I want to follow up on San Francisco's handgun ban proposal from earlier this month. First there was the voice of support from Supervisor-elect Ross Mirkarimi, who proudly proclaimed, "How many more Michael Moore films does it take to tell us that the Second Amendment is absolutely archaic, and other nations do it better than we do? We should absolutely go forward with it despite the constitutional challenges." Yeah, we know it's unconstitutional, but it's 'for the children' so lets go for it.

Then there was the use of statistics to try to muddy the issue, which is when Howard�Nemerov threw the bullshit flag.

Here is the statistic used to justify the ban (although even if it were true, I fail to see the logic).

"The homicide rate in Washington, D.C., in 2002 was 9.4 incidents per 100,000 people. In San Francisco that year, the rate was 5.2."

Now here is Nemerov's analysis:

A key gambit of gun banners is the judicious use of misapplied statistical data. In the above quote, the writer referenced FBI crime data that covers metropolitan areas.

The mythical "9.4 incidents per 100,000 people" for "Washington, D.C." includes residents of five Maryland counties, 17 in Virginia, and two from West Virginia. This report is also the source of the stated rate for the SF metropolitan area, which includes only two additional counties: Marin and San Mateo.

The "D.C." homicide rate is understated because Virginia and West Virginia, which allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed firearms for personal protection, had homicide rates of 5.3 and 3.2, respectively. Maryland, with gun control policies similar to California, had a rate of 9.4, two to three times higher than the pro-gun rights states, but still about 20% of the D.C. rate.

Since these three states' counties had a combined population of 14,553,552, over 25 times D.C.'s population of 570,898, the D.C. homicide rate was significantly diluted. Also, the author compares "apples to oranges," since the San Francisco metropolitan area is completely covered by similar gun control laws, while the D.C area is not.

In reality, while the SF metropolitan area experienced the 5.2 rate, Washington D.C. had a homicide rate of 46.2, nearly five times the article's assertion. . .

While I figured the D.C. statistic was understated, I had no idea that fuzzy math would take a 46.2 score and understate it down to 9.4. Either way, why would you want to emulate a city with a higher homicide rate?