Couple of Questions Mr. Obama.

……you said these types of killings don’t happen in other developed countries.

Gunmen stormed a beer hall in northern Mexico in broad daylight on Friday, killing 10 people before stripping the bodies and stealing all their money, police said.

Several armed men arrived in two vehicles before attacking people inside the bar in the municipality of Garcia at around 3pm, an official in the state prosecutor’s office said.

The assailants stripped seven bodies naked and left with 10,000 pesos ($650) in cash, the official said on condition of anonymity.

So does this killing not count because Mexico isn’t “developed”?
Or does it not count because there wasn’t an obvious race issue involved?
Or does it not count because Mexico has the type of restrictive gun control laws you only dream about?

Didn’t the NRA Stop…

….all the firearm related research?

I mean that is what the anti-rights cultists claim all the time. So exactly how does this happen?

Editor’s Note: Mary Vriniotis is a researcher at the American Institutes for Research in Washington, D.C. She has more than a decade of experience researching and writing about the prevention of firearms-related violence. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.


How does someone have a decade of experience researching about the prevention of firearm related violence? Of course she isn’t the only one researching the issue either. Some others have been making up stuff researching the issue for decades.

Slate contacted Garen Wintemute, director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis Medical Center. For over 30 years, he has studied firearm violence and published more than 100 studies in the field.

I was surprised to learn what the language in the restriction against the CDC actually said.

PT: Have other agencies besides the CDC also been intimidated by funding this type of research?

GW: I’ll let the agencies discuss whether they’ve been intimidated or simply prevented or prohibited. The statutory language, which remains in appropriations legislation for the Department of Health and Human Services to this day, is that “none of the funds made available in this title may be used, in whole or in part, to advocate or promote gun control.” I think it’s fair to say that this language has been interpreted at times to mean that none of the funds could be used to support research that, depending on its findings, might be used in support of efforts to alter current firearm policy.

Not a prohibition against the research but against pushing for gun control. A significant distinction in the mind of liberty minded folks but I’m sure the anti-rights cultists don’t see it that way.

So Mr. or Ms. Anti-rights Cultists; how do you explain decades of firearm related research some of it funded by our government?


Politcs and firearms.

Anti-Rights cultists, like “Perfectly Frank”, usually try to do two things; first they want to make firearm related violence simplistic (There are too many guns) and second, they usually try to paint gun owners with a broad brush.
Frank tried it with his “Adding Color To Firearm Death Rates” . He took the very simplistic approach of ‘determining’ which states are ‘Red’ (Conservative) and which states are “Blue” (Liberal); of course the top states with high firearm death rates are predominately Red. I left a reply – actually two – with links or the images below. That was Thursday; funny how there has been no reply since then.
These images are still very simplistic but add a layer of information or two.

First, as I showed with the city statistics for the Dallas Fort Worth Metroplex; not every area is the same. Especially not at the state level like Frank is trying to imply. I really like this first graphic; everyone has seen it. It shows some major cities in relation to the firearm death rates of other countries. Of course these aren’t ‘advanced, developed, western, handpicked nations’ so I’m sure some people will claim the comparison is invalid.


, e


The last graphic shows the voting pattern, broken down by county level, for ‘red’ and ‘blue’ states. Amazing how Red the country looks at this level of detail; much different from Frank’s list by state.



And when we look at the homicides by city and then look at the counties those cities are in; an amazing thing happens — it looks like many of those cities are voting liberal !!! Oh no, doesn’t that kinda run counter the ‘conservative’ areas are killing others more often?

Now, there are some important differences between urban and rural areas that need to be addressed.

Objectives. We analyzed urban–rural differences in intentional firearm death.

Methods. We analyzed 584629 deaths from 1989 to 1999 assigned to 3141 US counties, using negative binomial regressions and an 11-category urban–rural variable.

Results. The most urban counties had 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI]=0.87, 1.20) times the adjusted firearm death rate of the most rural counties. The most rural counties experienced 1.54 (95% CI=1.29, 1.83) times the adjusted firearm suicide rate of the most urban. The most urban counties experienced 1.90 (95% CI=1.50, 2.40) times the adjusted firearm homicide rate of the most rural. Similar opposing trends were not found for nonfirearm suicide or homicide.

Conclusions. Firearm suicide in rural counties is as important a public health problem as firearm homicide in urban counties. Policymakers should become aware that intentional firearm deaths affect all types of communities in the United States.

Cities have nearly twice the firearm homicide rate of rural areas while rural areas only have a slightly higher rate of suicide. Other distinctions have been noted.

Background: Family physicians can play a vital role in preventing gun violence, and better data on which to base their interventions might result in more effective prevention efforts. Using Washington State data, two assumptions on which interventions can be based were tested: compared with urban areas, rural areas have (1) a higher percentage of gun deaths from shotguns and rifles, and (2) a higher percentage of gun deaths from suicides and accidents.

This is important as we consider that suicides are much more common then homicides and the types of gun control laws proposed by anti-rights cultists are unlikely to address the most common rifles and shotguns used in rural suicides. That is unless they push for really draconian laws.

I won’t get into the debate about whether or not we suicide should be illegal. I’ll just note that very few of the gun control laws proposed by any of the antis address suicides.

Please join the discussion.




City Statistics

I will freely admit I do not have data on firearm ownership by the city. I’m not sure there is any out there. But let’s take a look at the homicide rates for various cities in the Dallas Fort Worth Metroplex. I could have listed all of the cities and the data but that is a bit cumbersome.

The Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area, the official title designated by the United States Office of Management and Budget, encompasses 13 counties within the U.S. state of Texas. The area is divided into two distinct metropolitan divisions: Dallas–Plano–Irving and Fort Worth–Arlington–Grapevine. Residents of the area informally refer to it as the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex, DFW, or The Metroplex. It is the economic and cultural hub of the region commonly called North Texas or North Central Texas and is the largest land-locked metropolitan area in the United States.[3]

The 2011 official estimate U.S. Census has the Dallas–Fort Worth Metroplex at 6,526,548,[4] making it the largest metropolitan area in the South. During the 12-month period from July 2008 to July 2009, the Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington metropolitan area gained 146,530 new residents, more than any other metropolitan area in the United States.[5][6] The area’s population has grown by about one million since the last census was administered in 2000.[7] The Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington MSA is, by population, the largest metropolitan area in Texas, the largest in the South, the fourth-largest in the United States, and the tenth-largest in theAmericas. The metroplex encompasses 9,286 square miles (24,100 km2) of total area: 8,991 sq mi (23,290 km2) is land, while 295 sq mi (760 km2) is water, making it larger in area than the U.S. states of Rhode Island and Connecticut combined. It is also the sixth largest gross metropolitan product (GMP) in the United States,[8] and approximately tenth largest by GMP in the world.

I think it is fair to say the cities all share the same geography, climate, state laws – including a preemption in the area of gun control; cities can not pass laws that contradict state law. Many of the people work in one city and live in another. For Example, I live in Arlington and work in Grapevine.

Okay how about we look at something not affected by great distances

City Pop. Homicides Per Capita Rate
Dallas 1,255,015 143 11.39429
Fort Worth 789,035 48 6.08338
Grand Prairie 183,822 11 5.98405
Arlington 378,765 18 4.75229
Mesquite 144,313 6 4.15763
Garland 235,683 6 2.54579
Richardson 104,577 2 1.91247
Plano 275,795 3 1.08776
Lewisville 100,710 1 0.99295
Denton 123,260 1 0.81129
Carrollton 127,459 1 0.78457
McKinney 146,869 1 0.68088
Frisco 131,769 0 0.00000


So, let’s ask again why homicide rates differ so greatly in the various cities? Plano has more residents then Grand Prairie but the homicide rate is only 1/5th. Mesquite has 1/3rd the population but the homicide rate is very close to Arlington? Richardson and Plano are neighbors geographically but the homicide rate is nearly double in Richardson.

All of the cities have similar firearm laws; the state does not require a permit to own a firearm, Concealed Carry is not prohibited, no background checks on private sales in one city and not the other. Access to each city is easy, well fairly easy depending on how many roads are under construction. So — Why does Frisco have no homicides and Dallas have 11.4 per 100K.
By the way, keep in mind the homicide rate for Chicago 15.2 per 100K for 2013.


Data from the FBI Uniform Crime Reports

State Statistics

Frank over at Perfectly Frank put up a post; one we often see from gun control advocates.

I’ve taken his chart – from the VPC and added a column.

Rank State Firearm Related Rate Firearm Ownership
1 Alaska 19.59 57.8
2 Louisiana 19.15 44.1
3 Alabama 17.79 51.7
4 Mississippi 17.55 55.3
5 Wyoming 17.51 59.7
6 Montana 16.94 57.7
7 Arkansas 16.93 55.3
8 Oklahoma 16.41 42.9
9 Tennessee 15.86 43.9
10 New Mexico 15.63 34.8
11 South Carolina 15.6 42.3
12 West Virginia 15.1 55.3
13 Missouri 14.56 41.7
14 Arizona 14.2 31.1
15 Nevada 14.16 33.8
16 Kentucky 14.15 47.7
17 Idaho 14.08 55
18 Indiana 13.04 39.1
19 Georgia 12.63 40.3
20 Florida 12.49 24.5
21 North Carolina 12.42 41.3
22 Michigan 12.03 38.4
23 (tie) North Dakota 11.89 50.7
23 (tie) Maine 11.89 40.5
25 Oregon 11.76 39.8
26 Colorado 11.75 34.7
27 Utah 11.69 43.9
28 Kansas 11.44 42.1
29 Pennsylvania 11.36 34.7
30 Ohio 11.14 32.4
31 Delaware 10.8 25.5
32 Texas 10.5 35.9
33 Virginia 10.46 35.1
34 Vermont 10.37 42
35 Wisconsin 9.93 44.4
36 Maryland 9.75 21.3
37 South Dakota 9.47 56.6
38 Washington 9.07 33.1
39 Nebraska 8.99 38.6
40 Illinois 8.67 20.2
41 Iowa 8.19 42.9
42 California 7.89 21.3
43 Minnesota 7.88 41.7
44 New Hampshire 7.03 30
45 New Jersey 5.69 12.6
46 Rhode Island 5.33 12.8
47 Connecticut 4.48 16.7
48 New York 4.39 18
49 Massachusetts 3.18 12.6
50 Hawaii 2.71 6.7



Since Frank is still trying to figure things out; I’m going to keep this real simple. Let’s just look at the top ten states for the two variables; Firearm Related Homicides and Firearm Ownership. One of the most common gun control mantras is “more guns = more death”

Top Ten by Firearm Homicide Rate Top Ten by Ownership
1.  Alaska 5.  Wyoming
2.  Louisiana 1.  Alaska
3.  Alabama 6.  Montana
4 . Mississippi 37. South Dakota
5.  Wyoming 4. Mississippi
6.  Montana 7. Arkansas
7.  Arkansas 12. West Virginia
8.  Oklahoma 17. Idaho
9.  Tennessee 3 Alabama
10. New Mexico 23. North Dakota

The Numbers in both columns are the states’ ranking for Firearm related homicide rate. So Frank, if More Guns equals more firearm related deaths; why does Wyoming have a higher percentage of firearms but fewer deaths then Alaska or Louisiana or Alabama or Mississippi?

Why does Mississippi have more firearms then Louisiana but Louisiana have more firearm related homicides?

Firearm Related Homicide Rate

As usual Bill Whittle really punctures the anti-rights cultists myths about how the USA has the most firearm related homicides.



I would ask the antis if they could explain these two questions; why do other countries have such higher rates than America? And why do some cities in America have higher rates than others.


H/T to Greylocke



Question for the Antis — What Should She Have Done?

Darn — the 911 call starts off in auto-play. Didn’t realize it when I snagged it.


Please look below the fold for a (hopefully) interesting Defensive Gun Use — and a question that I’m still waiting for the antis to answer.


Continue Reading