[rayiner]

In Atlanta, about 35-40% of households own a firearm: https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/6/3/189. In Idaho it’s 60% https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/gun-ownership-rates-by-stat....

Despite having more guns, Idaho has a homicide rate of 2.2 per 100,000, which is only a little higher than Belgium, and about the same as Canada, and a little lower than India.

By contrast, Puerto Rico had fewer guns than India, but a homicide rate of 19 per 100,000, more than six times higher than India. Disarmed Puerto Rico has a homicide rate eight times higher than heavily armed Idaho.

Clinging to the belief that it’s guns rather than social factors is just willful denial.

[dctoedt]

Population density per square mile:

- Idaho: 22.3 (44th out of 50 states) [0]

- Puerto Rico: 952 [1]

- India: 1,244 [2]

[0] https://www.gethealthy.dhw.idaho.gov/overview-of-idaho

[1] https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/puerto-rico-p...

[2] https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/india-populat...

[rayiner]

Homicide rate doesn’t actually have much to do with population density. Boise has a population density of 2,800 per square mile and similar homicide rate to the state as a whole. Urban Boise is actually slightly denser than urban San Juan, Puerto Rico, while being heavily armed and far safer. Boise is also similarly dense to Atlanta while being much safer.

[dctoedt]

> Clinging to the belief that it’s guns rather than social factors is just willful denial.

That's a false dichotomy — sure, social factors play an important role, but it's a multi-variate phenomenon, and you seem to want to deny that gun-ownership rates have anything to do with it.

[rayiner]

You haven’t presented any evidence that guns are a major factor after adjusting for social factors. The US also has the highest rates of fatherless households in the world, while India has one of the lowest. Maybe that’s the reason for the difference in homicide rates.

[dctoedt]

“The” driving factor? Are we in agreement that it’s a factor?