Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence
Take something like this claim that California's "Gun Death Rate" makes them 7th best state in the nation, and attributing that to their gun law strength.
That wording should be a red flag.
Of course Gifford Law Center doesn't show their methodology, they know their base won't care. But if you compare their numbers, you find they're getting them from the same source as Wikipedia, which warns on two of the three key factors:
- their table includes suicides
- it is not age adjusted
- it certainly isn't adjusted against gun ownership rates
All three necessary factors to sanitize and normalize your data, because they can all mislead the results.
- It turns out old people are more likely to commit suicide (often due to depression or medical maladies and not wanting to become a burden or feeling productive)... so if you don't adjust by age, then you're only proving which states have more old people. (That shows up on their map as an easy correlation). What this actually shows is that since people can't afford to retire in California, they move to older southern states with less gun control.
- There's been no good correlation shown that gun ownership rates change suicide rates. Japan and Iceland (both with strict gun control) far exceed the U.S.'s rates, as did Denmark before they became the most medicated country on earth. So suicides aren't caused by guns, but guns are often used for suicides (if available). If not, they jump off bridges or stand in front of trains/busses. Thus anything that counts suicides as the fault of guns, or includes it in "Gun Death Rates" is inherently misleading and dishonest.
- The per capita gun ownership rate is FAR FAR higher in many of those states without gun control. Even if there was a .01% difference in gun murder rate (there isn't), if you have 5x as many guns for a .01% difference, it shows that guns aren't the biggest factor in the problem: something else is. Their conclusion could more accurately say, "Strict gun control has an insignificant effect on murder rates"..
What happens if we use the correct table (gun murders, instead of just guns used in murders AND suicides)?
California goes from 7th best state, to 13th worst state. And their imaginary correlation between gun control and gun murder rates disintegrates. That's BEFORE adjusting for age.
Then you get into crime rates and violent crime rates, and you find not only does gun control not have a measurable positive effect, but there may be a net negative one. With many gun control countries having far higher violent crimes (like home-invasion robberies or rapes).I don't know about you, if the murder rate (something highly rare) went down nominally, but other crimes or violent crimes (less rare), went up significantly, that's not a net win for society. When I looked at violent crime by state, California was 15th worst.
Then you look at sources like immigration from countries with higher murder rates, racial/cultural breakdowns (gangs tend to be in black/latino communities and drive the rates up), and other factors. And competent calculation has to include all the relevant things that impact the conclusion, or you're just being dishonest.
Either the GLCTPGV knows what they're talking about, and are intentionally misleading their followers (who lack critical thinking skills, and knowing how to be skeptical). Or they're just completely and utterly incompetent (or blinded by their own biases). Either way, it screams: discredited propaganda, from dishonest sources. (Or at least incompetent ones). The only thing more retarded than they are (and their followers), is anyone associated with Brady Campaign to prevent Gun Violence.