https://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/11/25/hawaii-news/study-ranks-hawaii-lowest-in-u-s-for-gun-deaths-and-gun-related-homicides/


Does the police play a role in these numbers?

  paywall

Come on guys, newspaper is only a dollar   

The article is about how Hawaii has one of the lowest rates of suicide and gun crime in the nation due to our tough gun control laws and isolation from other states.  It does acknowledge later that suicides make up the bulk of the gun deaths vs homicide.

The picture is very misleading from the article content with the intent to cause fear and create the perception that guns are causing a lot of crime.

I believe the reason for publishing and headlining the article is to defend Hawaii's tough gun control laws despite the recent uptick in violent crimes in the news.

Come on guys, newspaper is only a dollar   

The article is about how Hawaii has one of the lowest rates of suicide and gun crime in the nation due to our tough gun control laws and isolation from other states.  It does acknowledge later that suicides make up the bulk of the gun deaths vs homicide.

The picture is very misleading from the article content with the intent to cause fear and create the perception that guns are causing a lot of crime.

I believe the reason for publishing and headlining the article is to defend Hawaii's tough gun control laws despite the recent uptick in violent crimes in the news.

And that dollar belongs to ME.

I refuse to support the Liberal mass media conglomerates at any level, in any way, if I can at all avoid doing so.

This is one dollar they will have to live without.

So, how many of the "gun deaths" are defensive use of guns? 
How many are committed by a person already prohibited from possessing a firearm -- i.e. already breaking the gun laws? 
How many of those murders would have been committed anyway with another means in the absence of a firearm?
How many of the actual murders have been solved using mandatory firearm registration before a suspect was identified through forensic, witness or video evidence?

There was a study released just after the last "Hawaii gun laws are an example for the nation" article proving that gun laws and a given number of gun deaths have no causal relationship.  it only takes a few similar-size cities or states (Chicago, anywhere in California such as LA, Baltimore...) with as strict, or stricter, gun laws for the hypothesis to be proven false.

Zero correlation between state homicide rate and state gun laws

Oct. 6, 2015 at 6:32 a.m. HST
There’s been much talk recently — including from President Obama — about there being a substantial correlation between
state-level gun death rates and state gun laws. Now correlation obviously doesn’t equal causation; there may be lots of other
factors that are the true causes of both of the things that are being measured. But if we do look for now at correlation, it seems
to me that the key question should focus on state total homicide rates, or perhaps (for reasons I describe below) total intentional
homicide plus accidental gun death rates. And it turns out that there is essentially zero correlation between these numbers
and state gun laws.

To begin with, here’s why I focus on total homicide, rather than gun homicide or all gun deaths. First, few people care much about
whether they are stabbed to death or shot to death. And even if gun restrictions do decrease gun homicides, that effect may well
be offset (or more than offset) by an increase in other homicides:

Some killers would kill with knives or other weapons instead of guns.
To the extent that today some attempted killings are stopped by defenders who have guns, those attempts might succeed if the
guns become harder enough for defenders to get.

To the extent that today some potential killings (or attempted robberies, rapes, or burglaries that lead to killings) are deterred by
attackers’ fear of running into a gun, it might be that fewer will be deterred if guns become harder enough for defenders to get.
If — put together — these effects mean that tighter gun laws will mean 100 fewer gun homicides in a state but 100 more homicides
with knives or other weapons, the net result would hardly be a gun law success.

Now of course you might think this won’t happen, and the 100 fewer gun homicides will be only slightly offset by, say, 20 extra knife
homicides. But to determine whether that’s true (to the extent that correlations can determine such things), you’d want to see how
gun laws are correlated with total homicides, not with gun homicides. If you’re right that the stronger gun laws will yield this net 80-homicide
decline, that should show up in stronger gun laws being correlated with total homicide rates.

Second, suicides are quite different from homicides. Morally speaking, restraining people’s liberty, and in particular their ability to defend
themselves, to prevent murder of unwilling victims deaths is quite different from restraining that liberty to prevent others from willingly
killing themselves. It is no accident, I think, that the calls for gun restriction are usually specifically tied to murders — whether mass killings
or the aggregate of individual killings — and not to suicides.

Suicide is also likely to be driven by many factors related to culture and the person’s living situation, factors very different from those
involved in homicide. The age-adjusted suicide rate among blacks in the U.S., for instance, is less than 40% of the suicide rate among
whites, while the homicide rate is much higher for blacks than for whites — and that’s just one of many examples.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/06/zero-correlation-between-state-homicide-rate-and-state-gun-laws/

Come on guys, newspaper is only a dollar   

The article is about how Hawaii has one of the lowest rates of suicide and gun crime in the nation due to our tough gun control laws and isolation from other states.  It does acknowledge later that suicides make up the bulk of the gun deaths vs homicide.

The picture is very misleading from the article content with the intent to cause fear and create the perception that guns are causing a lot of crime.

I believe the reason for publishing and headlining the article is to defend Hawaii's tough gun control laws despite the recent uptick in violent crimes in the news.

I refuse to spend money on the fake news.

I believe the reason for publishing and headlining the article is to defend Hawaii's tough gun control laws despite the recent uptick in violent crimes in the news.

You may be right, this could be a preemptive hit on any future citizens' demanding they be able to defend themselves.

Headline and image didn’t match the story at all.

You may be right, this could be a preemptive hit on any future citizens' demanding they be able to defend themselves.

Def is the reason for the article.  They want to tell the public, despite the recent use of guns, our laws work.

But reading the comments, over 95% disagree and support CCW or being armed.  The people have had enough with inaction of law makers for repeat offenders.  How can HIFICO tap into this new train of thought?  Seems like we're on the tipping point.  Just a few years ago, it was the other way around.  Only a select few wanted CCW and most said "we don't need it, this isn't the mainland" type of attitude.  I find myself having to defend my pro 2a comments less over the past year.

Def is the reason for the article.  They want to tell the public, despite the recent use of guns, our laws work.

But reading the comments, over 95% disagree and support CCW or being armed.  The people have had enough with inaction of law makers for repeat offenders.  How can HIFICO tap into this new train of thought?  Seems like we're on the tipping point.  Just a few years ago, it was the other way around.  Only a select few wanted CCW and most said "we don't need it, this isn't the mainland" type of attitude.  I find myself having to defend my pro 2a comments less over the past year.

Pointing out that HIFICO exists is the first bet. Seems like a lot of these people don't know who are the local activists and maybe most assume the NRA on a national level will just magically do something.

Doing it one by one on social media is a start.

However same thing, you can lead a horse to water, but how much they are willing to do, even just submit testimony is another thing. Anyone can get fired up on social media.

Pointing out that HIFICO exists is the first bet. Seems like a lot of these people don't know who are the local activists and maybe most assume the NRA on a national level will just magically do something.

Doing it one by one on social media is a start.

However same thing, you can lead a horse to water, but how much they are willing to do, even just submit testimony is another thing. Anyone can get fired up on social media.

I wear my HiFiCo tshirt in Sams Club all the time. Nobody asks me anything though. On other hand, nobody harasses me either

Is it just me, or did the star advertiser change the photo on the website for the story from the 8 days to picture of a gun on the counter.

Headline and image didn’t match the story at all.

They charged the headline it said what was on the news paper this morning