Talk:Gun violence in the United States

Incorrect math/bad stats, '109 people dying per day from gun violence'

From the first 3 sentences of this wiki topic:

Gun violence in the United States results in tens of thousands of deaths and injuries annually.[4] Guns were the leading cause of death for children 19 and younger in 2020.[5] In 2018, the most recent year for which data are available as of 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) National Center for Health Statistics reports 38,390 deaths by firearm, of which 24,432 were by suicide.[6][7] The rate of firearm deaths per 100,000 people rose from 10.3 per 100,000 in 1999 to 12 per 100,000 in 2017, with 109 people dying per day or about 14,542 homicides in total,[8][9][10] being 11.9 per 100,000 in 2018.

"with 109 people dying per day or about 14,542 homicides in total"

109 people x 365 days = 39785 homicides per year

Obviously there is some type of nuance to the two stats, but nevertheless, it's over doubly incorrect...

I think we should use this source - https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm Where:-

All homicides Number of deaths: 24,576 Deaths per 100,000 population: 7.5

Firearm homicides Number of deaths: 19,384 Deaths per 100,000 population: 5.9

19,384/365 = 53

Thus, "with 53 people dying per day or about 19,384 homicides in total"

Or perhaps it is better stated as "with UP TO 109 people dying per day"

Conflicting info in intro

This paragraph in the intro

Firearms are overwhelmingly used in more defensive scenarios (self-defense and home protection) than offensive scenarios in the United States.[14][15] In 2021, The National Firearms Survey, currently the nation's largest and most comprehensive study into American firearm ownership, found that privately-owned firearms are used in roughly 1.7 million defensive usage cases (self-defense from an attacker/attackers inside and outside the home) per year across the nation, compared to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (C.D.C.) report of 20,958 homicides in that same year.[16][17][18]

conflicts with the rest of the article. The text in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States#Defensive_Gun_Violence has text that disproves it.

The sources for the information in the intro paragraph seems to be in favor of guns and might not be entirely independent.

FlamingDrake (talk) 10:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. The defensive and offensive statistics are not even comparable. One is a survey of gun owners regarding their putative defensive use of firearms. As such, for an empirically valid comparison you would need something like the number of violent incidents (not crimes, because those would be underestimated relative to a survey) where the offender used a firearm in some capacity. Even just examining crimes, you have homicide obviously, but also assault, attempted murder, armed robbery, and rape, all of which can involve the use of a firearm. 128.84.124.214 (talk) 17:05, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Late to the party, but I also agree with this assessment. The first sentence is plainly not supported by the evidence, the remainder is less controversial but serves only to try and justify the initial claim. The fact many gun owners believe guns to be of significant defensive value should perhaps get a mention in the introduction, but as is I'm in favour of removing this section entirely. Damp Cuttlefish (talk) 16:15, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

I condensed it. This lede is a fucking mess. Einsof (talk) 11:25, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Political Science Scope and Methods

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 August 2025 and 15 December 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Parispetals (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Parispetals (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Messy

Someone with familiarity with this subject needs to clean up the mess of statistics here, which various editors have simply laid down year by year, like sediment. If longitudinal statistics are to be retained, they should be in tables. Any kind of coherent narrative that may exist in this article is completely obfuscated. Einsof (talk) 11:43, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

Under that rationale, I'm baffled by why more statistics and an editorial have been added to the lede - particularly considering that neither are anywhere discussed in the body of the article. Please review WP:LEDE - they should be removed. I agree that there's a trail of irrelevant old statistics in the lede, indeed laid down like sediment. We only need the (roughly) most recent data in the lede, the gross statistical trends can be discussed in the body. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 19:28, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

I've removed the recently added material, and trimmed seemingly randomly chosen statistics that aren't discussed in the body of the article. The 2023 data - while not the most recent - is adequate to the task for the time being. Just noticed I broke several named-refs, will fix. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 20:02, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

Fully automatic mag loaded double barreled assualt rifle

y is no mentions of this crutsl deacly ijfo!!! LewismillsHarBurEpicMan (talk) 22:54, 31 March 2026 (UTC)