A new study has found that Americans, including traditionally pro-gun groups, are averse to living near AR-15 owners and neighbors who store guns insecurely. This consensus highlights potential local-level agreement on gun safety practices.

A recent study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences reveals that across all political and social groups in the United States, there is a strong preference against living near AR-15 rifle owners and neighbors who store guns outside of locked safes. This surprising consensus suggests that when it comes to immediate living environments, Americans’ views on gun control may be less divided than the polarized national debate suggests.

The research was conducted against a backdrop of increasing gun violence and polarization on gun policy in the United States. The United States has over 350 million civilian firearms and gun-related incidents, including accidents and mass shootings, have become a leading cause of death in the country. Despite political divides, the new study aimed to explore whether there’s common ground among Americans in their immediate living environments, focusing on neighborhood preferences related to gun ownership and storage.

  • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
    136·
    6 months ago

    … gun-related incidents, including accidents and mass shootings, have become a leading cause of death in the country.

    What? Not even close.

    • paholg@lemm.eeEnglish
      51·
      6 months ago

      It says “a leading cause”, not “the leading cause”. Depending on how long your list of leading causes is, anything could qualify.

      I skimmed the source they linked, and it lists guns as the leading cause of death for ages 1-19. I did not see an overall list.

      I would agree that a more carefully phrased sentence would have been better and less misleading.

      Link to source: https://publichealth.jhu.edu/sites/default/files/2022-05/2020-gun-deaths-in-the-us-4-28-2022-b.pdf

      • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
        14·
        6 months ago

        It says “a leading cause”, not “the leading cause”. Depending on how long your list of leading causes is, anything could qualify.

        English is not my native language but this sounds like it should not be a thing. Sounds like it was made for con artists…

        • Jojo, Lady of the West@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          2·
          6 months ago

          Basically yes. It’s at best a way to hedge their language and avoid being technically wrong, but in practice it can certainly be used in quite misleading ways.

          I would say that in my opinion “a leading cause” would need to at least be in the top half, but it could possibly be anything but last since it’s “leading” last place…

      • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
        56·
        6 months ago

        Link does not work

        PS: Are you including suicides? If so, than maybe it is possible in the 1-19 age group you selected but incredibly misleading and still untrue in general population.

        PS2: You can link to the data by clicking save in the top right.

          • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
            1·
            6 months ago

            The goalposts have already been massively moved.

            The post is about AR-15s. All rifles combined are used less than 3% of firearm homicides, which combined make up approximately 1/3rd of firearm deaths.

            By including all firearm deaths in a discussion about AR-15s we’re suggesting they’re 100 times deadlier than they are.

            ARs don’t actually have a huge impact. It’s why the sunset of the AWB was kinda ignored. Every study of the AWB’s impact showed no statistically-significant impact from the AWB, so there wasn’t much effort to keep it going at the time.

            The guns that are involved in almost all homicides, suicides, and accidents aren’t ARs. They’re pistols. When the AWB expired, the gun control crowd focused on them almost exclusively. But then around 2009 messaging suddenly changed and ARs were the most evil thing in the universe again.

            In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled in DC v Heller that handguns were protected. Suddenly gun control groups had a problem. They couldn’t ban handguns without a constitutional amendment, and they needed to justify their existence.

            So they changed messaging and started going after ARs bigtime. They created a political climate that drove unhinged crazy people to go buy ARs to spite the Brady Foundation, and the AR became the most popular firearm platform in the country.

            Then, wonder of wonders, the most popular gun was used in more crimes.

            It’s like saying F-150s are more dangerous than Cybertrucks because more F-150s get in wrecks.

            • Ballistic_86@lemmy.world
              31·
              6 months ago

              Yeah, fuck those kids. They went out and bought those weapons! They can kill themselves if they want!

              • orrk@lemmy.world
                2·
                6 months ago

                I agree, we need to be able to threaten everyone we don’t like with execution!

                steal something? DEATH SENTENCE. vandalize something? DEATH SENTENCE. made me mad? YUP THAT’S A DOUBLE DEATH SENTENCE.

                an armed society is a polite society, because I can just shoot you!

                /s. if anyone wasn’t able to tell

                • Ballistic_86@lemmy.world
                  2·
                  6 months ago

                  Hell yeah! That’s why I keep a vial of anthrax on me at all times. Never know when you might need it.

                  You forgot to mention, pull into my driveway on accident, DEATH SENTENCE, served immediately. I need all citizens of the US to be Judge, Jury, and Executioner to feel safe.

              • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
                1·
                6 months ago

                Oh no, kids are dying. Quickly tell everyone nothing ever happened in Tiananmen Square because spreading misinformation will help apparently.

                Surely only people who want kids dead would point out misinformation. /s

                • Ballistic_86@lemmy.world
                  11·
                  6 months ago

                  You are a sad nihilist and you have a strange way of arguing your point. Comparing a random person quoting a stat from the internet on a social media post to the CCP covering up Tiananmen is so interesting. It takes what-about-ism to a whole other level. It wasn’t even misinformation, it was just a hastily googled fact from some random person on Lemmy.

                  Hard to believe you wouldn’t go with the usual, “What about cars? What about being fat?” As if any of that would be relevant to the shocking stats for gun violence deaths of children and young adults.

                  • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
                    1·
                    6 months ago

                    … and you have a strange way of arguing your point.

                    That’s the issue, I am not arguing any point other than the main post is misleading. US gun laws are absolutely stupid. You desperately need a reform. I never disagreed with that. Sure, more people die of heart disease but that is much harder to fix than gun laws.

                    You are just projecting shit onto my comments that was never there and then get confused when I don’t disagree in the way you expect.

                • Ballistic_86@lemmy.world
                  2·
                  6 months ago

                  Yikes. It doesn’t take too long before an attempted civil 2A debate lord shows their real view on life.

                  “I don’t accept your stats because those deaths only apply to children! Don’t skew the numbers!”

                  Eesh, I’m not quite sure how Biden got mixed into the discussion about gun control/gun violence. He has no plans to restrict access to guns at all. He’s even providing them to Israel so they can kill Muslim children.

                  • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
                    1·
                    6 months ago

                    Yeah, deleted the comment immediately when I realized it was poorly written. My stupid habit of pressing send before proof reading.

                    That being said, you may want to read again yours as well. Since when does calling lies lies means I support anything?