Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Show me ONE study that indicates that more guns in a country leads to safety and fewer firearm deaths.
Instead, we know that the U.S. has one of the highest per capita gun ownership rates and one of the highest rates of firearm deaths.
A 2013 study analyzed gun ownership rates, crime rates and deaths from firearms across 27 developed countries around the world. Places with higher gun ownership rates also have higher firearms-related deaths, the study found.
Places with higher gun ownership rates also have higher firearms-related deaths, a new study finds.
Really, how much did they pay these mental giants to come to that conclusion? Are they now off analysing why car accidents had remarkably lower fatality rates in the 1850's than today?
It's a tautology, higher gun ownership rates lead to higher firearms related deaths.
It doesn't make it a valid argument for eliminating guns unless you can prove that less guns results in fewer overall deaths, and that's not something that anyone has yet been able to prove. Here are three reasons why it is not true, Brazil, Venezuela, Mexico, all three have lower per capita guns than the US, all three have higher homicide rates than the US, and moreover all three have higher firearms related deaths than the US.
Show me ONE study that indicates that more guns in a country leads to safety and fewer firearm deaths.
Instead, we know that the U.S. has one of the highest per capita gun ownership rates and one of the highest rates of firearm deaths.
A 2013 study analyzed gun ownership rates, crime rates and deaths from firearms across 27 developed countries around the world. Places with higher gun ownership rates also have higher firearms-related deaths, the study found.
"Guns do not make a nation safer." "Guns Do Not Make a Nation Safer, (by the way, the study also found no significant correlation between mental illness and crime rate.)
I can't believe you needed a study to tell you that. Hey, I bet countries with more cars have a higher traffic fatality rate? I bet areas with more Grizzly bears are more likely to have bear attacks than areas that don't have a bear population at all.... People who live in a house with a dog are 100% more likely to be bitten by a dog in their own home than people who live in a dog free house..... So what do all these "facts" prove? Exactly nothing, that's what.
"Gun deaths" are a fallacy, a red herring. They are a way for the Left to make people who aren't capable of intellectual thought think they are making a valid point when in fact they are not. "Gun" deaths are not the issue, "deaths" are the issue and where the emphasis should be put. Take a gun away from a violent man and he's still a violent man who'll do violent things.
If there were no guns, there would be no gun deaths, but that doesn't mean much if there's still a violent element in society, and I don't see how the presence of a gun can make someone violent wherein they otherwise wouldn't be.
Really, how much did they pay these mental giants to come to that conclusion? Are they now off analysing why car accidents had remarkably lower fatality rates in the 1850's than today?
It's a tautology, higher gun ownership rates lead to higher firearms related deaths.
It doesn't make it a valid argument for eliminating guns unless you can prove that less guns results in fewer overall deaths, and that's not something that anyone has yet been able to prove. Here are three reasons why it is not true, Brazil, Venezuela, Mexico, all three have lower per capita guns than the US, all three have higher homicide rates than the US, and moreover all three have higher firearms related deaths than the US.
LOL, I know, right? Either they have been decieved, or they are trying to decieve others with these faux facts that don't prove a thing.
Really, how much did they pay these mental giants to come to that conclusion? Are they now off analysing why car accidents had remarkably lower fatality rates in the 1850's than today?
It's a tautology, higher gun ownership rates lead to higher firearms related deaths.
It doesn't make it a valid argument for eliminating guns unless you can prove that less guns results in fewer overall deaths, and that's not something that anyone has yet been able to prove. Here are three reasons why it is not true, Brazil, Venezuela, Mexico, all three have lower per capita guns than the US, all three have higher homicide rates than the US, and moreover all three have higher firearms related deaths than the US.
That's exactly what the study did find---the lower the rate of gun ownership, the lower the rate of firearm deaths. Naturally, correlation does not equal causation. But it does prove that having more guns in a country certainly doesn't make it any safer.
The statistics for each country in the study are shown in the table at this page: http://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-.../fulltext#tbl1
It's very clear, countries with lower rates of gun ownership had fewer deaths from firearms.
As for those three countries, I will try to locate data.
OK, here is a chart that shows relevant data for Mexico, Brazil, Chile, U.S. and other countries.
It doesn't make it a valid argument for eliminating guns unless you can prove that less guns results in fewer overall deaths, and that's not something that anyone has yet been able to prove. Here are three reasons why it is not true, Brazil, Venezuela, Mexico, all three have lower per capita guns than the US, all three have higher homicide rates than the US, and moreover all three have higher firearms related deaths than the US.
Well I do believe those three countries mentioned are influenced by the illegal firearms trade, some of which comes in no small part from the U.S. Remember that whole government operation fiasco?
In any event- I hear the NRA is poised to make an announcement concerning the recent event, not unlike they did post Sandy Hook. They will be supporting a 'More Nuns with Guns' initiative.
That's exactly what the study did find---the lower the rate of gun ownership, the lower the rate of firearm deaths. Naturally, correlation does not equal causation. But it does prove that having more guns in a country certainly doesn't make it any safer.
As for those three countries, I will try to locate data.
But we already know that, was his point. OF COURSE countries that have more GUNS are going to have more GUN DEATHS!!!!! The question is, do countries with LESS guns have less DEATHS??? Not less "gun deaths" but less deaths in general?
Saying countries with more guns are going to have more gun related deaths is like saying that coastal states are more likely to have shark attacks than inland states...
Well I do believe those three countries mentioned are influenced by the illegal firearms trade, some of which comes in no small part from the U.S. Remember that whole government operation fiasco?
In any event- I hear the NRA is poised to make an announcement concerning the recent event, not unlike they did post Sandy Hook. They will be supporting a 'More Nuns with Guns' initiative.
Link?
I doubt it. They have a policy not to remark on shootings, and really, they shouldn't be expected to any more than Budweiser should be expected to make an announcement when a drunk driver kills someone.
Frankly they should probably just keep their mouths shut, rather than enrage the public by promoting guns in churches or something like that, so I hope what you're saying isn't true.
Switzerland has a rate of 45 guns owned per 100 people. That does not equal 1 gun per 2 people. Because as is the case for the U.S., a majority of gun-owners own more than one gun.
The U.S. rate is 88.8 guns per 100 people. Again, that does not mean that 88 people in 100 own guns, it means that in a group of 100 people, statistically, there will be gun ownership of 88.8, but that is influenced by gun-owners owning more than one gun.
But we already know that, was his point. OF COURSE countries that have more GUNS are going to have more GUN DEATHS!!!!! The question is, do countries with LESS guns have less DEATHS??? Not less "gun deaths" but less deaths in general?
Saying countries with more guns are going to have more gun related deaths is like saying that coastal states are more likely to have shark attacks than inland states...
Well no kidding.
In any case, the OP's argument was that more guns around would lead to fewer deaths by gun, and the research findings do not support this argument. But the chart at the link does show what percentage of homicides are by firearm--in the u.S. it's 60 %, but it does vary a lot by country.
The deadliest places in the world (for firearm deaths) are the troubled regions of Africa, central (Honduras, El Salvador, Guatamala off the charts ,and south America, and the Caribbean.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
