Rate Of U.S. Gun Violence Has Fallen Since 1993, Study Says

[marble falls]

Last edited Mon Aug 10, 2020, 04:54 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/05/07/181998015/rate-of-u-s-gun-violence-has-fallen-since-1993-study-says



<snip>

"Firearm-related homicides dropped from 18,253 homicides in 1993 to 11,101 in 2011," according to a report by the federal , "and nonfatal firearm crimes dropped from 1.5 million victimizations in 1993 to 467,300 in 2011.

There were seven gun homicides per 100,000 people in 1993, the says, which dropped to 3.6 gun deaths in 2010. The study relied in part on data from the .

"Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49 percent lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation's population grew," according to the Pew study. "The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75 percent lower in 2011 than in 1993."


<snip>

The U.S. gun crime rate peaked in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the Pew study says, ending years of growth in gun violence that began in the 1960s. But the rate of suicides committed using a firearm hasn't fallen as fast, they add, noting that 6 out of every 10 gun deaths in America stems from suicide.

[ZombieHorde]

1. That's good. I hope it continues to fall. nt

[Squinch]

2. We're still in the stratosphere when compared to most other countries.

[marble falls]

3. No doubt. Three countries I can think of are as or more armed than the US ....

and have significantly less gun violence - Israel, Switzerland,and Canada.

My big concern is the gun suicides - about 30% of gun victims.

[DanTex]

5. Israel, Switzerland, and Canada are not as armed as we are.

They all have significantly tighter gun laws, and significantly lower rates of gun ownership. And, as you point out, significantly less gun violence.

[marble falls]

10. In both Israel and Switzerland anyone who serves in the armed forces.....

(both countries with mandatory service) also serves in the reserves after active duty and takes their personal weapons including assault weapons home in case of an emergency call up. I bet they are more armed than we in firepower per capita.

Don't mistake strong guns laws for disarming as it is in say GB or Australia. We need stronger gun laws here, too. National registration and background checks, no internet sales or "friend to friend" ales without going through a licensed gun dealer at least. In '92 I sold an AR-15 to a friend and I had to go through a dealer to transfer the weapon to my fiend. It didn't cost anything and I didn't feel put upon by an over reaching Federal bureaucracy, either. Serious weapons require more than a casual exchange.

Funny how only 4% of criminals bought their guns at a gun show.

[DanTex]

16. Yes, but we have more guns per capita.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country

National registration and background checks, no internet sales or "friend to friend" ales without going through a licensed gun dealer at least.

I agree.

[billh58]

24. Also funny how

criminals got most of their guns from "family or friends." All of those guns were originally "legally" purchased and then found their way into criminal's hands. Wonder how many of those legal guns were bought at gun shows as straw purchases for Uncle Billy Bob, or the friendly neighborhood drunk and wife beater?

Yeah, that's really funny.

[Squinch]

6. Why are gun suicides your big concern? Are you concerned with non-gun suicides as well? What

do you mean by concerned?

[marble falls]

11. It shows what a low priority we have for mental health, I am concerned about suicide by cop...

and the possibility of others being hurt by it. Aren't you and why the heck not? By concerned, I men concerned. Aren't you concerned by anything? I am concerned about those who choose a firearm over say, a handfull of pills or a plastic bag or seeking help, why a gun when it is all said and done.

[Squinch]

13. Concerned as in you would like to see fewer guns in circulation so as to reduce suicides?

Or is this the old NRA argument: "It isn't the guns, it's the bad mental health system, so let's be concerned about that and not, in the end, do anything."

[billh58]

18. Another NRA

talking point in addition to the general implication of the OP.

[marble falls]

23. These are inconveniant facts, but they don't negate the need in lite of all the gun mayhem...

in the US for tougher gun laws and national registration of firearms and background checks. At the minimum.

I believe in gun ownership and I believe in society's right to keep some of my fellow citizens from owning them due to legitimate established concern maintaining a safe and civil USA. I believe a lot of the fools dreaming of marching in Washington DC with loaded weapons are half out of their minds and probably are carrying illegally.

And as I've said before:If you have armed purely for self defense and you aren't a cop or legitimately in security, you're foolish and dangerous.

[billh58]

25. No they are not

"inconvenient facts," they are statistics which you are presenting out-of-context, and are manipulating to fit your, and the NRA's bullshit false equivalency arguments.

Your protestations of "but I am on YOUR side," ring hollow, and your Gungeoneer sympathies are as transparent as is your sincerity. As I said earlier, nice try, but you're not convincing anyone but NRA apologists and Gungeoneers. Bravo!

[billh58]

28. Another example of

a standard NRA talking point: most gun deaths are as a result of suicide, so they don't count. They could just as easily used "a handful of pills, or a plastic bag."

Is it really that hard for you gunners to figure out? People use guns because they are easily accessible, and the suicide attempts are mostly quick, easy to perform, and generally successful. Other methods often lead to failure due to second thoughts, and family or medical intervention (among other reasons).

Next NRA talking point please...

[rightsideout]

4. I wouldn't get too excited yet

The reason the homicide rate has gone down is because of better medical treatment.

Gunshot wound treatment has improved substantially. Alot of ERs are seeing the same gunshoot wound victims several times now! You have a better chance of surviving a gunshot wound than a few years ago.

The title should say more gun shoot victims are surviving rather than there is less violence.

[marble falls]

12. There are less shootings, period. Violence, according to the FBI has gone down.

[DanTex]

17. The number of shootings has increased in the last decade.

Violence also includes things other than shootings.

[marble falls]

19. FBI says otherwise:

http://reason.com/blog/2012/10/30/violent-crime-rate-continues-two-decade

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/12/19/143954561/violent-crime-drops-again-fbi-reports

[DanTex]

20. Sigh. Again, violent crime and shootings are not the same thing.

Also, reason.com? Really?

http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html

Rates of firearm assault injuries have increased over the 2000s

Year Number of
injuries Population Crude
Rate Age-Adjusted
Rate**
2001 41,044 284,968,955 14.40 14.11
2002 37,321 287,625,193 12.98 12.75
2003 42,505 290,107,933 14.65 14.40
2004 43,592 292,805,298 14.89 14.72
2005 50,320 295,516,599 17.03 16.92
2006 52,748 298,379,912 17.68 17.45
2007 48,676* 301,231,207 16.16 16.09
2008 56,626 304,093,966 18.62 18.57
2009 44,466 306,771,529 14.49 14.50
2010 53,738 308,745,538 17.41 17.55
2011 55,544 311,591,917 17.83 17.85

[marble falls]

21. see

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/report-sharp-drop-in-gun-violence-but-most-killings-still-involve-firearms/2013/05/07/28f96904-b694-11e2-92f3-f291801936b8_story.html

Why do you think that only gun violence wouldn't be following 20+ years of a drop in crime?

[DanTex]

22. So you are saying that the CDC stats are false. Am I understanding you correctly?

[marble falls]

26. So you are saying the FBI is making it up. Am I understanding you correctly?

Your little spread sheet had no link or attribution other than you. Am I right?

Its an inconvenient truth and fact. Freakonomics has an interesting take on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freakonomics

[DanTex]

27. For the third time, "violent crime" and "shootings" are not the same thing.

Do you really not understand that?

The data from that post came from the CDC WISQARS, which I linked to. Are you now accusing me of making up the data?

Are you for real?

[billh58]

30. NRA apologists

do not understand data which contradicts their approved talking points, which in turn are derived from using only those parts of data which support their half-truths and outright lies.

[marble falls]

38. Facts you don't like? Try these:

http://www.statesman.com/ap/ap/top-news/reports-show-gun-homicides-down-since-1990s/nXjqj/



<snip>
A study released Tuesday by the government's Bureau of Justice Statistics found that gun-related homicides dropped from 18,253 in 1993 to 11,101 in 2011. That's a 39 percent reduction.

Another report by the private Pew Research Center found a similar decline by looking at the rate of gun homicides, which compares the number of killings to the size of the country's growing population. It found that the number of gun homicides per 100,000 people fell from 7 in 1993 to 3.6 in 2010, a drop of 49 percent.

Both reports also found that non-fatal crimes involving guns were down by roughly 70 percent over that period. The Justice report said the number of such crimes diminished from 1.5 million in 1993 to 467,300 in 2011.

<snip>

By the way, until this year I did not believe in very much gun control at all. Since Aurora and Sandy Hook, I believe we need a central national gun registration and back ground checks as a starting point.

But the facts are the facts and a net drop of 49% in the murder rate per capita from '93 to 2010 is great but not good enough.

[billh58]

43. Tell Uncle Wayne

I said hello. I'm sure that he's very proud of you...

[rightsideout]

31. The CDC says otherwise

". . . medical data and other surveys in the U.S. show a rising number of serious injuries from assaults with guns and knives. The estimated number of people wounded seriously enough by gunshots to require a hospital stay, rather than treatment and release, rose 47% to 30,759 in 2011 from 20,844 in 2001, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Electronic Injury Surveillance System-All Injury Program. The CDC estimates showed the number of people injured in serious stabbings rose to 23,550 from 22,047 over the same period.

[link:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324712504578131360684277812.html|

[pipoman]

37. You do know you keep linking to this story which requires a subscription to see?

Do you have a scrip to WSJ?

[mwrguy]

7. Let's bring it to zero

Until then we aren't done.

[TheCowsCameHome]

8. Then how come gun nuts want everyone to be armed to the teeth?

[marble falls]

14. Um.... because they're gun nuts? Because like the article says, the public percieves...

more violence happening that there is. Thanks to violent TV and movies - some people think 24 is documentry, because demagogs in Congress and Fox have the Teabillies running in fear. Arming for self defense in ones home is stupid and dangerous.

[Turbineguy]

9. Holy Shit! The NRA had better get right on this.

A decline is murders is never a good thing. For them.

I suppose we could all do a grassroots letter writing campaign to Wayne LaPierre asking for one of his minions to shoot us.

[billh58]

15. Nice try

Last edited Tue May 7, 2013, 07:58 PM - Edit history (1)

with yet another NRA talking point: "crime is down because there are more guns." Bullshit!

Crime is down in the USA for a number of reasons, but none of those reasons are because there are more guns. Some of the reasons for the reduction in crime since the 1990s are: higher rates of incarceration, more proactive police surveillance and presence, and community and police involvement in social programs. See this article for more information: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0524/US-crime-rate-is-down-six-key-reasons

There is absolutely no correlation between the proliferation of guns in the USA, and the reduction in crime. Gun deaths are on track to out-pace automobile deaths by as early as next year:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-12-18/american-gun-deaths-to-exceed-traffic-fatalities-by-2015

Statistically speaking, people are 100% less likely to be killed or wounded by a firearm, when there is no firearm present, and that includes suicides, than when a gun is available.

[Robb]

29. Rubbish. And has been proven so repeatedly.

The common focus on gun deaths as a marker to illustrate America’s “gun problem” obscures an alarming trend. The number of persons who suffer nonfatal gunshot injuries―that is, who are shot but do not die―has risen over the same period. As graphically demonstrated by the chart below, this means simply that more people are being shot by guns every year. In other words, America’s gun problem is getting worse, not better.

More are being shot, and fewer of them are dying. We're getting pretty good at keeping GSW victims alive, what with our recent adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan, and our relentless pursuit of emergency medical technology.

[rightsideout]

32. Exactly

That was what I was trying to say several comments up. Shootings are up but more people are surviving gun wounds due to improved trauma treatment.

[ellisonz]

34. Over the last decade or so there is a definite plateau. n/t

[Kingofalldems]

33. Gun porn in the gun control group

[ellisonz]

36. There's some fine education going on upthread.

[ellisonz]

35. So if the general argument is correct, gun control clearly works!

The Brady Bill was passed in 1993 and the Assault Weapons Ban in 1994 - the plateau of the last decade might very well be attributed to a roll-back in gun control progress.

[marble falls]

39. While at the same time AR-15's and SK-47's and banana clips were made legal.

Go figure. Then again assault rifles tend to be used by a very few bad guys who seem to be themselves badly wired.

[ellisonz]

53. Jared Lee Loughner, Adam Lanza, and James Holmes all used weapons or clips...

...that were banned by the AWB. Does this supposed freedom to own "dangerous and unusual" weapons trump the right of the public not be massacred by lunatics with easy access to weapons with no designed purpose other than to kill human beings?

[jimmy the one]

40. have a cup of swiss myth

marblefalls: In both Israel and Switzerland anyone who serves in the armed forces.. also serves in the reserves after active duty and takes their personal weapons including assault weapons home.. I bet they are more armed than we in firepower per capita.

While on home guard duty, swiss soldiers are issued an assault rifle which they can keep after completing service, but ammo for the assault rifle is now kept in swiss armories not in the soldiers home (after service dunno). Swiss cannot carry concealed firearms without a valid reason, like a US 'may issue' state, & gunlicense required.
(BTW, dan did provide a link for his 'spread sheet', unedited, check again & apologize).

You say 'you bet' swiss & israel & canada are more armed than US? couldn't be more wrong, you are off by 2 or 3 orders of magnitude (in total, closer with rates).
Israel .. less than a million legal guns, maybe less than 100,000.
Switz: ~8 million people.. ~3 million guns .. ~1 gun per 3 people
USA: ~310 million people.. ~300 million guns.. near one gun per person.
In other words, the US has about 300 million more guns than Switz & Israel combined.

a good read for you, marblefalls: .. they don’t have high levels of gun ownership. The gun ownership in Israel and Switzerland has decreased. For instance, in Israel, they’re very limited in who is able to own a gun. There are only a few tens of thousands of legal guns in Israel, and the only people allowed to own them legally live in the settlements, do business in the settlements, or are in professions at risk of violence.
Both countries require you to have a reason to have a gun. There isn’t this idea that you have a right to a gun. You need a reason. And then you need to go back to the permitting authority every 6 months or so to assure them the reason is still valid.
The second thing is that there’s this widespread misunderstanding that Israel and Switzerland promote gun ownership. They don’t. Ten years ago, when Israel had the outbreak of violence, there was an expansion of gun ownership, but only to people above a certain rank in the military. There was no sense that having ordinary citizens [carry guns] would make anything safer.
In Israel, it used to be that all soldiers would take the guns home with them. Now {since 2006} they have to leave them on base.. there’s been a 60% decrease in suicide on weekends among IDS soldiers.
..Israel rejects 40% of its applications for a gun, the highest rate of rejection of any country in the world. And even when you get approved, you say that “all guns must have an Interior Ministry permit and identifying mark for tracing. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/mythbusting-israel-and-switzerland-are-not-gun-toting-utopias/

[marble falls]

41. Try this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Army

The structure of the Swiss militia system stipulates that the soldiers keep their own personal equipment, including all personally assigned weapons, at home (until 2007 this also included ammunition[3]). Compulsory military service concerns all male Swiss citizens, with women serving voluntarily. Males usually receive initial orders at the age of 18 for military conscription eligibility screening. About two-thirds of young Swiss men are found suitable for service, while alternative service exists for those found unsuitable.[4] Annually, approximately 20,000 persons are trained in basic training for a duration from 18 to 21 weeks (increased from 15 weeks, in 2003).


3 http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Specials/Gun_debate/Background/Archives/Soldiers_can_keep_guns_at_home_but_not_ammo.html?cid=970614
4 "Zwei Drittel der Rekruten diensttauglich (Schweiz, NZZ Online)". Retrieved 23 February 2009.

Your point actually is one of mine - it ain't the guns, its the gun nuts. Owning a Bushmaster would make me a mass murderer the same way owning a Stratocaster has made me another guitar god. The NRA has a lot created the mess. At the same time they have made a lot of these cretins to crawl out from under their rocks. Some of them to deadly effect but at least now we know who a lot of them are.

[jimmy the one]

42. the bigger picture

Gun violence in US has fallen dramatically over past 20 years, Justice Dept. report finds.. Murders committed with a gun dropped 39% to 11,101 in 2011, from a high of 18,253 in 1993, according to the report.

Certainly gun murder & rates dropped dramatically over the past 20 years, after RISING dramatically the previous 30 years when the national gunstock tripled & rose from 75 millions to ~225 millions, ~1963 - 1993;
Imagine a bell curve with 1963 to the extreme left & 2012 to the right, with a large upward bump in the middle representing gun murders, THAT is the BULGE which the huge increase in total guns has caused, & it has now, 2013, settled back down to 1963 rates (~3/100k) after reaching about 7/100k about 1993. (And medical treatment for gunshot wounds has improved thus saving more lives now than was possible in 20th century).

Put in perspective, 1963 - 1993 gunstock tripled, gun murder doubled.
1993 - 2013 gunstock increased ~50%, gunmurders decreased by ~half.
Like cattle thieves bragging 'we don't steal cattle as much as we did 30 years ago! we've decreased cattle rustling by 50% but boy have we got rich by selling what we stole the past 50 years!"

To take 1993 as a 'start point' dismisses the 30 year period prior, & makes a false conclusion that gunstock increases helped decrease gunmurder rates, when it was GUNSTOCK TRIPLING WHICH CAUSED MURDER RATES TO INCREASE TO RECORD LEVELS TO BEGIN WITH.

Other crimes committed with guns were down even more sharply — from 1.53 million in 1993 to 467,300 in 2011, a drop of 70%..

Again, implying false credit to guns where none is due; violent crime rates remain near tripled today since early 60's, where national gunstock quadrupled from ~75 millions to ~300 millions. Guns were a large reason for increasing crime & murder.

[marble falls]

44. From CBS, LA Times, USA Today .... got more if you need it......

http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/gun-crimes-drop-gun-purchases-rise

Gun Crimes Drop, Gun Purchases Rise
May 8, 2013
By Gregory Gwyn-Williams, Jr.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-gun-crimes-pew-report-20130507,0,3022693.story

Gun crime has plunged, but Americans think it's up, says study
By Emily Alpert

Gun crime has plunged in the United States since its peak in the middle of the 1990s, including gun killings, assaults, robberies and other crimes, two new studies of government data show.

Yet few Americans are aware of the dramatic drop, and more than half believe gun crime has risen, according to a newly released survey by the Pew Research Center.

In less than two decades, the gun murder rate has been nearly cut in half. Other gun crimes fell even more sharply, paralleling a broader drop in violent crimes committed with or without guns. Violent crime dropped steeply during the 1990s and has fallen less dramatically since the turn of the millennium.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/07/gun-crime-drops-but-americans-think-its-worse/2139421/

Study: Despite drop in gun crime, 56% think it's worse

By Meghan Hoyer and Paul Overberg12:14 a.m. EDT May 8, 2013
Story Highlights

The rate of gun homicides dropped 49% between 2010 and 1993
56% of Americans believe gun crime is worse today than it was 20 years ago
84% believe in recent years, gun crime has either gone up or stayed the same

Violent gun crime has dropped dramatically in the past two decades, but the majority of Americans think it's more of a problem now than ever, according to a Pew Research Center study released Tuesday.

According to the survey, done in March, 56% of Americans believe gun crime is worse today than it was 20 years ago. And 84% believe in recent years, gun crime has either gone up or stayed the same — when the reality is that it has dropped significantly.

The rate of non-fatal violent gun crime victimization dropped 75% in the past 20 years; The gun homicide rate dropped 49% in the same period, according to numbers Pew researchers obtained from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[Robb]

45. Are you going to address woundings

...or repeat yourself?

[marble falls]

46. Gun violence includes woundings. I haven't repeated anything. All links are origional....

and so are the articles. I am sorry that these facts are so hard for you to accept. Just so you understand: a year ago I was against any sort of gun control. Aurora and everything since makes me for a national gun registry and background checks.

But here's another one:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/08/us/study-gun-homicide/?hpt=hp_t2

Study: Gun homicides, violence down sharply in past 20 years
By CNN Staff
updated 2:14 PM EDT, Wed May 8, 2013

<snip>
The new study found U.S. firearm homicides peaked in 1993 at 7.0 deaths per 100,000 people. But by 2010, the rate was 49% lower, and firearm-related violence -- assaults, robberies, sex crimes -- was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993, the study found.

Those drops parallel an overall decline in violent non-fatal crime, with or without a gun, the study said.

<snip>

[Kingofalldems]

49. So should we just do what the NRA tells us?

[jimmy the one]

47. but gun ownership has declined those years

marble falls: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Army The structure of the Swiss militia system stipulates..
http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Specials/Gun_debate/Background/Archives/Soldiers_can_keep_guns_at_home_but_not_ammo.html?cid=970614 "Zwei Drittel der Rekruten diensttauglich (2009.

Don't you think you should've checked your above links prior to sticking your foot in your mouth about switz, canada, & israel being more armed than USA?

Your point actually is one of mine - it ain't the guns, its the gun nuts.

.. except that wasn't my point, which is it's both guns & gunnuts.

marble falls: Gun Crimes Drop, Gun Purchases Rise May 8, 2013

The very same article's headline could also read 'Gun Crimes Drop as Gun Ownership Drops', since gun ownership has fallen the past 30 yrs while gun sales have increased - primarily amongst existing gunowners.
So what apparently is happening is approx the 20/80 rule where 20% of the people enthralled with the 'fad' purchase 80% of the fad itself - which then isn't enough to compensate for yearly population growth so the actual ownership rate falls.

mar 2013:A national survey shows that US gun ownership has fallen steeply since the 1980s, even in the South and Western mountain areas where guns are more popular, the New York Times reports. The national ownership rate hovered around 50% in the 1970s and '80s, but dropped to 43% in the 1990s and 35% the decade after, according to the General Social Survey, the only poll to cover US gun ownership for so long. Democrats and independents lead the shift, with Republican gun ownership down just slightly.. the survey's director says those reports may reflect current gun owners stocking up on more firepower. Theories with experts noting:
1 the end of the US draft (fewer soldiers = fewer household guns) 2 rising urbanization (guns being favored in rural areas) 3 more Hispanics (only 14% of them have guns) 4 and more women heading households (only 10% of women own guns) http://www.newser.com/story/164169/gun-ownership-numbers-way-down.html

another: For the last 30 years, it turns out, gun ownership has dropped steadily. Today, only about 30% of households own a gun. Most of this is due to demographics. Apparently there was a big spurt in gun ownership in the generation born between 1920 and 1960, and then the spurt went away... I suspect the increase in gun sales has been limited mostly to current gun owners. The most reputable surveys show a decline over time in the share of households with guns

[marble falls]

48. Right. From 50% ownership in the 1950's to 37% currently. But population....

has grown and there are now more people and more powerful guns now than in the 1950's as a total number vs the percentage of ownership.

2012 population - 313,000,000 x 37% = 115,000,000
1959 population - 150,000,000 x 50% = 75,000,000

The population figures come from the US census.

[jimmy the one]

50. 1950 = wrong census

marble falls: Right. From 50% ownership in the 1950's to 37% currently. But population.... has grown and there are now more people and more powerful guns now than in the 1950's as a total number vs the percentage of ownership.
2012 population - 313,000,000 x 37% = 115,000,000
1959 population - 150,000,000 x 50% = 75,000,000

Has nowt to do with rates of gundeath, comparatively; your 115 million current gunowners (2013) is a high estimate, average estimate is around 100 million, indicating the 37% gunowner rate the culprit, & other estimates nearer 30 - 33% more accurate.

marblefalls: 1959 population - 150,000,000 x 50% = 75,000,000

You took the 1950 census & applied it to 1959, can you see where you went wrong? or did you do that on purpose to 'lessen' gun ownership in 1959?
The 1960 census would be closer to 1959 population, & voila wiki: {1960} 179,323,175, an increase of 18.5% over 151,325,798 persons enumerated during 1950 Census.

Year--Popu --------Total----Viol --Property -Murder-Rape -Robb--assault-Burg-Theft-GTA
1960 179,323,175 -1,887.2 -160.9 -1,726.3 ---5.1 -9.6 --60.1 --86.1 -508.6 -1,034.7 -183.0
2011 311,591,917 -3,295.0 - 386.3 -2,908.7 -4.7 -26.8 -113. -241.1 -702.2 -1.976.9 -229.6 http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

Compare violent crime rates above from 1960 (you cited 1959, close enough) and only the murder rate in 2011 is lower than 1960, tho at parity. Violent crime rate today is ~2.5 times higher than 1960, when the gun craze begin to gain momentum.

Using my 'updated' 1960 population, round to 180 mill (x 50% rate of gunowners then), thus 1960 gunownership increases to about 90 million compared with your figure of 75 million.
2013 population 310m minus 1960 pop 180m leaves 130 million increase in pop since 1960, and currently ~100m gunowners, less 90m in 1960 for an increase of 10 million gunowners since 1960, which also means an increase of 120m NON gunowers since 1960.
sub conclusion>> From 1960 to 2013 there has been an increase of 10 million gunowners as well as an increase of 120 million NONgunowners. THIS is what we're talking about, the gun ownership rate hasn't kept up with popu increases.

Using your figure of 115 million current gunowers would make a gunowner increase of 35m since 1960, with an increase of 95m NONgunowners, still a 3-1 increase in non-gunowners (~25% gunowner incr).
That is why gunownership is not keeping up with population growth.

[bowens43]

51. bullshit. Suicide IS gun violence.

[marble falls]

52. Suicide by gun is most definately violence.