14 ms·

Is this true? Almost no one in my social circles knows a victim of gun violence, and I live in one of the most violent cities in the country. Even if you count

Is this true? Almost no one in my social circles knows a victim of gun violence, and I live in one of the most violent cities in the country. Even if you count suicides (and you really shouldn’t), I would be surprised if this were true. I suspect most people in the country don’t know a victim or offender of gun violence, while they do know several law-abiding gun owners leading them to believe that inner city issues—not guns—are the real driver of gun violence. This is how I perceive the debate; I’m not advocating for either side.

javagram 7y ago
You don’t know anyone who’s ever been robbed at gunpoint or something like that? I think it might depend on who you define as a victim, but if you include suicides and robberies that didn’t result in a homicide this claim doesn’t seem unreasonable to me. I guess one thing is that it may be generational, as violent crime was far higher 20-50 years ago. Since the mid 1990s violent crime including gun crime has dropped dramatically so Gen Z and younger millennials would be less likely to have experienced it.
- baddox 7y ago
  > You don’t know anyone who’s ever been robbed at gunpoint Uhhh, no? Is that a question you would expect people to answer Yes to?
  - tasty_freeze 7y ago
    > You don’t know anyone who’s ever been robbed at gunpoint If you live in the US, then yes, I think it wouldn't be too uncommon. In fact if you listen to 2A advocates, crime is rampant and they love telling stories about how having a gun saved their bacon. Two different kids in my high school that I personally knew, in the suburbs west of Chicago, killed themselves with guns (separate incidents), early 1980s. I'm sure there have since been other suicides, but I'm out of touch with my HS classmates. Sunnyvale, 1986: I was in a 7-11 waiting to turn onto a street, but I had to cross lanes quickly to get to into turn position. Traffic started moving but I was unable to cross. The guy in the car behind me got irate that he was stuck behind me, pulled his car next to mine, and waved a gun in my direction. I pulled into traffic even though it lead me in a direction I didn't want to go to. The guy followed me, pulled up in parallel, rolled down his window and was shouting at me, spitting mad, to pull over ... I guess he wanted to fight. Fat chance. Although the trigger wasn't pulled, it sure felt like an assault. Mid 1990s -- a good friend was robbed at gunpoint at an ATM in downtown Palo Alto at about 7pm. About 2011 -- my sleepy neighborhood in Austin got the news that a murder had been committed and the killer was on the loose. The house was about one block away. It was a nerve-wracking 24+ hours until they caught the guy. It turns out he and his girlfriend were visiting friends for the 4th of july weekend, and after a night of drinking, he shot her and fled. I've always lived in low crime areas, and yet I can think of the above situations. I'm sure I know others who have experienced gun violence but I simply don't know about it.
- weberc2 7y ago
  Good point. I wasn’t thinking of threats of violence or suicides. If you define the term more broadly to make the “most people know a victim...” statement true (even with the broader definition, I’m not sure it would be true), then we shouldn’t be surprised that support for 2A isn’t weaker.
darkpuma 7y ago
I'm not sure, it could be true. I'm two degrees away from gun violence although I never met the victim (friend of a friend was accidentally shot in the ankle by a cop during a broad daylight robbery of a store he was in. The robber was unarmed but apparently very bold), one degree from knife violence (nobody has ever threatened me with a gun, but I've been threatened with knives more times than I can even remember.)
steveklabnik 7y ago
You may know someone, but not know it; I for example, have been, but I doubt many on Hacker News, or even many people I’m friends with, know this about me.
- weberc2 7y ago
  I’m really sorry that happened to you, Steve.
  - steveklabnik 7y ago
    Thanks. It was a long time ago at this point.
phil248 7y ago
Why would you arbitrarily exclude suicide from gun violence? Guns are a distinct problem because they make serious injury/death incredibly easy and simple. That's just as true for murder as it is for suicide, and in a world without guns both acts would have a far lower success rate.
- whatshisface 7y ago
  Taking guns away from mentally healthy people who like them under the justification that you'll also be taking them away from suicidal people will never fly. If you don't like guns then the issue is whether you'd rather have one group of people who aren't you enjoying guns, or another group of people who aren't you being saved from themselves. If you do like guns, then you'd be guaranteed to not vote for any politician who was going to take away something you liked under the assumption that you might be a loony. It's interesting how this falls in to the typically conservative "legislate the vice away" approach to social ills. Conservatives often want to take something that is causing harm to some people, and ban everyone from having it (drugs, alcohol prohibition, free love), under the argument that the light enjoyment of the many is not worth a few people having their lives ruined through lack of self-control. However because by a pure accident of history it's the rural voting block that is conservative and likes guns, it's typically-liberal people who want to legislate the vice away, arguing that the fun that a subculture is having is not worth the suicide deaths. I think this is because people only apply the utility calculation to other people, but treat themselves like they have free will. Everyone thinks that they should be treated as if they can be responsible, but nobody wants to treat other people like they can be responsible.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- briffle 7y ago
  In my state, they keep trying to ban 'assault style weapons' even though almost all gun crime and suicides are handguns... The last time they tried to define what an assault style weapon was, my Ruger 10/22 would have counted as one...
baby 7y ago
I don't know anyone but in my first year living in the US someone got shot in my street and I could see the blood stain on the sidewalk. Chicago, uptown, near the L. I have a friend who got a gun pointed at them too in Chicago (by a fake landlord). I've also overheard people bragging that they were carrying guns in the L. I was freaking out. I will never visit any state with open carry.
- AdrianB1 7y ago
  What is so scary with open carry? We have policemen that open carry in every country, are they not scary? We are talking about humans with guns, not about Batmans and Jokers.
  - Retric 7y ago
    People with guns are significantly more likely and capable to commit crimes. Open carry in many social circles is like walking around in prison tattoos. Source: http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/jpj_firearm_ownership.pdf http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/jpj_firearm_owner... As this study points out no database of US gun ownership exists, which makes these studies harder to carry out. PS: Police are also a surprisingly violent group. Still unlikely to randomly shoot someone, but as a rational risk assessment they rate much higher than many groups like young kids.
    - AdrianB1 7y ago
      People with penis are significantly more likely and capable of committing rape. They are everywhere!!! This is how your argument reads to me. Disclaimer: I live in a country with very strict gun control laws (East European, former Communist block. This is how they implemented it.)
      - Retric 7y ago
        I am talking about why people might be uncomfortable not nessisarily about changing the law. I got plenty of negative responses as a tall and very strong young man. That bothered me even if I understood the reasons for it. People react negatively to guns and physical fitness for rational reasons. I might like shooting and being physically strong, but that’s no reason to discount reality.
the_gastropod 7y ago
Hmm.. Let's do some back of the napkin math, and see. 1. In 2013 (most recent data point I could find) in the US, 107,141 were injured or killed by a gunshot wound. [1] 2. There are currently 327 Million people living in the U.S. (0.033% of Americans are killed or injured by guns every year). 3. The median age of the U.S. population is 38.1. 38.1 * 107,141 = 4,082,072.1, or ~ 1.25% of the population. My statistic-fu is pretty weak these days, but given this, I think it's fair to say most Americans do know someone who's been shot. Just for more anecdata: I'm hardly that popular, and I know at least 4 people who have been shot (that I know of). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta...
- 0942v8653 7y ago
  You're assuming that the distribution is uniform, but I think it's likely that the majority of Americans do not know anybody who was shot, while a (still decent-sized) minority know several.
- weberc2 7y ago
  As far as I can tell, you’re including suicides and attempted suicides, and you’re assuming that gun violence is evenly distributed across the population. If you live in rural America, you probably don’t know anyone who has been the victim of gun violence. If you live in an inner city, you likely know several.

javagram 7y ago

You don’t know anyone who’s ever been robbed at gunpoint or something like that? I think it might depend on who you define as a victim, but if you include suicides and robberies that didn’t result in a homicide this claim doesn’t seem unreasonable to me. I guess one thing is that it may be generational, as violent crime was far higher 20-50 years ago. Since the mid 1990s violent crime including gun crime has dropped dramatically so Gen Z and younger millennials would be less likely to have experienced it.

baddox 7y ago
> You don’t know anyone who’s ever been robbed at gunpoint Uhhh, no? Is that a question you would expect people to answer Yes to?
- tasty_freeze 7y ago
  > You don’t know anyone who’s ever been robbed at gunpoint If you live in the US, then yes, I think it wouldn't be too uncommon. In fact if you listen to 2A advocates, crime is rampant and they love telling stories about how having a gun saved their bacon. Two different kids in my high school that I personally knew, in the suburbs west of Chicago, killed themselves with guns (separate incidents), early 1980s. I'm sure there have since been other suicides, but I'm out of touch with my HS classmates. Sunnyvale, 1986: I was in a 7-11 waiting to turn onto a street, but I had to cross lanes quickly to get to into turn position. Traffic started moving but I was unable to cross. The guy in the car behind me got irate that he was stuck behind me, pulled his car next to mine, and waved a gun in my direction. I pulled into traffic even though it lead me in a direction I didn't want to go to. The guy followed me, pulled up in parallel, rolled down his window and was shouting at me, spitting mad, to pull over ... I guess he wanted to fight. Fat chance. Although the trigger wasn't pulled, it sure felt like an assault. Mid 1990s -- a good friend was robbed at gunpoint at an ATM in downtown Palo Alto at about 7pm. About 2011 -- my sleepy neighborhood in Austin got the news that a murder had been committed and the killer was on the loose. The house was about one block away. It was a nerve-wracking 24+ hours until they caught the guy. It turns out he and his girlfriend were visiting friends for the 4th of july weekend, and after a night of drinking, he shot her and fled. I've always lived in low crime areas, and yet I can think of the above situations. I'm sure I know others who have experienced gun violence but I simply don't know about it.
weberc2 7y ago
Good point. I wasn’t thinking of threats of violence or suicides. If you define the term more broadly to make the “most people know a victim...” statement true (even with the broader definition, I’m not sure it would be true), then we shouldn’t be surprised that support for 2A isn’t weaker.

darkpuma 7y ago

I'm not sure, it could be true. I'm two degrees away from gun violence although I never met the victim (friend of a friend was accidentally shot in the ankle by a cop during a broad daylight robbery of a store he was in. The robber was unarmed but apparently very bold), one degree from knife violence (nobody has ever threatened me with a gun, but I've been threatened with knives more times than I can even remember.)

steveklabnik 7y ago

You may know someone, but not know it; I for example, have been, but I doubt many on Hacker News, or even many people I’m friends with, know this about me.

weberc2 7y ago
I’m really sorry that happened to you, Steve.
- steveklabnik 7y ago
  Thanks. It was a long time ago at this point.

phil248 7y ago

Why would you arbitrarily exclude suicide from gun violence? Guns are a distinct problem because they make serious injury/death incredibly easy and simple. That's just as true for murder as it is for suicide, and in a world without guns both acts would have a far lower success rate.

whatshisface 7y ago
Taking guns away from mentally healthy people who like them under the justification that you'll also be taking them away from suicidal people will never fly. If you don't like guns then the issue is whether you'd rather have one group of people who aren't you enjoying guns, or another group of people who aren't you being saved from themselves. If you do like guns, then you'd be guaranteed to not vote for any politician who was going to take away something you liked under the assumption that you might be a loony. It's interesting how this falls in to the typically conservative "legislate the vice away" approach to social ills. Conservatives often want to take something that is causing harm to some people, and ban everyone from having it (drugs, alcohol prohibition, free love), under the argument that the light enjoyment of the many is not worth a few people having their lives ruined through lack of self-control. However because by a pure accident of history it's the rural voting block that is conservative and likes guns, it's typically-liberal people who want to legislate the vice away, arguing that the fun that a subculture is having is not worth the suicide deaths. I think this is because people only apply the utility calculation to other people, but treat themselves like they have free will. Everyone thinks that they should be treated as if they can be responsible, but nobody wants to treat other people like they can be responsible.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
briffle 7y ago
In my state, they keep trying to ban 'assault style weapons' even though almost all gun crime and suicides are handguns... The last time they tried to define what an assault style weapon was, my Ruger 10/22 would have counted as one...

baby 7y ago

I don't know anyone but in my first year living in the US someone got shot in my street and I could see the blood stain on the sidewalk. Chicago, uptown, near the L. I have a friend who got a gun pointed at them too in Chicago (by a fake landlord). I've also overheard people bragging that they were carrying guns in the L. I was freaking out. I will never visit any state with open carry.

AdrianB1 7y ago
What is so scary with open carry? We have policemen that open carry in every country, are they not scary? We are talking about humans with guns, not about Batmans and Jokers.
- Retric 7y ago
  People with guns are significantly more likely and capable to commit crimes. Open carry in many social circles is like walking around in prison tattoos. Source: http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/jpj_firearm_ownership.pdf http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/jpj_firearm_owner... As this study points out no database of US gun ownership exists, which makes these studies harder to carry out. PS: Police are also a surprisingly violent group. Still unlikely to randomly shoot someone, but as a rational risk assessment they rate much higher than many groups like young kids.
  - AdrianB1 7y ago
    People with penis are significantly more likely and capable of committing rape. They are everywhere!!! This is how your argument reads to me. Disclaimer: I live in a country with very strict gun control laws (East European, former Communist block. This is how they implemented it.)
    - Retric 7y ago
      I am talking about why people might be uncomfortable not nessisarily about changing the law. I got plenty of negative responses as a tall and very strong young man. That bothered me even if I understood the reasons for it. People react negatively to guns and physical fitness for rational reasons. I might like shooting and being physically strong, but that’s no reason to discount reality.

the_gastropod 7y ago

Hmm.. Let's do some back of the napkin math, and see. 1. In 2013 (most recent data point I could find) in the US, 107,141 were injured or killed by a gunshot wound. [1] 2. There are currently 327 Million people living in the U.S. (0.033% of Americans are killed or injured by guns every year). 3. The median age of the U.S. population is 38.1. 38.1 * 107,141 = 4,082,072.1, or ~ 1.25% of the population. My statistic-fu is pretty weak these days, but given this, I think it's fair to say most Americans do know someone who's been shot. Just for more anecdata: I'm hardly that popular, and I know at least 4 people who have been shot (that I know of). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta...

0942v8653 7y ago
You're assuming that the distribution is uniform, but I think it's likely that the majority of Americans do not know anybody who was shot, while a (still decent-sized) minority know several.
weberc2 7y ago
As far as I can tell, you’re including suicides and attempted suicides, and you’re assuming that gun violence is evenly distributed across the population. If you live in rural America, you probably don’t know anyone who has been the victim of gun violence. If you live in an inner city, you likely know several.