from a Connecticut paper. 100 most dangerous U.S. cities (low crime, living in)

[mr2448]

America's Most Dangerous Cities: 4 Are In CT | East Haven, CT Patch


no Rhode Island city listed or did I miss it?

[massnative71]

A whole bunch in MA. Boy do I miss that place.

[Hollytree]

RI ranks low in gun ownership and is clearly NOT a dangerous state to live in.
Most dangerous crime here is residents of the projects and gangs shooting each other. This is usually confined to certain sections of the city and easily avoided.

'Pro-Gun' States Lead the Nation in Per Capita Firearm Death Rates -- re> WASHINGTON, April 24 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by Hollytree

RI ranks low in gun ownership and is clearly NOT a dangerous state to live in.
Most dangerous crime here is residents of the projects and gangs shooting each other. This is usually confined to certain sections of the city and easily avoided.

'Pro-Gun' States Lead the Nation in Per Capita Firearm Death Rates -- re> WASHINGTON, April 24 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --

What a bunch of BS. Of the 6 states with highest gun ownership (over 50%), only one (Arkansas) has a higher than average murder rate. Right now I'm enjoying living in a state said to have some f the laxest gun laws in the country, and ironically it has the lowest violent crime rate of all 50 states.

Want examples of disarming the citizens. Visit Chicago, Baltimore, and Washington DC. Report back to me...

[boulevardofdef]

Because the gun debate is fraught with misinformation on both sides and I am interested in truth above all, allow me to rebut both the pro- and anti-gun arguments in this thread:

1. I've seen the list of "firearm death rates" by state before, and it's misleading -- if I were feeling accusatory, I'd suggest probably intentionally so. People who hear "firearm deaths" are going to think it's synonymous with "murders by firearm," but in fact the statistic includes suicides by gun. Now, suicides are definitely something to be prevented, don't get me wrong, but they're not what people are talking about when they bemoan the effects of guns; they're talking about people's risk of being killed by a gun. When you consider that firearm deaths include suicides, of course they're going to be lower in places with stricter gun laws and therefore lower rates of legal gun ownership.

2. The competing statistic about states with high gun-ownership rates having low crime rates is equally fallacious, though this one to me seems less intentionally misleading than just plain misguided. Correlation does not equal causation. Rural states have more guns; rural states have less crime. It's not the higher gun-ownership rates that lead to the lower crime, it's that low population density correlates separately with high gun ownership and low crime.

All that said, I'm proud to live in a state that's a great example of low gun ownership being associated with a low rate of violent crime -- though I freely acknowledge that that doesn't prove anything on a national level. (Delaware, the only state with a lower rate of gun ownership, has a very high violent-crime rate.)

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by boulevardofdef

2. The competing statistic about states with high gun-ownership rates having low crime rates is equally fallacious, though this one to me seems less intentionally misleading than just plain misguided. Correlation does not equal causation. Rural states have more guns; rural states have less crime. It's not the higher gun-ownership rates that lead to the lower crime, it's that low population density correlates separately with high gun ownership and low crime.

Exactly, gun-ownership rates have little effect on crime rates. That's all I was trying to disprove.

[CaseyB]

This belongs in the General US forum.