New York Firearms Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,150 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I decided to hit up the FBI website to look at the numbers straight from the horse's mouth. What I found was quite interesting.

I'm an engineer, so I work best with pictures, so I made up a spreadsheet of the data. I first looked at the violent crime rate (per 100,000 people) from 1960 to 2010 (the largest range the FBI has available), just to see what sort of trends there were. It shows a spike, and maximum between 1991 and 1992, with a steady decline after that.
Rectangle Slope Plot Font Parallel

I ran the numbers and from 1960 to 1992, there was a 65% increase in violent crimes, and from 1960 to 2010, there has been an overall increase of 43% in violent crimes. Taking into consideration the peak in 1992, we have seen a decrease of just over 30%. This is pretty significant, I believe.

The site also gave a breakdown of the violent crime rate from 1992 to 2010, which is more suited for what I was looking for anyway. this also gives a more detailed view of the 18 year span. Again, there has been a significant downward trend in violent crimes since 1992, which is interesting since the AWB from 1994-2004 did absolutely nothing, though there was a very slight increase in 2005.
Rectangle Slope Plot Font Parallel


While I was looking at the data, I noticed a steady increase in the overall population of the US, so I decided to look at total numbers, in order to decide if the increase in population was skewing the rate. I was pleased to find that even though the population has been increasing, the total number of violent crimes still showed a general downward trend.
Rectangle Slope Plot Font Parallel


This all really shows that the fear mongering is pretty radical, and looking purely at the numbers shows that there is NO need for any type of legislation that would further limit our rights.

I am currently trying to find data on gun related crimes, to take a similar approach with. If anyone has a link or something similar to where I could find this data, I'd be greatly appreciative.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,150 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,522 Posts
There is another a bit down the page with a youtube vid on crime stats, you should check it out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
365 Posts
I've done some looking into weapon laws and homicide rates and I have found NO correlation between the gun restrictions and the gun violence rates. (DOJ, FBI, Brady Bunch & other sources)

States with high homicide rates can have either strict or loose gun restrictions, and states with low homicide rates can have either strict or loose gun restrictions as well. The only correlation I found was with population density. Urban areas have high homicide rates and rural areas have low homicide rates regardless of the area's gun control laws. But that doesn't always hold true either. Chicago & New York City both have strict gun control laws. Chicago is having the most violent year it ever had and New York City has been having low rates for several years.

What I'd like to see are charts on the gun violence rate for the ten years before the AWB (1x?), during the AWB (0.5x?), and the ten years after the AWB (0.25x?) when the weapons became available for purchase again and the rate was still going down.

I'd bet the closet correlation one would find is that the violent crime rate is going down inverse to the population's age going up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,150 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I've done some looking into weapon laws and homicide rates and I have found NO correlation between the gun restrictions and the gun violence rates. (DOJ, FBI, Brady Bunch & other sources)

States with high homicide rates can have either strict or loose gun restrictions, and states with low homicide rates can have either strict or loose gun restrictions as well. The only correlation I found was with population density. Urban areas have high homicide rates and rural areas have low homicide rates regardless of the area's gun control laws. But that doesn't always hold true either. Chicago & New York City both have strict gun control laws. Chicago is having the most violent year it ever had and New York City has been having low rates for several years.

What I'd like to see are charts on the gun violence rate for the ten years before the AWB (1x?), during the AWB (0.5x?), and the ten years after the AWB (0.25x?) when the weapons became available for purchase again and the rate was still going down.

I'd bet the closet correlation one would find is that the violent crime rate is going down inverse to the population's age going up.
I'm trying to dig through the BOJ right now, but that site is a bit of a joke. I can find publicized reports, but very little data so far. Being at work limits how fast I can work on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
687 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,150 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Yes, correlation does not strictly indicate causation. It may, or it may not. What is sure, however, is LACK of correlation indicates LACK of causation. If the gun violence rate goes down regardless of whether the AWB is in effect or not, one cannot say the rate has gone down because of the AWB.
Especially when you see that the rate was dropping for 2 years before the ban.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,486 Posts
Yes, correlation does not strictly indicate causation. It may, or it may not. What is sure, however, is LACK of correlation indicates LACK of causation. If the gun violence rate goes down regardless of whether the AWB is in effect or not, one cannot say the rate has gone down because of the AWB.
Especially when you see that the rate was dropping for 2 years before the ban.
Hey, I'm already convinced, but the fact that correlation doesn't imply causation is something the anti-gunners will use to shut these things down.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top