State Rankings by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

[OC Freedom]

I was thinking about the Guns and Ammo state rankings that they published recently and how it was in my opinion very biased on certain criteria and open carry appeared to be dismissed from consideration.

So the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence hates every pro-gun freedom from OC/CC to high capacity mags and so on. They use a nice A through F rating system, and for our purposes and F rating is the goal we are trying to achieve in each state. How does your state rank? If it's not an F then you need to work harder to get there.

Good Job Idaho, I love this state.

Wow, Washington state needs some work, the Law Center is starting to like Washington.



http://gunlawscorecard.org/

 

[OC Freedom]

LOL Old news, not news. Meanwhile, Wisconsin eliminates the purchase waiting period. Will WI advance freedom in their eyes?

Agreed it's old news. I just think that their rankings are more on target than Guns and Ammo.

 

[stealthyeliminator]

Wow, that website is a hoot! I love how they come up with funny terminology, like "shoot first" laws. Hahaha!

Unfortunately, I think that the ratings are not that useful (even when reversed). Perhaps it is still more accurate (reversed) than Guns and Ammo, I haven't looked at theirs to compare.

 

[OC for ME]

Please please pleas!!! Do not direct liberty minded citizens to enable these anti-liberty organizations by increasing these organizations website hits/click counts.

 

[Ezek]

Please please pleas!!! Do not direct liberty minded citizens to enable these anti-liberty organizations by increasing these organizations website hits/click counts.

well then DAMNIT, I clicked the link so as to understand my enemy of individual liberty..

to think they are swaying American opinion on the second amendment with a title like "the Truth of the second amendment" yet provide no cites from the federalist papers, or anything else other then the heller case. And considering the federalist papers where written by, or at least involve, a man who signed the BoR and the constitution, I think his "opinion" of the matter has much more basis in fact and view for the purpose of it's creation.

to say I was as disappointed as one could possibly be is an understatement. if your going to pawn your views as fact, then provide ALL the facts, otherwise it is biased and skewed opinion, NOT fact.

 

[OC for ME]

well then DAMNIT, I clicked the link so as to understand my enemy of individual liberty.. ...

This is my point, the anti-liberty crowd cannot change any opinion if nobody reads their drivel.

 

[Eeyore]

"Gun Death Rate"

What I found most interesting (because it's the most misleading) about their map is their so-called "gun death rate". Note that the states with high gun death rates are not states known for their high rate of violent crime. Note also that they don't publish the actual rate, just the ordinal ranking of the rates. I suspect the spread between the various rates is very small, maybe even statistically insignificant.

I don't know the details of how they calculate it, but looking a the map I suspect that the main driver of this alleged "gun death rate" is demographics:

• all those states have relatively low populations. That way, a few gun deaths would result in a high per capita rate. None of the highest-population states (CA, NY, NJ, FL, GA, etc) rank among the "worst" gun death rate.
• I notice they also tend to be rural, so even a few hunting accidents would drive up their rate.
• And of course, any suicides using a gun would be gleefully counted (nevermind that the person would've found another way if a gun wasn't available).

Even with their massaging, their correlation coefficient is 77%--certainly not ironclad support for their position that strong gun restrictions = lower gun death rate. I think a violent crime (using a gun) rate would be a lot more informative and accurate, but those things would prove the exact opposite of what they want. That might be why they excluded Washington DC from their results--it doesn't support their thesis.

Although they try to give the impression that there's a direct correlation between "weak" gun laws and high death rates, a quick review of their chart would cause any thinking person to ask questions. Just look at some neighboring states:

• VT, NH and MA are all small New England states with low gun death rates (in the bottom ten). MA's gun laws earn an "A", but VT (F) and NH (D-) have much looser gun laws.
• VA and MD rank #32 and #33, respectively. But VA scores an F and MD scores A-.
• SC and NC both score an "F" for their gun laws, but SC is #10 for gun death rate while NC ranks 25th

If strong gun laws mean low gun death rates, how can similar states with dissimilar gun laws get similar results, or states with similar gun laws get such different results?

 

[davidmcbeth]

Wow, that website is a hoot! I love how they come up with funny terminology, like "shoot first" laws. Hahaha!

Unfortunately, I think that the ratings are not that useful (even when reversed). Perhaps it is still more accurate (reversed) than Guns and Ammo, I haven't looked at theirs to compare.

Don't you mean "hand grenade" as opposed to "shoot"? LOL