Monday, February 2, 2015

Fun with Statistics

Starting with the chart from yesterday's post about gun death rates

States with the Five Highest Gun Death Rates
States with the Five Lowest Gun Death Rates
Household Gun OwnershipGun Death Rate per 100,000RankStateHousehold Gun OwnershipGun Death Rate per 100,000
1 Alaska 60.6 percent 19.59 50 Hawaii 9.7 percent 2.71
2 Louisiana 45.6 percent 19.15 49 Massachusetts 12.8 percent 3.18
3 Alabama 57.2 percent 17.79 48 New York 18.1 percent 4.39
4 Mississippi 54.3 percent 17.55 47 Connecticut 16.2 percent 4.48
5 Wyoming 62.8 percent 17.51 46 Rhode Island 13.3 percent 5.33

 Findlaw shows the top ten for violent crime

Here are the Top 10 states with the most -- and least -- violent crime per capita, according to the FBI's data:
Highest Crime Per Capita
  1. Washington, D.C.: 1,243.7 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants
  2. Tennessee: 643.6
  3. Nevada: 607.6
  4. Alaska: 603.2
  5. New Mexico: 559.1
  6. South Carolina: 558.8
  7. Delaware: 547.4
  8. Louisiana: 496.9
  9. Florida: 487.1
  10. Maryland: 476.8
In case you were wondering, California (423.1), New York (406.8) and Texas (408.6) didn't trail too far behind.
Lowest Crime Per Capita
  1. Maine: 122.7
  2. Vermont: 142.6
  3. New Hampshire: 187.9
  4. Virginia: 190.1
  5. Wyoming: 201.4
  6. Utah: 205.8
  7. Idaho: 207.9
  8. Kentucky: 222.6
  9. Minnesota: 230.9
  10. Hawaii: 239.2

CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics calculated age adjusted suicide rates by state. Here are the 10 most suicidal states in America:
10. Oregon:                        15.2 suicides per 100,000
9. Utah:                                15.4 suicides per 100,000
8. West Virginia:              15.9 suicides per 100,000
7. Arizona:                           16.1 suicides per 100,000
6. Colorado:                        16.4 suicides per 100,000
5. Nevada:                           18.3 suicides per 100,000
4. Montana:                        19.4 suicides per 100,000
*3. Wyoming:                       19.7 suicides per 100,000
2. New Mexico:                  20.4 suicides per 100,000
*1. Alaska:                             22.1 suicides per 100,000

Based on National Center for Health Statistics calculations, here are the least depressed and happiest states in America:
10. California: 9.8 suicides per 100,000 residents
*9. Hawaii: 9.7 suicides per 100,000 residents
8. Maryland: 9 suicides per 100,000 residents
*7.  Rhode Island: 8.7 suicides per 100,000 residents
6. Illinois: 8.5 suicides per 100,000 residents
*5. Massachusetts: 7.6 suicides per 100,000 residents
*4. Connecticut: 7.4 suicides per 100,000 residents
*3. New York: 7 suicides per 100,000 residents
2. New Jersey: 6.7 suicides per 100,000 residents
1. District of Columbia: 5.8 suicides per 100,000 residents


  1. And what does this tell us that we haven’t been over dozens of times before?

    MikeB: “Thanks to you, I never look at these types of reports without noticing that we need to also check the overall murder rates plus the overall suicide rates.”

    You forgot to include murder rates in this post.

    MikeB: “I wonder if maybe that's where we've gone wrong before. The "gun deaths" numbers include suicides.”

    And it is for deaths only done by gun- looking at murder rates and suicide rates accounts for substitution.

    MikeB: “I remember saying that if most murders and suicides are committed with guns, then it stands to reason that high gun states would also have high murder and suicide rates.”

    I don’t know why you are so hung up on this. You don’t have to draw speculations from a “% murder by gun” statistic. We know murder rates and suicide rates. You don’t have to make these logic leaps. What happens when you look at “high gun” states and see that they don’t have higher murder rates? Do you think the stats are wrong because you’ve already drawn this logical conclusion? But here, Mike, I have another table for you that might be able to finally put this to bed. Do you remember when I showed you that California (the #1 ranked state for gun control) has the same 68% of murder committed using guns statistic as the United States as a whole? You can see that your favorite stat for why you want gun control doesn’t even get reduced where you have the most gun control. I have now assembled for you a list of the rest of the states by percent murder using firearms. Again, we see that there is no correlation with gun laws, or high gun ownership. It calculates out to 0.05 for Brady score (you need this number to be negative), and 0.01 for gun ownership rates. Not correlated.

    IL 83
    LA 83
    MO 76
    PA 74
    MS 74
    CT 73
    MI 73
    WY 73
    AR 72
    DC 71
    NJ 71
    GA 71
    OH 70
    SC 70
    VA 69
    NC 69
    MD 68
    DE 68
    CA 68
    KY 67
    MA 67
    KS 66
    AZ 65
    TN 65
    NE 65
    IN 64
    OK 64
    TX 64
    MN 61
    WI 59
    NV 58
    WV 58
    NY 57
    AK 55
    ID 53
    OR 52
    UT 51
    ND 50
    VT 50
    CO 50
    NM 50
    WA 49
    ME 48
    IA 43
    MT 39
    NH 38
    RI 36
    SD 33
    HI 14


    (note that two states are missing from their data)

    Is your mind blown, Mike?

    1. How can there be no correlation when every one of the lowest 5 gun death states appear on the list of lowest 10 suicide states?

    2. There’s that memory problem of yours again. It’s not even a case of your brain subconsciously blotting out what you don’t like- you don’t even remember the stuff that is supposedly *good* for you. As I said many, many times on your blog, there is a correlation between gun ownership and suicide rates. Where there is not a correlation is to murder rates and violent crime rates. That is overall suicide rates- not just “gun suicides”. Even recently we had an exchange where you seemed surprised to hear me say this even though I said it dozens of times before. Below is my first mega post on correlations from over three years ago. It was a three-part post, and the third was revealing the positive correlation with gun ownership and suicides at the state level:

      These are the answers to state level correlations that talk about often here:

      “gun death” = Yes (but it’s an irrelevant false metric which you even admit)

      Suicide rates = Yes

      Murder rates = No

      Violent crime rates = No (actually an insignificant correlation working against you)

      Will you remember this? Maybe you should bookmark this for easy reference on my stance.

    3. Sorry. I do have a bad memory but I think this one will stick. I'm curious though, how do you explain this? I mean, how does it make sense to you? Or is that too much thinking for you, no insult intended? Do you read the stats without trying to understand how they say what they say?

    4. Because correlation does not equal causation. Correlations don't have to make sense.

      Here are some examples:

    5. It's the same explanation for how a drop in crime could be correlated with sales of the iPhone [5].

    6. My iPhone post was an attempt at humor. You're trying to be serious. Correlation can not equal causation all day long, but things still have to make sense.

    7. I'm not sure what you're getting at. Are you saying even correlated data where there is no causation still has to "make sense"? Did you open the link I provided three posts above?

    8. Yes I did open that silly link. You can invent many "correlations" that point to the absurdity of comparing unlike things. But the fact remains, as I've said over and over again, if most murders are done with guns, how could more guns NOT lead to a higher murder rate. If you come up with stats that supposedly show it doesn't, something's wrong. It doesn't make sense, unless of course you can come up with a plausible explanation.

    9. Mike, I showed you the gun ownership vs. murder rate. So you are basically saying those stats are wrong, is that is? You believe the FBI is publishing false information, and/or the LCAV (a gun control group) did a flawed survey on gun ownership. Is that your stance?

      I’ll explain this again, and maybe you can see the disconnect you are having. Look at my first post. I listed nearly all the state data on “percent murder that occurs with a gun”, and you can see that gun ownership rates do not affect this number. Most murders being done with a gun is the reason why you want gun control. But that number does not address at all whether or not gun control works. We’re trying to answer the question of “does gun control work?”, or “do more guns cause more murder?” We know that murder is a rare thing. A very small percentage of people commit murder (even in the worst places on Earth that is still true). We know that gun ownership in the United States, is pretty damn high. So there are orders of magnitude more people who own guns and don’t murder anyone than the people who commit murder with guns. And that’s the number that we see fluctuate in the state gun ownership rates- it is really showing the amount of good people who are armed. The bad people (those likely to commit murder) have their guns whether they live in California or in Texas (as we can see that California has a slightly higher “percent murder using a gun” than Texas does). It’s all there in the numbers, Mike.

      We’ve discussed DC and Chicago here many times. The gun ownership rates in these cities is very small, but that hasn’t stopped the bad guys from bringing in guns and killing people with them. You say this all the time. In these cities, the bad guys are armed, and the good citizens are not, and we see that 71% of murders are committed using guns in DC- pretty much on par with the rest of the country. That’s what is going on, Mike.

  2. Yes, fun with statistics. You can make statistics appear to support every side of an issue. So keep arguing these statistics and get nothing done about the real problem of guns in America. Enjoy your statistical debates.

    1. Are you talking to me or to TS. He is, after all, the master of stats and math.

    2. She's just talking to be heard. No point made. Her comment can be applied to you and TS Mike, equally. Which really is no point at all.

      "So keep arguing these statistics and get nothing done about the real problem of guns in America."

      I will agree with half of this comment tho. You, Mike, keep making useless points in your threads, posting useless threads that absolutely does nothing to address the criminal except to give them a pass. You want this blog to really mean something? I mean REALLY take a bite out of crime? Address that and you can get somewhere. Being an anti-gun wont do it. Being a pro-gun wont either. The two only cancels each other out. Be anti CRIMINAL in ways that actually have meaning and you will achieve what Bloombergs anti everything cant, even with all his millions.

      Since yours is one of the VERY few blogs that actually post your opposition (most of the time), you have a unique opportunity to make that difference and I just don't understand why you squander it.

      How about getting something done all can agree on Mike. You would be the first and with that success, lead the rest.

      What say you?

    3. What BS Gunny. In typical gun loon style you claim the absurd statistical debate is wrong on only one side, Mikes. You loons try to prove with your statistical manipulation that there are fewer deaths and injuries from gun shot, then claim that's some victory over pro gun statistics. Disregarding the innocent victims of gun shot, as if their lives don't matter just because it MIGHT be a lower number than the pro gun side states. Sick position.

    4. You shouldn't rely on statistics that only compare guns to being shot by a gun. It's an invalid metric- even Mike admits that. That's why when I talk statistics, I am using murder, violent crime, and suicide rates. It's not manipulated data- it's different data then what gun control proponents present. And the reason why they don't present data on murder and violent crime is because they don't like the results.

    5. When I hear your concerns about innocent lives, not numbers, I might take you seriously.

    6. Sandra, you were so clear in your response that even Mike had to ask who your were talking to. I am sure now that he can enjoy the fact that you still have your lips on his behind liking the taste of the crap he puts out. Enjoy yourself.

    7. I didn't respond because I've made it clear on many posts here that I deplore any use of statistics to define the death of innocent people. Leave it to an idiot like you to not get that. Did I single out you gun loons in my first comment? No, but on with your lies.

    8. Well Sandra you sure made it clear on which side of the statistics you stand on with your second response and again here. So you lie about your position. Keep on kissing ass Sandra, only an idiot does that, keep up the lies. I am beginning to like to see the antis twist and lie.

      And Mike thinks I don't give an inch. HA!

    9. Gunny, you are so full of shit and lies it's not even funny. Not to mention you obviously can't read. Typical for an idiot gun loon.

    10. "Being an anti-gun wont do it. Being a pro-gun wont either. "

      You've got it all wrong. You ARE pro-gun, which is to say biased and close-minded. I'm NOT anti-gun. I would own guns again if I thought it were really necessary. What I'm against is gun availability go unfit and dangerous people and that starts with you lawful gun owners. They, the criminals and the nut cases, get their guns from you lawful gun owners because you're not required by law to lock up your guns at home and you're not required by law to conduct background checks. You are the problem and that's what this blog points out day in and day out.

    11. A complete and total lie Mike, everything you just said is a complete and total lie. You ARE anti gun, you don't give an inch, closed minded, biased against anything that goes bang and anyone that owns or holds one. Your excuses and reasoning are not so veiled as you think. The only difference in this site and MDA (and others) is you actually allow replies where they don't. But in doing so you continue to show just how badly anti liberty people fail, continually. You continually show the truth about how laws don't work in almost every subject and try to argue they do. You and your minions continually try to put words in my mouth, insert meanings that aren't there and wont answer anyone's simple questions. You post complete falsehoods and twist and split "statistics" to show something to support your wishes but fail when the entire facts are shown to you. Then twist and squirm and complain.

      I have been watching you for a long time, I see what's going on. Yes, I am PRO GUN. I told you that in the first place. I am NOT wrong, I am NOT biased or closed minded or I would have NEVER asked you to come up with real solutions WE COULD ALL AGREE ON! So who is closed minded? YOU ARE!

      Listen up you stupid fool, I WANT SOLUTIONS and I want them NOW! I have my reasons. I POSTED MY REASONS if you would just READ THEM!

      I am not closed minded, I want solutions.

      I want to work with someone to STOP this madness, YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY NOT THE ONE!

      Goodbye Mike and all your ass sucking minions, good luck in your delusions. You will need it. Your not worth my time.

    12. Gee, does this mean the insulting ass Gunny will not be back? Nice!!!

    13. Gunsmoke, you can't call someone a liar for expressing their opinion. Did you not know that? My opinion is what I said, that I'm reasonable and open minded and you're not.

      So, if you're really gone, fine, but if you comment again, don't call me a liar for an opinion and don't fucking call me names either.