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

61–70 of 145 posts

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

#61

Post by maxerickson »

oaththrowaway wrote: post #40
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"

Not really fair to throw that out there without articulating what you think it means to understand the current laws.

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

#62

Post by bmitc »

fisherjeff wrote: post #5

Very interesting but not a great map for us color deficient types!

Honest questions that just popped in my head. Are there not color conversion filters that convert colors into more readily seen colors? What is a resource one would use to select color palettes from when designing in general but keeping color blind people in mind?

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

#63

Post by BaculumMeumEst »

scotty79 wrote: post #37
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.

Do you also consider living in an area with high rate of violent crime to be a lifestyle choice?

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

#64

Post by jprete »

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…

I think the paper is purely political. Alcohol causes 140k deaths per year, and if there were any scientific goal here they would have included alcohol before including firearms.

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

#65

Post by conductr »

scotty79 wrote: post #37
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.

Even “optional” gets a little fuzzy when all these things are likely to be a cultural phenomenon; as in, influenced by your parents/family.

It’s like saying that Christianity continues to be the most popular choice of religion in the US. Sure it’s optional, but there’s a bit of inertia involved.

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

#66

Post by bentley »

CoastalCoder wrote: post #54
masfuerte wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That whole debate feels like a distraction. If the majority wants gun control don't debate the meaning of the text, amend it.

The 2nd amendment falls within the Bill of Rights. Maybe the "living document" view is the only obvious play, given past SCOTUS rulings? N.B.: I've never studied law, so I may have no idea what I'm talking about.

The Bill of Rights is just as amendable as the rest of the Constitution.

Witness the various efforts to “repeal Citizens United,” which often (always?) require amending the First Amendment.

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

#67

Post by dehrmann »

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…

> it borders on nonsensical to pair them that way

While I agree, the one government tasks one law enforcement agency (ATF) with managing them.

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

#68

Post by CoastalCoder »

netsharc wrote: post #51
CoastalCoder wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Seems like, just with many issues in the US, it's become another "The other side is against it, so we're for it!" problem... I'm confused by your comment. Your main thesis is worded as though it applies to all U.S. political groups, but the rest of your post seems specifically anti-Republican.

At the moment I can't think of Democrats sabotaging things that would be good for the American public to benefit themselves politically; care to find examples for me? Then we can put the examples of Republicans doing that on one side of the scale, and the examples of Democrats doing that on the other side, and call them equally bad... ;-)

I could give some examples, but I think this would just devolve into an unproductive partisan fight.

(Which would be ironic, but I don't support either party.)

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

#69

Post by dbrueck »

scotty79 wrote: post #37
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.

> They are both completely optional lifestyle choice.

Kind of like alcohol, right? (which has nearly 4x the annual deaths vs firearms)

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

#70

Post by xrd »

paulcole wrote: post #19
xrd wrote: post #10

Interesting that this was created by a Florida professor but Florida is the only southern state where it is mapped almost entirely "white"; completely different than the other Southern states that are red indicating high mortality.

There’s no conspiracy here. North Florida (where I grew up) is part of The South. South Florida is not part of The South.

I live in Central Florida, so let's split the difference? ;)

I agree with you mostly but if you look at the Opportunity Atlas (https://www.opportunityatlas.org/) all of Florida looks pretty bad. But I suppose that doesn't all correlate to gun violence?

Post reply on HN