RSS

US Homicide Rate A.D. 1885-2012

12 Mar

I received a copy of the following graph by email.  I don’t know who prepared the graph nor can I verify the numbers presented.  However, the evidence “rings true” with me so I assume it’s correct. The implications are fairly obvious and significant:

1) The “wild west”–when virtually everyone had access to firearms–had a much lower homicide rate than was ever seen under any measure of “gun control”.

2) As more guns reenter society under the guise of concealed carry, the homicide rate is declining.

3) Given that the homicide rate is already declining, the government must have an ulterior motive for promoting gun control.  Their current excuses for gun control are lies.

4) Guns save far more lives than they take.

Homicide Rates2

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

48 responses to “US Homicide Rate A.D. 1885-2012

  1. Gary Russell

    March 12, 2013 at 10:50 AM

    I think I am seeing a pattern here…… : 0

     
  2. Joe Farrar

    March 12, 2013 at 10:58 AM

    Awesome Graph!!!

     
    • Adask

      March 12, 2013 at 12:27 PM

      Damn right.

       
  3. christiangood

    March 12, 2013 at 12:27 PM

    lets look at the first “statistic”—union led gun control enacted…..well, seeing how unions were a little busy with fighting for their right to EXIST in 1900, i thought that was a bit fishy, so i looked it…..turns out THERE WAS NO SUCH THING! the first gun control laws in the 20th century were enacted in 1934….so i look at the graph again, this time forget about the idiotic arrows and look at 1934….seems that one simple little fact check debunks the entire thing.

     
    • Adask

      March 12, 2013 at 12:35 PM

      No. If the upturn in homicides in A.D. 1900 had nothing to do with unions (which tend to be of the “leftist” persuasion), that error does not “debunk the entire thing”. If the graph is still reliable for the remainder of the data and correlations to gun control efforts, there is one mistake but not a complete fraud.

      Further, it may be that whoever assembled the graph may have mistakenly inferred from union efforts to affect gun control in one State circa A.D. 1900, that union efforts were responsible for a national rise in homicides.

      But, as I said when I posted the graph, I don’t know who prepared it and I can’t vouch for the accuracy of the data and correlations. It may be that before we’re done, more errors will be identified and the entire graph may be “debunked” as false. But, so far, alleging one possible error does not cause that result.

       
    • Sparky the dullard

      March 12, 2013 at 1:33 PM

      “Union” can also mean “Federal.” There once were “Union Soldiers” in “Civil War.”

       
    • Felipe

      March 12, 2013 at 2:37 PM

      Union as in the Northern States. Not union as labor unions.

       
      • Sparky the dullard

        March 12, 2013 at 3:59 PM

        The graph shows & says >”Union led gun control laws enacted.” Who enacts laws? The Union Army defeated the Confederated Army. We have States of this & States of that & we have ,I think annually, a State of the “Union” report. Maybe this State of the Union report is made more that this, I don’t watch or listen anymore because I already know the State of the Union & the State of the State.At least enough to know I don’t want to listen “reports” about either one of umm. I try to conslder the “source”

         
    • Dusty

      March 13, 2013 at 11:57 AM

      I think I will change your position in my company from systems analyst to running a machine on the production floor…. That’s some pretty stretched reasoning.

       
      • Dusty

        March 13, 2013 at 12:01 PM

        Well, this page doesn’t respect one’s choice of where your comment appears. My comment (somewhere in this comments area!) from Dusty at 11:57 a.m. was in reply to Christiangood at 12:27 p.m. who decided the entire graph was flawed.

         
      • Sparky the dullard

        March 14, 2013 at 11:43 AM

        Hey Dusty,
        What, or who in your opinion does “Union” enacted laws refer to? In other words, who comprised this “UNION” that enacted those laws? Thanks.

         
      • Sparky the dullard

        March 14, 2013 at 5:55 PM

        Dusty,
        @ >Well, this page doesn’t respect one’s choice of where your comment appears.

        Yes, & this makes it hard for a dunce like me to know at times who the comment is meant for. I wish there was a “Reply” button (<?) at the bottom right hand corner to click on after every comment. Sometimes "Reply" is there & sometimes it isn't. Al says that is the way word press works/is & he has nothing to do with it. Now, I'm not wording it exactly like he did so I don't mean to upset anyone.

         
    • SEJohnsen

      October 28, 2013 at 9:34 PM

      Christian,

      The first really strong gun control laws in the US were enacted in 1904 largely as a result of union lobbying. From 1896 to 1904, conflicts between striking workers and corporations had turned increasingly violent, with strikers killing several guards and sabotaging factories, while companies hired thugs to attack strikers. After several well-publicized deaths of strikers at the hands of corporate thugs, the unions (and the media) lobbied for strong gun control legislation, which they got in 1904. Unfortunately, as the data in this graph (well documented from Federal sources) shows, the result was NOT what the unions had hoped for!

       
    • Adam

      November 29, 2013 at 4:47 PM

      @christiangood…
      “This honored tradition went completely unchallenged until the 1900s. Then New York passed the Sullivan Act in 1911, one of the first gun control laws. This law required that firearms small enough to be concealed on a person be registered. This state law became a test measure for future gun control laws.” …@ http://www.wnd.com/2007/06/41950/

       
    • George M. Hale

      January 14, 2016 at 5:47 PM

      Please give me your source for 1934 gun control law. Thank you.

       
  4. Eric U

    March 12, 2013 at 1:01 PM

    In support of points 2, 3, 4 above:
    From the American Civil Rights Union’s website:
    http://theacru.org/acru/harvard_study_gun_control_is_counterproductive/

    Harvard Study: Gun Control Is Counterproductive

    I’ve just learned that Washington, D.C.’s petition for a rehearing of the Parker case in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit was denied today. This is good news. Readers will recall in this case that the D.C. Circuit overturned the decades-long ban on gun ownership in the nation’s capitol on Second Amendment grounds.

    However, as my colleague Peter Ferrara explained in his National Review Online article following the initial decision in March, it looks very likely that the United States Supreme Court will take the case on appeal. When it does so – beyond seriously considering the clear original intent of the Second Amendment to protect an individual’s right to armed self-defense – the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court would be wise to take into account the findings of a recent study out of Harvard.

    The study, which just appeared in Volume 30, Number 2 of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy (pp. 649-694), set out to answer the question in its title: “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? A Review of International and Some Domestic Evidence.” Contrary to conventional wisdom, and the sniffs of our more sophisticated and generally anti-gun counterparts across the pond, the answer is “no.” And not just no, as in there is no correlation between gun ownership and violent crime, but an emphatic no, showing a negative correlation: as gun ownership increases, murder and suicide decreases.

    The findings of two criminologists – Prof. Don Kates and Prof. Gary Mauser – in their exhaustive study of American and European gun laws and violence rates, are telling:

    Nations with stringent anti-gun laws generally have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. The study found that the nine European nations with the lowest rates of gun ownership (5,000 or fewer guns per 100,000 population) have a combined murder rate three times higher than that of the nine nations with the highest rates of gun ownership (at least 15,000 guns per 100,000 population).

    rest of story at web address above.

     
    • Adask

      March 12, 2013 at 2:59 PM

      Thank you. There is no end to opinion on whether guns should or should not be controlled. So, it’s always nice to see some actual evidence.

       
  5. Lex Mercatoria

    March 12, 2013 at 2:02 PM

    The legislators, lobbyists and media personages who are trying to ban guns DO NOT believe their own b.s. about “fighting crime”, etc. They are simply trying to replay their Russian Bolshevik revolution, Chinese communist revolution, French revolution circa the 1700s, and other “revolutions” and gun grab laws passed in various countries. There is one common denominator between the perpetrators is that they are overwhelmingly Jewish. Someone needs to say it. Many people are wising up to this and still won’t say it for fear of being labelled an “anti-this-or-that”, such is the effect of the behavioral conditioning imposed by the perps’ dis-education & media industries.

     
    • Anthony Clifton

      March 12, 2013 at 4:56 PM

      amen.

      of course the good news is, and it cannot be stressed to emphatically, that NO ONE ON EARTH

      http://www.public-action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum/death/74/74_pix.html

      HAS TO BE A JEWISH. 90% of so-called “Jews” are Khazar – [Japhetic]
      turko-mongolian “PROSELYTES” to Talmudic Judaism, an Anti-Israelite so-called “Religion”.

      http://buelahman.wordpress.com/2013/03/05/gaslighting/

      such good news.

       
      • Adask

        March 12, 2013 at 6:20 PM

        Anthony, I get it. You hate all Jews at all times and places.

        But this blog does not exist for the purpose disparaging Jews. I’m not here to defend the Jews; I’m not here to attack them. If a particular article legitimately implicates the Jews, I don’t mind if people make comments for or against the Jews.

        But that does not mean that anyone who hates Jews should feel entitled to vent his spleen against Jews every time I publish an article explaining how to bake brownies.

        I recently published an article entitled “Holy Cow!” which consisted of nothing more than a video of a new “para-sailor” or glider. Unless that glider was built, designed or flown by Jews, the article had nothing I know of to do with Jews. It was merely a celebration of a wonderful kind of technology. Nevertheless, you felt compelled or entitled to use that article as an opportunity to express you rage against Jews. I deleted your comment because it was completely irrelevant to the “Holy Cow!” article.

        Here, we have another instance of an article on “Homicide Rates” that has nothing to do with Jews. But, again, you take this as an opportunity to vent your hatred for Jews.

        No more. If you want to make comments that are relevant to the articles I’ve published, fine. If you want to capture my blog and use it for a billboard to express your hatred for Jews, your comments will be deleted.

        If you feel compelled to disparage Jews, there must be thousands of other websites that will welcome your venom. Post your comments there.

         
      • Doug

        March 13, 2013 at 7:04 AM

        I think you’re trying to say that most of the people calling themselves Jews are actually brainwashed “Gentiles” with the same opportunity to enjoy the GRACE of God or the salvation of Christ as any other gentile. That it’s possible for them to leave the Synagogue of Satan. That’s not hatred that’s truth though love.

        I get it ! It’s a tough concept to wrap ones mind around. It’s as hard for the disoriented Jew to understand as it is the disoriented Christian … because the deceiver roams the earth seeking those he can confuse (devour).

        Sometimes it’s not the message that’s harsh but the delivery of that message.

         
  6. Anon4fun

    March 12, 2013 at 3:21 PM

    Here’s another graph to check out. This one goes back 300 years.

    There are several copies of this around the internet, so a little searching should turn up where the data came from.

     
  7. Sparky the dullard

    March 12, 2013 at 10:04 PM

    Maybe the following graphic words will quieten down the “Jew haters.” Anything good is going to be made to appear otherwise by truth haters.

    Lineage of Yahshua (Jesus)
    There were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah.See Matthew 1:1-16, Luke 3: 23-38

    This is the genealogy of “Jesus” the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham:

    Abraham was the father of Isaac,
    Isaac the father of Jacob,
    Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,
    Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar,

    This Judah mentioned above IS the Judah whose offspring are the “true” so called Jews.

    As far as the continuation of the lineage, See Matthew 1:1-16, Luke 3: 23-38

    hint- JEW-DUH. Jew is like a nickname,e.g. Jerry Sparks, nickname, Sparky.

     
    • Doug

      March 13, 2013 at 7:14 AM

      Ahh, a learned student. Now, Jacob (Israel) had two wives (Leah and Rachel) and two handmaidens that gave him children … which was Judahs mama ?

      Laban, the father of Leah and Rachel, means “TO BE WHITE” …

      Last of all and this is for Al Adask. From my point of view it’s more important to know that those claiming “chosen” status, especially amongst the so-called Christian community, cannot be what they claim as they haven’t fulfilled “even one” of the promises God made to Abraham. The thing is that so many in our society give an unspoken immunity to criminals calling themselves Jews that they wouldn’t give otherwise. This has grown into a nation destroying issue that must be addressed.

       
      • Sparky the dullard

        March 13, 2013 at 11:41 AM

        Doug,
        @ > which was Judahs mama ?
        Doug,off the top of my head,if I remember correctly, her name was,Leah. I stand to be corrected. Many years ago,I honestly think I did know. I have forgotten a lot of things.Tell me if I’m wrong re:Leah being Judah’s momma. Thanks

         
  8. Anthony Clifton

    March 13, 2013 at 6:01 AM

    thank you Al for your honesty,

    most people continue their course in life based on any number of assumptions that may have existed for several generations and for any number of reasons could be totally untrue…

    *** [Anthony, I get it. You hate all Jews at all times and places.] ***

    SERIOUSLY- so there is no misunderstanding – I DON’T HATE “ALL” socalled “JEWS”…

    http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/03/11/killing-jews-is-worship-ad-campaign-rolled-out-on-sf-buses/

    mostly, what I hate is seeing my neighbors murdered by TERRORISTS using Military Equipment on Sunday morning…and my other neighbors {Baptists} cheering for the Mass Murderers…

    http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=802

    300 MILLION murdered in the last century alone…roughly the same time frame of the alleged GRAPH.

    http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/splc-letter-to-doj-dhs-patriot-groups-pose-domestic-terror-threat/

    here’s a recap…13 March 13

    http://rense.com/general95/killing_dev.html

    Charles Boston’s colleague, George Wickersham, a former United States Attorney General, couldn’t agree more. Writing in the 1920s, he allowed how the contemporary American bar was filled with a “pestiferous horde of aspiring lawyers whose spoken English is of the most imperfect character and who lack the faintest comprehension of the nature of our institutions or their history and development.”

    Read more: http://forward.com/articles/172378/lets-discriminate-against-all-the-jewish-lawyers/

    you have a really tight “cool” blog, which is as much informative as it is entertaining, and attracts many who have had to deal with the ongoing criminal enterprise called the US GOV and its subsidiary organs at the STATE level…

    http://twistedsifter.com/2013/02/soldiers-engraved-zippo-lighters-from-vietnam-war/

    I’ve always admired your demeanor and honesty and obviously I’m guilty of
    ——–> “PUSHING THE ENVELOPE” <—— {you have shown remarkable restraint}

    of so-called "JEW" hate,

    http://snippits-and-slappits.blogspot.com/2013/03/rip-douglas-hewson-christie-canada-has.html

    ….perhaps the statement is overlooked or not properly understood but the truth is NO ONE ON EARTH HAS TO BE A "JEWISH"…It's TRUE !!

    http://freeyourmindconference.com/

    especially not the Japhetic/Turko-mongolian – Khazar "PROSELYTES"…

    http://www.whitenationalist.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-891.html

    Thank you again for helping others to at least have some exposure over the years to a path out of the spiritual dungeon they find themselves in with little or no HOPE for an exit….

    http://www.thechristianidentityforum.net/index.php?/topic/2169-christian-identity-newsletters/

    cyber court watchers, its just the next phase of CLR….

    in the for what it is worth dept., I'm glad your file wound up behind the cabinet.

    http://www.zombiesoup.net/2013/03/sarah-palin-to-write-christmas-book.html

    Peace/Jubilee……harmony

    http://www.azchords.com/h/harrychapin-tabs-24176/sixstringorchestra-tabs-285419.html

    Sincerely,

    http://www.apfn.net/Messageboard/08-19-05/discussion.cgi.100.html

    Mark….AKA "Davy from Dallas", Anthony Clifton, Rabbi Schmuely Blowfeldt, Alfred J. Vendablatt

    ps…Doug I tried to call but your number doesn't work….

     
    • doug

      March 13, 2013 at 11:29 AM

      806-286-0067 – the old number is connected to my fax.

       
    • doug

      March 13, 2013 at 11:37 AM

      Call my cell phone: 806-324-7024

       
    • Sparky the dullard

      March 14, 2013 at 12:13 PM

      Anthony,
      In this video,”The End of Sovereign America,” do you think the commentator is a “real” Jew? I don’t. If you think he is, tell me why, & then I’ll tell you why he is not a “real Jew.” Fair enough?

       
  9. Doug

    March 13, 2013 at 6:51 AM

    If the current D.C. govt has its way there will be a significant rise on the graph in 2013-14 as the internal strife becomes a full blown civil war between the taxpayers and the entitlement scourge.

    As far as the posted graph goes – I’d like to know if the availability of guns has had any influence on the number of murders as a percentage of population among blacks. Because of the high volume of gang related murders throughout the US it seems to me that the statistics would be difficult to arrive at with any precision.

    Besides, what is it about “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” that seems so difficult for the gun grabbers to “git” ?

    Please allow me to say that gun control most certainly involves the so-called Jews. It’s holocaust claimants like Lieberman, Dershowitz, Schumer, Feinstein, Boxer, Bloomberg, Waxman, Nadler and on and on ad nauseum that perpetually try to disarm us. And, you’d think that if their stories relating the ovens and gas chambers were true or if they really believed the stories they’d be the last people on earth to push for disarming the public. (Just sayin … ) Like the man said “let’s call a spade a spade” if ya know what I mean.

    Thanks for allowing this post !

     
    • Sparky the dullard

      March 13, 2013 at 11:17 AM

      Doug,
      @ >”SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”
      This means that any gun you have shall not have gold/yellow fringe dangling from it like the Commander N Chief of the armed forces (aka President of the U.S.) authorized gold/yellow fringed flag.(:

       
      • doug

        March 13, 2013 at 11:37 AM

        Oh, now I “git it” !

         
  10. Sparky the dullard

    March 13, 2013 at 1:11 PM

    doug
    March 13, 2013 at 11:37 AM
    Oh, now I “git it” !

    AND, you got it in factory fresh pristine,mint condition. Isn’t that nice? AND you would appreciate it even more if you knew that I do not share valuable information as this with “just anybody.” He/she must be special.

     
    • Sparky the dullard

      March 13, 2013 at 3:33 PM

      utt oh, doug, forgot to put the> (: < smile.

       
  11. Yartap

    March 13, 2013 at 2:54 PM

    QUESTION: Of the 11,000 homicides in the US, how many were murder and how many were justifiable or self defense?

    QUESTION: Does the U.S. government lead the world in causing the deaths of more people in the world than any other nation sense the year 2000? (Almost One million have died in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars to date.)

     
    • Sparky the dullard

      March 14, 2013 at 11:57 AM

      Yartap,
      @ > “Does the U.S. government lead the world in causing the deaths of more people in the world than any other nation sense the year 2000?”

      Been waiting for anyone to respond to your two questions in one way or another Hope I’m not imposing on you by saying, there is no doubt in my mind that the answer to your 2nd question is YES & I believe you will say yes too & already knew the answer.Tell me the answer to your 1st question.I really don’t know the answer.

       
    • Yartap

      March 14, 2013 at 4:09 PM

      What I have found out about Justifiable Gun Homicides in American:

      PERCENTAGE AVERAGES:

      Suicides 46.55%
      Justifiable by Non-law Enforement 6.03%
      Justifiably by Law Enforcement 2.80%
      Non-justifiable Murder 39.87%
      These Four above Total 100%

      Other findings about gun related deaths:

      In non-justifiable murders, 75% of the victims knew their killer. In justifiable killings, 60% of criminals were unknown to the surviving victim.

      In all Justifiable deaths (guns and non-guns used), 80% of death were by firearms.
      In all Non-justifiable deaths (guns and non-guns used), 65% of deaths were by firearms.

       
      • Sparky the dullard

        March 14, 2013 at 4:32 PM

        Yartap,
        @ >Suicides 46.55%
        WOW !!!
        Then the answer to solving the major cause of death problem is, all suicides MUST be banned. It’s as plain as the noses on our faces. Sometimes it’s true that we cannot see the forest because the trees get in our way. BAN ALL SUICIDES,it’s that simple. I regret to say that I have come close to being one of those statistics myself. ): You cannot get away from excruciating pain trying to crawl away from it. & even if you had the strength to walk, you cannot walk away from it either.

         
  12. Yartap

    March 14, 2013 at 8:52 PM

    Read this article by Mike Adams. It discusses the suicide problem in the military.

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/25-disturbing-facts-about-psych-drugs-soldiers-and-suicides.html

     
  13. Sparky the dullard

    March 14, 2013 at 10:36 PM

    Yartap
    March 14, 2013 at 8:52 PM
    It’s not right to say thanks for a link like this, is it? What is the proper thing for me to say?

    @ > “chemical lobotomy” for soldiers.

    Another sad thing is we become hardened to atrocities like this. There are good doctors, somewhere however. Luke himself,was one. But I know for a fact that “modern medicine” is incredibly barbaric.I also know of a lobotomy or two that HAVE been “performed” on others that simply questioned the authority & fairness of the then present gov-co 20 years ago. No wonder another poster on this blog called gov-co FrankenState,like in Frankenstein.

     
    • Yartap

      March 15, 2013 at 7:07 PM

      After the Aurora, Colorado shooting and the Sandy Hooks shooting by drug induced people (zombies), how will a drug induced army react towards the public or any group? Will they respond as MASS KILLERS, too?

      I remember an article that discussed how the Department of Defense was studying how to make solders better in combat by using certain drugs to help them overcome fear, anxiety, sleep and pain. These drugs would be inside the solder’s gear or uniform for each’s personal use and need in an IV hookup. All the solder had to do was hit a button for his injection of drugs.

      And guess who was doing most of the talking in the article for the Defense Department? Answer: Dick Cheney!

       
      • Sparky the dullard

        March 15, 2013 at 11:10 PM

        @> Will they respond as MASS KILLERS, too?
        Absolutely & they call it collateral damage. Tricky Dick Cheney,huh? Didn’t he also approve of water boarding? I wonder how many are aware that torture tactics are performed in jails, HERE !!!
        Yes, including water boarding.

         
  14. Mike

    May 11, 2013 at 11:01 AM

    Reblogged this on This Got My Attention and commented:
    An interesting graph. Why is gun control suddenly such a big issue? Perhaps because the politicians want to divert your attention from real problems such as falling incomes, high unemployment rates and rapidly increasing health insurance premiums to mention just a few.

     
  15. todreigus

    January 5, 2016 at 11:48 PM

    I’m not sure if this PDF contains all the info to verify your graph/chart above, but it does cover various USA death statistics going back several decades & provides multiple links to similar resources so > http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr63/nvsr63_09.pdf#taba

    Here’s the website your graph/chart originated from > http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/12/foghorn/guns-violence-united-states-numbers/

    hope it helps!

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s