Half as many US children are killed by firearms in states where laws are stricter

... the new Stanford University study demonstrates.

Gun injuries ae the second leading cause of death for children in the US
The US has far more school shootings than any other wealthy country
This year alone, 560 children have been killed by guns
Rates of pediatric gun deaths are twice as high in the South and Midwest where laws restricting the weapons are more lax than in the West and Northeast
Federal bills to restrict gun sales have largely failed
But the Stanford University study authors say their study shows that state laws show promise for preventing children from being killed by guns

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/...irearms-states-laws-stricter-study-finds.html

Click to expand...

Then there is this down in the article.

California has 107 laws regarding guns and Massachusetts has 101.

On the other end of the spectrum, Missouri, Idaho and Mississippi each have just two laws each pertaining to guns on the books.

Click to expand...

I have little doubt that the CA and MA claims are accurate. The MO, ID, MS? I guess it depends on how you define "gun law" is.

More bush-league-psych-out-stuff from self proclaimed statisticians.

For Missouri, 40% of the fatalities by firearm are reported from the STL, KC and Springfield metro areas. Then there is the Chicago paradox...stats are rarely misused...no?

OC for ME said:

Then there is this down in the article.I have little doubt that the CA and MA claims are accurate. The MO, ID, MS? I guess it depends on how you define "gun law" is.

More bush-league-psych-out-stuff from self proclaimed statisticians.

Click to expand...

On a scale from 1 to 10, I'd give Columbia University a 6 when it comes to proper research. The pediatricians they mentioned have training in statistics. They're not statisticians themselves, but good universities use policies where statisticians on staff act as advisers and reviewers of other research.

For Missouri, 40% of the fatalities by firearm are reported from the STL, KC and Springfield metro areas. Then there is the Chicago paradox...stats are rarely misused...no?

Click to expand...

Yes. Often.

I see a lot of claims about the research, but no link to anything that's been published, or other details. I do see a comment that "the study is ongoing." The fact that DailyMail is sharing results before the study has completed or been peer-reviewed makes me want to trust it about as far as I can kick a Buick.

Finally, I see no evidence the study examines the significantly different aspects of "associative" vs "causal" relationships. My gut feeling, and perhaps worthy of a hypothesis test, is that the volume of regulations in any state results in increased awareness of firearms safety and care taken by firearms owners. In other words, the volume of legislation accomplishes nothing, but the mere fact of increased awareness carries the intended effect. If this proves to be the case, then expensive and rights-infringing legislation isn't the answer, and education and awareness training would be the appropriate course of action.

Lastly, the graphic breaks things down into 7.54 and 8.3 injuries per 100k, claiming "far more children are injured or killed", despite the fact that 8.3 is only 10.1% greater than 7.54. That gross exaggeration indicates it's a liberal, anti-gun fluff piece rushed to publication before the close of the 2018 elections with little to no actual substance.

First, the 2 Nov article cited is from the UK’s Guardian and lack cites to Dr Chao’s original study to see where the journalist’s rhetoric begins and what the study actually states! No idea where the graph originated.

second, the 1 Nov/Updated 2 Nov Mercury News article also lacks cites to Dr Chao’s original study and doesn’t have the graph. But states, which the Daily Mails doesn’t, quote:

[FONT=&quot]Research in adults has suggested that laws are protective. A 2013 paper in JAMA Internal Medicine found that states with the most laws on gun ownership, including Massachusetts and New Jersey, have 42 percent lower rates of death from guns than those with the least restrictions, including Utah and Oklahoma. Unquote
[/FONT]
third, Stanford’s Scopeblog ‘published by Stanford Medicine also fails to reference a cite to Dr Chao’s original study [ https://scopeblog.stanford.edu/2018...d-adolescent-gun-deaths-stanford-study-finds/ no graphs, nothing of substance.

Fourth, the Sanford press release states Dr Chao is “presenting” her study the 5th of November at the American Pediatric conference in FL. Further, the press release states her data come from...quote:

[FONT=&quot]Chao’s team used 2014 and 2015 data on firearm deaths of individuals 0 to 19 years old from the National Vital Statistics System, which is maintained by the Centers for Disease Control’s National Center for Health Statistics.
[/FONT]unquote

Wait, is this the same data the CDC marks with an * saying it is unreliable unverifiable and such?

so since the study does not appear to have been released, coupled with the FACT the only data being discussed here is from newspeek media...how on earth can anyone state on this a public forum, that this data is viable, repeatable, let alone discuss or continue to lend credibility to this self-promoting concept previously identified medical group against any and all firearms.

Focus on the claimed gun laws on the books, not the claimed number of fatalities. What is the study's criteria to qualify a law as a gun law.