Some U.S. Cities Have Higher Gun Violence Than ENTIRE Nations — Check This Map

reply to post by Cancerwarrior


1) Whether that particular statistics was misleading or not, the fact stays, US has significantly higher amount of firearms than any other nation.

2) I have supplied different stats on the firearms-related death rates /non-firearm related death rates in UK, which shows pretty clearly that the amount of firearms does not affect firearm related death rates, at least there. If you take the stats from any larger EU nation from Central/Northern/Western Europe, the stats are similar. Roughly around 4-10 times lower gun homicide rate and non-firearm homicide rates are similar or lower. At least in advanced nations, amount of firearms in the hands of citizen is in correlation with higher gun violence.

Cabin
reply to post by Cancerwarrior

 

2) I have supplied different stats on the firearms-related death rates /non-firearm related death rates in UK, which shows pretty clearly that the amount of firearms does not affect firearm related death rates,

Exactly. It is odd that you use that truism to excuse the UK's crime rates but completely ignore that in the US. The highest per capita firearm ownership in the US (rural and small town areas) have the lowest crime rates but the regions where guns are all but outlawed, Chicago, NY, and DC, have the highest crime rates. That crime is increased by gun ownership is contradicted by the stats you post yourself. Methinks your belief system clouds your ability to process statistical data.

reply to post by PhoenixOD

Yes humans are violent angry people but the reason we don't go around attacking people hand to hand is mostly about risk to ourselves by way of getting caught or getting hurt.

Curious... you just used the terms, 'we' and 'ourselves' so... you are indeed connecting yourself directly to those whom some seek to isolate by way of bad behavior.

This is not a bad thing. It is honesty and I salute you. It is the first step to looking at 'ourselves' as a race, with a little more care and scrutiny.

Now then, with this understanding in mind... after we ban guns, what's next? We do know that our collective imperfections will not cease just because we don't have guns... and we know that we are more than capable of turning most implement into a weapon... even if to assure our own safety!

I think we can be pretty sure that wanging someone upside the head with a computer keyboard will not result in a fatality but... electrical cords combined with bathtubs could be a real danger.

hmmm....

It's not really a big secret. The places that have the most crime, everywhere in the world, are areas controlled by street gangs. Crime is rampant, including the more heinous crimes such as rape and murder.

It's no different in the US. I could show you "ganglands" in NY, and you would find like 90% of all NY crime happens in these densely populated tiny areas. It's not really rocket science here, even the cops know to stay the hell out of those areas, unless they are rolling with like 20 squad cars and a few SWAT vans.

That is why statewide and nationwide gun laws are rubbish. Most of the gun owners don't live in these areas, don't have the problems these areas have. Why should they have to live with laws that are badly designed to try and curb violence in those ganglands? I am glad I am gone from NY, the new stricter laws on guns would have forced me to sell a few of mine. Here I don't gotta even bother registering my guns.

Mod Note:

Please... no more bickering.

does other violence stats not apply as long as people are talking about guns?
there are a million ways to kill a man, and they all take place. but everyone thinks guns are bad.

gun defence trumps all those types thats why they are used. but we only hear about the few gun offenses.

reply to post by PplVSNWO


Well America is going through an obesity epidemic, it's one of the fattest nations on earth.

Doesn't mean its okay for me to call all Americans 'fattys' now does it?

Some relevant memes to lighten the mood

reply to post by Lady_Tuatha


What you and the anti gun crowd are missing is the real issue. People will always kill people a desperate individual will kill you for whatever necessity aids him the fastest. You sit here telling me you would rather be bludgeoned to death over being shot. Mind you a man shooting you is more prone to fleeing while you are downthan to stop hitting/stabbing you till you cease to breathe.

I guess in reality guns only even the playing field between the desperate and the common man. It was not our fault that it just made the choice to defend more palatable than to flee.

Shame on Americans!

Guns aint the problem. Murderous fetishes are engrained in American culture from wee early on.

Its all about killing the most and being the hero/leader.

oasisjack
reply to post by Lady_Tuatha

 

What you and the anti gun crowd are missing is the real issue. People will always kill people a desperate individual will kill you for whatever necessity aids him the fastest. You sit here telling me you would rather be bludgeoned to death over being shot. Mind you a man shooting you is more prone to fleeing while you are downthan to stop hitting/stabbing you till you cease to breathe.

I guess in reality guns only even the playing field between the desperate and the common man. It was not our fault that it just made the choice to defend more palatable than to flee.

The thing is that some people are more likely to act in the spur of the moment if taken by rage, now if the person has a gun in front of them they could easily shoot it in the heat of the moment, if the gun wasn't there then I believe it would be far less likely the other person would be seriously injured or dead, sometimes all it takes is a few seconds of madness for someone to do something they quickly regret. Im talking about a few seconds of rage a person may go though, I know here if every Tom, Dick and Harry had a gun there would be spur of the moment shootings during heated arguments that we see happen in America, because guns are not that common here these arguments usually just end in fistfights or the person has a chance to come to his/her senses before doing something silly like looking for a weapon or knife etc.

reply to post by gardener


Close closer than most. We are tought from early on to scramble to the top of the food chain. The problems stem from what comes as side effects, drug use, gambling and trying to out pace our neighbors in wealth.

reply to post by Lady_Tuatha


I hear your argument but it rings false when compaired to history.I live in an nice southern state inwhich we enjoy both having teeth and the ability to open/conceled carry firearms. On anygiven day I pass around 30 to forty people with their sidearm firmly strapped to what ever appendage they like. I would also think about a hundred or more concealed pistols. Yet there are no wild west fire fights the only shootings this year have been in majorty black areas (not being racist) by criminals who by law should not of had those fire arms to start with while in the commission of a crime they would commit with a stick if thats all they had.

I understand how simple it is to blame a tool but you will never effectively legislate the evil and desperation in some of mankinds hearts just condemn those with good in theirs to a fireing squad.

reply to post by oasisjack


I understand that. It is just a shame that guns are so widespread there that criminals have easy access to them, and I doubt you guys will ever be able to disarm them. I mean if every average Joe criminal here had a gun then it's likely that I myself would want to be armed. I guess we are just lucky here that they dont.

reply to post by Lady_Tuatha


That's the problem. Even if firearm access was extremely restricted as to be almost unobtainable by the citizenry, the criminals still find a way to project as much force as possible, and today that means firearms. The link I posted on page 5 about the gun seizures and related arrests in Luton in the UK are a good example. Criminal access to firearms is somewhat correlated with citizen access, but the data isn't linear. By that I mean criminal's access to firearms won't correlate with the citizen's access above or below a certain level. Below a certain level of restriction and the criminal's access will flatten out while the citizen's remains linear as the criminals will always have access because they are willing to break the law in order to obtain firearms. Above a certain level, and criminals literally cannot risk owning that many firearms without drawing too much attention to themselves and risking huge intervention by law enforcement, so their access flattens out.