CDC & FBI Data: Gun Bans = Violent Crime

Introduction

Earlier this month, we debunked the Associated Press portrayal of a recent "gun deaths" study in our post Another Fake Gun Control Study.

The study had some good information and some misleading information. One useful piece of information is data on gun control measures in all 50 states compiled by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Yes, we know they are far-left "gun grabbers", but this data can be used to shed light on whether gun laws help or hurt society.

The aforementioned study also used CDC data from 2007-2010. We decided to compare this data with FBI data from the same period (*1). We then used FBI data as a basis to correct some short comings of the debunked study.

Once a base comparison was established, we expanded the study to include all violent crime statistics per the FBI.

Modifications from the study published in JAMA are as follows:

1. FBI data was substituted for missing data in Vermont, North Dakota, and New Hampshire.
2. The District of Columbia was added to the data set.
3. The Brady Legislative Strength Score (median) for the District of Columbia was estimated in comparison to other gun banning states. Due to the District of Columbia v. Heller decision in 2008 (*2), the score was reduced by one from our estimate. Our final estimate is 22. 
4. Suicides are not included as "Homicides."
5. We entered this project with only one concern, the truth. While all human beings are biased and prone to fallacy, we have no illusions to our short comings in the field of statistics. We also have no concern for professional pride, funding, or political agenda. While I am personally pro-choice in the realm of self defense, what follows is pure unadulterated data.

Comparing CDC and FBI data.

We can only speculate why these numbers are different. The FBI Murders data is higher than the CDC "gun homicide" rate per 100,000 people. Sixty-seven percent of murders in the USA involve guns per the UN:

In 2009, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 66.9% of all homicides in the United States were perpetrated using a firearm

So, we expect the FBI gun and non-gun related murder numbers to be higher than gun "homicides" per the CDC. However, the simple averages for the 51 data points are 3.83/4.9  (CDC/FBI). This leads one to believe 78% of murders in the US involve firearms.

It appears that the CDC numbers, used to promote gun control by the AP, are significantly overstated, the FBI murder statistics are understated or a combination of both. We could do a more elaborate comparison, but with such a large discrepancy between the UN and US data the truth would still elude us.

For our purposes, it does not matter. Both numbers will be included on all graphs to give you a visual representation of the available data. (click to enlarge)

By including Washington, D.C. we bring additional clarity to the gun control debate. It appears that in both CDC and FBI data, a few sensible gun laws reduce murder/homicide but additional laws are counter-productive. Fellow San Diego Local Order of Bloggers author Beers with Demo explored a broader representation of this legal reality in a recent post entitled "It's as if we've run out of good ideas..."

Exit question: We may try to expand on this later, but can a Republic reach a point where they've got pretty much all their basis covered but since they maintain a full time legislative body that is sent to the nation's capitol to do something, they wind up being far more counter-productive than not? 

The data further suggests that there are two optimum points for gun legislation. First, when both police and private citizens are armed, murders are minimized. When both an empowered public right to self-defense and fear of law enforcement cooperate to reduce crime, criminals face a difficult task. The next minimum is upon entering a seeming police state with assured criminal justice, but where citizens offer much less resistance to criminals.

Finally, once gun laws become extreme, such as total bans of lawful gun ownership, criminals are assured  defenseless victims. Avoiding law enforcement ensures a successful criminal career. Due to harsh criminal penalties, witnesses may then be shot in the attempt to avoid criminal punishment.

More Gun Laws Leads to More Violent Crime

In the age of the internet, we don't like to read long posts, so let's keep this direct. Below we explore robbery, rape, and total FBI reported violent crime. The results are mixed, but may be the best data you have seen in your life regarding gun control. We are damn proud of the following, even where it does not fit my political philosophy.

Gun Laws vs Robbery and Rape

Increased gun laws clearly increase violent robbery but there is an apparent minimization for forcible rape. (click to enlarge)

We are using polynomial order 4 smoothing in these graphics to show more detail than a sloped line. If you look closely at the graphic, robbery is almost a straight line in the wrong direction as more gun laws are passed.

Forcible rape falls with a few "common sense" gun laws, then increases slightly as women lose the ability to defend themselves. Once legislative strength becomes very high, forcible rape appears to fall. Complete gun ownership bans then coincide with increased forcible rapes.

There may be additional rape related laws or other factors that coincide with gun laws in a near police state.  The data does suggest that a near police state reduces forcible rape to about 18 per 100,000 per year.

New York (*1) and Connecticut are the data points creating the apparently low number of forcible rapes. A quick review to see if warmer weather skewed the results with regard to forcible rape did not find an obvious indication.  We leave this question for you to ponder.

Gun Laws vs Total Violent Crime

Overall violent crime information from the FBI is heavily influenced by aggravated assaults. This seems to be a type of crime badly influenced by excessive gun laws. It makes sense, people are less likely to get into fights with armed citizens.

The following graph is damning of strong gun control legislation and serves as my conclusion to this study. (click to enlarge)

Conclusion

A few gun control laws are reasonable for public safety. As additional laws are put in place they become counter-productive. As a near police state is enacted, violent crime falls to an average level. When gun bans are enacted, violent crime increases rapidly.

If you are a professional statistician or wish to check my work contact me via twitter.

Sources

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr-publications
http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/fatal.html
http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1661390

Notes

*1) In 2012, the FBI changed the definition of "Forcible Rape." Because of this definition expansion, which now includes rapes of males and other non-consensual sexual acts, it came to light New York, Chicago and other progressive strongholds under reported or could not be included in FBI statistics for prior years.

U.S. to Expand Its Definition of Rape in Statistics:

For example, the New York Police Department reported 1,369 rapes in 2010, but only 1,036 were entered in the federal figures. However, the police department in Chicago, which had nearly 1,400 reported sexual assaults in 2010, refused to discard cases that did not fit the narrower federal definition when reporting its crime statistics; as a result, the F.B.I.’s uniform crime report — which reported 84,767 forcible rapes that year — did not include any rapes from that city.

The new "Forcible Rape" definition is:

“The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

This change will likely show massive increases in rape reporting in FBI statistics starting with 2012.

*2) District of Columbia v. Heller. After the gun ban in Washington D.C. was repealed, murder rates fell 43.2% by 2011. During the same period, murder rates in Chicago oscillated then ended up 1.9%.

City	2007 Murder Rate	2010 Murder Rate	2011 Murder Rate
Chicago	15.6	15.2	15.9
Washington D.C.	30.8	21.9	17.5

Update 3/27/2013:

Added link to data.

Another Fake Gun Control Study

AP is reporting "More Gun Laws = Fewer Deaths, 50-State Study Says." Unfortunately, the study is transparently biased and misleading. The Associated Press reported the following information about the study:

The results are based on an analysis of 2007-2010 gun-related homicides and suicides from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The researchers also used data on gun control measures in all 50 states compiled by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, a well-known gun control advocacy group. They compared states by dividing them into four equal-sized groups according to the number of gun laws.

The results were published online Wednesday in the medical journal JAMA Internal Medicine.

Editorial author Dr. Garen Wintemute, director the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis, said the study doesn't answer which laws, if any, work.
Wintemute said it's likely that gun control measures are more readily enacted in states with few gun owners  a factor that might have more influence on gun deaths than the number of laws.

The actual study can be found here, but we pillaged the most informative graphic for you below. Study it closely.

The study breaks states into groups, but city laws are not taken into account. So the two progressive gun violence capitals, Washington D.C. and Chicago are excluded and misclassified respectively. Chicago is classified by Illinois' gun laws and Washington D.C. is excluded.

Considering that Chicago has more annual gun deaths than America loses in the Afghanistan War, it is hard to take this study serious. California's gun restriction number in the study is 22, while Illinois gets an 11.5.  Further, Chicago related murders in East Chicago, Indiana and Gary, Indiana are deflected from Illinois' gun deaths count.

The numbers:

• Chicago, Illinois murders in 2008 were 18 per 100,000 residents (510 total). The highest comparable number in the study was Louisiana at 10.1.
• East Chicago, Indiana murders in 2008 were 56.9 per 100,000 residents (17 total).
• Gary, Indiana murders in 2008 were 51.2 per 100,000 residents (49 total).

There are a few other statistical issues in the study.

Suicides are counted. When you remove suicides and look at only Homicides you come to a very different conclusion. Lets be serious. If people are allowed to have guns, they may use them to commit suicide, but that is not the implication of "More Gun Laws = Fewer Deaths."  If someone commits suicide by drugs or jumping from a highway overpass instead of by a gun, society does not benefit from the gun law that influenced the method of suicide.

Either the study authors believe that suicides are caused by guns or they are using suicide victim statistics to dishonestly support their political agenda. If there is another explanation, please comment and let me know.

Next, Vermont, North Dakota and New Hampshire "homicide" numbers are reported as "NA" instead of using zero or a very small number. Mysteriously, "overall" fatalities for these states do not match the remaining "suicide" fatalities numbers. As seen in "Climate Change Math", the "overall" fatalities for these states are greater than the "suicide" fatalities despite the NA for "homicide" fatalities. Consider that these numbers are statistical means or mathematical average. Can you say fudge factor?

Here are the numbers from the study. Take note of the "Firearm Fatalities, Mean (SD)" calculation. Can you smell the Doo Doo?:

Here is my chart of data from the study excluding suicides. Washington, D.C. was not added. States without reported homicide numbers were included as zero. Illinois was not corrected to maximum gun laws in this graph. If we had added Washington, D.C. and adjusted Illinois the results would more conclusively display the short comings of the report, but the changes would be inaccurate estimates. Unlike the CDC, who provided the data, we do not allow political goals to push us into deception.

Here is the graph from the study.

This study is actually reporting the obvious. If someone doesn't have a gun, they cannot commit suicide with a gun. It is the Associated Press who has dishonestly spun the study into a political weapon. Consider this study debunked.

Note:
After consideration, this information may become central to comparing gun deaths and crime. The study uses the term "homicide" for non-suicide gun deaths, but this requires closer scrutiny. They may mean simple non-suicide gun deaths, including police shootings, self defense shootings or other "justifiable homicides."  That would be blatantly deceptive on their part if they are twisting the language in such a fashion.

AP Omits Truth About George Zimmerman

The Associated Press has been under fire after Dean Singleton, chairman of the Associated Press board, gave a glowing introduction for Barack Obama at an economics speech. AP has now stepped up to promote the "If I had a son, he would look like (Trayvon)" narrative against George Zimmerman. It could have been a simple oversight, but if so the timing could not have been worse.

In the article Zimmerman's lawyers withdraw from shooting case, a title that could lead people to follow the racist narrative against Zimmerman, there was a shocking omission.  Bob Owens reports the story:

See if you can spot what’s missing.

Eddie Jones, a 58-year-old black man and lifelong resident of Sanford, said Zimmerman’s arrest is paramount to keeping the protests peaceful.

“They need to go ahead and arrest this guy before something happens,” he said. “Sanford is screwed up. This place just didn’t get corrupt.”

While tensions are high, some think this city of about 53,000 — around 57 percent white and 30 percent black — will come through the crisis without violence, as it did during similar uproars.

Two years ago, after a black homeless man was beaten by the son of a Sanford policeman, passions soon cooled. The assailant, Justin Collison, initially wasn’t charged but eventually was arrested after footage of the episode went viral on YouTube. He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor and received probation. 

Do you give up? 

The “black homeless man” in the previous scandal was Sherman Ware. do you want to take a wild guess who led the charge to bring the policeman’s son to justice? 

Was it Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, the NAACP, or Barack Obama claiming that “if he had a son”  he’s look like Ware? Absolutely not. The effort to bring Justin Collison to justice was spearheaded by none other than George Zimmerman.

That's right. George Zimmerman led the charge for justice for Sherman Ware, the "black homeless man" Kyle Hightower of AP just wrote about.

A letter from one of Zimmerman's family members to Seminole County NAACP president Turner Clayton stated:

“Do you know who spent tireless hours putting fliers on the cars of persons parked in the churches of the black community? Do you know who waited for the church‐goers to get out of church so that he could hand them fliers in an attempt to organize the black community against this horrible miscarriage of justice? Do you know who helped organize the City Hall meeting on January 8th, 2011 at Sanford City Hall??”

“That person was GEORGE ZIMMERMAN.”

Never let it be said that the mainstream media allows facts or reason to stand in the way of a story that benefits Barack Obama. Associated Pravda.

Update: The Washington Times is reporting that Barack Obama is still unsatisfied with his media lap dogs.