27 Aug 2012, 3:55 pm
27 Aug 2012, 4:05 pm
27 Aug 2012, 5:17 pm
27 Aug 2012, 5:40 pm
Max000 wrote:
John_Browning wrote:
Shau wrote:
It is my personal opinion, which is about all most people have at this point, that the US is only going to solve this problem when it manages to both:
1. Reduce the number of guns sitting around, starting preferably with the ones sitting in the hands of criminals, and...
2. Knuckle down on cultural issues facilitating the usage of guns without patronizing those that wish to own and use them.
1. Reduce the number of guns sitting around, starting preferably with the ones sitting in the hands of criminals, and...
2. Knuckle down on cultural issues facilitating the usage of guns without patronizing those that wish to own and use them.
Please tell me more about:
1) How to take guns away from criminals first.
2) Why taking guns away from other people would matter if the criminals don't have them.
3) How to separate guns from culture (except maybe certain antisocial subcultures), based on your cultural experiences.
4) Why your solutions to violent crime are fixated solely on guns.
1) Make gun ownership illegal, impose substantial penalties and let the police and the courts deal with it.
2) Because if other people have guns the criminals can get them. Example by burglarizing the homes of those who have the guns and stealing them.
3) Make them illegal.
4) Because guns are used in over 80% of violent crimes. Removing guns has been proven in many societies to reduce violent crime substantially.
I could shred you to pieces on this and so could a few others but we've been shedding your kind on every single gunz-r-bad thread we've had since I've been here.
sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA
27 Aug 2012, 5:46 pm
John_Browning
Veteran
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range
27 Aug 2012, 5:50 pm
sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA
27 Aug 2012, 6:03 pm
27 Aug 2012, 8:12 pm
6655321 wrote:
Max000 wrote:
guns are used in over 80% of violent crimes. Removing guns has been proven in many societies to reduce violent crime substantially.
Can you prove that guns are used in over 80% of violent crimes? (Since what period of time until the present and in what parts of the world?) Also, in which societies did banning guns cause a reduction in the rate of violent crime?
I can't prove the 80%. But 68% of all murders are done with guns, according to FBI, The Uniform Crime Reports.
Murders with firearms
As for your other question:
Over 9,000 Murders by Gun in US; 39 in UK
sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA
27 Aug 2012, 8:18 pm
Max000 wrote:
6655321 wrote:
Max000 wrote:
guns are used in over 80% of violent crimes. Removing guns has been proven in many societies to reduce violent crime substantially.
Can you prove that guns are used in over 80% of violent crimes? (Since what period of time until the present and in what parts of the world?) Also, in which societies did banning guns cause a reduction in the rate of violent crime?
I can't prove the 80%. But 68% of all murders are done with guns, according to FBI, The Uniform Crime Reports.
Murders with firearmsAs for your other question:
Over 9,000 Murders by Gun in US; 39 in UKa) Just because 68% of murders are committed with guns doesn't mean that those murders were committed because guns were available.
b) You still haven't linked gun control with a decrease in crime
c) The UK has never had access to guns, so that comparison is moot. Try comparing the US to Brazil and see what you come up with.
27 Aug 2012, 8:26 pm
Max000 wrote:
That is absolutely not an answer to my question.
I did not ask what the raw numbers (unadjusted for any factors, by the way
) of gun homicides were in the US vs. UK.
I asked something along the lines of, "In which societies did banning guns cause a reduction in violent crime?"
That is a qualitatively different question.
27 Aug 2012, 10:09 pm
Ancalagon wrote:
Max000 wrote:
Removing guns has been proven in many societies to reduce violent crime substantially.
The whole point of this entire thread was to ask for evidence of this assertion, yet you made the assertion without evidence.
My god man, do some research for yourself.
Firearm-related death-rate per 100,000 population
1. Colombia 51.77
2. El Salvador 50.36
3. Jamaica 47.44
4. Honduras 46.70
5. Guatemala 38.52
6. Swaziland 37.16
7. Brazil 14.15
8. Estonia 12.74
9. Panama 12.92
10. Mexico 12.07
11. United States 10.27
59. England/ Wales 0.46 #
60. Singapore 0.24 #
61. Hong Kong 0.19 #
62. Mauritius 0.19 #
63. Qatar 0.18 #
64. South Korea 0.13 #
65. Japan 0.07 #
# = Very strict gun control laws.
List of countries by firearm-related death rate
States with the Five Highest Gun Death Rates
Rank - State - Household Gun Ownership - Gun Death Rate per 100,000
1 Louisiana 45.6% 19.87
2 Mississippi 54.3% 18.32
3 Alaska 60.6% 17.62
4 Alabama 57.2% 17.55
5 Nevada 31.5% 16.21
States with the Five Lowest Gun Death Rates
Rank - State - Household Gun Ownership - Gun Death Rate per 100,000
46 New York 18.1% 5.07
47 Connecticut 16.2% 4.27
48 Massachusetts 12.8% 3.63
49 Rhode Island 13.3% 3.51
50 Hawaii 9.7% 2.82
States with Higher Gun Ownership and Weak Gun Laws Lead Nation in Gun Death
27 Aug 2012, 10:19 pm
6655321 wrote:
Max000 wrote:
That is absolutely not an answer to my question.
I did not ask what the raw numbers (unadjusted for any factors, by the way
) of gun homicides were in the US vs. UK.I asked something along the lines of, "In which societies did banning guns cause a reduction in violent crime?".
OK to s p e l l i t o u t f o r y o u.
The UK is a society where banning guns has caused a reduction in violent crime.
sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA
27 Aug 2012, 10:20 pm
Max000 wrote:
Ancalagon wrote:
Max000 wrote:
Removing guns has been proven in many societies to reduce violent crime substantially.
The whole point of this entire thread was to ask for evidence of this assertion, yet you made the assertion without evidence.
My god man, do some research for yourself.
Firearm-related death-rate per 100,000 population
1. Colombia 51.77
2. El Salvador 50.36
3. Jamaica 47.44
4. Honduras 46.70
5. Guatemala 38.52
6. Swaziland 37.16
7. Brazil 14.15
8. Estonia 12.74
9. Panama 12.92
10. Mexico 12.07
11. United States 10.27
59. England/ Wales 0.46 #
60. Singapore 0.24 #
61. Hong Kong 0.19 #
62. Mauritius 0.19 #
63. Qatar 0.18 #
64. South Korea 0.13 #
65. Japan 0.07 #
# = Very strict gun control laws.
List of countries by firearm-related death rateStates with the Five Highest Gun Death Rates
Rank - State - Household Gun Ownership - Gun Death Rate per 100,000
1 Louisiana 45.6% 19.87
2 Mississippi 54.3% 18.32
3 Alaska 60.6% 17.62
4 Alabama 57.2% 17.55
5 Nevada 31.5% 16.21
States with the Five Lowest Gun Death Rates
Rank - State - Household Gun Ownership - Gun Death Rate per 100,000
46 New York 18.1% 5.07
47 Connecticut 16.2% 4.27
48 Massachusetts 12.8% 3.63
49 Rhode Island 13.3% 3.51
50 Hawaii 9.7% 2.82
States with Higher Gun Ownership and Weak Gun Laws Lead Nation in Gun DeathBut you've done nothing to prove causality. I could just as well use the same data to suggest that states with richer populations have less gun violence. Also - your numbers fail to explain the anomalies of California - which has some of the toughest gun laws of any state, Washington DC - which doesn't allow any handguns, and only one long gun per resident, and Illinois - which bans carry of weapons, and restricts ownership of guns similarly to CA and DC - yet all three of them have gun death rates much higher than the national average.
Lets look at the same picture Internationally - Brazil has some of the strictest gun laws of any Country in the world (they ban all private gun ownership period except for target guns - and possession of a gun carries a huge jail sentence) - yet your own numbers suggest they have one of the highest gun deaths in the world.
And then explain Switzerland - which has a huge amount of gun ownership, and miniscule gun violence.
Your numbers - as flashy as they are - still don't provide an example of a country that implemented stricter gun control laws and saw crime decrease. At all. Not even a little bit.
sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA
27 Aug 2012, 10:27 pm
sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA
27 Aug 2012, 10:31 pm
sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA
27 Aug 2012, 10:36 pm
Max000 wrote:
6655321 wrote:
Max000 wrote:
That is absolutely not an answer to my question.
I did not ask what the raw numbers (unadjusted for any factors, by the way
) of gun homicides were in the US vs. UK.I asked something along the lines of, "In which societies did banning guns cause a reduction in violent crime?".
OK to s p e l l i t o u t f o r y o u.
The UK is a society where banning guns has caused a reduction in violent crime.
Really? What were the gun murder figures from before they banned guns? How much did gun crime drop?
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Mario Kart: Bowser's Challenge question |
06 Jan 2025, 12:42 am |
| SCOTUS skeptical-Challenge to Tennessee trans treatment ban |
04 Dec 2024, 5:03 pm |
| Trump proposes U.S. control of Gaza |
25 minutes ago |
| Black Church gains control of Proud Boys trademark |
05 Feb 2025, 5:51 pm |
