10-01-2009, 01:22 PM
Some other reasons the analogy is flawed.
Alaska has what is considered the most liberal state for gun ownership. By your rationale it should have a low weighted average for firearm deaths. So why is it Number 2?
In DC the majority of gun deaths are criminal on criminal (almost 74%) so only 26% of incidents involve "law abiding" citizens. In Washington State, only 40% are criminal on criminal, which means 60%, involve law abiding citizens. By those numbers the chances of an innocent individual law abiding person being the victim of crime with a firearm is more than double in Washington State.
In Texas, almost half the people who used a gun in a crime obtained the gun illegally and half legally. In DC almost 95% of people who used guns in crimes obtained them illegally. You are more likely in Texas to be a victim of a gun crime by another law abiding citizen toting a gun than in DC.
In states with liberal gun ownership laws, the rate of firearms used by the aggressor in domestic violence deaths are high compared to states with restrictive gun ownership laws.
Hawaii cannot be compared to the mainland because there is no free flowing unrestricted transportation network. The majority of illegal firearms in NYC are legally purchased in states with liberal gun laws and illegally transported to NYC. If NYC was located 2,000 miles out in the Atlantic with everything being flown or shipped in, bet they wouldn't have a big gun problem.
My question is: Are crimes with firearms in Hawaii really influenced by gun control laws or is it really influenced by the availability of guns?
Alaska has what is considered the most liberal state for gun ownership. By your rationale it should have a low weighted average for firearm deaths. So why is it Number 2?
In DC the majority of gun deaths are criminal on criminal (almost 74%) so only 26% of incidents involve "law abiding" citizens. In Washington State, only 40% are criminal on criminal, which means 60%, involve law abiding citizens. By those numbers the chances of an innocent individual law abiding person being the victim of crime with a firearm is more than double in Washington State.
In Texas, almost half the people who used a gun in a crime obtained the gun illegally and half legally. In DC almost 95% of people who used guns in crimes obtained them illegally. You are more likely in Texas to be a victim of a gun crime by another law abiding citizen toting a gun than in DC.
In states with liberal gun ownership laws, the rate of firearms used by the aggressor in domestic violence deaths are high compared to states with restrictive gun ownership laws.
Hawaii cannot be compared to the mainland because there is no free flowing unrestricted transportation network. The majority of illegal firearms in NYC are legally purchased in states with liberal gun laws and illegally transported to NYC. If NYC was located 2,000 miles out in the Atlantic with everything being flown or shipped in, bet they wouldn't have a big gun problem.
My question is: Are crimes with firearms in Hawaii really influenced by gun control laws or is it really influenced by the availability of guns?