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.
Nobody said there would be no gun related deaths. The idea is to reduce them. If you look it up, the US has 5 times the per capita gun death rate as England and 3.3 times that of Australia.
Actually the poster I responded to said more or less just that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoke
The rest if of the world watches in awe..... as we wait for America to get it.
Barely any of us have gun violence, but the US doesn't follow our lead.
Well I found a double shooting in Birmingham England less than 72 hours into the new year on one of the places that barely has gun violence (we know this because we're constantly told how little gun violence the UK has).
No one said anything about gun related deaths either, both articles I provided were merely indications of violence. If guns are the issue then I'd expect that the US would have 17 times more per capita gun deaths than the UK, it has 17 times more guns per capita, if it's only 5 times that's way below the statistical projection.
I wish I had the data, but some time back I ran across something that suggested that of the 11,000 zipcodes, the worst 50 were the cause of the vast majority of the disparity between the USA and Western Europe.
in other words, remove those 50 zipcodes from the stats, our crime rates are no different than western Europe.
Bottom line, we have a government that has no interest in fixing the issue. They would rather have a wedge issue. Guns aren't the problem. Criminals and a government that needs criminals is the problem.
Well if you find it again, post it, and I will put the site in my favorites.
I had not seen that one related to guns, but I did see a stat showing that if you eliminated minority (black, brown) students from averages of test scores, America would be #1 and/or in the top 3 in almost every category.
Frankly I was surprised such a non-PC analysis was done, because liberals would naturally scream it is racist to even do a study like that, regardless of whether it was true or not.
So while not all minority students have lower test scores, and not all gangbanger gun violence is minority driven, it would seem that the segment of our society that worships the thug culture is responsible for skewing the statistics in gun violence and test scores.
Actually the poster I responded to said more or less just that.
Well I found a double shooting in Birmingham England less than 72 hours into the new year on one of the places that barely has gun violence (we know this because we're constantly told how little gun violence the UK has).
No one said anything about gun related deaths either, both articles I provided were merely indications of violence. If guns are the issue then I'd expect that the US would have 17 times more per capita gun deaths than the UK, it has 17 times more guns per capita, if it's only 5 times that's way below the statistical projection.
Yes, you're right about my poor math skills. I confused gun deaths and ownership per capita and generally screwed the stats up. The per capita gun death rate is actually 30 times less in the UK.
Yes, you're right about my poor math skills. I confused gun deaths and ownership per capita and generally screwed the stats up. The per capita gun death rate is actually 30 times less in the UK.
So then that shows equally it's not guns.
If the US has 17 times the guns per capita than the UK, we would expect that the number 17 or there abouts would be related to the difference between US and UK gun figures.
Yes, you're right about my poor math skills. I confused gun deaths and ownership per capita and generally screwed the stats up. The per capita gun death rate is actually 30 times less in the UK.
Actually I have to ask if you're making things up.
UK gun homicide rate is 0.06/100,000
US gun homicide rate is 3.55/100,000
US is 59 times higher (again not 17)
UK gun death rate is 0.23/100,000
US gun death rate is 10.64/100,000
US is 46 times higher (again not 17)
What I find alarming is not the comparison US/UK, but UK death rate vs. homicide rate, their gun death rate to gun homicide ratio is roughly 30% higher than the US, where guns are more freely available and firearms suicide should be significantly easier, and the UK has half the per capita suicide rate of the US. Leads me to conclude that US and UK homicide rates are not comparable, US and UK suicide rates are not comparable, or the UK gun owning segment has a suicide rate that is stratospheric in comparison to the general population.
Actually I have to ask if you're making things up.
UK gun homicide rate is 0.06/100,000
US gun homicide rate is 3.55/100,000
US is 59 times higher (again not 17)
UK gun death rate is 0.23/100,000
US gun death rate is 10.64/100,000
US is 46 times higher (again not 17)
What I find alarming is not the comparison US/UK, but UK death rate vs. homicide rate, their gun death rate to gun homicide ratio is roughly 30% higher than the US, where guns are more freely available and firearms suicide should be significantly easier, and the UK has half the per capita suicide rate of the US. Leads me to conclude that US and UK homicide rates are not comparable, US and UK suicide rates are not comparable, or the UK gun owning segment has a suicide rate that is stratospheric in comparison to the general population.
Depends where you get your statistics.I imagine we would have to go to all sources and take an average. Suffice it to say that both the UK and Australia have much lower per capita gun death rates.
Depends where you get your statistics.I imagine we would have to go to all sources and take an average. Suffice it to say that both the UK and Australia have much lower per capita gun death rates.
I get my statistics from the UN, where do you get yours?
Yes and lower per capita guns, what has that to do with anything. Their homicide rates are not lower enough to be able to draw a conclusion that the US homicide rate is driven by gun ownership. If it were we'd expect that the US after a disarmament to UK levels we would have a homicide rate of 0.27/100,000, this is patently ridiculous, since 40% of all US homicides are not gun related, and those alone exceed 0.27/100,000. Similarly we'd expect that the UK if it had as many guns as the US would have a homicide rate of around 17/100,000, it does not, nor ever has, even prior to the post WW2 gun control laws, in fact back in 1966 prior to serious gun control initiatives (you needed a license that was more or less the equivalent of a US background check), the homicide rate was 0.66/100,000, with more guns and more gun ownership.
Consider the following, suppose a country has 1 car period. Driving it is a death sentence, and there are 20 million people living there. Every day the car is driven and someone dies, the RTA death rate per capita is 1.8/100,000. Would you like to drive in that country? The US has an RTA rate of 11.6/100,000 for comparison. If not why not.
So the US has a higher per capita gun death rate, because it has more guns (and it also has more cars in my example, it actually has more guns than cars too, and deaths by RTA are higher than deaths by guns). So clearly it's a tautology that if the US has a high number of guns, then guns will be used to commit homicides. However it proves nothing to the effect that reducing the number of guns will reduce the number of homicides. Indeed both Australia and the UK have little evidence that gun control reduced their overall homicide rates (in fact for 10 years or so after the 1997 Firearms Amendment act in the UK homicides increased to double the rate in 1996) or suicide rates. So what benefit has it produced that is not ephemeral?
Nobody said there would be no gun related deaths. The idea is to reduce them. If you look it up, the US has 5 times the per capita gun death rate as England and 3.3 times that of Australia.
Robbery rates in Australia have risen 70% since the gun ban. The AIC states: "In 2001 the rate for robbery peaked at 136 per 100,000 people -- the highest recorded since 1995."
The International Crime Victimization Surveys of 1992 and 2000 concur, showing that while having had lower crime rates than the USA in 1992, by 1999 Australia’s combined rate of robbery, sexual assault, and assault with force was more than double that of the USA.
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.
