Replies

Here are the tables:

TABLE 1 —Crude Incidence Rate Ratios of Regional Homicide in the United States by Region-Level Proxies of Firearm Prevalence, 1988–1997

Victim Age	Homicide (95% CI)	Gun-Related Homicide (95% CI)	Non–gun-Related Homicide (95% CI)

0–4 years
FS/S	1.11 (0.98, 1.24)*	1.22 (1.10, 1.35)	1.09 (0.97, 1.24)
GSS ANY GUN	1.08 (0.98, 1.20)	1.24 (1.13, 1.36)	1.06 (0.96, 1.18)
GSS HANDGUN	1.07 (0.97, 1.18)	1.20 (1.07, 1.34)***	1.06 (0.95, 1.17)
5–14 years
FS/S	1.15 (1.02, 1.29)**	1.21 (1.03, 1.42)**	1.05 (0.98, 1.12)
GSS ANY GUN	1.11 (0.98, 1.26)	1.15 (0.94, 1.39)	1.05 (0.97, 1.11)
GSS HANDGUN	1.14 (1.02, 1.26)**	1.20 (1.02, 1.41)**	1.04 (0.98, 1.11)
15–24 years
FS/S	1.10 (0.90, 1.34)	1.11 (0.89, 1.39)	1.07 (0.96, 1.20)
GSS ANY GUN	1.04 (0.87, 1.24)	1.04 (0.85, 1.27)	1.02 (0.93, 1.12)
GSS HANDGUN	1.10 (0.92, 1.31)	1.11 (0.91, 1.35)	1.07 (0.96, 1.20)
25–34 years
FS/S	1.24 (1.00, 1.53)*	1.26 (0.99, 1.61)*	1.17 (1.01, 1.37)*
GSS ANY GUN	1.16 (0.96, 1.40)	1.18 (0.95, 1.46)	1.11 (0.98, 1.26)*
GSS HANDGUN	1.21 (1.01, 1.47)**	1.24 (1.00, 1.54)**	1.15 (1.01, 1.32)**
35–44 years
FS/S	1.35 (1.09, 1.66)***	1.44 (1.13, 1.84)***	1.19 (1.02, 1.39)
GSS ANY GUN	1.26 (1.05, 1.53)**	1.34 (1.07, 1.67)**	1.14 (0.99, 1.30)*
GSS HANDGUN	1.31 (1.09, 1.58)***	1.39 (1.13, 1.73)***	1.17 (1.02, 1.34)**
45–54 years
FS/S	1.32 (1.10, 1.59)***	1.43 (1.18, 1.73)	1.16 (0.97, 1.38)*
GSS ANY GUN	1.25 (1.05, 1.49)**	1.35 (1.12, 1.63)***	1.10 (0.95, 1.28)
GSS HANDGUN	1.30 (1.10, 1.54)***	1.40 (1.17, 1.67)	1.14 (0.98, 1.33)*
55–64 years
FS/S	1.35 (1.19, 1.53)	1.48 (1.29, 1.70)	1.21 (1.07, 1.36)***
GSS ANY GUN	1.27 (1.11, 1.45)***	1.39 (1.16, 1.63)	1.14 (1.02, 1.27)**
GSS HANDGUN	1.32 (1.17, 1.50)	1.44 (1.26, 1.65)	1.19 (1.06, 1.33)***
65 years
FS/S	1.38 (1.20, 1.59)	1.63 (1.44, 1.85)	1.26 (1.09, 1.45)***
GSS ANY GUN	1.31 (1.13, 1.51)	1.51 (1.28, 1.80)	1.21 (1.05, 1.38)**
GSS HANDGUN	1.35 (1.18, 1.56)	1.60 (1.36, 1.88)	1.23 (1.07, 1.40)***
All ages
FS/S	1.23 (1.02, 1.49)**	1.27 (1.02, 1.58)**	1.16 (1.01, 1.33)**
GSS ANY GUN	1.16 (0.98, 1.38)*	1.19 (0.97, 1.45)*	1.11 (0.98, 1.25)*
GSS HANDGUN	1.21 (1.02, 1.44)**	1.25 (1.03, 1.52)**	1.14 (1.01, 1.29)**


Note. CI = confidence interval. Regional household firearm ownership prevalence was estimated using 3 measures: (1) a proxy representing the percentage of suicides that are firearm suicides (FS/S), (2) household gun ownership rates as reported in the General Social Survey (GSS ANY GUN), and (3) household handgun ownership rates as reported in the General Social Survey (GSS HANDGUN). All measures are standardized at the regional level so that their mean equals 0 and their standard deviation equals 1. Incidence rate ratios correspond to the standardized proxies. Over the 10-year study period, on average, our proxies vary across regions by 3.1, 3.4, and 3.4 standard deviations for FS/S, GSS ANY GUN, and GSS HANDGUN, respectively. Longitudinal variation is an order of magnitude smaller: over time, FS/S, GSS ANY GUN, and GSS HANDGUN measures fall within 0.35, 0.33, and 0.34 standard deviations of one another. Overall, when each region assumes a distinct prevalence estimate for each year, proxies span 3.6, 4.5, and 4.7 standard deviations for FS/S, GSS ANY GUN, and GSS HANDGUN, respectively.
P < 0.1; P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; P < 0.001. All P values are two-tailed.

TABLE 2 —Crude and Multivariate Adjusted Incidence Rate Ratios of State-Level Homicide by State-Level Measures of Firearm Prevalence, 1988–1997

Victim Age	Homicide (95% CI)	Gun-Related Homicide (95% CI)	Non–gun-Related Homicide (95% CI)

0–4 years
FS/S (bivariate)	1.09 (1.02, 1.17)**	1.26 (1.13, 1.41)	1.07 (1.00, 1.15)*
FS/S (multivariate)	1.07 (0.98, 1.17)	1.35 (1.18, 1.53)	1.05 (0.96, 1.15)
5–14 years
FS/S (bivariate)	1.13 (1.03, 1.24)***	1.20 (1.07, 1.36)***	1.04 (0.97, 1.11)
FS/S (multivariate)	1.15 (1.03, 1.28)**	1.23 (1.07, 1.41)***	1.05 (0.97, 1.13)
15–24 years
FS/S (bivariate)	1.10 (0.94, 1.27)	1.12 (0.93, 1.34)	1.03 (0.94, 1.11)
FS/S (multivariate)	1.23 (1.12, 1.34)	1.32 (1.18, 1.47)	1.02 (0.95, 1.10)
25–34 years
FS/S (bivariate)	1.23 (1.08, 1.41)**	1.28 (1.09, 1.52)**	1.13 (1.03, 1.25)**
FS/S (multivariate)	1.27 (1.10, 1.49)**	1.39 (1.23, 1.57)	1.10 (1.02, 1.19)**
35–44 years
FS/S (bivariate)	1.32 (1.17, 1.49)	1.45 (1.24, 1.71)	1.15 (1.04, 1.26)***
FS/S (multivariate)	1.35 (1.23, 1.48)	1.52 (1.35, 1.77)	1.15 (1.06, 1.24)
45–54 years
FS/S (bivariate)	1.32 (1.16, 1.49)	1.45 (1.25, 1.68)	1.14 (1.02, 1.27)**
FS/S (multivariate)	1.33 (1.19, 1.48)	1.48 (1.30, 1.68)	1.12 (1.02, 1.24)**
55–64 years
FS/S (bivariate)	1.34 (1.21, 1.49)	1.51 (1.32, 1.73)	1.17 (1.06, 1.29)***
FS/S (multivariate)	1.36 (1.24, 1.50)	1.54 (1.37, 1.72)	1.18 (1.07, 1.38)***
65 years
FS/S (bivariate)	1.36 (1.22, 1.52)	1.64 (1.46, 1.84)	1.24 (1.11, 1.38)
FS/S (multivariate)	1.39 (1.27, 1.53)	1.71 (1.53, 1.91)	1.24 (1.13, 1.37)
All ages
FS/S (bivariate)	1.22 (1.08, 1.37)***	1.28 (1.10, 1.50)***	1.11 (1.03, 1.21)**
FS/S (multivariate)	1.27 (1.16, 1.39)	1.41 (1.27, 1.57)	1.10 (1.02, 1.19)**


Note. CI = confidence interval. Adjusted analyses control for rates of violent index crimes other than homicide (aggravated assault, forcible rape, and robbery), percentage unemployed of the adult population, percentage of the population living in poverty, percentage of the population living in metropolitan areas, and per capita alcohol consumption. Household firearm ownership prevalence was estimated for all 50 states using the percentage of suicides that are firearm suicides (FS/S) as a proxy. FS/S is standardized so that its mean equals 0 and its standard deviation equals 1. Incidence rate ratios correspond to standardized values for FS/S. Over the 10-year study period, on average, FS/S spans 4.1 standard deviations across the 50 states (FS/S ranges from 0.29 to 0.80); within-state variation is far smaller, ranging, on average, across 0.28 standard deviation (FS/S ranges from 0.58 to 0.61). Overall, when each state assumes a distinct value for each year, FS/S spans 5.1 standard deviations (FS/S ranges from 0.21 to 0.85).
P < 0.1; P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; P < 0.001. All P values are two-tailed.

TABLE 3 —Homicide Deaths in States With the Highest vs the Lowest Average Gun Ownership Prevalence Index, 1988–1997

Victim Age	High Gun States	Low Gun States	Mortality Rate Ratio (High Gun:Low Gun)

Total population, all ages	158 million	160 million
0–4 years
Gun-related homicide	67	17	4.0
Non–gun-related homicide	437	293	1.5
Total	504	310	1.6
5–14 years
Gun-related homicide	302	80	3.8
Non–gun-related homicide	149	104	1.5
Total	451	184	2.5
15–24 years
Gun-related homicide	5157	1539	3.4
Non–gun-related homicide	963	697	1.4
Total	6120	2236	2.8
25–34 years
Gun-related homicide	4397	1078	4.1
Non–gun-related homicide	1445	920	1.6
Total	5842	1998	3.0
35–44 years
Gun-related homicide	2825	495	5.8
Non–gun-related homicide	1168	684	1.7
Total	3993	1179	3.4
45–54 years
Gun-related homicide	1316	264	5.0
Non–gun-related homicide	544	331	1.7
Total	1860	595	3.2
55–64 years
Gun-related homicide	609	106	5.8
Non–gun-related homicide	402	216	1.9
Total	1011	322	3.2
65 years
Gun-related homicide	602	80	7.6
Non–gun-related homicide	745	331	2.3
Total	1347	411	3.3
All ages
Gun-related homicide	15 283	3668	4.2
Non–gun-related homicide	5865	3598	1.6
Total	21 148	7266	2.9


Note. For ease of comparison, similar populations were obtained by comparing the 4 states with the lowest gun ownership rates ("low gun states") and the 6 states with the highest gun ownership rates ("high gun states"). The 6 states with the highest average gun ownership rates for 1988 to 1997 were Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Wyoming, West Virginia, and Arkansas. The 4 states with the lowest average gun ownership rates for 1988 to 1997 were Hawaii, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey. Overall mortality rate ratios and ratios for each age stratum use strata-specific populations as denominators.

Some stats that I did not see in this 'study':

1] The number of legal gun owners in the 'high gun states' vs the 'low gun states

2] The total number of guns in each area, and

3] The number of justifiable or self defense homicides vs the number of criminal homicides.

It seems to me that that info would be relevant. For instance, if the 'high' states own 25 or 50 times the number of guns as the 'low' states, then 4 times as many gun deaths doesn't make gun ownership as significant a factor. The number of justifiable homicides would also seem to make the case that gun ownership is a positive factor rather than negative.

NON-STANDARD REPORTING METHODS COVER UP FLAWS IN HARVARD STUDY

Look at the explanatory note that accompanies Table 3:

[From the Table explanatory notes]
"Note. For ease of comparison, similar populations were obtained by comparing the 4 states with the lowest gun ownership rates ("low gun states") and the 6 states with the highest gun ownership rates ("high gun states"). The 6 states with the highest average gun ownership rates for 1988 to 1997 were Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Wyoming, West Virginia, and Arkansas. The 4 states with the lowest average gun ownership rates for 1988 to 1997 were Hawaii, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey."

What is misleading about that approach? It uses a non-standard and unnecessary reporting method so that they can conflate the data from somewhat disparate states that have very different homicide rates. The standard method (used in sociology, criminology, medicine and other fields) is the use of rates per 100,000 residents, in order to compensate for different population sizes in different jurisdictions. Using the "rate per 100,000" standard method would allow you to examine each state's homicide rate separately, with no need to aggregate. If you did this, you would find that "high gun ownership" Wyoming and West Virginia have pretty low homicide rates. That might cause people to ask why the authors' paradigm doesn't seem to work with all the states--and they don't want people to ask that sort of question. For example, it is somewhat embarassing for Harvard to explain why the U.S. homicide rate (5.6 per 100,000) is 255% of the homicide rate (2.2 per 100,000) in heavily armed West Virginia. Harvard finds it much more convenient if they can just hide the West Virginia stats within a larger grouping where it doesn't need to be explained. Heck, it won't even be noticed by the average incompetent media hack or politician or voter.

AN ADDITIONAL DECEPTIVE APPROACH:
Note that Table 3 uses homicides aggregated over a 10 year span, which has the effect of impressing the casual observers with totals 10x higher than the typical year. If deception were not their intent, they could have simply used a 10 year average, to approximate the yearly losses. This aggregation of many years to yield a single number is a common tactic used by the anti-self-defense fanatics in order to inflate the numbers so that they will look far more terrifying than the real numbers. A similar tactic was used in the Violence Policy Center's "study" ("A License To Kill") of disqualified Texas CCW/Self-Defense-Permit holders.

The aggregation and conflation tactics of the "researchers" also fails to note that the 4 lowest gun ownership states are Northeastern states with one laid-back island-state thrown in, while the 6 highest gun ownership states are all Southeastern states with the exception of Wyoming. Innumerable researchers have found that the Southeastern culture is one of macho and honor, where people are culturally disposed to violence of all types. It is the region that gave our language the phrase, "Some people just need killing". I say this not to harass or insult Southeasterners, but simply to make an observation of a fact that is relevant to this study. I also observed, in a different thread, that the homicide rate in America is generally highest in the southern tier of states, with less in the middle, and the lowest homicide rates in the northern tier. That low homicide rate even occurs in northern states that are heavily armed--like Wyoming, Washington, North Dakota, Minnesota, South Dakota, Maine, Vermont, etc. You will note that this model provides a better fit of the data than the Harvard "study".

Also, as mentioned on the other thread, the entire study is almost useless because the use of proxies to determine the rate of firearms ownership is highly deficient. See my message 166 on the other thread for details. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/800686/posts?q=1&&page=151

Note. For ease of comparison, similar populations were obtained by comparing the 4 states with the lowest gun ownership rates ("low gun states") and the 6 states with the highest gun ownership rates ("high gun states").

This needs to be re-written:

Note. ~~For ease of comparison,~~ So that we may bury a fact that decimates our hypothesis, similar populations were obtained by comparing the 4 states with the lowest gun ownership rates ("low gun states") and the 6 states with the highest gun ownership rates ("high gun states").