« A reader likes the four-point perception range chart | Main | A pretty chart hides the message »



The first chart looks like the countries are deliberately selected to obscure the comparison rather than to reveal anything. The snapshot of single time point comparisons leaves many questions about the comparability unanswered.

A better analysis would be to compare the rates over time within each country before and after a ban (and maybe for a larger group that actually included some of the key countries like Australia or the UK who used to allow some guns and now don't). This before and after comparison removes a lot of the inherent differences among countries and directly addresses the question.

The current country selection is clearly biased by the omission of the UK anyway since we are one of the larger examples of a country where handguns were allowed but are no longer allowed.

Rhonda Drake

Kaiser for the second chart where the US is identified in the gold point there is another outlier on the dimension of intentional homicides per 100,000 people. What country is that? Do we know? It might help put the data relationship in context.


The sources are given at the end of Fosslien's page. The homicide rates are from http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/homicide.html The problem is that the plot only uses a selection of these. Many third world countries have much higher homicide rates than the US. The omissions are probably because they don't have data on gun ownership.

Kevin Henry

In the first chart, it's not clear how the countries are ordered within each group. Certainly, the effect of putting Russia last in the 'Handguns banned' area, right next to the very-low Poland data point, has the effect of heightening the contrast between the two groups.

Imagine if the chart was ordered from most murders to least (so: Russia, Belarus, Luxembourg, Finland, Poland, Belgium, France, Germany, Norway). Sure, the 'Handguns banned' group would still be noticeably higher, but I think the smooth shape would lessen the subjective impact of the difference.

When arbitrary, unconstrained changes to the layout can cause such noticeable differences in the impression, it's a good sign that you might have the wrong chart design.

Gun Guru

State-by-state figures are also confusing.


Gun Law Agnostic

Great information here. The effects of gun legislation are difficult to tease out given the countless variables involved. It seems to me that things like poverty and income disparity combined with relatively easy access to guns are the reason the US sticks out like a sore thumb among advanced countries. http://www.factandmyth.com/gun-laws-restrictions/states-gun-laws-and-crime-across-the-united-states

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


Link to Principal Analytics Prep

See our curriculum, instructors. Apply.
Marketing analytics and data visualization expert. Author and Speaker. Currently at Columbia. See my full bio.

Book Blog

Link to junkcharts

Graphics design by Amanda Lee

The Read

Good Books

Keep in Touch

follow me on Twitter