· 149 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Apr 22, 2026 at 11:14 AM

California sees lowest number of firearm-related deaths since 1968, new data shows

Posted by montemanm1


California sees lowest number of firearm-related deaths since 1968, new data shows
ABC7 Los Angeles
California sees lowest number of firearm-related deaths since 1968, new data shows
California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Tuesday highlighted what he called historic progress in the state's fight against gun violence.

🚩 Report this post

149 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
Demoz7186 3 days ago +616
Facts don't matter anymore, what does my facebook feed say about California?
616
Nugur 3 days ago +165
They’re still on Iowa with $3 gas and ca with $6 gas.
165
TheTerribleInvestor 3 days ago +60
Can't wait for all the cars in CA to be EVs.
60
Worthyness 3 days ago +36
They're trying. Theres a mandate to have HEV or EV cars only in the state by i think 2030 ish. And the state has some of the better electrical charging infrastructure in the country (not that its all that great either, but that just shows how awful the reat of the country is).
36
Big_Bookkeeper1678 2 days ago +12
Yeah, I have had an EV for 18 months and I still haven't used a charging station other than my home. We have a hybrid for trips. It is a problem, but the hybrid has only been filled about 10 times in the past 18 months... Right direction, but too slow. Amazingly enough, I have watched about 5 more gas stations...NONE with charging...get built in my area (Allentown, PA) in the same time period.
12
rizorith 2 days ago +7
It's about not selling them new after 2030, or whatever date. Not banning them. Banning them is what fox news likes to tell everyone
7
mjh2901 3 days ago +20
The infrastructure is c*** because a shit ton of Tesla chargers do not allow non Tesla even with adapters. Until that gets fixed our charging infrastructure is worse than c***, its a scam. Tesla's app isn't even always correct and the third party apps can be useless. It looks like good infrastructure as long as you own a specific brand. When you find the other types of chargers they are normally packed because Tesla had such a huge head start.
20
DarthSamwiseAtreides 2 days ago +7
A lot of brands actually work on their chargers now.  I have a Chevy and charge at Superchargers on road trips, I'll see the Korea bros, Fords, rivians, polestar so I'd imagine Volvo would work.  
7
AnewTest 3 days ago +9
Hey, if they want to buy one for me, sure. I'm not opposed to getting an EV, but I'm f****** poor, so I'm sticking to my 20 year old car that's still passing annual smog tests.
9
DillDeer 3 days ago +5
All need to have 50 miles of electric range if I recall correctly. Gas will still exist.
5
SleepingToDreaming 3 days ago +3
It is awful.  The amount of dead zones in places like the Central Valley tend to favor older cars and it makes those mandates pointless with hard headed dickheads that think oil grows on trees.
3
rizorith 2 days ago +5
I don't know a single person in California who has bought a gas or hybrid car in the past 3 years, other than the one right wing friend I have, who bought abused Nissan. Obviously it's just my personal experience but as a bit big car guy it's hard to argue that EV's aren't better in every single way. I haven't pumped or even gone to a charging station in a year, and when I did it was because I was driving from LA to Santa Cruz. Just plug in at home. The entire world sees this but somehow not only do we have a party that politicizes cars, but it's doing this to the detriment of our economy. We were the world leader in evs and f****** handed it to the Chinese because of politics. Also, California isn't banning gas cars, just won't be selling new ones in 2030
5
DarthSamwiseAtreides 2 days ago +1
I'm doing my part 
1
Reikukaja 2 days ago +3
Ah yes, Iowa. The cultural mecca we all wish we could live in... /s I live in the midwest in a state that is only marginally better than Iowa, thanks to some larger cities. It honestly feels like the midwest is an experiment to see how little our local/state governments can give us in exchange for our compulsory tax dollars.
3
turb0_encapsulator 3 days ago +2
if you have to drive more than twice as far to everything in Iowa, how does that save you money?
2
Silent-Hyena9442 3 days ago +40
Tbh I don’t think calis Fox News territory is murders anymore. That’s my cities (Chicago) Fox News territory. Calis Fox News territory is homelessness, the drug epidemic, and smash and grabs. At least from what I see my grandparents sharing
40
Gator_farmer 3 days ago +16
Correct. The shift has gone from violent crime to "quality of life crimes." Which, to be fair, are important. Sure you're not likely to get shot anymore, but if you're walking through blocks of garbage and drug users then things aren't exactly peachy.
16
Dry_Extension1110 3 days ago +41
That is true but the vast majority of Californians don't live in skid row and tenderloin. Most Californians live in suburbs
41
Gator_farmer 3 days ago +10
For sure. Just pointing out where the shift in media narrative has been
10
donutgut 2 days ago +6
Maybe they should cover the south is f****** violent narrative, which is way more important
6
akujiki87 3 days ago +15
The latest ive seen is "DeMs DoNt RePoRt CrImEs bY IlLeGaLs"
15
1d10 3 days ago +3
"If gun control worked why does California still have gun deaths?" "the reason California has gun deaths is because they took everyones guns and now mexicans are running rampant and buying bullets with SNAP cards" Your facebook Feed
3
JollyToby0220 2 days ago +1
Chad Bianco would tell you crime is out of control. But now the new thing is homelessness 
1
Financial-Desk-669 3 days ago +265
Any hypotheses for the stunning drop in crime in America the last 30 years? 
265
chantsnone 3 days ago +327
Everybody’s aim is getting worse?
327
FoldCurious6978 3 days ago +134
Even 'c****' range ammo is too expensive.
134
USSZim 3 days ago +46
Chris Rock was right all along?
46
RBVegabond 3 days ago +14
Comedians often get it right on their sets, we just don’t realize it until much later. Carlin especially.
14
mhornberger 3 days ago +30
Carlin was the one who told us "if voting mattered, they wouldn't let you do it." That enlightened cynicism was part of what put us here.
30
k_realtor 3 days ago +5
also had a skit about if democracy actually works and a stupid person wins the vote, then it's a lot of stupid people voting so then the system is working as intended. Of course there's variables like gerrymandering but if that's not taken into account, then well. that's what it is. The guy that drinks bleach for fun that doesn't know right from wrong gets the same vote as the scientist that wants to change the future for better.
5
MonochromaticPrism 2 days ago +3
To be fair this is a solvable problem via breaking people into 100-ish person blocks and having that single block elect a representative that votes for all of them (local, state, and federal). At that kind of small community scale it's far more likely that everyone votes for the scientist to be the group representative over the bleach drinker. Even if they don't choose the scientist they are still overwhelmingly likely to choose someone in the top 25% of intelligence out of everyone in the group.
3
k_realtor 2 days ago +3
I tend to think people vote for someone that looks like them and acts like their neighbors and not someone that is a professor at Oxford or a Director of economics that can engineer and create city projects for millions of people to live in a sustainable environment. There's some sad truths to "I'd vote for someone I can have a bbq with and have a beer with". That's the limitation and also why even though they might vote for some one that is better than the low average or worse, some bleach drinker, it's just the guy that might be a C+ type of person in school instead of a D- candidate type sleazy politician.
3
Kalslice 2 days ago +3
And now Republicans are doing everything they can to stop Americans from voting. Almost like it matters.
3
Steamed_Memes24 3 days ago +2
Quite the opposite on what youre thinking. Voting *DOES* matter and those not voting is how we got Trump.
2
mhornberger 3 days ago +3
Yes, I was *criticizing* Carlin's "insight." Carlin's performative cynicism contributed to a great number of people thinking they were terribly smart for not seeing the point in voting.
3
PaladinMax 3 days ago +2
Brilliantly funny bit
2
VagrantShadow 3 days ago +7
The shooters are coming up to those who got shot saying to them "I believe you have my property".
7
Hyperious3 3 days ago +10
yup... $400 for 1000rds of 5.56 *reloads* - not even new brass. It's rough rn...
10
jgilbs 3 days ago +224
Leaded Gasoline was banned
224
Stormthorn67 3 days ago +19
The removal of lead has had global benefits for decreasing violence but it will be some time before the last of the lead-damaged die off 
19
Old-Suspect4129 2 days ago +6
More true then many people realize. I remember people that used to argue for leaded gasoline. Mostly because it was slightly cheaper.
6
5GCovidInjection 2 days ago +8
People argued for it because it was a super reliable way of protecting older engines from fuel detonation. Lead’s a c**** octane booster. Modern engines are much better built and have advanced ignition systems that can detect detonation and adjust spark timing to prevent it, so they no longer need leaded gasoline to last a long time. The other reason why leaded gasoline was banned, apart from lowering everyone’s IQ, is that lead destroys catalytic converters (which have been required on all US market cars since 1975).
8
lo_fi_ho 3 days ago +29
Eating crayons became frowned upon.
29
jgilbs 3 days ago +21
No one told the Marines
21
geosensation 3 days ago +4
Well they are supposed to be violent!
4
CrotalusHorridus 3 days ago +58
Ripples of Roe v Wade also
58
WhatamItodonowhuh 3 days ago +26
Reversing that as fast as they can though.
26
NotFlameRetardant 3 days ago +8
Can't wait for automakers to start lobbying for a reversal of leaded gasoline bans, so they can make cheaper and shittier engines again
8
[deleted] 3 days ago +191
[removed]
191
ghostspectre1518 3 days ago +41
Bro the mental health part is surprisingly the best part and never gets the lime light. in this California has pretty great access to therapy clinics and treatment relative to everyone else. Nobody ever likes bringing this up but it's the most data driven response to crime rates.
41
VagrantShadow 3 days ago +5
I remember growing up and everything that was a form of entertainment was used as an excuse for violence. It was rock music, then it was rap music, it was also D&D, then it was Video games, then it was video game accessories. There were so many fingers pointed in different directions as the cause and catalyst of violence in Amerikca in the past.
5
ghostspectre1518 3 days ago +6
And none of them were mental health or poverty the two deamed legitimately most likely. Politics and outrage make politicians rich and the average man poor
6
mchgndr 3 days ago +1
Can you link me to some data? Sounds interesting
1
ghostspectre1518 3 days ago +4
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537064/ This is a good start I think it's been 2 or 3 years and I remember my study was more on economic factors but you can't avoid linking finances to mental health access in America. Simply put if you don't have enough money you can't treat your issues or you accumulate stress until you get issues.
4
ghostspectre1518 3 days ago +2
Also I don't have my school's old library but there's some studies from around 2010 examine recidivism and access to community support/mental health help
2
Sumeriandawn 3 days ago +34
Less youths out in public leading to.... Less youths running with the wrong crowd/gangs Less racial tension and violence among the youth. Therefore they no longer feel the "need" to join gangs for self defense reasons More entertainment options at home. Why go out and cause trouble when you can stay home and go online?
34
CapitalPunBanking 3 days ago +23
It's funny that while everyone was screaming how video games made kids more violent they actually had the opposite effect because kids were inside playing them instead of down the block causing trouble.
23
SparkFunk30 3 days ago +6
I think the drop in alcohol consumption is huge. Very few people are committing murders sober.
6
milexmile 3 days ago +6
Cocaine epidemic gone? Nah, but the distribution systems are now fully in place. Cocaine is *everywhere*
6
LeftyLifeIsRoughLife 3 days ago +64
Took the lead out of gasoline. Literally every country that banned the lead also saw the same violent crime trends drop along the same timelines. The first generations without dealing with leaded gasoline are only around 30 right now. I’d wager most violent crimes are done by people in their 20s and 30s, but I truly don’t know which age group does more violent crime.
64
reality_boy 3 days ago +19
I’m 50 and I remember my dad going on about the led ban. He even bought led additives for a while. Back then the carburetor was still common, breathing gas fumes was part of the driving experience
19
Fadedcamo 2 days ago +17
If we still had lead in our gas today it would never get a hope of getting banned with today's uninformed and polarized populace.
17
OneWholeSoul 3 days ago +3
Was that truly it? It made the smell more familiar and nostalgic, somehow? Lead in the air for vibes?
3
dern_the_hermit 2 days ago +4
[Straight from the CDC about tetraethyl lead](https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npgd0601.html) for whatever that's worth these days: > Colorless liquid (unless dyed red, orange, or blue) with a pleasant, sweet odor.
4
montemanm1 2 days ago +2
"I’d wager most violent crimes are done by people in their 20s and 30s" It has been a while since I looked up the numbers, but yes, it is men in their late teens to 40s
2
useribarelynoher 2 days ago +1
yeah usually when theres talk of violent crime statistics, they say people, but it’s a pretty overwhelmingly male dominated space
1
CV90_120 2 days ago +1
> Took the lead out of gasoline Still a 'correlation does not necessarily equal causation' scenario. Other significant societal changes have occurred at the same time, while TEL had been in fuel since the 1920's. There are also arguments for lower poverty, Roe V Wade etc.. (fewer unwanted children being born into a life of crime).
1
Zestyclose-Novel1157 3 days ago +84
In sociology there is actually a theory that wider abortion availability led to a decrease in unwanted children / children parents were not capable of raising. There are probably many factors though.
84
Doam-bot 2 days ago +3
I fully agree with this I work with people in the system we have fewer lashing out at the world types with no where to go that we used to get back in the day. Fewer violent homeless people as well the number of homeless is still high but it seems there are enough services available There is no statistic for it but what I have noticed is a stark increase of family related homicide namely spoiled kids whose parents waited too long to say no leading to death and adults so dependent on other people that the state has to flip the bill on them now.
3
CapitalPunBanking 3 days ago +25
Something i don't see anyone really hypothesize is that almost nobody chain smokes in their house anymore.
25
angrysquirrel777 3 days ago +82
Gun crime correlates quite a bit to poverty and Americans are richer than they were in the 90s. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N
82
Particular_Main_5726 3 days ago +36
We're not really "richer," because the velocity of money (how much you can buy) has decreased faster than it's inflationary value (how much it's worth). Healthcare, housing, transportation and food prices have all increased at rates *beyond* inflation, etc. California likely has seen a reduction mostly because of pushes towards education, but also expanded social safety nets that other states lack - like MediCal. While these things don't eliminate poverty, they can help provide a "floor" for how bad it effectively is to *be* in poverty, which in turn means that there's (roughly) a floor for intersectional violence that's related to poverty.
36
KRacer52 3 days ago +18
Velocity of money means how quickly money travels through an economy, it doesn’t mean “how much you can buy”. It measures circulation rate.
18
angrysquirrel777 3 days ago +39
The link I provided is accounting for inflation. Americans *are* richer than ever before.
39
ReserveFormal3910 3 days ago +3
Aren't we in the K shape economy though more money for the top half but that doesn't mean we have fewer in poverty.
3
angrysquirrel777 3 days ago +15
K shaped economy is just something people say because they heard a new term. The median income is going up which means that more people are wealthy now than before. A few rich people can't bring up a median.
15
SwiftTyphoon 2 days ago +2
Median still is pretty far from directly representing poverty levels, it would be better to have 10th or 20th percentiles or something like that but I don't immediately see an option for that on the site.
2
sasha_the_impaler 3 days ago +2
Okay so why is income disparity skyrocketing in the last 30 years lol
2
angrysquirrel777 3 days ago +13
Because rich people are getting richer, poor people are just getting richer too. They aren't getting poorer like the K implies.
13
sasha_the_impaler 3 days ago +3
You're not accounting for changes in cost of living and changes in spending patterns, especially in regards to basic necessities... The average person struggles to afford a normal life more today than 30 years ago. https://www.hamiltonproject.org/publication/post/where-does-all-the-money-go-shifts-in-household-spending-over-the-past-30-years/
3
angrysquirrel777 3 days ago +5
Yes, the career economist who have done this for decades are accounting for cost of living. That is what CPI U is.
5
sasha_the_impaler 3 days ago +3
I can promise you in my field of psychology, there are also "psychologists who have been doing this for decades" who can barely write an abstract. You're first of all making broad assumptions about their methodology and second of all are using an appeal to authority lol
3
OhItsBeenBroughten 3 days ago +5
This is more an indictment of psychology than economics.
5
CV90_120 2 days ago +1
>We're not really "richer," because the velocity of money (how much you can buy) has decreased faster than it's inflationary value (how much it's worth). Actually we are ahead even accounting for inflation. https://archive.ph/Aw6bR
1
therealruin 3 days ago +6
Piggybacking to drop [this link](https://web.archive.org/web/20230401052143/https://zachmortensen.net/2018/02/20/your-gun-control-ideas-wont-work-this-one-will/).
6
SanityIsOptional 2 days ago +1
True, but gun *deaths* are mostly suicides, and gun suicide has a strong correlation with gun ownership. There's enough of a correlation between gun ownership and gun suicide that gun suicide is used as a proxy for gun ownership numbers. Per the article: >California has achieved something historic with the lowest rates of firearm deaths, suicides and homicides on record So, unless this is specifically talking about gun accidents/gun murders, it's probably just a decrease in gun ownership/gun suicides. And yes, gun crime, and in fact most crime, correlates significantly with poverty, which is why I'm a *progressive* gun owner, not part of the empty head red-hat brigade. [edit] Checking through the release, this actually seems to be more than just a suicide reduction, which is definitely good news. >This data confirms that in 2024, California achieved the state’s lowest firearm death, firearm suicide, and firearm homicide rates on record in CDC data collected since 1968. Historic reductions in firearm homicide also drove California’s overall homicide rate to its lowest level on record in CDC data. In addition, it was found that California was one of three states that achieved record low firearm homicide rates in 2024, after reducing statewide firearm homicide rates by 35% in three years. >As recently as 2010, a child under 18 was more likely to die from bullet wounds in California than in the rest of the U.S. on average. By 2024, a child in the rest of the nation was nearly three times as likely to die from bullet wounds as a child in California. >Drive transformational reductions in firearm homicide, with many California cities recording record low homicide rates and over 50% reductions in homicide since 2021. >Cut firearm homicide rates by more than half (52%) for young Hispanic men from 2021 to 2024, and by 48% for young Black men. >Cut firearm death rates for children under 18 to about one-third the rate recorded in the rest of the U.S. on average. >Open a record large safety gap between California and the rest of the U.S. for rates of firearm death, firearm suicide, and firearm homicide.
1
WillitsThrockmorton 3 days ago +37
* Freer access to abortion(fewer unwanted kids and all the home life problems that entails) * End of leaded gasoline * Some would seriously argue that the liberalization of carry laws(as in, literally more guns legally on the street) helped out. * A drive to de-mystify mental health help * Reduction of use of all types of drugs * Finally, and I'm rather enamored with this, but the phrase "idle hands make for the Devil's work" may apply. As much as people attribute social media to crimes, e.g. trying to get tiktok clout for carjacking for instance, having access to the circuses part of bread and circuses in your hands probably does wonders for staying out of trouble. About a decade back I had a prof in grad school who seriously argued that the decline in birthrate was correlated to "young people finding other ways to entertain themselves than fuckin'", such a train of thought could probably be applied to crime as well.
37
Financial-Desk-669 3 days ago +14
That last one is an excellent point. I hadn't really thought of that. Endless entertainment, distraction.
14
WestCoastBestCoast01 3 days ago +10
Yeah I've actually never seen that connection made. We know teenagers specifically have been doing less underage drinking & sex, make sense that they'd be engaging in less crime of opportunity too.
10
WillitsThrockmorton 3 days ago +11
It's a digital opiate for the masses. Your life sucks a lot so you consume it to feel better rather than acting out in other ways.
11
_N4AP 2 days ago +1
> drive to de-mystify mental health help Should probably put widespread adoption of antidepressants and other psychological medications in general in that list too.
1
jrzalman 2 days ago +1
Yeah, the last one is a big part of it. People do a lot less of everything now because they spend so much time staring at their phone.
1
GreenHorror4252 3 days ago +5
> Any hypotheses for the stunning drop in crime in America the last 30 years?  I think the main factor is the decrease in the use of cash. People don't have cash, gas stations don't have as much cash, even banks don't have as much cash. Therefore, street crime has dropped. However, another type of crime that didn't exist 30 years ago (hacking people's accounts) has gone up.
5
Financial-Desk-669 3 days ago +1
Another great point. Thanks!
1
Clone95 3 days ago +10
Less (different?) drugs, less alcohol, gen lead got too old, kids kept inside more, economic prosperity
10
cheese_wizard 3 days ago +7
Doom scrolling instead of doom shooting.
7
cattlemanish 3 days ago +5
It stems mostly from the drop of fire arms related suicide, not from homicides. Unfortunately, alternate ways of suicide are being used. Criminals will find guns, people with suicidal ideation will not… they will find other methods, unfortunately
5
Stephen_California 3 days ago +2
Abortions, widely available birth control (both of which reduce the number of unwanted children in a country that provides practically null services for young children and their parents) and the reduction of lead in the atmosphere which had an impact on impulse control.
2
nathanwilson26 3 days ago +2
Also there has been tremendous advances in medical treatment of gunshot wounds since the Vietnam war, the better statistic to measure is firearm injuries, that would measure the underlying criminality rather than just how much better we are at surviving.
2
This_lady_in_paso 3 days ago -7
California has some of the strictest gun laws in the country now.  Beyond that, freakonomics links the availability of birth control and abortions to better outcomes for the impoverished which leads to less crime 
-7
angrysquirrel777 3 days ago +58
This doesn't explain the decrease in violent crime across all 50 of the states in the last 30 years though.
58
rinderblock 3 days ago +20
Violent crime has been going down as American average net worth has been going up. If people can afford treats they are less likely to do crime. Treats are cheaper and people have more money.
20
Fallouttgrrl 3 days ago +10
That's the most real "you're not you when you're hungry" Snickers commercial yet
10
GoodOlSpence 3 days ago +2
The Freakonomics part does, and it's fascinating. They cover it in their book and documentary.
2
IAteACake 2 days ago +2
what about the strict gun laws in Chicago?
2
Viceroy1994 2 days ago +1
Laws mean nothing if you can't or won't enforce them
1
discopirate2000 3 days ago +1
What happened to the incarceration rates in that time?
1
GingerSnapSurprise 3 days ago +1
There's evidence to suggest it's partly from phasing out leaded gasoline.
1
Random_182f2565 2 days ago +1
Not enough money for ammunition
1
peanutski 2 days ago +1
People are so poor they can’t afford ammunition?
1
Radoon1 2 days ago +1
Aging population. People stop committing most crimes after 25.
1
yellowcloak 1 day ago +1
Lead-Crime and Abortion, alongside generally decent economy and some degree of social safety net. Some speculation as to the relative ease of obtaining entertainment. Plus the general age of the population has increased on average. These add up to simply reduce the number of triggermen you're going to get. Personally, I've been wondering if cell phones make drug dealing less territory based, and thus violence to control it less important.
1
Able-Help782 2 days ago +19
No one can afford bullets 🤣
19
Quiet_Researcher7166 3 days ago +69
Can they show us this data? I did not see it in the article.
69
Plenor 3 days ago +52
If you click through to the press release there is a link to the full report at the bottom. The data appears to come from the CDC.
52
PSteak 3 days ago +37
I'd be interested in overall shootings. For a number of reasons, a person is more likely to survive getting shot than in decades prior, so a downturn in gun deaths does not equally correlate to a drop in gun violence itself.
37
TimothyMimeslayer 2 days ago +3
I looked up the math earlier today, the low for the US for deaths was in the early 2000s. Current deaths as of last year in the US are higher than that. California deaths are lower than the US 2000's numbers.
3
elsphinc 3 days ago +39
Ammo must be expensive.
39
dubious455H013 3 days ago +28
It is, theres 21-ish% sale tax on it here
28
onlyforsellingthisPC 2 days ago +9
It's expensive everywhere my guy. Prices spiked during COVID and then never came back down.  Same thing that happened with a bunch of industries. 
9
MaverickTopGun 3 days ago +29
Ahh I love when states restrict rights away from the poor.
29
Jmalco55 3 days ago +5
Per capital or hard numbers?
5
moosenuckel44 2 days ago +5
Can’t afford ammo with all this winning
5
Explorer_Entity 3 days ago +41
Don't look at the rise in deaths caused by cars. #2 killer of CHILDREN in USA, and only getting worse.
41
JennyWearsBlueJeans 3 days ago +12
Is that true? Cars have been getting safer and safer as years go on. I’m curious why deaths by cars would be increasing. Edit: it’s not true. “U.S. traffic deaths fell in 2025, to about 36,600 fatalities, a ~6–7% drop from 2024. That continues a multi-year downward trend since about 2022–2023.” Source: https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/traffic-deaths-2025-early-estimates-2024-annual
12
Gurpa 2 days ago +31
Cars have been getting bigger and bigger as years go on, and without a proper increase in safe infrastructure to combat this, it's just a matter of bigger vehicles = bigger impact. Safer for the occupants, way more dangerous for people outside. Also, bigger vehicles have bigger blind spots (see the increase in front-overs)
31
JennyWearsBlueJeans 2 days ago +3
Hmm…that data doesn’t back that up. “U.S. traffic deaths fell in 2025, to about 36,600 fatalities, a ~6–7% drop from 2024. That continues a multi-year downward trend since about 2022–2023.” Source: https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/traffic-deaths-2025-early-estimates-2024-annual
3
Ambitious-Drawer-659 2 days ago +17
Hmmm… the data doesn’t back your claim up for PEDESTRIAN deaths with 2023 being the worst year in over 40 years. 1 out of 5 car related deaths are pedestrians https://www.cdc.gov/pedestrian-bike-safety/about/pedestrian-safety.html https://www.npr.org/2023/06/26/1184034017/us-pedestrian-deaths-high-traffic-car
17
MalTalm 3 days ago +26
I hate the limited scope of things like “gun related deaths”. It’s too specific - the part that matters is the change in homicide rates. If gun related deaths drop by 5 per 10,000, but stabbing related deaths increase by the same ratio, nothing has materially changed. Now in California, the homicide rate is down, the suicide rate is down, and some of that can likely be attributed to gun restrictions, education, and better mental health support for the community. That’s the story, and it’s a great one. Articles like this miss the mark.
26
TheTerribleInvestor 3 days ago +55
And they're still trying to pass legislation to control 3d printers? Almost as if that law has nothing to do with guns in the first place.
55
Swamp_Ape_92 3 days ago +31
It 100% has nothing to do with guns. They already passed a law requiring background checks for barrels, one of the few critical gun parts that can’t really be 3d printed.
31
TwoPoundzaSausage 3 days ago +13
> They already passed a law requiring background checks for barrels, So now you need a background check to purchase pipe at the hardware store?
13
SeaUrchinSalad 2 days ago +2
Can't buy rifled pipe, and I imagine it's not sold in common calibers
2
realestateqs22 2 days ago +6
A rifled barrel is not required to make a functional firearm. It just makes it more accurate. People can and do make firearms literally from Home Depot plumbing pipe 
6
Jmg0713 2 days ago +3
Really because Newsom says quite the opposite.
3
StoreRevolutionary70 2 days ago +3
Don’t tell the “kids” in Washington DC.
3
Swamp_Ape_92 3 days ago +32
And yet California is pushing a bill that will effectively ban 3d printers “because of all the gun deaths”. This seems to show that their other laws are working and blaming guns is an excuse for going after 3d printers.
32
optimaloutcome 3 days ago +4
We can't afford bullets anymore
4
ICXPDQ 2 days ago +4
This is what happens when the baddies kill each other off! This is good news!
4
ThatDudeJuicebox 2 days ago +4
Try telling that to anyone in Stockton lol
4
collin-h 2 days ago +2
Lowest deaths because medical treatment has improved, or lowest number of attacks even if they don’t lead to deaths? Important clarification. If the number of attacks is the same but more people are surviving, that’s more of a silver lining type deal and less of a “things are actually getting better” situation.
2
montemanm1 2 days ago +2
One of the many factors in violent crime is social trends. Crime, like all other parts of human social life, goes in and out of style. Back in the 90s during the crack epidemic violent crime was very much in vogue.
2
eilidh1339 3 days ago +7
california resident, here. my uncle went to prison via fbi sting back in 1994. of note, he got three years for the kilo of coke and five years for the gun.
7
ass4play 2 days ago +4
Why is “firearm-related” needed as a qualifier? For better or worse one of the key arguments in favor of gun control is that it makes s*icide and violent crime rarer because those two acts are less convenient by other means. That may still be the case but it’s hard to take that argument seriously if the article is only measuring crimes that need a specific, heavily regulated weapon.
4
Adventurous-Start874 3 days ago +10
That's because everybody lost their guns in a house fire
10
bobsonjunk 3 days ago +3
They all moved to Texas.
3
Goodrah 3 days ago +1
What will they do when we stop killing each other?
1
HoganRO 2 days ago +1
And they said the Pope was weak on crime
1
compuwiza1 21 hr ago +1
Fewer guns, fewer gun deaths. It ain't rocket science.
1
← Back to Board