1. The hypothesis of “more guns = more deaths” is demonstrably false over the past 28 years of documented American history. The number of firearms in civilian circulation have been steadily increasing over that time period, and the number of firearm-related fatalities has not been equivalently increasing. However, again, since there seems to be some confusion on the concept, proving “more guns = more deaths” to be false does not prove “more guns = fewer deaths” to be true. Doing so would require accounting for far more variables than I did, and involve far more interesting math than I employed, and require controlling for far more variables than I care to.
2. When comparing raw numbers, there is a weak, negative correlation between the number of firearms in America and the number of firearm-related fatalities, and that correlation seems to become more negative with additional data.
3. When comparing rates, there is a strong, negative correlation between the number of firearms per person in America and the number of firearm-related fatalities per person, and that correlation seems to become more negative with additional data.
Great job, Linoge, as always! The post is long, because he gets into fairly detailed explanations in a way that most people should be able to understand, but it’s worth reading it all.
Not that rights are subject to statistics (or, as Tam said, “I don’t care if every other gun owner on the planet went out and murdered somebody last night. I didn’t. So piss off.”). It is, however, a good source for debunking the anti-Rights cultists arguments among people who might be swayed to put statistics above individual rights.
END OF LINE