It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Spent the weekend running through numbers from Britain's Home Office. A number of people have explained that the violent crime rates in the UK and US are not comparable simply because different criteria are used. Tomorrow night Reality Check will correct that information using apples to apples comparisons with violent crime in Britain. (spoiler alert) the number in the UK are STILL higher than the US.
Originally posted by MaMaa
I really dislike and distrust Fox, but this was interesting. I do however wonder who the skeptical libertarian is and can they be trusted as a valid source?
Originally posted by 31Bravo
I think it's obvious why there isn't a ban on what seems to be the mode of weapon used in killings.
By making it harder to obtain weapons and high capacity magazines for war dulls the effectiveness for a revolution.. Imagine having to fight off LEO's and uniformed government mercs with 10 round mag hunting rifles and hand guns.
Seems they would have the upper hand since the government has the edge. This should just be added to the bag of evidence our government is trying to tie another hand behind our backs.
edit on 17-1-2013 by 31Bravo because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by solomons path
reply to post by eLPresidente
I wish the pro-2nd argument could rely less on facts and their inherent right to defense and argue from emotion and what other countries do. That way, at least both sides would be on a level playing field.
Thanks for the vid!
S+F for you!
Originally posted by eLPresidente
Originally posted by MaMaa
I really dislike and distrust Fox, but this was interesting. I do however wonder who the skeptical libertarian is and can they be trusted as a valid source?
Fox is his company's affiliate, FOX doesn't have any say over what they do.
Whoever the 'skeptical libertarian' is, most likely an online editorialist...he was close. I did some light digging into the numbers and indeed he was very close, by estimation.
Originally posted by Raelsatu
Currently the UK at the top, past South Africa...
Conspiracy to Murder
Threats to Kill
Causing Death by Dangerous Driving
Causing Death by Careless Driving under the Influence of Drink or Drugs
Causing Death by Careless or Inconsiderate Driving
Causing Death by Driving: Unlicensed, Disqualified or Uninsured Drivers
Harassment
Racially or Religiously Aggravated Harassment
Public Fear, Alarm or Distress
Racially or Religiously Aggravated Public Fear, Alarm or Distress
Possession of Firearms with Intent
Possession of Firearms Offences
Possession of Other Weapons
Possession of Article with Blade or Point
Child Abduction
Procuring Illegal Abortion
Causing Death by Aggravated Vehicle Taking
Assault without Injury on a Constable
Assault without Injury
Racially or Religiously Aggravated Assault without Injury
The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program defines aggravated assault as an unlawful attack by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury. The UCR Program further specifies that this type of assault is usually accompanied by the use of a weapon or by other means likely to produce death or great bodily harm
Originally posted by narwahl
Gun related deaths in the US per 100.000:
10.2 Homicides:3.6
UK:
0.25, Homicides 0.04 (Second lowest rate of gun related deaths in Europe)
Switzerland
3.84, Homicides: 0.52 (Highest rate of gun related deaths in Europe)
Homicides regardless of weapon:
US: 4.8
UK: 1.2
Switzerland: 0.7
What this guy does is cherry picking. Why isn't he using murder but "violent crimes"? So he can find a "Violent crime" definition for the US and another one for the UK, in which UK>US.edit on 19-1-2013 by narwahl because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by eLPresidente
Originally posted by narwahl
Gun related deaths in the US per 100.000:
10.2 Homicides:3.6
UK:
0.25, Homicides 0.04 (Second lowest rate of gun related deaths in Europe)
Switzerland
3.84, Homicides: 0.52 (Highest rate of gun related deaths in Europe)
Homicides regardless of weapon:
US: 4.8
UK: 1.2
Switzerland: 0.7
What this guy does is cherry picking. Why isn't he using murder but "violent crimes"? So he can find a "Violent crime" definition for the US and another one for the UK, in which UK>US.edit on 19-1-2013 by narwahl because: (no reason given)
That comparison doesn't even come close to proving your point that guns cause violence or that gun control works.
First Switzerland has relatively lax gun laws yet their gun murder rate is almost 3 times lower than in the U.S.
Second, over 70% of gun related deaths are gang related and happen in inner cities, criminals don't abide by the laws.
Talk about cherry picking, narwahl? Are you just angry that UK has a poor violence rate? Don't hate the messenger, hate the facts.
Originally posted by narwahl
Originally posted by eLPresidente
Originally posted by narwahl
Gun related deaths in the US per 100.000:
10.2 Homicides:3.6
UK:
0.25, Homicides 0.04 (Second lowest rate of gun related deaths in Europe)
Switzerland
3.84, Homicides: 0.52 (Highest rate of gun related deaths in Europe)
Homicides regardless of weapon:
US: 4.8
UK: 1.2
Switzerland: 0.7
What this guy does is cherry picking. Why isn't he using murder but "violent crimes"? So he can find a "Violent crime" definition for the US and another one for the UK, in which UK>US.edit on 19-1-2013 by narwahl because: (no reason given)
That comparison doesn't even come close to proving your point that guns cause violence or that gun control works.
First Switzerland has relatively lax gun laws yet their gun murder rate is almost 3 times lower than in the U.S.
Second, over 70% of gun related deaths are gang related and happen in inner cities, criminals don't abide by the laws.
Talk about cherry picking, narwahl? Are you just angry that UK has a poor violence rate? Don't hate the messenger, hate the facts.
Switzerland is nowhere *near* the gun toting paradise you imagine it. Yes, you *can* have your militia issued weapon at home. But you don't have to. You can just as well leave it in the Zeughaus. (And most people do, because why carry it back and forth? Thing is heavy.) You want to take your gun home and want ammunition for it? First of all, no you can't do that, because you are not defending an airport, and second please have a talk with the troop psychiartrist. Just to check if everything is allright at home.
Own a private gun? You get a visit from the police every 6 months to check if you still have it, and if it is securely locked, and the ammunition is locked as well, in a different place.
You want to carry in public? Prove that you have a reason! 6 months later prove that you still have the reason! 6 months later: Seriously? Still? etc, etc etc...
Originally posted by skalla
meh, the figure them selves are irrelevant anyway, too many different factors in play, not just gun availability and control, anyone with half a brain should be able to see this, the media are justr trying to engage your emotions to deflect you from deeper thinking etc etc blah blah blah
it's funny where on a site where we all (repeat after me...) say "you cant trust the mass-media/govts" etc that at times "we" hang off of their every word and then go to base threads off of it.
no one else seing this?