Correlation between Gun Control and Gun Homicides (updated)

[gego]

Causation is EXCATLY what correlation implies. It dose not PROVE causation. Correlation points the direction to look for possible causation.

Also note the original post does not claim to show causation, just correlation.

I have heard it said that correlation does not prove causation, but without correlation you cannot have causation. Here we have a case where there is not correlation, hence you can be sure that lack of gun control does not cause gun homicides.

If there had been correlation, then we would still not have proof, but cause and effect could have been possible. So the graph is quite meaningful. Is my logic incorrect?

 

[qwert65]

gego, It means that they could be linked or not but just bc they are correlated dosen't mean one causes the other. for ex. having a high concentration of churches is correlated with high crime rate, but one has nothing to do with the other (except that they are in cities)

 

[HoosierQ]

You would expect, as noted, if the antis were right, the the graph to be low at left, high at right and there to be a steady trend upward as we move left to right, most to least gun control. The seeming randomness off the whole thing tends to support a lack of correlation.

Correlcation is the key word. If you plotted a straight line that reflected the various means all the way across, it looks to me like that line would be nearly horizontal. LA kinds of messes things up a bit but in statistics, one often throws out the high and the low so who knows.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Louisiana is the fly in the ointment, but overall, it's clear there is no correlation. They need CRIMINAL control in LA.

 

[rscalzo]

other factors such as demographics and highly populated areas.

You took the words right out of my mouth. Statistics can be bent in just too many ways to fit the desired outcome.

 

[mordechaianiliewicz]

No one has ever been able to do more than correlation. But, the strongest correlations out there are poverty and crime. People being poor tends to correlate with higher crime more than any other factor. (Though even that isn't a direct straight line).

But, I like the story of Southern Rebel about the leo he knew. There are always criminals in any given place. Those folks in the middle who would commit crimes if they thought they could get away with them, yeah.... those guys get poor, and the incentive to do the wrong thing goes up. They commit those crimes they wouldn't have, had they had a better job, more money, not in debt, etc. and so forth.

Shoot, Mexico's problem (not to go too far off topic, but this is a good example) is based upon the fact that Mexican LEOs have very little ability to enforce laws, and cannot even keep the peace. While there are many good Mexican people who aren't going to get involved in the criminal activities, virtually every Mexican "person in the middle" who would, is. No consequences, and in some cases, coersion exists to do the wrong thing.

Louisiana has the same problem right now.... so does Illinois. Just not as dramatically.

 

[RP88]

the only correlation I see there is a correlation of crime and poverty/lower class income. Most of the states with high crime are also known for larger impoverished or low-class populations.

 

[LaEscopeta]

If there had been correlation, then we would still not have proof, but cause and effect could have been possible. So the graph is quite meaningful. Is my logic incorrect?

Well, my logic matches yours. TIFWIIW

 

[RyanM]

Just for fun, here's a different take on it.

Cost of a concealed carry permit in US dollars per year for the initial issuance, versus homicide committed with a handgun, rates per 100,000 population.

For may-issue states with common issuance (Alabama and Connecticut) the cost was unchanged. For may-issue states with limited issuance, $50 per year was added to the cost, up to a maxiumum of $100. No-CCW states were put at $100. That breaks up the data enough that you can compare shall-issue, may-issue, and no-issue states (though MD costs over $58 a year for all 3 of the people with CCWs there, so it got bumped all the way over to no-issue).

So much for easy CCW contributing to people murdering each other all the time, dueling in the streets, etc. Back to the drawing board for Brady.

What I'd really like to do is CCW $ vs. justifiable homicide with a handgun, but the FBI didn't publish per-state justifiable homicide data.

 

[RyanM]

And for even more fun, here's CCW cost per year, as above, vs. percent of murders committed with a handgun.