State firearm legislation and non-fatal injuries: What’s the relationship?

[jimmy the one]

19. beevul's blunder, misleading us

beevul, pathetic non-explanation: No James. Everyone else caught it right away, and you missed them catching it. Everyone else is well aware of the differences and the reasons for them, except, apparently, you

Nobody else said boo about the discrepancies between your chart & branfords chart. You haven't either, you only think you did. For one thing you mislead readers including myself that your chart measured gun violence, it apparently doesn't:
beevul post 14: Maybe you can tell us all why the encircled pro-gun states don't have actual gun violence incidents in quite the same way the places outside the circle
beevul post 6: That's a raw map of gun violence as it happens, where it happens.

Your map/chart evidently measures gun deaths, including suicide & accidents, not overall gun violence.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/12/gun_death_tally_every_american_gun_death_since_newtown_sandy_hook_shooting.html

It appears that the chart beevul posted only measures the incidence of gundeath from when newtown shooting occurred and dec 31, 2013. Click on LA globule and Matched Deaths: 266 or more between Newtown and Dec. 31, 2013
I think NYC: 81 or more between newtown and dec 31, 2013; Dallas 105, Houston 90; Nashville(?) 71;

beevul: How do your figures (I wont accuse you of using facts) square with the following map?

Duh, mine measured violent crime rates, your map/chart measures index (of gundeaths I now see). I'm gonna buy you a copy of 'statistics for dummies', you couldn't recognize a fact from progun propaganda unless your life depended on it.

beevul: I'll tell you. Nevada and Alaska and New Mexico make your list not because they have high amounts of violent crime, but because they have a small population.

It's not 'my' list, it's the list of states with the highest violent crime rates, obtained from fbi ucr. Nevada Alaska & NMex have high violent crime rates. Comparing by rates is the better way to measure efficacy of regulations, is this a revelation to you? if so you need go back to playing softball on the junior varsity, you're out of your league with me.

beevul: Disregard them from the list, as you'd have us do with DC, and New York Texas and California take their place.

DC should be disregarded from the list of 50 states since it is not a state. DC is a city & should be compared with other cities, not states. DC is only on the list since DC stats are needed to provide complete USA violent crime stats. To compare DC violent crime rates with the state of Alaska's is an invalid method of comparison, tho charlatan band leader does similar frequently with Baltimore, demonstrating his naivete' of proper statistical methodology. DC has ~8,000 per sq mile, nearest state is RI 1,000, while Alaska has 1.
You cannot 'disregard' Nevada Alaska, new mex or Tennessee from the list, this is more junk science from beevul.

beevul: Disregarding the three low population states, Pro-gun TX with its higher pop makes the list, and NY and CA with their ridiculous gun control and higher populations make the list in spite of both.

No you cannot disregard New Mex, Alaska, or Nevada from the list of top ten violent crime rate states. They have HIGHER violent crime rates than California & New York, which have stricter gun control. You evidently do not understand what a rate measures.

beevul: Well I'll be, if you make the change I suggest, the data starts to support that map I posted, and branfords assertions.

Utterly ridiculous. Beevul demonstrates a complete lack of knowledge of what he speaks of. He didn't even understand what his map was measuring, didn't post a link as usual, & he blundered in his portrayal of gun violence.