As I've been saying for some time now, if you break crimes by geography, you find some very interesting things. Such as if you map shootings and murders on a map, you very rapidly see that more than half the shootings are concentrated in two or three areas of a city, and some areas have no murders at all.Here's a guy who did that for the continental United States.
We hear a lot of banter from the "anti-gun" media that these problems are gun problems, and they've concocted this "gun deaths" number in order to lump these into the same problem and gloss over the differences. But if the problem were "guns," then the hot spots on the suicide map and the hot spots on the homicide map would coincide, and would be related to gun ownership rates. There are only a few places where they overlap. Most of the hot zones for suicide have low homicide rates, and most of the hot zones for homicide have low suicide rates. The difference is stark.
Gun ownership rates, as far as such a thing can be determined, generally are inverse to crime and suicide rates from the studies I've seen. But its kind of hard to tell, because people generally lie like bastards when asked if they have any guns.
At any rate, there are some very interesting graphs here that tell a very non-PC story about who is getting shot by who, and where.