"The Geography of U.S. Gun Violence"

[SDGuy]

Lemon Drop wrote:
"I'm just curious, though, why both yourself and pdq seem to be advocating for a one-size-fits-all approach, when this would be in conflict with what the OP is pointing out."

Did you read the entire linked article? I linked to it in my first post.

They are not saying we don't need federal gun control laws. In fact, they show why we DO need it. Political and cultural forces in some regions make those regions resistant to passing legislation that we know would reduce violence there.

Also your conclusion above is wrong looking at states overall.

States with more gun safety legislation have lower gun homicide rates.

I suspect we are in overwhelming agreement on many parts of this; I've stated MANY times on multiple threads what I believe the Federal Government could (and should) do in this area - but the majority of posters here seem to be content with posting soundbites along the lines of "just ban all guns" or "we should do the things we know that need to be done" (without explaining what, exactly, those things are). Then there's the ever-present posting of discount ads for various semi-automatic firearms that pop-up.

As for the original source article cited in the OP (thank you for linking to it!), even its conclusion states that "With such sharp regional differences, it is unlikely the United States will ever reach a federation-wide consensus on gun control... it’s conceivable that political supermajority could coalesce that could find agreement on measures that could have a marginal effect, like banning high-capacity magazines or creating truly universal background checks."
This is in-line with what I've been advocating.

I don't know what your (or pdq's) stances are exactly; it seems very hard to pin folks on here down to provide specifics on what, exactly, they are proponents of.