BREAKING NEWS: Someone Somewhere Is Shooting Somebody... WITH A GUN!

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Dude you got a thumbs up from " Best in show". That alone gives you bragging rights.
Good job, very well balanced.
S n F

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: PhoenixOD

To say that after 10 years of no guns 'oh look now they're showing to decrease'... doesn't prove causality. That could be explained by many other social dynamics

Then why did you post

Look here, the total homicide rate in the UK actually increased post gun ban:

You cant try to link murder to gun ownership during a short time after the gun ban and try to claim their is no correlation in the longer decrease that followed. You cant have it both ways lol

Meanwhile essentially every other metric of crime has spiked ever since. 'Hey look we have 100 less murders, but 5,000 more sexual assaults this year wo hoo'! IS THAT PROGRESS?????

Are you trying to infer causality with gun ownership?

a reply to: intrepid

That wasn't meant to be some comprehensive listing of all the possible factors. That's a couple of the big recent trends the past 10 years that came to mind that might have to do with it.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: intrepid

That wasn't meant to be some comprehensive listing of all the possible factors. That's a couple of the big recent trends the past 10 years that came to mind that might have to do with it.

I haven't seen back pedaling like that since the dyslexic bike race. I hear China is favored in this years Olympics. They already read backwards.

BTW, "might" is an "iffy" word.

a reply to: intrepid


Hey, you know what, I'll give you guys this one. So its back down to 1997'ish rates, with less heat of the moment murders... meanwhile, also in the absence of guns, the UK has now become one the most crime ridden violent nations on earth. IS THAT PROGRESS?

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Nobody has been able to crap on Canada yet with our strict gun laws.

a reply to: intrepid

I've never looked into Canadian guns laws / stats / etc before.

But the UK is the grand old experiment. And for a somewhat marginal either change up or down in total homicides over 19 years, I dont see how the 'ban all the guns' crowd has much to stand on with all that. With the US non-firearm homicide rate alone nearly 10 times the UK total homicide rate, it seems to me they should stick to the annual accidental deaths by firearms in the US. Problem with that though, then the media sensationalized events they want to politicize become mostly pointless fodder given all herein. And that's just poor ratings material

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Nobody has been able to crap on Canada yet with our strict gun laws.

If you look at population and size. Canada has about 11% of USA's population in the approximate same size country.
This is not an apples and apples comparison.
Correlation is not causation, as we are all aware.

But I'm curious, what proof do you have the strict gun laws keep you safer than you would have been before?

Uh uh. I'm not feeding you. I want to see how this BS is going to be spun.

originally posted by: 3danimator2014
No one is really getting shot in the UK. It's exceptional if it happens. That's point.

Jesus...its like trying to teach infants logic.

No one is really murdered or killed there either?

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Nobody has been able to crap on Canada yet with our strict gun laws.

It seems that people feel that guns create the desire to kill or some how drive people to kill.

a reply to: intrepid

What BS?

You got some big argument (presumably following some big data set), yet you only allude to it and after how many posts now you're talking about WHAT exactly?

I've written over 300 threads and this is my first gun 'specific' thread ever, if I'm not mistaken. I dont recall if I've ever even posted in a gun thread (and I have too good a memory which I dont recommend for most folks).

So please spare me the insinuations and if you've got something to bring up just do it already.

Here I'll point you in the right direction: Were guns banned there at some point? If so, what is the before and after data?

I like the UK example because in modern history they BANNED them outright meaning there should be pretty clear before & after data to work with.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

You can't accurately compare most recorded crime statistics across countries because different countries record crimes differently. In the UK relatively minor incidents can be classified as violent crime. It even explains this in one of the articles you linked to.

It is the sane nonsense that claims Sweden has the highest level of rape in the world without people actually engaging their brain to think if that sounds even remotely plausible.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

OK. The "gun proliferation" isn't a problem thing. Wanna bet? It's a HUGE problem that has been ignored in the past but now is being an accepted aspect of society. I can't think of any other developed country that works that way. Oh, don't think we don't have guns. We do. Lots of them. Just not automatics and handguns need special privilege. Now go see if the NRA has spun that to look like it's worse than the States.

a reply to: intrepid

I've enjoyed your posts in my time here, and those I've come across from before my time.
I've not seen you be coy with a subject before.
My curiosity is for real.

Please, if I have something that is BS, point it out.

Otherwise, I expect you can provide something that would show the benefits of what you have posited in this thread.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Okay, then, if none of the stats are of any use I guess there's no point in debating anything outside of raw homicide rates.

But then again, how many murdered people in any place are only ever listed as "missing persons"?

I guess there's no point in anything LOL

Meanwhile, the OP is about the media sensationalizing murder sprees etc, and they always do seem to have more that happen they can report on (that get bigger and 'better' each year in bodycounts & theatrics).

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

You can't accurately compare most recorded crime statistics across countries because different countries record crimes differently. In the UK relatively minor incidents can be classified as violent crime. It even explains this in one of the articles you linked to.

Yes Common assault is classed as a violent crime in the UK and this is the deffinition

An offence of Common Assault is committed when a person either assaults another person or commits a battery. An assault is committed when a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force.

So you dont even have to be touched by someone to be a victim of violent crime in the UK, you just have to think it might happen. Thats going to skew the figures somewhat.

a reply to: PhoenixOD

Are you seriously saying, from that definition, that giving someone the impression you might punch them, is considered "unlawful force".

>2 kids get up in each others face talking big ####, they both get charged with 'battery'.

LOL

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
>2 kids get up in each others face talking big ####, they both get charged with 'battery'.

LOL

Yup. Happens in damn near every developed nation. People's rights come before imaginary "God given" ones.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Yep, harsh words that lead a person to think they are about to receive harm is assault. If you shout at someone and they run away and trip over while running it is Grievous Bodily Harm or GBH. Both are counted in the violent crime stats for the UK.

Battery is another separate charge.

My father was a policeman who got to the rank of inspector before he retired.

abh
assault examples