Firearms violence in Tennessee?

[LagerHead]

Another interesting thing to note would be the difference between gun owners in general and those who have a carry permit. Or even people in general and those who have a carry permit. HCP holders nationwide tend to be far more law abiding than just about any other segment of society. I took the liberty of forwarding to you an email I authored during the "carry in parks" debates here in Nashville and other cities and counties statewide. I hope there is something in there you didn't know that will help you in your research and writing.

[Guest brianhaas]

How many of these "murders" were committed by people with records?? How many were drug and gang related??? How many turned out to be justifiable?? How many were accidents? What part of the state did they occur, and if most were in a certain area......why???

This information isn't available in the FBI data. Sorry, I really wish it were, I'm kind of a stats and data junkie.

The idea of doing a story about gun murder rates by itself is agenda driven. You are only linking guns to murder and ignoring the bigger picture. Unless you dig deeper and investigate the societal ills that are at the cause, the article is just old fashioned toilet paper. The gun in every case was just a tool, and what we really need to talk about is the why/what made these folks kill.

No, it's not agenda driven. It's data driven. Also, the story isn't simply murder rates. It includes aggravated assault and robberies. In essence, it's every gun crime tracked by the FBI.

My job is to find interesting crime stories. I'd argue it's interesting (and surprising) that Tennessee of all states ranks so high, regardless of the cause.

It's unreasonable to ask us to not report a story simply because we can't prove the exact cause of gun violence -- something thousands of criminologists over the last 100 years haven't been able to do.

[TMF]

This information isn't available in the FBI data. Sorry, I really wish it were, I'm kind of a stats and data junkie.

No, it's not agenda driven. It's data driven. Also, the story isn't simply murder rates. It includes aggravated assault and robberies. In essence, it's every gun crime tracked by the FBI.

My job is to find interesting crime stories. I'd argue it's interesting (and surprising) that Tennessee of all states ranks so high, regardless of the cause.

It's unreasonable to ask us to not report a story simply because we can't prove the exact cause of gun violence -- something thousands of criminologists over the last 100 years haven't been able to do.

I agree, this is newsworthy. I'm interested simply because I find the statistics surprising. The part that concerns me has nothing to do with the story, but more for how people interpret the information, but whaddaya gonna do? I don't think the OP has any kind of agenda against guns/gun owners/HCP holders because if he did he wouldn't have come here and asked for the opinions of very pro-2A types.

[Guest bkelm18]

It's important to note that Mr. Haas has been very fair and honest with us before. I doubt this story has any agenda other than to report the statistics.

[mikegideon]

I agree, this is newsworthy. I'm interested simply because I find the statistics surprising. The part that concerns me has nothing to do with the story, but more for how people interpret the information, but whaddaya gonna do? I don't think the OP has any kind of agenda against guns/gun owners/HCP holders because if he did he wouldn't have come here and asked for the opinions of very pro-2A types.

This isn't Brian's first rodeo with TGO either. He has been fair so far.

Now, I wish one or two of our criminal lawyers would pipe up and give us a theory on the high aggravated assault number.

[Oh Shoot]

The most interesting statistic to me would be how many of these gun crimes were committed by those with a felony record, such that :

(1) they of course possessed the weapon illegally

but more importantly

(2) they shouldn't have been out of jail in the first place save for our liberal sentencing and time served policies

- OS

[gregintenn]

I look forward to your story. I did not have any idea that Tennessee ranked so high in gun crime rates. Most states with very strict gun control laws are high crime states. Tennessee doesn't really fit that mold. I'm interested in learning your findings, assuming they are objective, and so far you have proven to be objective.

[QuietDan]

You're right, it isn't. That's news. For the record though, I began crunching the numbers last Thursday, so I'm not simply stumbling upon this today. I'm just getting around to writing it.

Unfortunately, no. The FBI statistics (called UCR) are an arcane system that I wish would simply die out in favor of a better system which already exists, called NIBRS. NIBRS captures a lot more data and offers a much better picture of crime than UCR.

I don't speak with the editorial folks unless they ask me a question about a story I've already written, and then it's just to make sure they don't get something wrong that I've already reported. There's a solid wall between news and editorial judgment here and at every paper I've been at.

I don't get paid enough to offer my opinions.

That data does exist, but only in the "murder" data. It's separated out as "justifiable." I'm not certain how possible it is to pull that out of this full data set and I'm not sure it would make much of a statistical difference, since robberies and agg assaults are far higher. I know of no stats within UCR that include non-fatal shootings.

It doesn't appear so. I don't believe it's possible to get this gun crime rate any lower than the state level with the current data. Your point on Memphis is well taken and I may mention that in my story if I can get enough comment along those lines to justify it.

All I have is my own work to stand by. I can't and won't speak to former reporters or past stories written here or elsewhere. I'm not always going to write stories you guys like (this may be one of them), but I'm going to do my best to get a wide variety of perspectives. I've already spoken with John Harris at TFA. He's always been very accessible and helpful and I appreciate it.

No comment on this one

Thank you very much for your honest and straightforward answers. Regarding the last question: You answer it by not answering it. And I appreciate it.

Again, good luck with your story. I sure hope you get to work the Memphis angle in. I'm pretty sure my town, and Nashville as a whole, doesn't want to be Memphis, widely perceived as out of control dangerous. I wish the stats broke it down to back up or refute the perception.

[Guest nysos]

The key thing that you can deduce from those stats (which we already knew), is that a criminal will use whatever is available to commit a crime. In Tennessee, it happens that many of the crimes committed are with a gun. The criminal will use whatever they think the most effective tool is to get the job done. Can't find a gun, maybe a really big knife, if not a knife, a baseball bat, if not a baseball bat, a large stick from their oak tree in the back yard...... What I would like to know is the number of crimes committed with a gun, in which the criminal fired shots. I have a feeling a lot of those crimes are due to someone with a gun acting with too much bravado, waving it around without real intent of using it - and as a result the charge gets tacked on to whatever else they were doing (domestic violence, public intoxication, whatever).

Would it be possible with your data to compare states conceal carry permit holders to that of overall crime rate, to see how it compares to these other states in order to argue whether a larger number of lawful conceal carry holders indeed has an effect on overall crime rate in their area?

[Guest brianhaas]

Would it be possible with your data to compare states conceal carry permit holders to that of overall crime rate, to see how it compares to these other states in order to argue whether a larger number of lawful conceal carry holders indeed has an effect on overall crime rate in their area?

With this data alone? No, unfortunately. The FBI data is pretty poor in terms of its depth and we're lucky we get as much as we do now.

This would likely take some significant time and research that goes beyond my current meager knowledge of crime stats. I'm pretty good, but that's getting into an academic level of research that would require quite a bit of time that I'm unlikely to get.

Still, it's a great idea and hopefully, if this research hasn't already been done, someone's working on it.

[Guest vantoo]

Well.........the only thing I question to begin with is any stat that any federal government agency gives:screwy:......I just find anything they say unbelievable:rolleyes:....maybe I am just a pessimist...or:tinfoil:

[Guest brianhaas]

Well.........the only thing I question to begin with is any stat that any federal government agency gives:screwy:......I just find anything they say unbelievable:rolleyes:....maybe I am just a pessimist...or:tinfoil:

Understandable. If it's any consolation, these stats do originate with the local police departments and sheriff's offices. So while the FBI compiles and releases it, it is actually local data.

-Brian

[QuietDan]

Understandable. If it's any consolation, these stats do originate with the local police departments and sheriff's offices. So while the FBI compiles and releases it, it is actually local data.

-Brian

It's been my experience in other states that when they aggregate crime data at the state level, the political class does NOT want to break it out by city. Affects tourism and business interests, you know. When the political class doesn't want something, it seems to me one more reason to do it.

[Guest vantoo]

Understandable. If it's any consolation, these stats do originate with the local police departments and sheriff's offices. So while the FBI compiles and releases it, it is actually local data.

-Brian

well.....again, have you seen the way some of the local police and sheriff depts. run their offices....not trying to be a smart arse, but just being realistic I think. But could be wrong, and it would not be the first time the feds doctored documents or stats. Man, I didn't know I was so anti-government...

[JeffsSig]

So one out of 500 (about) people, 1 will commit a violent gun crime based on the stats for total population divided by the number of total V/crimes?

[Guest brianhaas]

It's been my experience in other states that when they aggregate crime data at the state level, the political class does NOT want to break it out by city. Affects tourism and business interests, you know. When the political class doesn't want something, it seems to me one more reason to do it.

Well, the FBI does have crime at the city level, I just can't find a way to break out just the firearms crime. So that's a bit disappointing.

well.....again, have you seen the way some of the local police and sheriff depts. run their offices....not trying to be a smart arse, but just being realistic I think. But could be wrong, and it would not be the first time the feds doctored documents or stats. Man, I didn't know I was so anti-government...

I'm with you on being skeptical. Unfortunately, it's all we've got for now.

[Guest brianhaas]

So one out of 500 (about) people, 1 will commit a violent gun crime based on the stats for total population divided by the number of total V/crimes?

Yes, that is one way to look at it. Another way would be that out of 500 people, at least one will be a victim of a violent gun crime.

It's not perfect, because UCR is really weird when it comes to multiple offender/victim crimes, but a decent approximate.

[DaveTN]

Call this guy; he’ll get you straightened out.

Any ideas on why this could be the case? Is there something about Tennessee that would make it more prone to gun violence?

Memphis, Nashville

Edited October 3, 2011 by DaveTN

[Guest vantoo]

Well, the FBI does have crime at the city level, I just can't find a way to break out just the firearms crime. So that's a bit disappointing.

I'm with you on being skeptical. Unfortunately, it's all we've got for now.

you're skeptical of the stats but you are going with the story anyway????? I don't get it......

[Mark A]

Brian, thanks for the fairness that you seem to show here. Is there any info in the data that shows how much of the crime was committed by citizens of other states? It seems like I remember reading a few years back that Tennessee carries a large part of the regions interstate traffic. I'm curious if that could be a factor.

mark

[Glock30]

Is there any way to break out repeat offenders from first-time offenders in the data? THAT would be a telling statistic. Probably belongs on this statistician's wishlist

Thanks for the fair reporting, Brian, and best wishes with this particular write up.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

OK, here are the numbers I've gotten from the FBI. Appears you can't break out firearms crimes on any level lower than a statewide level, from what I'm finding.

You'll notice Illinois' numbers are way out of whack for some reason (their population reported to the FBI is clearly in error), so that can't be considered. You'll also see that Florida's numbers exclude murders, so that has to be discounted as well.

So at best, Tennessee would be ranked fourth, if Illinois and Florida proved higher. At worst, it's second, behind D.C.

For the record, I added murders, robberies, agg assaults, divided that by the population and then multiplied by 100,000 to achieve the rate.

[TABLE=width: 714]

[TR]

[TD]State[/TD]

[TD]Total murder w/firearms[/TD]

[TD]Robbery w/ Firearms[/TD]

[TD]Agg Assault w/Firearms[/TD]

[TD]Population[/TD]

[TD]Total[/TD]

[TD]Rate/100,000[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Illinois³[/TD]

[TD]364[/TD]

[TD=align: right]240[/TD]

[TD=align: right]805[/TD]

[TD=align: right]156,180[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1,409[/TD]

[TD=align: right]902.1641695[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]District of Columbia[/TD]

[TD]99[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1,563[/TD]

[TD=align: right]606[/TD]

[TD=align: right]601,723[/TD]

[TD=align: right]2,268[/TD]

[TD=align: right]376.9176182[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Tennessee

[/TD]

[TD]219[/TD]

[TD=align: right]4,682[/TD]

[TD=align: right]8,231[/TD]

[TD=align: right]6,136,858[/TD]

[TD=align: right]13,132[/TD]

[TD=align: right]213.9857236[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Delaware[/TD]

[TD]38[/TD]

[TD=align: right]839[/TD]

[TD=align: right]824[/TD]

[TD=align: right]897,934[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1,701[/TD]

[TD=align: right]189.4348582[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]South Carolina[/TD]

[TD]207[/TD]

[TD=align: right]2,656[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5,274[/TD]

[TD=align: right]4,393,517[/TD]

[TD=align: right]8,137[/TD]

[TD=align: right]185.2047005[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Georgia[/TD]

[TD]376[/TD]

[TD=align: right]6,192[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5,160[/TD]

[TD=align: right]7,659,917[/TD]

[TD=align: right]11,728[/TD]

[TD=align: right]153.1087086[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

One question might be-- There are obvious differences in for instance murder rate by state, but wonder if the firearms-related murders happen to be somewhat-related to how "well armed" a state might be?

For instance I recently watched a few post-apocalyptic TV series. There was plenty of gratuitous violence in all of them, but the USA series involved lots of guns including "military grade" AR's, AK's and semi-auto pistols. The brit equivalent series had about the same amount of violence but surprisingly few guns. A rare semi-auto pistol, more commonly double-barrel shotguns, bolt rifles, and a few old revolvers. Most Brit post-apocalyptic TV violence involved bludgeons, ersatz pikes and knives. Perhaps that is quasi-realistic, because in a post-apocalyptic britain they wouldn't have as many guns available and survivors would have to snuff their neighbors via more labor-intensive methods.

Some might depend on the percentage of "amateur" murders and assaults, versus "pro" murders and assaults? Possibly the "pro" criminals of any state would be about equally well armed? However, the amateurs taking out family members or neighbors in fits of rage, would likely use whatever tools are available? A gun-control state might have a larger percentage of baseball bat and knife murders, wheras a non-gun-control stat might have a larger percentage of gun murders?

Maybe it is possible to get at a percentage of firearms crime? For example, this link--

FBI — Table 5

It tabulates by state total murder rate etc. Total murder would include such as guns, knives, bludgeons, poison, voodoo curses and cruel taunts. Divide gun murders by total murders to get a percentage of gun murders. Subtract gun murders from total murders to get non-gun murders for per-100,000 calculations--

Dunno if it would tell us much really. Just thinking out loud (the below is not guaranteed free of math errors)--

Edit-- I just noticed that that FBI Table 5 agrees with your population figures for DC, but it gives different population figures for TN and GA. It shows total TN pop at 6,346,105 and total GA pop at 9,687,653. So I edited the numbers below using the table 5 population figures.

Edit #2-- FBI lists TN and DC 100% reported but GA is listed as not fully reported for either Urban, small town or rural, so the GA population figure would probably be lower than the total state population to represent only the percentage as reported. I give up!

Total Murders

DC - 132, 21.9 per 100,000

TN - 357, 5.6 per 100,000

GA - 558, 5.8 per 100,000

Non Gun Murders

DC - 33, 5.5 per 100,000: 25% non-gun, 75% gun

TN - 138, 2.2 per 100,000: 39% non-gun, 61% gun

GA - 182, 1.9 per 100,000: 33% non-gun, 67% gun

Total Robberies

DC - 4325, 718.8 per 100,000

TN - 8366, 131.8 per 100,000

GA - 12373, 127.7 per 100,000

Non Gun Robberies

DC - 2762, 459 per 100,000: 63% non-gun, 37% gun

TN - 3684, 58 per 100,000: 44% non-gun, 56% gun

GA - 6181, 63.8 per 100,000: 50% non-gun, 50% gun

Total Ag Assaults

DC - 3360, 558.4 per 100,000

TN - 28060, 442.2 per 100,000

GA - 24048, 248.2 per 100,000

Non Gun Ag Assaults

DC - 2754, 457.7 per 100,000: 82% non-gun, 18% gun

TN - 19829, 312 per 100,000: 71% non-gun, 29% gun

GA - 18888, 195 per 100,000: 79% non-gun, 21% gun

Looks like DC murderers like guns best regardless of gun control laws. Or maybe a relatively disarmed population makes gun attempted murder more likely successful? GA murderers seem to prefer guns more than TN murderers?

TN robbers seem to prefer guns most, and DC robbers prefer guns least. Or maybe street muggers are simply more likely to have a gun in TN? Is there a stat determining the percentage of "successful" robberies? Wonder if some localities have more robbers which get caught and arrested on-scene, versus the ones who got away with it or were arrested later?

TN Ag Assaulters seem to prefer guns best as well (of the three localities examined). I wonder if Ag Assault is legally defined tight enough between localities to allow valid comparison of statistics? Maybe it is easier to get charged with Ag Assault in some localities than others?

If one can get charged or convicted for Ag Assault merely by drunkenly waving a gun around in public, then it stands to reason that this would happen more frequently in states where there are lots of guns per capita (assuming that there may be approximately equal numbers of drunken fools per capita in all vicinities)?

Wonder about the ratio of each state's urban vs suburban vs rural populations? Dunno if we could hazard a guess about which populations would be more likely violent. The stats for AK are pretty high per 100,000 regardless of the low population density.

I would have expected GA and TN to be more similar in stats unless there are state-wide reporting variances. Having lived in both states, there seems to be about the same incidence of crazy rednecks in both states, and both states seem about equally well-armed.

Dunno about Nashville or Memphis deep-city denziens, but the Atlanta violent inner-city dwellers seem an entirely different class of cold impersonal violent than for instance Chattanooga inner-city folk. Chatt has some pretty high-crime areas, but they might take it a little more "personal". Slightly less impersonal sociopathy. Just my impression which could be wrong. Chatt urban hipsters are hillbillies compared to the Atlanta breed. OTOH there is no shortage of crazy country boys who don't mind messin you up.

Edited October 4, 2011 by Lester Weevils

[QuietDan]

Brian Haas' story:

Tennessee gun crime rate is among highest | The Tennessean | tennessean.com

Should this also be posted as the start of a new thread? Just asking. . . .

[ted]

we should ck Memphis tn. that's where most of it happens if it happens at all. ark. and ms. people coming across state lines into tn. up to no good because of poverty might be a possibility ???

Edited October 4, 2011 by ted

[Guest bkelm18]

I don't believe gun ownership and gun crimes have a correlation. DC had a higher rate, yet they have some of the strictest gun laws on the books. Like Mr. Harris said in the article, I think certain areas in TN are skewing the overall statistics.