4 ms·
California's population in 2013 was 38.4 million. According to the map, 2 Californians per million were affected by firearm violence that led to death, so that
by SteveLAnderson 10y ago
California's population in 2013 was 38.4 million. According to the map, 2 Californians per million were affected by firearm violence that led to death, so that'd be about 77 people killed by firearms.
According to "Homicide in California 2013" (https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/cjsc/publications/homicide/hm13/hm13.pdf https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/cjsc/publicati...) Table 21, in 2013, there were 1,699 homicide crimes where the type of weapon used was a firearm.
That's just crime data, it doesn't include suicides.
Am I reading this wrong or is the data way off or is it indicating some other kind of firearm violence?
- microcolonel 10y ago1,225 was the number of firearm homicides recorded in 2013, according to that publication. 1,699 was the number of homicides where a weapon was "known". But yeah, still totally off, AFAICT. I also wonder where she got the supposed 2016 data, given that 2016 hasn't happened yet. Other interesting tidbits from that PDF: almost as many people were killed with ropes, as with rifles. About half as many were killed with knives and blunt objects as were with handguns. Hardly epidemic, if you ask me. Considering how much more convenient it is to kill somebody with a firearm, you wonder why it's not really that much more popular.
- SteveLAnderson 10y agoAnswering my own question - the graph is about mass shootings. The data is from http://www.shootingtracker.com http://www.shootingtracker.com.