Gun violence is a national problem, can we learn something from states that are doing better

[HereSince1628]

compared to states that are finding it worse?

I am one of those that believes that many things contribute to gun violence and it's likely to be different types of problem in different places in the US. But if we consider that the goal is per capita reduction in gun deaths, injuries and criminal use of guns, maybe there are some clues in comparing and contrasting states at the extremes in incidence of gun deaths.

Seems from the graphic below that the states with the lowest per capita gun deaths are MN, IA, SD, ND, MA, NH, NE, WI, VT, and NY.
the states with the highest gun violence are LA, NV, NM, FL, AZ, OK,TN, MS, AL, WY.



What do the descriptors of gun control and gun culture look like in these places? DUers from around the country might have some insight into this.

WI has been an open carry state for a long time. Gun ownership is between 30 and 40 percent. Hunting/sport shooting is considered both an inter-generational tradition and a major component of the tourist industry.

For 2012, 76 of 111 gun homicides in WI occurred in Milwaukee. Nearly 90% occurred in men, avg age 32. The risk of gun death in 2012 was 30 times greater for blacks than for non-hispanic whites. The national average is about 10 times greater for blacks than non-hispanic whites. Milwaukee's population of roughly 800k or about 12% of the state suggesting that gun deaths are many times higher than the state average.

None-the-less our recent mass-shootings at pubic venues occurred at a suburban Sikh house of worship, a suburban spa/beauty salon, and a church service held at a suburban hotel. Most multiple homicides in WI, including those that meet he numbers requirement for reporting as mass-shootings occur in residential neighborhoods and reporting of them is treated as routine rather than as as social crises.

Although our numbers look better than the US trend this carnage is pretty horrific

[PJMcK]

1. Of course not

You're suggesting the the gun debate should use logic and empirical evidence, HereSince1628. What could you possibly be thinking? (wink)

[HereSince1628]

5. Well, I was thinking that a conversation could ensue...

[PJMcK]

7. My response was a lame attempt at snarky humor (n/t)

[hack89]

2. Education, poverty, out of wedlock births

if you map social indicators you will see that the poorer, less educated states with dysfunctional families will also have higher levels of crime and violence.

In many places "gun culture" is the same as "crime culture". Gun violence in America is very concentrated, even in poorer states.

[HereSince1628]

8. Maybe but I never thought of NV, NM or FL as terribly impoverished

Certainly the Dakotas, at least until the recent oil boom weren't wealthy states.

And some places which are currently in vogue as hot spots for gun violence, such as Illinois, are pretty close to national trends of relationship between numbers of gun deaths and gun ownership

[hack89]

10. All three are below the nation average in income and education.

New Mexico is ranked near the bottom in nearly all social indicators.

[HereSince1628]

11. Thanks, didn't know that.

[msongs]

3. oddly enough gun users and owners are responsible for all the gun caused deaths nt

[Squinch]

4. Huh. Who'da thunk.

[Lee-Lee]

6. If you remove "gun" from the front and just focus on violence you will find the answers

Focusing on the gun aspect skews data and skews responses.

The violent behavior is the issue, no matter what means a person uses. When you focus on the root causes you will lower the violent behaviors and with that "gun violence" will drop too.

Poverty, a failed educational system, lack of job opportunities, broken families, a failed mental health system and so much more should be focused on and will not only make this nation a better place but reduce much of the violence in the country.

[HereSince1628]

9. Well, that might be. Certainly there are co-variates that could account for variance