Vox’s misleading gun death graph

In the wake of the mass shooting tragedy in Los Vegas, Vox posted an analysis showing that more guns lead to more gun deaths:

I was immediately suspicious because I’m living in Guatemala and I am constantly being reminded that Latin America has very high homicide rates, and although I see guards with massive guns all over the place, Guatemala has quite low gun ownership rates. Whereas I agree that a lot of data supports the thesis that too many guns contributes to more gun deaths, gun availability isn’t the only thing that leads to gun deaths. Other factors are often more important. Otherwise the US would have the highest homicide rate in the world because the US has by far the most guns per capita.

I can’t figure out any simple rule that explains how they picked the nations they included in the above graph. It isn’t the list of OECD nations. It is pretty close to a graph that excludes all poor nations, but if so, then it should really include Panama and Uruguay which are richer than Argentina (which is included). But that wouldn’t fit the thesis that guns cause more deaths as nicely. The graph originally came from Tewksbury Lab, but they have taken down all reference to it, so I can’t see where they got their data, but it looks like they used data from the 2011 “Estimating Civilian Owned Firearms” by the Small Arms Survey. Nationmaster seems to have taken the Small Arms Survey data and added some estimates for other countries to come up with a more comprehensive data set of gun ownership which I combined with World Bank homicide data to produce this graph:

In fact, it appears that gun availability is actually somewhat correlated with fewer gun deaths. I tried excluding all nations poorer than Spain, but it still doesn’t give much support to the thesis that more guns cause more homicides because there is little correlation again:

Basically, there are two outliers, the US and Qatar, and they are so different from all other rich nations, that they should both probably be excluded. When you do that, again there is almost zero correlation between guns and homicides. That doesn’t mean that guns don’t contribute to the high homicide rate in the US, but it just isn’t a simple matter. Lots of other factors are also important such as environmental lead, criminal justice, inequality, etc.

Below is another graph using data from Wikipedia’s entry about firearm-related deaths which looks more reliable than NationMaster because Wikipedia cites where all their data comes from, and it is more up to date. Still, it tells a similar story.

Guns don’t make that much difference because there are wide differences in the number of homicides per gun:

That is using the Nationmaster & World Bank data again. Each gun kills over 2,000 times more people in Tunisia than in Switzerland. Here is a close up of the left tail of the above graph to show the nations that have low levels of homicides per 1,000 guns like in the USA.  On average, only about 1 in 20,000 guns is used to kill people in America.  That is just a few bad apples.

UPDATE: I found the original graph on the Wayback Machine and the author’s methodology looks sound, but he says he got a lot of criticism about it so maybe he took it down to avoid controversy (UPDATE AGAIN: as he explains in comments below, he unfortunately just happened to take down his old website, so it was hard to find his original work.)

Also, the following chart from Mother Jones is a pretty convincing simple demonstration that more guns are linked to more deaths since US states are all relatively similar in income, culture, demography, criminal justice, and all the other important factors that influence homicides, so the effects of differences in gun ownership can pop out more clearly:

Gun ownership tightly correlates with gun violence.

So, reducing gun access undoubtedly saves a few lives (particularly gun suicides and gun accidents), but lots of other factors are more important for saving lives than guns.  

Posted in Health, Violence & Peace
6 comments on “Vox’s misleading gun death graph
  1. […] passionate about gun control because although it generally reduces homicides and suicides, other factors are even more important for reducing homicides. Furthermore, there are a lot of other public health issues that are more important for saving […]

    • Thanks George, I updated the text and included your link at the bottom of the original post. I agree that the research overwhelmingly shows that gun control generally saves lives, but after living in Latin America, I can’t say that the homicides that gun control can prevent are anywhere near the biggest public health problem that any country faces and although the gun fanatics are simply wrong to think that greater gun access prevents violence, both sides are actually irrational in overly focusing on their excessive fear of violence because lots of other issues are more important than guns in determining public health or even for determining levels of violence, so we should all take a deep breath and try to focus more on issues where we can more easily find common ground to improve society. Let gun fanatics cling to their irrational fears and instead of trying to get them to be more rational, lets work with them on issues that we can achieve more on that don’t trigger their irrational fears.

  2. […] Once again, Vox Media gets the importance of gun violence all wrong. Brian Resneck says, “America’s teens are [right to be] extremely stressed out about school shootings”. No, no, no. Schools are extremely safe places and mass shooters are extremely rare even in America. America has many more gun massacres than any other country (except countries that are immolated in war), so gun massacres are an odd problem for a rich country like America to have, but it is still a very minor problem that is far from the top of the long list of American public health problems. And mass shootings in schools are especially rare. It is really irrational to worry about them. Driving to school is much more dangerous than mass shooters in school. Suicide is more dangerous than murder for young people. Climate change will probably have a bigger impact on youth than mass shooters. But young people are more worried about mass shootings than about suicide or climate change: […]

  3. Josh Tewksbury says:

    Just found this great thread – thanks for digging up the original posts. To be clear, the data got pulled down because I changed jobs, and I don’t currently have a good place for these kind of posts. Kudos to the way back machine! Here is the link to the second post


  4. Thanks Josh. I updated the links to your original pages in the addendum at the bottom. I thought I had included that second link, but I messed that up, so thanks for the correction.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 48 other followers

Blog Archive