Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Geographic ‘hot spots’ for cigarette and firearm deaths in the U.S.

fau.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 145 posts

Re: Geographic ‘hot spots’ for cigarette and firearm deaths in the U.S.

#31

Post by ct0 »

daniel_iversen wrote: post #11

I think I read somewhere recently that the majority of Americans were in favour of stricter gun reforms, yet no real change I laws seem to happen and all the current presidential candidates over in the US seems to not even dare touch the subject. I find it reprehensible and puzzling how they’ve got this weird relationship with guns, but it’s interesting how often people are using a certain interpretation of their con…

There are 2 schools of thought on the constitution. Living constitutionalists believe that the constitutional adapts or changes and can be fluid based on "modern" beliefs and the interpretation changes to allow for that. Originalists believe the text is strict and not up for debate and that the contract of the constitution is fixed. Most of what we are seeing is based on these 2 ideas in conflict.

Re: Geographic ‘hot spots’ for cigarette and firearm deaths in the U.S.

#32

Post by dbrueck »

Sort of interesting, but the whole setup is oddly misleading:

"Smoking and firearms are among the leading causes of avoidable premature death in the United States"

The statement is true for smoking but it takes some work to make it true for firearms. And then it describes tobacco and firearms as "both are legal yet lethal" - it borders on nonsensical to pair them that way (I guess possessing both can be legal, but it's worded to imply that the use of both, in the ways that resulted in death, is legal).

I'd love to see fewer firearm deaths, but it just seems odd to try and link a really high cause of deaths with one that is an order of magnitude smaller, while skipping over others that are very preventable causes of death. You are, for example, many times more likely to die from poor diet than from being shot. I mean, using their framing, automobiles are "legal yet lethal" and auto deaths are the cause of about as many deaths as firearm deaths - and that includes suicide (i.e. intentional) deaths.

Re: Geographic ‘hot spots’ for cigarette and firearm deaths in the U.S.

#34

Post by [deleted] »

tester756 wrote: post #9

Smoking is biggest shit that's widely accepted, why? idk People argue that banning it would be against "freedom" Please explain to me how: 1) causing harm to yourself 2) causing harm to people around you 3) paying for it additional taxes(!!!) 4) and all of that while being highly addictive ... how is it a freedom? The nature of it being addictive removes "freedom" from the consideration. It isn't freedom when you're…

[deleted]

Re: Geographic ‘hot spots’ for cigarette and firearm deaths in the U.S.

#35

Post by dghlsakjg »

neovialogistics wrote: post #2

The distribution along the basin and range parts of the country are very interesting. Just eyeballing it, it looks like there is a significant altitude component. Is it just the second and third-order effects of higher transportation costs, or is it something to do with barometric air pressure?

The basin and range distribution is particular to firearm suicides.

Those are rural places, with limited access to healthcare, cultures of shame around mental health, limited economic opportunities, and high rates of gun ownership.

I have no way to know causality, but my guess is that the social factors are far more important than the barometric pressure.

Re: Geographic ‘hot spots’ for cigarette and firearm deaths in the U.S.

#36

Post by oaththrowaway »

partitioned wrote: post #16
daniel_iversen wrote: post #11

I think I read somewhere recently that the majority of Americans were in favour of stricter gun reforms, yet no real change I laws seem to happen and all the current presidential candidates over in the US seems to not even dare touch the subject. I find it reprehensible and puzzling how they’ve got this weird relationship with guns, but it’s interesting how often people are using a certain interpretation of their con…

It’s because we don’t have a choice. A stacked Supreme Court that says any gun law has to be a gun law that would’ve been cool in 1776 has made any progress impossible without violent revolution

If that were true, the NFA would be repealed (the legal ground for it was pretty shaky originally and somehow it has stood)

Re: Geographic ‘hot spots’ for cigarette and firearm deaths in the U.S.

#37

Post by scotty79 »

dbrueck wrote: post #32

Sort of interesting, but the whole setup is oddly misleading: "Smoking and firearms are among the leading causes of avoidable premature death in the United States" The statement is true for smoking but it takes some work to make it true for firearms. And then it describes tobacco and firearms as "both are legal yet lethal" - it borders on nonsensical to pair them that way (I guess possessing both can be legal, but it…

There's another quality that allows to group cigarettes and guns together. They are both completely optional lifestyle choice. While cars and diet might be way harder to opt out given how cars are needed to get to work and stores and the most unhealthy diet is the cheapest and fastest one.

Re: Geographic ‘hot spots’ for cigarette and firearm deaths in the U.S.

#38

Post by uoaei »

pnw wrote: post #15

I was intrigued to read the details but this is just a press release with the actual research paper locked behind a paywall unfortunately. I can't find the paper anywhere.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00917...

You've heard of sci-hub?

Re: Geographic ‘hot spots’ for cigarette and firearm deaths in the U.S.

#39

Post by cjensen »

Some random observations on this...

1. The suicide difference between the Mountain & Basin West vs the Great Plains surprises me. I would have expected Wyoming and Nebraska would have been more similar.

2. The gradient across Texas is interesting, particularly the lack of both suicide and smoking death in the southwest part of the state compared to the northeast.

3. Rural Nevada counties, except the northernmost two, utter lack the suicide rate that is seen in nearly all of Arizona.

4. It's not helpful to conflate these three causes of death. Seems like it would be better as separate maps

5. It's not helpful to color-code these maps as a binary choice between "has problem" and "does not have." I wonder how much subtlety is hidden by not using a gradient.

6. Unlabeled graphs are a sin. What is the definition of "hot spot?" And why is it hidden from the casual reader?

Re: Geographic ‘hot spots’ for cigarette and firearm deaths in the U.S.

#40

Post by oaththrowaway »

daniel_iversen wrote: post #11

I think I read somewhere recently that the majority of Americans were in favour of stricter gun reforms, yet no real change I laws seem to happen and all the current presidential candidates over in the US seems to not even dare touch the subject. I find it reprehensible and puzzling how they’ve got this weird relationship with guns, but it’s interesting how often people are using a certain interpretation of their con…

Most people that are in favor of stricter gun laws don't understand the current laws that already exist and just hear buzzwords like "gun show loophole"
Post reply on HN