Monty: It is difficult to compare statistics across cultures, but we have a great tool for comparison here in the U.S., because each state makes most of it's own gun laws here. States which restrict concealed carry of firearms have signficantly higher crime rates that states which recognize their citizens right to self defense. Here's how much worse crime are in states which restrict firearms carry: Robbery: 105% Murder: 86% Assault: 82% Violent Crime: 81% Auto Theft: 60% Rape: 25% Those rape statistics will be even better as those womens rights organizations I referenced above gain ground. Right now, most firearms which are carried are carried by men. This means that men are safer, but women still aren't that much safer (only 25%). Source of statistics: Gun Facts 4.0
How easily are guns transported between states that control guns though? If guns are easily available in neighbouring states then I'd just argue that criminals just go there and buy a gun to commit crimes in their own states. If all states banned guns then I'd argue that crime figues across ALL states would fall.
In the U.S., you are not allowed to purchase a firearm outside of your state of residence. In addition, those stats reflect the differences in state laws concerning carrying firearms, not purchasing them. And I would once again point you to Gun Facts.
Yep I got into fights when I was younger. Once I learned that fighting was do to insecurity issues and a failure to understand human nature I grew out of it. I still stand up for myself. I learned the hard way it's all about the bark and tact.
In reality how easy is it to buy one on the black market or simply steal one? I'd guess it would be very hard to control guns in one state while they're freely available a few miles away with no border controls.
I can get you anything you want, anywhere on Earth. There may be a fee attached. Don't forget that I'm Irish. Only my avatar is Jewish. Did you see all the firepower that my relatives in Northern Ireland were displaying, in a country where firearms (except shotguns) are almost impossible to obtain? Have you seen the firearms factories in The Philippines, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, where local craftsmen build fully automatic weapons with hand files? I'm not talking about a zip gun which can be put together by any school kid in a few minutes, I'm talking about working replicas of the AK-47 assault rifle. You'll not get far with the "if only everyone was unarmed" argument until you do a few things: Disarm the police and the military. Make all people exactly the same size and shape -- otherwise you're just taking us back to the dark past where bullies ruled the world. Conduct door-to-door searches to confiscate all weapons. Outlaw metal and files, because those are all you need to build a firearm. But really, your argument is even more off course than that, because the data doesn't show that more gun control means less crime except for cross-border crime. The data clearly shows that more gun control means more crime. It's not exactly a weak correlation, those are big numbers. Or, let's take a look at something a bit closer to home for you, Gun Control’s Twisted Outcome: Restricting firearms has helped make England more crime-ridden than the U.S. Disclaimer: The IRA are a bunch of terrorists and I'd not feel a bit bad to see them all hanged.
Exactly, in the UK most criminals don't have guns, only those that can afford them and have the connections. Must gun crime is between criminals in organised crime as they don't have the connections to get hold of a gun. In the US any potential mugger can get hold of a gun by robbing a house. They were used in terrorism and organised crime rather than domestic violence and petty crime. Shold everyone in the US start carrying Semtex, genade launchers and anti-aircraft missiles also used by the IRA? 1. The police in the UK are largely unarmed. No reglar officers carry firearms as they don't really have a need to. S019, a special firearms unit called in to deal with armed suspects. 2. Not really practical. From what age should children start carrying guns? There will always be people unarmed. If a criminal thinks that a householder will have a gun will they be more likely to take one on a robbery? If most households have guns will they be more likey to be used during domestic crime? If guns are easily available will muggers start to use them? 3. Not really needed, I've lived in london for more than 10 years and never even seen a gun. 4. And a lot of practical knowledge about ballistics or if not the contacts to get hold one. Yes there is gun crime in the UK, though the vast majority of citizens have never even seen a gun, let alone been involved in a crime involving one. The report you posted unsurprisingly is a bit one sided and a little thin on the correct stastics. http://www.connected.gov.uk/facts/guncrime/index.html Firstly, yes gun related offences have risen, though this includes the new offence of being in possession of a handgun or unlicenced firearm and also the use of an immitation firearm. Also worth noting is the the total number of people killed with a gun in 2002 in the UK was just 81 In the US there were 253 gun deaths between 94 and 99 in SCHOOLS alone. Gun deaths per 100,000 population (for the year indicated): Homicide Suicide Unintentional USA 4.08 (1999) 6.08 (1999) 0.42 (1999) Canada 0.54 (1999) 2.65 (1997) 0.15 (1997) Switzerland 0.50 (1999) 5.78 (1998) - Scotland 0.12 (1999) 0.27 (1999) - England/Wales 0.12 (1999/00) 0.22 (1999) 0.01 (1999) Japan 0.04* (1998) 0.04 (1995) <0.01 (1997) From - http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm
Matt, gun crime rises every time you tighten gun laws. What does that tell you? To tighten more? What is it called if you keep doing the same time, expecting to get different results? If a criminal things that a householder will have a gun, they pick another house. Or do you seriously think that it's in a burglars best interest to get into a gun battle with an armed citizen? That's not their job. Their job is to steal from people who don't protect themselves. Burglars aren't stupid, they are independent businessmen. In the U.S., we have a public database of campaign contributors. If I were a burgler, I would only target the contributors to the Democratic party. This is covered in Gun Facts. How is reading that coming along? It's either that or they beat their victims into submission. As a victim, which do you prefer, having a gun pointed at you or being beaten into a bloody pulp with a steel pipe? Do you really think it's that hard? Firearms are a medievil invention. Government can't stop the flow of marijuana, which is a very bulky commodity and one that must be constantly replenished. Firearms are small and they last a long long time. Imagine the War on Drugs, but thousands of times more difficult. I have already explained the impossibility of comparing violence statistics across cultures, so I am surprised that you brought that point up. It's amazing that blood isn't running in the streets in Switzerland, isn't it? But really Matt, if you don't want a gun, don't buy one. Have you considered becoming Amish? Just don't try to take the natural right of self-defense away from other living human beings. It it not the civilized thing to do.
The crime stastics have risen becasue then now include the new offences of owning a gun. Crime has risen over that time period also, but gun murders have proportionately dropped when compared to the rate of increase. If gun ownership is legel then burglers will treat ALL houses as having a gun. Hence they'll take one too. I'd rather be beaten than shot dead. I think most rational people would agree. You can also run from a pipe, I'm pretty quick but I couldn't outrun a bullet. That's a pretty poor comparison. I know hundreds of people that have smoked dope. I can count on the fingers of one hand the people that have seen a gun that wasn't on TV. I don't see that it's impossible, they just don't back up the facts you're using. They look pretty damning evidence to me so I'm not surprised you're discounting them. After argueing that gun crime in the UK is rising and a ban doesn't work, then perhaps you can explain why the gun crime rate in the UK is so low? Since when are guns natural? I don't reacall being born with one? Then again, if we take things to the other end of the scale, then perhaps we should all have our own personal nuclear weapons?
Matt, even "traditional" crimes raise when you outlaw firearms, the entire rise is not accounted for in just these newly invented crimes. Matt, I can tell that you're an honest man. Why? Because you don't think like a criminal at all. Burglars are not in the business of getting into gunfights. Burglars are in the business of stealing. They don't want to shoot anyone and they don't want to get shot at. Matt, robbers are not in the business of killing people. They point a gun at you to get you to comply with them. If they don't have a gun, they have to hit you with the pipe. And no, they don't always say "Hey, I'm going to hit you with this pipe" and give you time to run along your merry way. Plus, of course, you're not the target mugging victim. Your not female, or old and infirm. Matt, I'm sorry, but no one really cares if you're mugged. It's the small, the weak, the old, and the female who need and deserve the protection that only a firearm can provide. That's funny, I know more gun owners than dope smokers. It must be the crowd of people you hang around. We've already covered this. Overall violence rates are cultural. Gun crime in the UK was very low before anti-gun laws were enacted in the UK. The effects of anti-gun laws have been only to raise those numbers from very low to only kind of low. You're right. And cars aren't natural either. You should walk everywhere you go. And the old and infirm, they can walk too -- because you don't need a car. You sure that you don't want to become Amish?
Exactly, but, if they though there was a chance that someone was going to be in a house, and that person may be armed, you can bet that they'd take a gun with them when they wouldn't have done so previously. Does it provide protection? If a lady or old person is carrying a gun, then they'll be carrying it in a bag. A prepared robber is going to get to their gun first no matter how handy the victim keeps it. The robber is also going to be more prepared to shoot if they think there's a chance their victim is going to have a wepaon. I can see 'protection' just ending in more dead women and old ladies. No, it's just the place that I live. Like I said, I don't know one gun owner. Exactly. Are you saying Americans are a more violent race? I don't believe so. There are just higher murder rates becase of the traditional easy access to guns and the willingness to use them. I pretty much do I live in London, it's faster than driving anywhere. Again though, it's a pretty poor comparison.Cars weren't designed to kill people. I actually has this debate with a few friends. One of them being a policeman in one of the roughest areas of London. He said himself, and many other policemen would flatly refuse to carry firearms if they became standard police issue. His arguement was at the moment criminals don't have to carry guns, so the vast majority don't. If the police carried guns, then all the criminals would have to also.
Matt: You aren't reading, you're making the same failed arguments over and over again. You're wasting my time. I am not responding to any more of your nonsense. Believe whatever irrational illogial crap you want to believe. Make stuff up. Ignore reams of published statistics. Life in a dream world. Have a nice life.
I could say exactly the same about your arguements I'm actually the only one that's actually posted any statistics for comparison, which you claim that violence in America is 'cultural' which is a pretty poor counter. No thanks, I'd rather live in a country that isn't full of gun violence.
Ooo I see fight related Google Ads on this thread, like "Fear no man! Learn how!", "Defend yourself and your family" blah blah But, seriously, you should all come to Denmark....: No guns...no fights...no crime...only respect and equality!