Possibly for you, and some others, these is an easier format to comprehend the matter. I have difficulty seeing how but then I'm very comfortable with raw numbers and data so I may be biased. Nonetheless I really don't see how it adds to the conversation. For me it is a simple matter to know the approximate population of the country and lifespan and say "roughly 10,000 people die everyday of various causes" and I am not really aided by a pin-map by location, since I instantly know that it either is a rough parallel to a population density map and rather irrelevant, or that it is statistical significant, such as increased cancer deaths by location, in which case I won't see that from two months of data, unless it were 'Hurricane deaths from X hurricane' in which case I'd still need it adapted against population density for most applications.

What you really mean is that you think this will 'bring it home' for some people, that a map is more of a tear-jerker than a simple number. Maybe, though probably not for most people, and regardless it would remain a purely emotional argument. You've added nothing new in data or logic. You merely descend to the level of commercial advertising, attaching kittens or cute kids or bikini-clad ladies to sell your prescription for life's problems.



Proper word there 'more personal' not 'concrete'. I also resent the implication I'm 'pretending' we don't have a gun violence issue, I simply don't believe the suggested treatments by the left are worth the cost, I view them as parallel to using homeopathic or alternative medical remedies. Ineffective, inefficient when they have positive effect at all, and often doing nothing or even making things worse, all under the justification that 'we have to do something', which is not a good reason to shoot a cancer victim up with snake oil.