[anonym29]

Sure, but 5.5 per 100,000 is still extremely rare, and even that number obscures a highly bimodal distribution that largely tracks race. In Massachusetts, the rate drops to 0.7 per 100,000, while in Mississippi and Louisiana it's over 8 per 100,000.

From ages 1-19, that means the cumulative risk varies by about an order of magnitude even just at the state level before diving into specific cities or communities - there's cumulatively about a 1/750 chance of a kid dying from firearm violence in Louisiana or Mississippi from 1-19, or about a 1/7500 chance of a kid dying from firearm violence in Massachusetts.

The national figure might look scary (even though it's still a tiny, remote risk that most people never have to seriously worry about), but that's only because it blends a high-incidence minority with a low-incidence majority.

Looking at the national figure alone as representative of the whole country is like looking at the number of people who are imprisoned across Europe for being LGBT and being shocked at how much higher that figure is than in the USA - it's really all just Russia, a minority of Europe as a whole, responsible for a majority of the mortifying criminalization. It's disingenuous to insinuate that Europe as a whole is anti-LGBT because of Russian criminalization, just as it's disingenuous to insinuate that America as a whole is a dangerous place filled with gun violence, largely because of one demographic subset that is itself concentrated across a few small areas.

[rjrjrjrj]

> 5.5 per 100,000 is still extremely rare

About 20% of all deaths in that age range. Dying from any cause at that age is extremely rare.

> largely because of one demographic subset that is itself concentrated across a few small areas

eg the geographically adjacent and culturally/ethnically indistinguishable states of Mississippi, New Mexico, Alaska, Alabama, and Wyoming? https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/state-stats/deaths/firearms.html

[anonym29]

Keep in mind, the data you just linked is all firearm deaths, not just firearm homicides, and that a majority of all firearm deaths in the USA (over 60%) are suicides, not homicides or accidents.

What you're seeing in Alaska and Wyoming and New Mexico is overwhelmingly suicides correlated with social isolation (Alaska, Wyoming), high rates of poverty (New Mexico), and SAD (Alaska), not an epidemic of violent shootings.

The correlation coefficient between gun ownership and firearm homicides at a state level is 0.22.

The correlation coefficient between gun ownership and firearm suicide at a state level 0.84.

Note that Illinois (Chicago) and Maryland (Baltimore) both have above-average firearm homicide with below average firearm ownership, while Idaho and Maine have above average firearm ownership and significantly below-average firearm homicide.

The drivers of homicide are overwhelmingly urban violence, poverty, and illicit markets, not the firearms themselves.

[rjrjrjrj]

> Keep in mind, the data you just linked is all firearm deaths, not just firearm homicides

Yes. My earlier comment was "often from a gun"