Looking for statistics - edit

[SecularMotion]

Last edited Fri Sep 14, 2012, 09:35 AM - Edit history (1)

Are there more gun deaths in gun free zones or outside gun free zones?

Gun free zones = no public carry allowed

Gun deaths = fatally shot by assailant

I suspect that there are more gun deaths overall outside gun free zones, but there may be more deaths per incident in gun free zones.

[ManiacJoe]

1. Depends on how you are measuring "gun violence".

For example, according to an article I glanced at this last week, someone made the claim that since 1950 of all the shootings where three or more people died all but one of these events took place in gun-free zones.

While that measure does point out a major problem with gun-free zones, it is not necessarily an accurate measure of gun violence "in general".

[SecularMotion]

2. Okay, let's use death by gunfire as "gun violence"

Have more people been killed by gunfire in gun free zones or non-gun free zones?

[ManiacJoe]

3. Given the relatively small number of gun-free zones

as compared to non-free zones, my money would be on the non-free zones without seeing any official breakdown of gun homicides by "geographic" area.

[spin]

8. "Death by gunfire" is too general ...

as it would include shootings by the police and by honest citizens using a firearm for legitimate self defense.

Mass shootings do seem to often occur in gun free zones. Gang warfare over turf often do not and since they often involve a drive by shooting from a moving vehicle, innocent bystanders are frequently killed or injured.

I believe a study on this subject from a reliable and unbiased source could be very valuable in forming a fair and honest opinion on the gun control debate.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

9. Not to over think this but...

...many people work, shop, eat, learn and/or recreate in gun free zones. Other than outdoors in Chicago, I'm not aware of any places that you can actually live that are posted as gun free zones.

Also with an eye toward normalizing the comparison, perhaps a better statistic to study would be deaths by gunfire per 10 acres of area per year.

[petronius]

4. Link?

I think it would be a tough comparison to make, and I've not seen any actual studies. First, you'd need to define 'gun free zone' - I take it we're referring not to actively-secured locations but rather to places where guns are generally barred, but the only barrier is a law and a sign.

Next, you'd need to find a way to compare the 'gun free' and non-gun-free' zones - although there are lots of places that are formally 'gun free', there is a vastly larger proportion of the country that is not. So, in raw numbers it's almost certain that most acts of violence don't occur in GF zones. So, you'd need a measure: crimes/deaths by unit area? By number of people using the area on a time basis? Comparing a sample of GF zones (e.g. schools) to non-GF zones (e.g. malls or office buildings)?

Considering how many mass attacks occur in schools, it would not surprise me if GF zones are disproportionately represented (or at least with equal rate) in firearm death totals, but I really have no idea one way or the other...

[GreenStormCloud]

5. Do you mean mass shootings in public places, or all shootings?

If you mean all gun illegal homicides then the answer is easily, more are shot in non-gun free areas. The reason for that is that most murders take place in places like streets, stores, and homes, because that is where most crime takes place.

If you mean rampage murders, then most of them take place in gun-free zones. Those type killers plan the rampage in advance so they chose a place with lots of victims (shopping mall, theater) or that has personal meaning to them (school, work place, etc.) In general they do tend to choose gun-free zones, but not always. There has even been one case of a guy that started shooting up a police station. In that particular case a CCWer attempted to shoot the killer, but the killer was wearing a vest that defeated the CCWers bullet, allowing the killer to then kill the CCWer.

To give you a better answer I need to know if you mean all gun-murders, or only rampage gun-murders.

[SecularMotion]

6. Let's use all deaths by gunfire

"Rampage gun-murders" seems too ambiguous.

[GreenStormCloud]

7. Then the answer is easily, "non gun-free" zones.

Most criminals prefer to do their violent crimes away from crowds, so naturally that is where most gun murders will take place. Such shootings will mostly have a single victim, sometimes two, very rarely more.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

10. A hearty thanks for this thread.

Discussions like this seem spot on for the SOP.
Also, I'm quite intrigued.

[shadowrider]

11. Gun free zones are target rich environments

[rrneck]

12. Well done. This thread is a discussion generator. nt

[4th law of robotics]

13. Shouldn't gun free zones be entirely free of gun violence?

As far as I know there are no such things.

There are zones where legally held guns cannot exist. But all guns?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

14. I think so, either that, or it is a misnomer, an oxymoron type of phrase.

Ironic, isn't it.

It reminds me of Assault Weapon.

[Clames]

15. You won't find them on such an obvious and poorly framed question.

Work a little harder on the design parameters and making a representative sample on which to do your survey and you might have some luck.

[ileus]

16. I'm gonna say non-gun free zones since so many rednecks get drunk

at home and do stupid shit.



I apologize in advance to the higher classed rednecks we may have reading this forum.

[Remmah2]

17. Try GOOGLEING.

[SecularMotion]

18. Try spellcheck

[Remmah2]

24. Try punctuation.

It usually indicates an attempt at a complete thought.

[SecularMotion]

25. Thanks for the kick

Speaking of complete thoughts, do you have anything to add to the discussion besides snark?

[former-republican]

19. The most gun free city there is , Washington DC

Statistics show that Washington D.C. enacted a virtual ban on handguns in 1976. Between that year and 1991, Washington D.C.'s homicide rate rose 200%, while the U.S. rate rose 12%.

[GreenStormCloud]

22. Meanwhile, El Paso, TX averages 15 murders per year, (10 year average)

El Paso is almost the same size as Chicago and with Texas gun laws it has more guns than people. Directly across the border is Juarez, Mexico which has Mexico's almost complete ban on civilian gun ownerhip, and had 3,075 murders in 2010.

[former-republican]

20. And then you look here

http://www.dailyfinance.com/blog/2010/04/07/the-15-safest-state-to-live-in-based-on-2010-crime-rankings/

The safest states to live in have the laxest gun laws in the nation.


As to a specific gun - free zone verses a non - gunfree zone .

I don't think a study like that has been made by the justice dept.

Too many variables to conduct an accurate one.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

21. There is more gun violence in non-gun-free zones.

If a zone is free of guns, there is no gun violence there.

If a gun is brought into a gun-free zone, then it is no longer gun-free.

[krispos42]

23. The question is a difficult one.

"Gun-free zones" - areas where guns cannot be carried legally except for government agents - are generally not occupied full time, and are occupied by different demographics than the general public.


For example, schools. School is in session 6 hours a day, 180 days a year. That's a total of about 45 full days in a 365-day calender year. So that leaves 320 days where the schools are essentially empty. If a gun-related violent crime occurs at a school, how should it be weighted? Should it count 8x against a non-school one?

Also, the demographics are heavily biased towards a population that lives much more restrictive and controlled lives than the general public, namely, elementary and middle school students. So given that the population of students is MAYBE 2/3rds people that cause or receive essentially zero gun violence.



Similarly, houses of worship... occupied by millions of people a week, but only for an hour or two.



I can spot the problems, but I have no clue on how to correct for them!

[beevul]

26. Often rates are discussed...

Often rates are discussed, when comparing places or situations or things that are very different from each other.

Deaths Per Firearm (henceforth to be known as "DPF&quot in gunfree zones, far outnumber deaths per firearm in non gun free zones.

30000 gun deaths in America annually, even including suicides, and an estimated 280 million guns in america.

Based on those rough estimates, that gives a rate of .00010714285 DPF.

AT the VT shooting, on the other hand, 32 were killed, and 2 firearms present.


16 DPF.

The rate of death per firearm is astronomically high, in gun free zones. When firearms make it into gun free zones while in possession of those with ill intent who successfully carry it out, they're responsible for a much higher rate of death than they are outside gun free zones.

One might just conclude that theres something about "gun free zones" which causes firearms to become extraordinarily deadly within them.

[SecularMotion]

27. I don't think it's accurate to use "an estimated 280 million guns"

Many guns are owned purely as collectibles and never used. It may be more accurate to use Deaths Per Gun Carrier.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

28. Perhaps that 8,000,000 figure...

...here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/117272066
...would replace the 280,000,000 and 1 carrier at VT would replace the 2 guns carried?

[SecularMotion]

29. No, I think you have compare incident to incident

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

30. for example???

[SecularMotion]

31. The # of incidents with deaths outside gun-free zones vs # of incidents with deaths inside

That would be more accurate than comparing the total number of guns owned against guns incidents in gun-free zones.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

32. Why would this be...

...statistically meaningful without some normalization?

I would suggest that less than 1% of US land area is composed of gun free zones. Aside from certain anomalies, I'm not sure anyone (a number much smaller than 1% of the population) lives in a gun free zone. The raw numbers wouldn't be valid.

[beevul]

34. "More accurate" to what end? N/T

[DWC]

33. Comparables

Last edited Sun Sep 16, 2012, 01:51 PM - Edit history (1)

Gun-Free Zones are limited areas designated by law and signage. Those areas virtually always represent the geographic boundaries of a public facility of some specific type such as a college, hospital, theater, etc. where large numbers of people are concentrated together in a reasonably small space.

A comparison between similar facilities will show gun deaths in "gun free" facilities to be substantially higher than in facilities where possession of defensive firearms is allowed.

This discussion may lead to the even more substantive question of: Are people more likely to be subjected to violent, life threatening attacks (regardless of the tool used) at a "gun-free facility" or a comparable facility where possession of defensive firearms is allowed?

Semper Fi,