That’s not what the data from the PEW research center reflects:
What is your source for this claim?
I’m wondering if this might be a better fit for the pit, and how you’d feel about moving it there.
That is the overall count, not the rate. If the population doubles but the rate stays the same, the overall count will double. If you look at the rate and not the count, it looks like this (source is FBI):
That may be the murder rate in general but we are specifically discussing gun violence in here.
So what are the rate statistics specifically for guns?
Here are some verified statistics: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
There are only two actual data points on your chart, 1968 and 2021. I looked up the U.S. population for those two years and calculated the rate:
1968 gun murders 9425 population 195,743.427 rate 4.815e-5
2021 gun murders 20958 population 336,997,624 rate 6.219e-5
Doesn’t look to be too far off from the overall murder rate.
Just looking at your chart and comparing it to the population rate chart (which shows a pretty steady increase yearly), it looks like the gun murder rate was steadily declining from about 1998 to 2014 or so, and while the rate did increase from 2014 to 2016, the overall trend from 1998 to 2018 is below the rate of population increase. It also looks to me like the peak in your gun chart for the early 1970s is larger than the peak for 1980.
Again, I’m just going by pixels on your chart and not actual statistics, but I would say that while there is some slight variation from the total murder rate (the gun only rate is higher in the early 70s, the gun only rate decreases more than the overall murder rate fro about 2006 to 2016), overall the gun only chart tracks fairly well with the total murder rate.
Firearms homicide rate chart, 1981-2010, also from the PEW research center:
Again, this shows some slight variation to the overall murder rate (note the two peaks in the early 1990s - the first peak is higher in the overall murder rate but both peaks are roughly the same in the firearms chart), but the two charts do track very closely.
Mostly, but not always.
The OP is confusing two numbers- “gun deaths” and “firearm violence”. Gun deaths are indeed mostly suicides, and really are there just to make the scary numbers higher.
Most “mass shootings” happen in urban areas, the result of drug gang violence. But you dont hear much about those on the news, leaving people to think most ‘mass shootings’ are the lone crazed nutcase shooter- which are the scary ones and the media covers.
Right. Murderers use handguns. Drug gangs love the 9mm pistol, very common.
Correct. But both parties like to play it up- to scare the voters- The GOP likes to claim more violence to push “law and order”, the Dems like to show a high “gun deaths” to push gun control.
However, the violent crime rate is down.
I’ve never heard of a gun being violent. That statement applies to cars,planes, knives, clubs, bricks, gasoline, explosives and an infinite number of other objects. What a person uses to kill someone is secondary to the person committing the act.
It’s an important distinction to make because you can remove any of the tools of murder and the crime will be committed using the other tools.
We have a cultural problem and that is what has to be addressed unless the idea of death by gun is considered different or worse than death by other methods.
It’s an interesting question. If you replace the word “pit” with “vulgar behavior” or “cyberbullying” it fits nicely in a thread about how people engage in violent behavior toward each other.
This is objectively false. The number one predictor of whether or not someone will succeed at killing themselves is whether or not they are using a gun. The rates of success are much higher than other types of suicide attempts. Suicide attempts are usually based on a sudden impulse (by sudden I mean the average length of time between the impulse and the attempt, is, based on self-reported data from survivors, about seven minutes.) For many people, that impulse passes before they can carry out their plan, or with enough time to seek help. The only sensible conclusion is that suicide rates would plummet without access to firearms.
Though guns are not the most common method by which people attempt suicide, they are the most lethal. About 85 percent of suicide attempts with a firearm end in death. (Drug overdose, the most widely used method in suicide attempts, is fatal in less than 3 percent of cases.) Moreover, guns are an irreversible solution to what is often a passing crisis. Suicidal individuals who take pills or inhale car exhaust or use razors have time to reconsider their actions or summon help. With a firearm, once the trigger is pulled, there’s no turning back.
I think even people killed by drug violence is bad, even when the victims are “urban.”
My hobby is fly fishing. I really enjoy it, but if fly fishing was the number one cause of death for American children, I can assure you I would be open to some more regulation. Given that I am required to have a fishing license, my hobby is already more regulated that guns.
You don’t consider the deaths of mentally ill people as important enough to count, or what?
Anything to parse the numbers so the problem doesn’t seem as bad as it obviously is.
This statement is based upon what, exactly?
You’re telling us that if all firearms were removed from this country tonight, the murder rate will be the same tomorrow as it is today? I don’t think so.
Homicides are overwhelmingly committed using handguns; they were found to be the most common murder weapon for nearly half of all homicides in the United States in 2019.
To be fair, many were not mentally ill, they just happened to have a bad day.
I assume that anyone who feels that suicides are just counted to make the numbers look “scary” advocates for a lottery ticket/suicide pill package to be sold at convenience stores. Otherwise, their argument is self contradictory and self serving.
Of course they are, especially as sometimes one of those gang shootings kills some innocent bystander.
But my point is that we are conditioned by the media to think of a mass shooting as a lone nut gunman with an AR15 killing some innocent people “just because”, while it is usually a gang war over drug sales using 9mm pistols.
However the real issue is- most Americans want some more moderate gun control, like better background checks, which I am all in favor of. BUT- most voters (and the courts) are against a widespread handgun ban or something like that.
So, what I ask- rather than 'something has to be done"- what is specific gun control idea that posters here can suggest? “Something has to be done” and bringing up raw numbers doesnt help. Real, workable solutions can help.
Note that Biden recently passed thru a Gun control bill that altho not very strong, had real workable solutions. We need more like that.
I ask, because you often to dismiss “urban” violence. You also seem to dismiss suicide by gun. I’m not clear what point you are trying to make.
We clearly have a gun violence problem. Would you agree?