The firearm-homicde rate is apparrently not tied to restrictive firearm laws

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

For 2010 DC and Maryland are 2 of only 4 areas with firearm murder rates above the national average for murder (4.8 per 100,000). They are both also in the bottom of the Guns & Ammo list for firearms friendly laws. At the same time five states among the top 12 friendliest in firearm laws are also among the states with firearm murder rates less than a third of the national average for murder overall. I'm referring to Vermont, Utah, Wyoming, New Hampshire and Montana.

The simplest conclusion is that gun-control laws don't affect gun murder rates very much.

[Eleanors38]

1. But some want tax funding to prove otherwise.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

5. It is my opinion that...

...working to prove what is not the case is a waste of time, money and effort. YMMV

[beevul]

2. They don't want 'the simplest conclusion'.

They don't want 'the simplest conclusion'.

They want to muddy the waters, then go for 'the simplest solution'.

Exhibit A: "Gun deaths", rather than discussing firearm homicides and suicides as the distinctly different things with distinctly different root causes and therefore solutions, that they are.

This is deliberate and calculated.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

6. re: "This is deliberate and calculated."

Perhaps but only using a "special" calculator.

[Puha Ekapi]

7. No...

...you need a calcululzator for that.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

8. DUzy

[EdwardBernays]

3. Huh?

There's a LOT more than 2 places in America that exceed the National Average of Firearm Murder Rates?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

4. Well I was able to find 4 on wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state

The other 2 are Louisiana and Missouri. Again this is data from 2010. The national average for murder that I found for 2010 was 4.8 per 100,000.

As I said, or at least was trying to say, gun laws don't appear to have much influence over the incidence of gun murder.