General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA Free-Market-solution for gun-violence.
I saw this coming up in some editorial cartoons and I thought... Why not? What's the problem? Why would anybody be against this?
My proposal is fairly simple:
Imagine a weather-map, but instead of temperatures, humidity, air-pressure and winds it shows you for each state things like:
- mass-shootings per citizen and year
- gun-murders per citizen and year
- fatalities from gun-accidents per citizen and year
- casualties from gun-accidents per citizen and year
- gun-suicides per citizen and year
Citizens would see which states are nice and which are not. Citizens would see how state-laws correlate to gun-violence and they would be free to give their politicians the appropriate "praise".
1939
(1,683 posts)The five safest states in the union for not being a "victim of guns" are South Dakota, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, and Iowa. I doubt that their gun laws (which are lax) are the reasons these states are so "safe".
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Kotya
(235 posts)Is less of an issue about "safe" states vs. "unsafe" states.
It is about "safe" zip codes vs. "unsafe" zip codes. These violent zip codes skew the rest of the state.
Look at Chicago with its annual homicide rate in the hundreds, yet most of Chicago you could walk around at night without a care in the world. Almost all the murders are taking place in a small handful of neighborhoods.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Gun violence is, in general, markedly concentrated.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)flamin lib
(14,559 posts)National average is 10.2.
Vermont isn't all that much. It's just a little place with not many people.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)flamin lib
(14,559 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)The vastly different causal factors behind murder and suicide mean that the best ways to address either are going to be very different. If one is looking to find safe places to live for one's family, to stick to the general topic of the thread, suicide rates are basically irrelevant. Rates of homicide and other violent crimes are, on the other hand, quite pertinent.
flamin lib
(14,559 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)Then you have places like Detroit where people are too poor to move away but the police chief advises citizens to arm and defend themselves.
YabaDabaNoDinoNo
(460 posts)We also know where the guns come from too and interestingly enough the places where the guns come from are also not the best states to live in either and bring up the rear in all measurable standards of quality of living
branford
(4,462 posts)of cities or counties, or better yet, congressional districts.
Such a proposal will almost assuredly get near unanimous Republican support.
Heck, they could make an fairly reasonable argument that they key to lowering gun deaths in your neighborhood is voting for the GOP...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_elections,_2012#/media/File:US_House_2012.svg
http://data.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/gun-deaths
beevul
(12,194 posts)Citizens would see which states are nice and which are not. Citizens would see how state-laws correlate to gun-violence and they would be free to give their politicians the appropriate "praise".
Works for me.
BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)...to a fund.