Interactive Map of US Public Shootings

[mojollnir]

I found this on a link from a news site. It displays state and local info. These numbers are both disturbing and informative. The areas with the most gun control again seem to lead the way. Showing both gun control does not affect certain people, and people that own and respect guns behave appropriately....

link to map,, http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...-epidemic.html

article,

AURORA SHOOTINGFASHIONANDREW SULLIVANHOWARD KURTZDAVID FRUM
SHOOTING IN AURORA
Content Section
Interactive Map: The U.S. Shooting Epidemic
By Brian Abelson & Michael Keller

Friday's horrific shooting in Aurora, Colo.—one of the deadliest in U.S. history—has reignited the debate over gun control in America. Just how bad is the problem? Through media reports, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a nonprofit lobbying group, has compiled a list of 431 shootings with more than one victim since 2005. On average, according to the organization, a multiple-victim shooting happens every 5.9 days in the United States. The deadliest city in this period, according to the data, is Chicago, with 17 shootings since 2005—totaling 72 people wounded and 30 deaths. Thirteen of those shootings were in a public place. New Orleans, Kansas City, and Philadelphia were tied for second bloodiest, with nine shootings in this seven-year period. Plus, James Warren on why the Colorado shooting is tragically unsurprising.
Roll over or tap the interactive map below to see how your state compares, or explore the data in the spreadsheet below. If we missed one, let us know in the comments or at @mhkeller and @BrianAbelson.

[snaplink]

Is there any data which shows a map where a legal firearm has prevented any of these types of shootings?

[Marlin60]

Interesting map and info. I'm not familiar with thedailybeast, but it seems they pulled their data from the Brady Campaign. So, if anything, it may be skewed to an anti-gun outlook. Still, apart from some entries in the heart of the country (TX,MO,KS,OK), most of the incidents do appear in areas with more gun control as you mentioned.

It would be nice to see a population overlay on this map, as that looks like it may also be a prime factor.

[spacemanvic]

Those maps are suspect as they are provided by a known anti-gun group the Brady Campaign. So, while furthering their sides perspective, overall not advancing the argument. We would need a party that has no "dog in the fight".

Here's an interactive map from the UK:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datab...map-statistics

Whats interesting to note is that the map from the UK amptly illustrates how areas with strong anti-gun policies, suffer the most from gun crime. What is disingenuous is that the UK map does not differentiate between crimes using guns, and crimes stopped by guns:



However, maybe a study by Harvard holds more credence:

Harvard Study: Gun Control Is Counterproductive

I've just learned that Washington, D.C.'s petition for a rehearing of the Parker case in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit was denied today. This is good news. Readers will recall in this case that the D.C. Circuit overturned the decades-long ban on gun ownership in the nation's capitol on Second Amendment grounds.

However, as my colleague Peter Ferrara explained in his National Review Online article following the initial decision in March, it looks very likely that the United States Supreme Court will take the case on appeal. When it does so - beyond seriously considering the clear original intent of the Second Amendment to protect an individual's right to armed self-defense - the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court would be wise to take into account the findings of a recent study out of Harvard.

The study, which just appeared in Volume 30, Number 2 of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy (pp. 649-694), set out to answer the question in its title: "Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? A Review of International and Some Domestic Evidence." Contrary to conventional wisdom, and the sniffs of our more sophisticated and generally anti-gun counterparts across the pond, the answer is "no." And not just no, as in there is no correlation between gun ownership and violent crime, but an emphatic no, showing a negative correlation: as gun ownership increases, murder and suicide decreases.

The findings of two criminologists - Prof. Don Kates and Prof. Gary Mauser - in their exhaustive study of American and European gun laws and violence rates, are telling:

Nations with stringent anti-gun laws generally have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. The study found that the nine European nations with the lowest rates of gun ownership (5,000 or fewer guns per 100,000 population) have a combined murder rate three times higher than that of the nine nations with the highest rates of gun ownership (at least 15,000 guns per 100,000 population).

For example, Norway has the highest rate of gun ownership in Western Europe, yet possesses the lowest murder rate. In contrast, Holland's murder rate is nearly the worst, despite having the lowest gun ownership rate in Western Europe. Sweden and Denmark are two more examples of nations with high murder rates but few guns. As the study's authors write in the report:

If the mantra "more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death" were true, broad cross-national comparisons should show that nations with higher gun ownership per capita consistently have more death. Nations with higher gun ownership rates, however, do not have higher murder or suicide rates than those with lower gun ownership. Indeed many high gun ownership nations have much lower murder rates. (p. 661)

Finally, and as if to prove the bumper sticker correct - that "gun don't kill people, people do" - the study also shows that Russia's murder rate is four times higher than the U.S. and more than 20 times higher than Norway. This, in a country that practically eradicated private gun ownership over the course of decades of totalitarian rule and police state methods of suppression. Needless to say, very few Russian murders involve guns.

The important thing to keep in mind is not the rate of deaths by gun - a statistic that anti-gun advocates are quick to recite - but the overall murder rate, regardless of means. The criminologists explain:

[P]er capita murder overall is only half as frequent in the United States as in several other nations where gun murder is rarer, but murder by strangling, stabbing, or beating is much more frequent. (p. 663 - emphases in original)

It is important to note here that Profs. Kates and Mauser are not pro-gun zealots. In fact, they go out of their way to stress that their study neither proves that gun control causes higher murder rates nor that increased gun ownership necessarily leads to lower murder rates. (Though, in my view, Prof. John Lott's More Guns, Less Crime does indeed prove the latter.) But what is clear, and what they do say, is that gun control is ineffectual at preventing murder, and apparently counterproductive.

Not only is the D.C. gun ban ill-conceived on constitutional grounds, it fails to live up to its purpose. If the astronomical murder rate in the nation's capitol, in comparison to cities where gun ownership is permitted, didn't already make that fact clear, this study out of Harvard should.

A podcast of a nationally syndicated show Guntalk discussing the Aurora shooting:
http://ec.libsyn.com/p/e/a/5/ea5bdf0...3&c_id=4725969

Again, another podcast of the same show regarding Aurora, but the perspective gained a week later. The shooter DID NOT have body armor, just a tac vest.
http://ec.libsyn.com/p/3/a/f/3af22a0...3&c_id=4758448

[spacemanvic]

Interesting map and info. I'm not familiar with thedailybeast, but it seems they pulled their data from the Brady Campaign. So, if anything, it may be skewed to an anti-gun outlook. Still, apart from some entries in the heart of the country (TX,MO,KS,OK), most of the incidents do appear in areas with more gun control as you mentioned.

It would be nice to see a population overlay on this map, as that looks like it may also be a prime factor.

The Daily Beast is considered a Progressive website. So, their publishing something from the anti-gun Brady Campaign should come as no surprise.

[Marlin60]

Agree on the unreliability of the Brady Campaign. The Harvard study you excerpted was good reading... especially this para: "Nations with stringent anti-gun laws generally have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. The study found that the nine European nations with the lowest rates of gun ownership (5,000 or fewer guns per 100,000 population) have a combined murder rate three times higher than that of the nine nations with the highest rates of gun ownership (at least 15,000 guns per 100,000 population)."

... regarding Aurora, but the perspective gained a week later. The shooter DID NOT have body armor, just a tac vest.
http://ec.libsyn.com/p/3/a/f/3af22a0...3&c_id=4758448

Hmmm... I had not heard that. It is sounding as though the shooter may only have been wearing this blackhawk vest. If so, that changes a lot. Any armed citizen could have made a major difference that night.... 22WMR, .38, you name it.

[spacemanvic]

Agree on the unreliability of the Brady Campaign. The Harvard study you excerpted was good reading... especially this para: "Nations with stringent anti-gun laws generally have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. The study found that the nine European nations with the lowest rates of gun ownership (5,000 or fewer guns per 100,000 population) have a combined murder rate three times higher than that of the nine nations with the highest rates of gun ownership (at least 15,000 guns per 100,000 population)."



Hmmm... I had not heard that. It is sounding as though the shooter may only have been wearing this blackhawk vest. If so, that changes a lot. Any armed citizen could have made a major difference that night.... 22WMR, .38, you name it.

Which is why you will NEVER hear from the media that anyone could have made a difference if they had the opportunity to take a shot - that would run counter to the media's pushing for gun control.

[libra8]

Interesting CA has some of the toughest gun laws but it also has the highest murder rate.

[Cherokee60]

It's unimaginable that the lunatics in office cannot see that once you take guns away from law-abiding citizens, only the lawless will have guns.

Or, at some point, the now law-abiding may be judged as lawless.

[thebearpack]

According to this map most shootings occur in California, Illinois, New Jersey and Philadelphia. That speaks volumes about the effectiveness of gun laws doesn't it? The left will never learn.