc. would make no sense. Seventy-four percent of firearms deaths here are suicide. And mag capacity limits or banning assault weapons won’t affect that at all.

It’s a city based program not a state program. There is no need for such a program in the part of the state I reside in. Central planning is very inefficient in such matters. Where I live a lot of kids have and regularly use firearms. Yet the violence rates are minuscule. Statewide programs don’t address such facts so are wasteful and/or ineffective. States shouldn’t be heavily involved in community interventions. It defeats the purpose.

https://empoweromaha.com/omaha-360/

In closing, firearm violence is a community problem. Even places like Chicago have massive disparities of violence rates based on areas of the city.

Another example is OK, NM, and MT. All have significant reservation populations that have extremely high rates of firearm violence, both suicide and homicide. This shows up in state statistics. But no state law can possibly have any effect because state law has no force on reservations.

Just like the people doing crimes in Chicago, these people don’t need laws. They need help fixing their broken communities. And that can only happen through efforts of stakeholders, not authoritative state government.

 

Adopting approaches that have proven effective, as cities such as Boston, Chicago, Kansas City, etc. have reportedly adopted Omaha 360, obviously makes since.

States regulate firearms. Given that states with permissive laws such as Alaska, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, etc. have much higher rates of firearm fatalities, I would expect them to benefit by the experiences of states like Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island that have much lower rates.

I inquired whether the states with the highest rates of firearm fatalities were taking such measures.

What are Alaska, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, etc. doing in this regard?

 

What is Maryland with the #7 position for the strictest gun laws nationally but the #8 position for most murders per capita nationally doing to solve that problem? I don’t understand why you only care about a small handful of states.

California has the strictest gun laws in the nation. Wyoming has the second most permissive gun laws in the nation. But look at this.

Firearm homicide rate
Wyoming 2.7/100,000
California 3.9/100,000

Firearm assault rate
Wyoming 4.2/100,000
California 8.9/100,000

What should CA state legislature be doing?

I think you are looking for solutions to problems you haven’t yet correctly identified. Do you think if Wyoming passed a mag capacity law it would have much effect on hypoxia?

 

I think that what are, by far, the leading states in firearm fatalities adopting the relatively far more successful policies of the states with the lowest rates of firearm fatalities is entirely sensible. Surely, given the ongoing toll of human carnage in those states, it's worth a try.

Here are the 10 states with the highest rates of gun death:

1. Alaska - 23.0 per 100,000 people
2. Alabama - 21.4 per 100,000 people
3. Louisiana - 21.2 per 100,000 people
4. Mississippi - 19.8 per 100,000 people
5. Oklahoma - 19.6 per 100,000 people
6. Montana - 19.0 per 100,000 people
7. Missouri - 18.8 per 100,000 people
8. New Mexico - 18.2 per 100,000 people
9. Arkansas - 17.7 per 100,000 people
10. South Carolina - 17.7 per 100,000 people

States with the lowest rate of firearm fatalities:

1. Massachusetts (3.4)
2. New York (3.9)
3. New Jersey (4.1)
4. Hawaii (4.4)
5. Rhode Island (4.6)

​

 

Ok. Carry on with the binary thinking and confusion with correlation/causation and denial of cases of inverse correlation.

Good luck. If you think FOID cards or approved firearm rosters will keep people from offing themselves in Alaska, soldier on.