Could there be a correlation between gun ownership and gun deaths by state? Hmm…




Leave a Reply

14 Comment threads
16 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
13 Comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Uh…could there be a correlation between population density and death of any kind? This is a false correlation. Not science.

You know, I am american.
All this america hate is really starting to piss me off.
We are not nearly what the tele makes us out to be.
For the most part we are an intelligent people, who really do care about others.

I also run an atheist page, but I’m not shouting that britards need to bring back gun s if they wanna deal with the islamic threat in their country.
You can have my gun when you take it.
I have a right to own one, both for protecting and deterring.

Unliking the page.

They took away our guns in the UK, now we stab each other

I’m sure a crackdown on gun possession will be as wildly successful as our crackdown on drug possession has been.

Britards? Real grown up. That’s the kind of comment that makes us Americans living in the UK have a hard time. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

The graph accounts for population density. As you may also note, Wyoming, Montana, and Alaska (all with rather low population density) are near the top in both categories. Explain how that’s “not science”, please.

Its sad that people need a graph to comprehend something so obvious…

Does this account for suicides? Or mass killings(by one person) police(hostile or not) shootings?

You don’t say?

Gun suicides are under-reported. But they account for 2/3 of all gun deaths in the US. Interesting post coming about that whole part of the equation. This chart is just gun deaths as a whole vs gun ownership per state. It’s not that complicated Patrick, don’t make it so. 😛

Ah yes, the asshole ideologue speaks yet again. Does he try to dispute or counter the numbers charted? Nope. Does he make any kind of logical argument? Nope. Does he try to compare guns in the US to the drug war, as asinine as that is? Yes. Typical idiot ideologue goober.

Population density? Are you fucking kidding? Sean, put down the tall beers, and sober up. 😛

My take on it.

Why the fuck would population density be relevant when it’s clear that it’s rating based on GUN DEATHS per 100,000 people?? That puts all stats on a constant that doesn’t give a fuck about gross population, or density. Then people like certain drunk Canadians and idiot ideologues who just like to talk to hear themselves will try to make arguments about “population density” that are utterly clueless. Geez…

Yeah Pete, the UK’s stabbing murder rate is just through the roof… 😛

Your “take” was so asinine and stupid, it got nuked. Please keep your idiotic drivel that is based on utter and complete lunacy off my page please. If you can’t debate on anything even remotely close to logic and facts, don’t fucking bother. To try to make an argument that it’s somehow “ok” for gun deaths to be this ridiculously high because a big part of them are suicides is, pardon me, fucking insane.

It’s even sadder when people try to dissect the statistics to the point of utter and complete insanity. Don’t get me wrong, I knew it would happen. That’s how insanely stupid some people are about their guns.

Even a simplistic graph like this requires one correlation to be made. The mental equipment required for this is not available to most gun nuts.

They have their own special form of cognitive dissonance, as evidenced right here…

I’ve been sober for 3 weeks. This is just me pointing out that probabilities shift with population density. There’s a greater chance of some nut causing somebody harm, guns or not. And I’m pretty certain that most registered gun owners do not go out shooting people, it’s the unregistered fuckers, the ones buying guns on the streets. Those guns are often sold to 3rd world countries by your government, then smuggled back in and sold black market.

And then there’s the amount of civilians shot and killed by the cops annually. No responsibility there. I’m sure half the numbers would come from those fucking low-IQ nutbags.

Well, Sean… we’re not talking about low-IQ nutbag cop shootings right now, are we?

“I’ve been sober for 3 weeks.” Then act like it. Do you get a chip for that? 😛 “This is just me pointing out that probabilities shift with population density.” No, this is just you talking out of your ass. Population density has no real relevance in statistics like this. Look at the chart. Look at Wyoming. What kind of fucking population density do you think Wyoming has compared to… oh I don’t know… CALIFORNIA??? Now, look at where California is on the chart. See it? Good, can you move on now? “There’s a greater chance of some nut causing… Read more »

My cock is denser than Wyoming.

Btw, don’t blame me, blame Blackberry. I couldn’t even see your chart here. I just assumed you were making an ass out of you and me.

I kinda like you, Holes. I’m on your side.


While I am a supporter of gun regulation and agree that more guns do not and will not solve the mass shootings problem, this chart is not helpful because, as linear regression models go, it’s not very convincing. There are far too many “outliers” on this model to call the inference prediction (the actual linear progression “line”) to be a robust prediction. It suggests, at the minimum, possible collinearity problems.

Uh, Dan… are you kidding? All this chart is doing is gauging gun deaths per 100k to gun ownership per state. The line shows the trend on the chart. Don’t overthink it.

Sure Sean, you’re sober…