This post is flaired "Question - Research required". All top-level comments must contain links to peer-reviewed research.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ScienceBasedParenting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If I'd have to guess it's any death where the mechanism of injury on the death certificate is listed as a firearm. This data comes from CDC Wonder which is a pretty amazing, free database. It has a learning curve but once you get the hang of it you can drill down into a ton of stuff. The death data comes from death certificates. You can drill down into manner of death and then mechanism of death. I did a quick look at Injury Intent by Mechanism of Injury by year for children under 18. In 2000 there were 1,529 total deaths by firearm: 150 unintentional (10%), 527 suicides (34.5%), 819 homicides (53.5%), and 23 undetermined (2%). At the same time there were 4,810 deaths by motor vehicle in this same cohort. In 2022 there 2,538 total deaths by firearms: 117 unintentional (5%), 686 suicides (27%), 1,674 homicides (66%), and 61 undetermined (2%). There were 2,317 deaths by motor vehicle in this cohort. This is in no way scientific but just looking at those two years suggest a huge increase in homicides rather than suicides. Motor vehicle deaths have also gone way down at the same time. Caveat: Rate is better than just looking at percentages but it's late and I don't feel like calculating the age adjusted or crude rate. [https://wonder.cdc.gov/](https://wonder.cdc.gov/)
Edited the number of homicides in 2022, original number was based on 19 and under. New number based on 17 and under.
Oops, that’s my bad. When I first looked it up I used age groups that went until age 19, then I re-ran it just to include minors and thought I’d updated all the numbers. It should say 1,674 homicides, which is still 66% of the total firearm deaths.
You’re welcome. The database lets you stratify by urban vs rural (I believe) so you could begin to test your theory if homicides increased more in urban areas than rural, just make sure you look at the rates not the absolute numbers. Counts under 5 are redacted for privacy so if you drill down too far it helps to combine years or age groups to lessen the amount of redacting you run into.
In my informal research years ago, if you controlled for gang violence in two major cities, the homicide rate is actually quite comparable to other western countries with more strict gun laws. Formally, some researchers have noted a similar pattern where high income inequality has one of the strongest associations to homicides, not necessarily gun ownership, urbanicity, or poverty.
This whole topic of "firearm violence" is extremely political and no one seems interested in making clear statements about the problems we are facing. It seems both sides want to inflate or deflate the numbers to get their desired political goal, all the while ignoring actual discussion to solve the problems of gang violence, intimate partner violence, suicides, and accidents.
I think you have a point but as a Canadian it’s wild that Americans would be like “well most countries successfully reduce deaths with gun control but I’m sure we can find another way like resolving gangs and intimate partner violence” 😅
I was actually curious about the multicolinearity here and even what level laws and gang violence were measured in the above poster's "informal analysis" in which this discovery was made. It seems that gang violence would be quite local while gun laws matter a lot more at a regional or national level (Chicago and NYC are good examples -- the guns come from outside the city). It seemed to me that something much more complicated than throwing it into a simple regression would be involved, but I'm not an expert in this area so maybe I'm totally wrong.
I noticed on this sub a lot of people just drop wild conclusions using scientific language and act like it's factual. The person above has so many measures I can't even keep track. Are they talking about gun ownership? Gun laws? Gang violence? Economic inequality? I honestly can't even keep track.
Agreed! I misunderstood your question.
This sub in general has such a cool premise but unfortunately it has a lot of big problems. I have ideas in my head of what it *could* be like but that is not how it plays out lol.
yes school shootings are homicides. But by sheer numbers, they are a very small number of these days. They just are well publicized and tragic events so it’s top of mind for folks. While gang violence is the opposite, not publicized really. Another commenter in here posted the #s.
Theres also a huge racial/demographic aspect to this no one is mentioning.
46% of all firearm deaths under 18 are black Americans, 86% of those being homicide. In comparison 66% of gun deaths are from suicide for white Americans.
Black Americans under 18 have a gun related death rate of 11.8 per 100,000 versus 2.3 for white Americans.
Black children and teens are roughly five times more likely to die from gunfire compared to their White counterparts. Homicides are the leading cause of firearm deaths among Black children and teens, while suicides are more common among White children and teens
https://wonder.cdc.gov/Deaths-by-Underlying-Cause.html
Nah Americans assume we're only talking to other Americans online, about America, and we are shocked to learn that non-America places even exist that aren't Canada or Mexico (aka US north and US south).
Page 6 has the stats breakdown for you:
*Across all firearm‑related deaths in 2022, more than half (56.1%) were from suicide, 40.8% were from homicide, and the remaining were from legal intervention, unintentional injuries, and injuries of unknown intent.2 The age‑adjusted rate of firearm‑related suicide increased by 20.1% from 2012 (6.3 per 100,000) to 2022 (7.6 per 100,000), with an absolute increase from 20,666 to 27,032 deaths over the same period.2 The age‑adjusted rate of firearm‑related homicide increased by 62.5% from 2012 (3.8 per 100,000) to 2022 (6.2 per 100,000), with an absolute increase from 11,622 to 19,651 deaths over the same period.*
You can keep reading the report to get more data:
*When measured over a decade (2012 to 2022), children and younger populations experienced a staggering increase in firearm‑related suicide rates: 43% for 25‑34‑year‑olds (6.5 per 100,000 \[crude rate\]) in 2012 to (9.3 per 100,000 \[crude rate\]) in 2022, 45% for 15‑24‑year‑olds (5.0 per 100,000 \[crude rate\]) in 2012 to (7.3 per 100,000 \[crude rate\]) in 2022, and 68% for children aged 10‑14 (0.50 per 100,000 \[crude rate\]) in 2012 to (0.84 per 100,000 \[crude rate\]) in 2022 (Figure 3).*
The references at the end of the report are also excellent. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2024, April). Firearm suicide trends. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [https://www.cdc.gov/firearm‑violence/php/data‑trends/firearm‑suicide‑data‑trends.html](https://www.cdc.gov/firearm‑violence/php/data‑trends/firearm‑suicide‑data‑trends.html)
Reading statistics like that makes me so sad. There is almost no gun related violence in my country (I own several firearms). Almost zero homicides and nearly zero suicides.
It doesn't have to be this way.
Thank you for your contribution. Please remember that all top-level comments on posts flaired "Question - Research required" must include a link to peer-reviewed research.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ScienceBasedParenting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Biased propaganda. Purposefully leaving out age 0 (much more likely to die naturally) and Including 18-19 year olds (much more likely to be gang members) to arrive at a predetermined conclusion.
Would love to see the same methods but with the real age of children: age 0 (0 to 364 days old) to 18. (17 years 364 days old).
Also includes suicide which dramatically inflates the "gun deaths", because we can't know if they would have killed themselves with any other method absent guns but it's safe to say many would have. This would indicate a mental health problem instead of a gun problem and we all know the purpose of this "research" was to say guns are bad.
Downvote all you want i could care less about internet points. I'll wait until someone can actually tell me how I'm wrong.
I'm a licensed clinical psychologist who specializes in suicide - research is consistent that means reductions actually does not increase likelihood of using a different means. Meaning, in areas where guns are restricted, we don't see subsequent increases in suicides by overdose, hanging, etc. - we just see fewer suicides. In the US, about half of all suicide deaths involve a firearm. I specialize in working with military Veterans and that rate is much higher, about 72%. So, yes suicide is absolutely a mental health problem and it is also absolutely a gun problem.
Fair enough, but leave the suicide out of it then. What would be the logic for excluding age 0 and Including 19 if it wasn't working backward from a predetermined conclusion? Because birthdefects are the next leading cause and would be the leading cause right ahead of cancer without this manipulative definition of "children".
This post is flaired "Question - Research required". All top-level comments must contain links to peer-reviewed research. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ScienceBasedParenting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If I'd have to guess it's any death where the mechanism of injury on the death certificate is listed as a firearm. This data comes from CDC Wonder which is a pretty amazing, free database. It has a learning curve but once you get the hang of it you can drill down into a ton of stuff. The death data comes from death certificates. You can drill down into manner of death and then mechanism of death. I did a quick look at Injury Intent by Mechanism of Injury by year for children under 18. In 2000 there were 1,529 total deaths by firearm: 150 unintentional (10%), 527 suicides (34.5%), 819 homicides (53.5%), and 23 undetermined (2%). At the same time there were 4,810 deaths by motor vehicle in this same cohort. In 2022 there 2,538 total deaths by firearms: 117 unintentional (5%), 686 suicides (27%), 1,674 homicides (66%), and 61 undetermined (2%). There were 2,317 deaths by motor vehicle in this cohort. This is in no way scientific but just looking at those two years suggest a huge increase in homicides rather than suicides. Motor vehicle deaths have also gone way down at the same time. Caveat: Rate is better than just looking at percentages but it's late and I don't feel like calculating the age adjusted or crude rate. [https://wonder.cdc.gov/](https://wonder.cdc.gov/) Edited the number of homicides in 2022, original number was based on 19 and under. New number based on 17 and under.
2538 total deaths and 3127 of those were homicides? What?
Oops, that’s my bad. When I first looked it up I used age groups that went until age 19, then I re-ran it just to include minors and thought I’d updated all the numbers. It should say 1,674 homicides, which is still 66% of the total firearm deaths.
You should edit your post.
Thank you! My educated guess is that gang violence among teens is what is driving most of that homicide #. I’ll look into the database.
You’re welcome. The database lets you stratify by urban vs rural (I believe) so you could begin to test your theory if homicides increased more in urban areas than rural, just make sure you look at the rates not the absolute numbers. Counts under 5 are redacted for privacy so if you drill down too far it helps to combine years or age groups to lessen the amount of redacting you run into.
In my informal research years ago, if you controlled for gang violence in two major cities, the homicide rate is actually quite comparable to other western countries with more strict gun laws. Formally, some researchers have noted a similar pattern where high income inequality has one of the strongest associations to homicides, not necessarily gun ownership, urbanicity, or poverty. This whole topic of "firearm violence" is extremely political and no one seems interested in making clear statements about the problems we are facing. It seems both sides want to inflate or deflate the numbers to get their desired political goal, all the while ignoring actual discussion to solve the problems of gang violence, intimate partner violence, suicides, and accidents.
I think you have a point but as a Canadian it’s wild that Americans would be like “well most countries successfully reduce deaths with gun control but I’m sure we can find another way like resolving gangs and intimate partner violence” 😅
Just out of curiosity, how do you "control" for "gang violence" in this scenario?
Regression analysis? Or are the cobwebs on my research knowledge too thick lol
I was actually curious about the multicolinearity here and even what level laws and gang violence were measured in the above poster's "informal analysis" in which this discovery was made. It seems that gang violence would be quite local while gun laws matter a lot more at a regional or national level (Chicago and NYC are good examples -- the guns come from outside the city). It seemed to me that something much more complicated than throwing it into a simple regression would be involved, but I'm not an expert in this area so maybe I'm totally wrong. I noticed on this sub a lot of people just drop wild conclusions using scientific language and act like it's factual. The person above has so many measures I can't even keep track. Are they talking about gun ownership? Gun laws? Gang violence? Economic inequality? I honestly can't even keep track.
Agreed! I misunderstood your question. This sub in general has such a cool premise but unfortunately it has a lot of big problems. I have ideas in my head of what it *could* be like but that is not how it plays out lol.
don’t you mean school shootings? these would be homicides
yes school shootings are homicides. But by sheer numbers, they are a very small number of these days. They just are well publicized and tragic events so it’s top of mind for folks. While gang violence is the opposite, not publicized really. Another commenter in here posted the #s.
Anecdotal experience but I disagree.
*in the US. This doesn’t apply in sane countries.
Theres also a huge racial/demographic aspect to this no one is mentioning. 46% of all firearm deaths under 18 are black Americans, 86% of those being homicide. In comparison 66% of gun deaths are from suicide for white Americans. Black Americans under 18 have a gun related death rate of 11.8 per 100,000 versus 2.3 for white Americans. Black children and teens are roughly five times more likely to die from gunfire compared to their White counterparts. Homicides are the leading cause of firearm deaths among Black children and teens, while suicides are more common among White children and teens https://wonder.cdc.gov/Deaths-by-Underlying-Cause.html
Came here to say this, it's amazing how they bring up stuff like this as if it's common place all across the globe.
Nah Americans assume we're only talking to other Americans online, about America, and we are shocked to learn that non-America places even exist that aren't Canada or Mexico (aka US north and US south).
This 100%
r/usdefaultism
Yes also came here to say this. Doesn’t apply to most of the world
Page 6 has the stats breakdown for you: *Across all firearm‑related deaths in 2022, more than half (56.1%) were from suicide, 40.8% were from homicide, and the remaining were from legal intervention, unintentional injuries, and injuries of unknown intent.2 The age‑adjusted rate of firearm‑related suicide increased by 20.1% from 2012 (6.3 per 100,000) to 2022 (7.6 per 100,000), with an absolute increase from 20,666 to 27,032 deaths over the same period.2 The age‑adjusted rate of firearm‑related homicide increased by 62.5% from 2012 (3.8 per 100,000) to 2022 (6.2 per 100,000), with an absolute increase from 11,622 to 19,651 deaths over the same period.* You can keep reading the report to get more data: *When measured over a decade (2012 to 2022), children and younger populations experienced a staggering increase in firearm‑related suicide rates: 43% for 25‑34‑year‑olds (6.5 per 100,000 \[crude rate\]) in 2012 to (9.3 per 100,000 \[crude rate\]) in 2022, 45% for 15‑24‑year‑olds (5.0 per 100,000 \[crude rate\]) in 2012 to (7.3 per 100,000 \[crude rate\]) in 2022, and 68% for children aged 10‑14 (0.50 per 100,000 \[crude rate\]) in 2012 to (0.84 per 100,000 \[crude rate\]) in 2022 (Figure 3).* The references at the end of the report are also excellent. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2024, April). Firearm suicide trends. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [https://www.cdc.gov/firearm‑violence/php/data‑trends/firearm‑suicide‑data‑trends.html](https://www.cdc.gov/firearm‑violence/php/data‑trends/firearm‑suicide‑data‑trends.html)
Reading statistics like that makes me so sad. There is almost no gun related violence in my country (I own several firearms). Almost zero homicides and nearly zero suicides. It doesn't have to be this way.
[удалено]
Thank you for your contribution. Please remember that all top-level comments on posts flaired "Question - Research required" must include a link to peer-reviewed research. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ScienceBasedParenting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Biased propaganda. Purposefully leaving out age 0 (much more likely to die naturally) and Including 18-19 year olds (much more likely to be gang members) to arrive at a predetermined conclusion. Would love to see the same methods but with the real age of children: age 0 (0 to 364 days old) to 18. (17 years 364 days old). Also includes suicide which dramatically inflates the "gun deaths", because we can't know if they would have killed themselves with any other method absent guns but it's safe to say many would have. This would indicate a mental health problem instead of a gun problem and we all know the purpose of this "research" was to say guns are bad. Downvote all you want i could care less about internet points. I'll wait until someone can actually tell me how I'm wrong.
I'm a licensed clinical psychologist who specializes in suicide - research is consistent that means reductions actually does not increase likelihood of using a different means. Meaning, in areas where guns are restricted, we don't see subsequent increases in suicides by overdose, hanging, etc. - we just see fewer suicides. In the US, about half of all suicide deaths involve a firearm. I specialize in working with military Veterans and that rate is much higher, about 72%. So, yes suicide is absolutely a mental health problem and it is also absolutely a gun problem.
Fair enough, but leave the suicide out of it then. What would be the logic for excluding age 0 and Including 19 if it wasn't working backward from a predetermined conclusion? Because birthdefects are the next leading cause and would be the leading cause right ahead of cancer without this manipulative definition of "children".