[make3]

the fact that she can get a gun from any other state makes it a question. gun control laws work when you can't just super easily go to another state to get a gun, the proof being in the much lower number if gun crimes in every other industrialized country where the gun laws are tight in the whole country. That's pretty much every single other industrialized country.

[ctdonath]

Interesting that those low-restriction states have such low violent crime. In fact, those US counties with zero murders (about half) have the most lax gun control laws.

Were the premise of your comment true, those other states should be the ones with outlandish murder rates. We have guns, we don't abuse guns; what's up with the high-gun-control areas being so prone to such violence that when guns are available they're so readily abused?

[danans]

> what's up with the high-gun-control areas being so prone to such violence that when guns are available they're so readily abused?

Your reasoning doesn't add up because the factor you are using (lax gun laws vs strict between states) is far too coarse to make any reasonable inference from.

California has tight gun restrictions. But high income cities, counties, and neighborhoods in California (i.e. Palo Alto, Marin, Pacific Heights) with intact community structures have very low gun violence rates by US standards.

Low income areas with a significant illicit drug trade, high rates of intra-community trauma, historical abuse by police, and a frayed community structure, have high rates of gun violence.

The availability of guns, purchased legally or illegally, has a more pronounced impact on the latter sort of area than the former because the latter type is more likely to produce interpersonal conflicts which escalate to the use of guns, because other means of dealing with the conflicts (police, the court system, community structures) are often less effective or available for them.

[ctdonath]

There's plenty of low-income areas in flyover country, with high gun ownership - used fairly for defense & provisions. That they can own guns at high rates responsibly points to cultural choices; don't punish them for bad behavior of strangers far away. STOP SHOOTING PEOPLE.

[dragonwriter]

> Interesting that those low-restriction states have such low violent crime.

Not all that surprising. The low restriction states also tend to be low-urban-population proportion; many types of crime increasing in urban environments is a long observed thing across pretty much all human societies, for which density, relative anonymity, and Stark and omnipresent socioeconomic contrasts have all been suggested as contributing factors.

> In fact, those US counties with zero murders (about half) have the most lax gun control laws.

Well, sure, they also mostly have populations below (often by an order of magnitude or more) the level at which the expected number of murders at the national rate would be 1.

[mars4rp]

If someone owns a gun in a lax gun control states, do they take it to work?

[ctdonath]

Up to the employer, and whether they know about it ("concealed means concealed").

I've worked places where several employees (owners included) were known always armed. No big deal. Safety was assured precisely because they were.

[ctdonath]

Fun fact: Kodak's headquarters had a rifle range in the basement.

[kec]

Buying a gun across state borders is already a federal felony. If buying out of state you must use an FFL in your home state as a middle man.

There's also no evidence she did obtain the gun from out of state, so that's a bit of a straw man to begin with.