Fewer gun deaths in states with most gun laws, study finds
Source: NBCnews.com
States with a heavier dose of firearm laws tend to have the lowest rates of gun deaths, according to a study released Wednesday by Boston-based researchers who argue their findings show "there is a role" in America for more rigid gun-control legislation.
"It seems pretty clear: If you want to know which of the states have the lowest gun-mortality rates just look for those with the greatest number of gun laws," said Dr. Eric W. Fleegler of Boston Children's Hospital who, with colleagues, analyzed firearm-related deaths reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 2007 through 2010.
By scoring individual states simply by the sheer volume of gun laws they have on the books, the researchers noted that in states with the highest number of firearms measures, their rate of gun deaths is collectively 42 percent lower when compared to states that have passed the fewest number of gun rules. The study was published online in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine.
Read more: http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/06/17213303-fewer-gun-deaths-in-states-with-most-gun-laws-study-finds?lite
Some data!
= new reply since forum marked as read
more guns.
Guns laws make people safe? That's Kerouazy!
the vast majority of them haven't even bothered to read.
Thanks for the OP. 
If gun laws actually resulted in a lower probability of getting murdered, California would be the safest state in the nation. Vermont and Wyoming would be the most dangerous states. DC and Chicago would be among the safest places.
Poverty and lack of education are the real causes (or good predictors) of violent crime. "Gun deaths" is just a canard used by propagandists pushing for gun prohibition.
What are values except social norms? And I think social norms can be influenced by laws. What was a social norm vis a vis African Americans fifty years ago, for instance, is no longer the norm and values have changed. In that gradual process, law has played and continues to play an important role in legitimizing certain attitudes and delegitimizing others. But I don't need to tell you this, I'm relatively certain that you aren't an anarchist at heart. 
Agreed, the problem is people, but I don't think people live in a vacuum. They weren't born on some other planet and just magically materialized here one day. The social values that they embrace are the ones that we collectively have created. I've been following a thread this morning in which a fellow DUer has passionately argued that marital infidelity is a legitimate ground for uncontrollable rage, mitigating recourse to violence. The values he grew up with differ from the values I was brought up with. Mayhaps, had he grown up in an environment closer to the one in which I grew up, his values would be closer to mine, and vice versa. Since I believe that my values result in fewer spouses getting beaten up, I want to promote them as much as I can, to which end, I support things like VAWA, in the hopes that laws criminalizing domestic violence will, over time, delegitimize it and fewer people will consider it justifiable, even if their spouse does engage in an act of infidelity.
Similarly, I think that our society in general is too eager to embrace violence as an option. We are quick to start wars, we're quick to validate use of lethal force, we revere Hollywood heroes who settle disputes through violent means. Violence feels satisfying to us as a society. What disgusts me is that media that depict violence are more popular and considered less offensive than media that depict sex. I'd like to see that change. So I'm going to support whatever laws that present themselves that afford the opportunity to delegitimize violent solutions to problems.
True, violence is perpetrated by people, and for a variety of reasons. Poverty, inadequate education, depression, disillusionment, disenfranchisement, there are a great many root causes for it, all of which we should be actively seeking to reduce. Until such time as we've vanquished those problems, though, part of addressing the problem of violence has to be minimizing the extent of the damage that those unhappy members of society are physically able to cause. Guns may not be the direct, proximate cause of violence, but they remain the but-for cause in fact, without which, the violence, at least at its presently horrific levels, could not take place. Enacting stricter gun control legislation, even if we were to ban all guns altogether, won't eradicate violence, I know that. But it's a piece, maybe a small piece, maybe a large piece, I don't know, but a piece nonetheless, of the problem. Maybe stricter gun control laws will make an impression upon those members of society with less clear values than yourself that they need to take ownership of firearms more seriously and accept greater responsibility for how they use them. I have to have hope that something can be done.
The nerve to collect data! And what gall to report the facts!
