Per capita cost of gun violence, by state

[kallend 2,175]

Top 25 states for annual per capita cost of gun violence. Direct costs (police, medical, courts, prisons etc) + indirects (loss of productivity, etc.)

WY $1,397
LA $1,333
AK $1,287
AL $1,034
OK $996
MS $995
TN $990
MO $980
SC $938
MD $932
AR $922
WV $890
MT $877
FL $867
PA $864
NV $858
NM $850
CO $844
AZ $831
GA $819
MI $800
DE $793
KY $783
KS $765
NC $755

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[BartsDaddy 7]

Source?

Handguns are only used to fight your way to a good rifle

[Hooknswoop 19]

Looks very cheap to me.

Derek V

[kallend 2,175]

Hooknswoop

Looks very cheap to me.

Derek V

On balance I'd prefer to spend taxpayer money on education.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Hooknswoop

Looks very cheap to me.

Derek V

I'd have to agree. It would be interesting to me to see the demographics of cost kf gun violence. That is, is the per capita spending on gun violence correlated with per capita spending on other things?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[RMK 3]

lawrocket

***Looks very cheap to me.

Derek V

I'd have to agree. It would be interesting to me to see the demographics of cost kf gun violence. That is, is the per capita spending on gun violence correlated with per capita spending on other things?

It's in this thread:

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=4721762;page=1;mh=-1;;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC

The state numbers stack up with the above overall number of around $230 billion. That is a lot of money it's nearly what the US spends on Medicaid - in this case for something that is needless (excepting this need to have "shootin' irons" like the founding fathers).

I hope both of the above two posters were joking by saying that the numbers seem cheap; otherwise it shows a strong lack of maths skills and understanding of large numbers.

It seems every hillbilly can recite the US debt number, but ask them what the US GDP is and they go blank - it's 16.7 trillion; I'll save you Googling it. Anything that equates to a 1/4 trillion USD is a lot of money and not "cheap"

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[champu 1]

While kallend doesn't share his methodology, the methodology in the article you posted in your thread does not lend itself to dividing up the number per capita and treating it as a tax burden.

[Glitch 0]

Nevermind the implied supposition that if you can ban/confiscate firearms, ALL that money would be saved and there would be no violence.

What a crock of shit.

Randomly f'n thingies up since before I was born...

[champu 1]

I don't really see that as an implied supposition. The problem is more insidious as they even have you referring to it as "all that money" as though it actually existed and was "spent" in some way.

[RMK 3]

champu

While kallend doesn't share his methodology, the methodology in the article you posted in your thread does not lend itself to dividing up the number per capita and treating it as a tax burden.

If you take a rough average or median of those per capita state numbers and extrapolate them to the US population; yes it is pretty close.

This isn't forensic auditing to bicker over small amounts. The gun deaths in US is approximately 120x that of the UK adjusted for population. This is general the same for all other G7 nations.

The rest of the planet just thinks the US can do a little better than say Angola.

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[kallend 2,175]

BartsDaddy

Source?

In the long run, taxpayers.

Maybe ammo should be taxed like tobacco, to reimburse for the costs to society.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[champu 1]

RMK

***While kallend doesn't share his methodology, the methodology in the article you posted in your thread does not lend itself to dividing up the number per capita and treating it as a tax burden.

If you take a rough average or median of those per capita state numbers and extrapolate them to the US population; yes it is pretty close.

This isn't forensic auditing to bicker over small amounts. The gun deaths in US is approximately 120x that of the UK adjusted for population. This is general the same for all other G7 nations.

The rest of the planet just thinks the US can do a little better than say Angola.

The exercise of converting all firearms deaths into as big a dollar amount as possible is dishonest. If pro-life people came in here and said, "well, if we imagine every abortion in the US resulted in a wrongful death lawsuit and figured an average jury award of $6.2M then that means abortion costs Americans $19,000 per capita each year." We would all laugh together at them and tell them to get bent.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

In the long run, taxpayers.

Maybe ammo should be taxed like tobacco, to reimburse for the costs to society

That is an option. It is a slippery slope though. Maybe we should tax aircraft owners to pay for airports, air traffic control, the FAA, and for the costs associated with aircraft accidents.

Why should tax payers cover those expenses?

Derek V

[kawisixer01 0]

Kinda makes you wonder what the positive impacts of the firearms industry are to the country's economy. Oh wait, that was just compiled and released. http://www.nssf.org/impact/. Well heck, that makes me wonder what kinda money all these gun toting folks are infusing into the economy persuing their sport. Oh that info is readily available as well. http://www.nssf.org/PDF/research/HuntingInAmerica_EconomicForceForConservation.pdf The hunting data is from 2011, so one would gander to guess that the figures have increased significantly, as the sales of everything associated with firearms and hunting have skyrocketed over the last couple of years, especially among females.

[RMK 3]

champu

******While kallend doesn't share his methodology, the methodology in the article you posted in your thread does not lend itself to dividing up the number per capita and treating it as a tax burden.

If you take a rough average or median of those per capita state numbers and extrapolate them to the US population; yes it is pretty close.

This isn't forensic auditing to bicker over small amounts. The gun deaths in US is approximately 120x that of the UK adjusted for population. This is general the same for all other G7 nations.

The rest of the planet just thinks the US can do a little better than say Angola.

The exercise of converting all firearms deaths into as big a dollar amount as possible is dishonest. If pro-life people came in here and said, "well, if we imagine every abortion in the US resulted in a wrongful death lawsuit and figured an average jury award of $6.2M then that means abortion costs Americans $19,000 per capita each year." We would all laugh together at them and tell them to get bent.

Do this then; exclude every item that you remotely question the efficacy of and recalculate yourself - I won't argue the number with you. The result will still be outrageous in comparison to the rest of the developed world.

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[NewGuy2005 53]

I wish I could opt out of my share of that. I could buy a nice gun with that kind of money.

[kallend 2,175]

Hooknswoop

Quote

In the long run, taxpayers.

Maybe ammo should be taxed like tobacco, to reimburse for the costs to society

That is an option. It is a slippery slope though. Maybe we should tax aircraft owners to pay for airports, air traffic control, the FAA, and for the costs associated with aircraft accidents.



Derek V

We do.

Next...

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[BartsDaddy 7]

kallend

***Source?

In the long run, taxpayers.

Maybe ammo should be taxed like tobacco, to reimburse for the costs to society.

So another post tthat you throw out stats and expect people to believe you, but you won't say where they came from. Same old shit different day.

Handguns are only used to fight your way to a good rifle

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

We do.

Next...

100LL taxes does not come close to covering the costs of general aviation. Try again.

Derek V

[champu 1]

RMK

Do this then; exclude every item that you remotely question the efficacy of and recalculate yourself - I won't argue the number with you. The result will still be outrageous in comparison to the rest of the developed world.

If you don't care what the number is it only serves to reinforce how idiotic the exercise is, and how focusing energy on ridiculous calculations like this is a big part of the problem. When you created essentially this same thread I posted links to a number of suggestions I've made and to where I've shared my thoughts about the kinds of things we should and shouldn't be doing and that thread immediately died when I did that. Now the topic gets rebooted and people here are overjoyed to jump around in the bounce house of derp all over again.

[kallend 2,175]

Hooknswoop

Quote

We do.

Next...

100LL taxes does not come close to covering the costs of general aviation. Try again.

Derek V

1. Funny that the trust fund has been used to offset the deficit, then.

2. GA includes more than piston aircraft.

3. What are the costs to which you refer? ATC is for the benefit of the airlines, as are most runways. The COMPARABLE cost to gun violence would be the cost of the NTSB investigations (which are cursory for GA unless involving a celebrity) and clean up of a few wrecks each year, paid for by insurance companies. There are no court costs, police costs or prison costs.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Coreeece 2]

pfffft....

How much of that is due to illegal possession and "the war on guns?"

This is just another example of your liberal hypocrisy in that prohibition is only good for stuff you don't like...

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[Hooknswoop 19]

General aviation doesn't cover their costs 100%, the tax payers pick up the tab. Maybe this should change. A per use fee for ATC, per call to 1-800-WX-BRIEF, per flight plan filed, increase fuel taxes to cover all maintnence, improvements, etc of airports, fire stations on airports, etc.

On second thought, maybe we should just ban private ownership of aircraft. Why does anyone NEED their own airplane?

Derek V

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

kallend

In the long run, taxpayers.

Maybe ammo should be taxed like tobacco, to reimburse for the costs to society.

It already is.

11% excise tax on all ammunition.

Guns are also taxed, 10% for pistols, 11% for long guns.

That's over and above the normal sales tax, which is also levied.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[kallend 2,175]

wolfriverjoe

***

In the long run, taxpayers.

Maybe ammo should be taxed like tobacco, to reimburse for the costs to society.

It already is.

11% excise tax on all ammunition.

Guns are also taxed, 10% for pistols, 11% for long guns.

That's over and above the normal sales tax, which is also levied.

Ooooh, punitive.

Phillip Morris currently lists total government revenue, including federal, state, local, and sales taxes, as 56.6% of the estimated retail price of a pack of cigarettes

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.