Skip to Navigation

Bookmark and Share

Crime vs Gun Ownership

Violent crime rate per 100,000 divided by % of Households with Loaded Firearm

Created by: staples71

Your rating: None Average: 3.2 (171 votes)

RankRegionViolent crime rate per 100,000÷% of Households with Loaded FirearmResult
2New Jersey329.30÷1.20274.42
3New York414.10÷1.80230.06
11Rhode Island227.30÷1.80126.28
18South Carolina788.30÷8.9088.57
19New Mexico664.20÷7.5088.56
30North Carolina466.40÷7.7060.57
31North Dakota142.40÷2.4059.33
34New Hampshire137.30÷2.8049.04
38South Dakota169.20÷3.8044.53
39West Virginia275.20÷6.4043.00
highest to lowest


hm, the states known for gun ownership have way less crime. Fancy that.

You're seriously misreading the data.
There is a positive correlation between the amount of guns per household and violent crimes.
i.e. More guns=more crimes (or visa versa). Crunch the numbers instead of just looking at pretty pictures next time.

While it does appear that in some states more loaded guns equals more crimes, as I went through many states the loaded gun percentage tended to increase much faster than crimes committed, and indeed in some states the crimes committed were low and the loaded gun percentage was high. Although it is a very pretty picture =D!

Generally stupid or easily mislead people aren't crunching numbers and researching gun crime statistics you dick. I have a suggestion, consider the the types of people that would be interested in these numbers, Informed gun owners? People who are interested in facts and laws concerning gun ownership i.e. your average American prospective intelligent gun buyer? Law enforcement personnel? People who are statisticians and number cruncher's for a living? Those are people who come to my mind first, stupid people, drug users, criminals and other undesirable types don't give two shits about statistics. So in conclusion before you assume you are brilliant and your interpretation of the data is flawless use your brain a little bit more, and if your trying to be a cynical ass-bag take a lesson from this comment douche.

Federal laws prevent drug users and felons from lawful ownership of guns ( So its more a matter of enforcing already existing laws than passing new, stricter laws.

So in conclusion before you assume you are brilliant and your interpretation of the data is flawless use your brain a little bit more, and if your trying to be a cynical ass-bag take a lesson from this comment douche.

yet the fellons and drug users still get guns... maybe its because they are criminals? and i'm not sure if you all have heard or not but criminals don't really follow laws... put all the restrictions you want on them. take away every legal gun. a criminal who really wants a gun will get a gun. illegally. because they dont follow laws.

He said... Enforce. The reason the criminals are getting them is because they don't enforce the laws that are already on the books and because every dink in the country thinks that because they don't have one or because they can't own one or can't control themselves, then everyone else shouldn't have one. What they fail to realize is that it is guns that keep a society safe and free. People are not perfect and they can /will do crazy stuff, the crazy ones...and guns keep us safe from those too. We have been a suppressed society for a long will take time to weed out the mentally ill and in bread fools that we have been supporting on the public dole..when we allowed the government to started making laws against guns and make laws to support able bodied people and started dumbing down our society through public education systems, is when we started to die as a nation. Look at history..look at the rest of the world and see where the free people live. In nations with guns.... Its the only thing that keeps this nation from being taken over for many years and the only ones that want to take your guns are globalist tyrants....

the only people that should not want guns are those that fear being shot by them. That should be criminals not us free people.

So because criminals break laws, that means the laws shouldn't exist? So because, inspite of laws against it, criminals still murder, deal drugs, molest children, etc., that means those laws shouldn't exist either?

No, it means we shouldn't make MORE laws that only target law abiding citizens and won't do a thing to stop criminals or crime (as even the laws' supporters admit). We should focus on solutions that actually have a chance of working rather than just stripping people of their rights for fun.

Especially since enacting these laws is specifically forbidden in the constitution.

You created quite a few superb ideas inside your posting, “Reply to comment | DataMasher”.
I may you should be coming back to your website before long.
Many thanks -Drusilla

Stop by my blog post; [url=]imeall.

yet the fellons and drug users still get guns... maybe its because they are criminals? and i'm not sure if you all have heard or not but criminals don't really follow laws... put all the restrictions you want on them. take away every legal gun. a criminal who really wants a gun will get a gun. illegally. because they dont follow laws.

It's illegal to own a rocket propelled grenade launcher too, but no one seems too concerned about criminals getting their hands on them. The only difference with guns is that our society has enshrined gun ownership almost like a sacred cow.

Actually. Its a huge problem. What you dont know is that most of those rocket launchers and grenades for that matter end up in mexico. The cartels are willing to fork over more cash then the gangs here. Heres more to it then that. But thats the gist.

yea when obama and his henchmen send them
over there can you say fast and furious

Oh, you meant to say when BUSH and his administration sent them, since it was his policies that enacted fast and furious. You obviously have internet access, use it for something other than porn sometime.

Bush policy was NOT Fast and Furious "gun walking" - take your own advice...turn off the porn (let go of yourself too) and do some real research.

Fast and Furious occurred under the Obama administration. The similar program under the Bush administration was called Open Receiver.

Maybe you should research a little better hugh? It was closely monitored under Bush and used as a trace to see where they went to catch the cartels. Obama just let a flood of guns into the cartels with no one to answer to since he always brushes off the subjects he isn't willing to be held accountable for.

Actually, it is not illegal to own a rocket propelled grenade launcher. You can own a tank, if you can afford it.

You can also own a MIG 29.

A local fellow keeps his MIG hangered at the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport, less than five miles from where I live.

Great. So we should make a hand gun as expensive as a F22. Not many civilians own those. Problem solved.

Great post i want more! Thank you
les options

Yes, like freedom of speech, press, religion, etc., our society has enshrined gun ownership almost like a sacred cow. We have 10 sacred cows: the Bill of Rights.

Gun ownership has not been enshrined as the sacred cow....Homosexuals have.

Gun ownership is a sacred cow and don't forget it. The reason you aren't on a reservation like some 19th century Navajo or Comanche Indian right now is because of the 2A. I wish the chattel would research history and take in what is going on in the world as of now. The powers that be would like to deep six all of us so they can rape and pillage the land for their own gains. That is the finality of communism and despotism. The problem then is they have eliminated all enemies so they no longer have lap dogs to kick around and torture so they must cull the herd and keep the largest and strongest around to do their bidding.

Sounds a bit like slavery, right? That is the intent.

Actually it is not illegal to own a rocket propelled grenade launcher. It is expensive to own one, but not illegal. Now, owning the ammunition for a rocket propelled grenade launcher is illegal.

yes there is also a law against meth and cocaine. people still use those. and the federal government has know way of knowing if you use drugs unless you were caught using. so you can be high on meth as you buy a gun and if it if your first time doing meth, you will get that gun in about 20 minutes.
if you do some research, you will see that if the more violent crimes happen when people are not educated and they dont know how to properly handle guns. another major factor in violent crimes is people are mentally handicap and they were never treated for it.
so before you all start bitching about more load weapons means more murders and crimes, you should do some real research.

I agree we should teach all children gun safty and how to use properly. When they get into gangs atleast they can shot the correct person.

What reputable establishment would not realize someone was high on drugs? These silly analogies are getting worse by the day. look up other stats as well before you make yourself look like a retard.The guns for Felons has been/ was around for a while, and while you are trying to down someone, you just make yourself look inept. have a good day, but even the felons with gun related violence and even homocide have gotten their gun rights back.

شركة الشامل مكافحة حشرات بالرياض

شركة رش مبيدات بالدمام

شركة تنظيف خزانات بالدمام

y r u so Angry?

Do u evn lift

funniest thing ive read period!

I really think this particular article , “Reply to comment | DataMasher”, extremely engaging plus the
post ended up being a good read. Thanks for the post-Philip

Stop by my webpage - [url=]adsondisplay.

Hands down, the best comment ever made... You are correct about who pays attention to inflated gun statistics. People who use this argument do so to further their biased beliefs. They don't live a normal life, around normal people who know it's wrong to kill people(helloo obviously) or get out behind the computer long enough to see just how many crazy people are out there... It's a right, our right as Americans to protect ourselves. Career criminals know the laws, not the stats... Most criminals that break into/burglarize houses, know that if they get caught with a gun that it's either a first or second degree felony instead of misdemeanor trespassing, except in New York where it is automatic felony. Gee, I wonder why that is? I am a single female, I live by myself and not in a good neighborhood... I have no desire to shoot a person. I do however desire to protect myself against an attacker or violent criminal. Would love to see how the bleeding hearts would respond if any other right was being violated or at risk of being taken away! This guy has the freedom of the press, the right to free speech, freedom of religion, but cries about that second one. I bought my own gun, don't steal or rob from people, am not a murder, don't wish to off myself, or harm anyone for any other reason but to save my own life... Yet, I'm the big bad scary person? Really? If someone has the urge to murder another person they will find a way to do it. Funny those liberals, guns and murder are only okay when Eric Holder arms drug cartels. Glad, I live in Texas where this debate is meaningless. Don't like it, don't own a gun... Heaven help you if a drug crazed maniac breaks into your house and threatens your family. But that'll never happen to you right? Remember the average 911 response is ten minutes... Good luck with that!

You hit the nail on the head! I can't wait until my three sons are old enough to go through gun safety/training so that they can know how to safely defend themselves when a criminal who doesn't give two sh*ts about laws tries to hurt them. The left is so delusional when it comes to guns (and A LOT of other things too!) it's like they don't consider that if a criminal wants a gun they will get it no matter what the law says and would be less likely to attack a place they know other people there will most likely be carrying as well. I live in Cali and hear all this crap all the time and it makes me so angry. I am really considering moving to Texas, this is crap.

you are terrifying.... yes more guns... guns guns guns... everybody get a gun!

I am sure that is what they want they want a shooting war so they can make us all slaves

You are delusional, clearly your emotions aren't letting you have a rational understanding of the issue.
Set your emotions aside for a moment to read the numbers and listen to the arguments.
Why are you so scared, have you been shot before? Violent crime rates in the U.S. are the LOWEST they've been since the 60's!!! Whether this has anything to do with the increase of gun ownership among citizens or not doesn't matter.
I don't own a gun, I'm not a gun nut.
I just understand history and that every time guns are band, genocide and mass murder happen.
I'm thinking about existing laws that mass shooter ALREADY DON'T FOLLOW.
How is the government going to enforce these laws?
Are they going to break into peoples homes and point guns in their face to take their fire arms.
I'm sorry I don't think people should hand their weapons over to people armed to the teeth.
Governments in the 20th century murdered far more people then any individual could even imagine.
Less guns for the citizens really means more guns for the criminals protected by the laws.

The crime rate has dropped in correlation to the number of armed households. Do your research.

It does not matter how many households have guns or if the increase correlates to the crime rate. He is trying to make people see the sense in individuals owning guns. They, the government, cannot guarantee that we the average citizen will be safe from violent crimes. Making the laws tougher is not going to put fear into those who decided to break the law, for whatever reason, laws are very strict in my state concerning illegally possessing firearms and committing crimes with them (FL 10, 20, life). It has not stopped violence in Miami at all...if anything those who have invested in owning prisons have been doing very well for themselves. I don't care about the numbers nor should anyone. I care about what makes the most sense....the numbers will follow.

The truth is nothing can stop violence from occurring. Should there be ways and punishments to combat this sad truth, yes, but does those that govern the people actually show compassion when enforcing these The innocent will also fall victim to these laws so our appointed leaders should take their time when deciding what laws should be put in place because it will affect us all, not just those that decided to act outside of the law.

Well I see no one learned anything from what happens in our revolutionary war. Wake up read and get educated that pulling weapons from law abiding citizens is the worst thing. Yes I be leave every one should
Own and carry a weapon that legally can now. Does anyone care that when a shooting occurs. If the police end it an average of 18 people get killed before the gunman can be subdued. If a CCW or procure citizen interviens only am average of 2 die. Everyone should carry a gun

The average shooter kills somewhere between 0 and 1 person so your statistic is obviously either false or misleading.

You're under the delusion that the most publicized cases are the most common when in fact, they're publicized *because* they're uncommon. The kind of mass shootings you're citing are statistically irrelevant and basing nationwide policy on them is like a hospital treating all patients as if they all had ebola.

Addressing the day-to-day crimes where one person shoots *at* one other person and may or may not hit the intended target is a much more rational course.

I consider myself to be on the side of the left. You may be surprised, but most people on the left are not trying to take your guns away. We want to have sensible gun legislation. Is it delusional to ask a ban on automatic weapons that can fire hundreds of rounds of ammunition? Is it delusional to ask that there be background checks on everyone who wants to own a gun? Is it delusional to ask that we stop the loopholes that make it so easy for people to get guns? You want to hunt - so be it. You want a gun in your house for safey -so be it. BUT WE NEED TO BAN THESE AUTOMATIC GUNS OF MASS DESTRUCTION. Your argument will be that banning automatic weapons will not stop shootings. I agree. Yet, if a maniac wants to go on a shooting spree and can only get their hands on a handgun, than a lot less innocent people will be killed. And that is not delusional!

Not true. Most mass shootings are conducted with handguns, not assault rifles. And the University of Texas belltower shooter killed 14 with bolt-action hunting rifles.

there is a flaw in your aessment. in some states you are allowed to own a full automatic weapon, handgun or assult rifle, but the cost is in my state $5000 dollars. by the way hunting rifles use the same ammo as aks. and most ar purchases are of semi auto rifles. the guns are not the problem. it is the jakasses that use them for senseless acts. it only takes 3 seconds to reload a gun, so automatic guns really do not make a difference on how many can be killed it is all on how well the shooter can aim. and by the way the oregon mall shooting ended not beause the guy ran out of ammo or police showing up but by a concealed carrier aiming the gun aat the assailant. the guy did not fire due to the people behind the shooter, but it scared the shooter into knowing his terror was at an end. the shooter ended up shooting himself. i agree some people do not deserve to have guns. for every 1 killing in america there is at least 200 self defense uses for firearms. if it was not a gun it would be a knife, bomb( easier to make than you think), bow and arrow or the oldest assult weapon a rock.

the highest crime rates are in two states with the stritest gun laws, d.c. and chicago. gun laws work as well as prohibition did for alcohol. in kennesaw ga the rime rate nose-dived after the ity made guns manitory, and yes if it is against you religion or belief you are exempt

Firstly, Chicago and DC are NOT States. Secondly, Chicago does not have the highest crime rate. Houston, Dallas, Miami, Orlando, and Philadelphia to name a few, ALL have higher crime rates than Chicago. Richmond Virginia's violent crime rate, is double that of Chicago and Richmond's property crime rate is 50% higher than Chicago's.

Post new comment

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options