Yet another shooting in the USA

Looks like as good a place to throw some NRA propaganda in as any....

[video=youtube;0c_M7Rrsrxo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0c_M7Rrsrxo&feature=player_embedded[/video]
 

Nice graph. It shows a per capita number on one side, but a total number on the other side. Then you can look at the compressed axes, to see how they wanted you to view the data. Additionally the numbers are speculatory, rather than coming from hard data, further invalidating the data. There may well be no more guns now than there have been in the past, as gun registration has been increasing with time. There might be 4 times as many guns as listed here.

I think that this chart says more about gun crime, than your graph ever could.
 

Attachments

  • c-g-4-eng.gif
    c-g-4-eng.gif
    6.3 KB · Views: 94
Maybe look into how often a gun has prevented rape, murder, assault ,kidnapping before becoming hysterical.
[SIZE=+1]The National Self-Defense Survey indicated that there were 2.5 million incidents of defensive gun use per year in the U.S. This is probably a conservative estimate, for two reasons. First, cases of respondents intentionally withholding reports of genuine defensive-gun uses were probably more common than cases of respondents reporting incidents that did not occur or that were not genuinely defensive. Second, the survey covered only adults age 18 and older, thereby excluding all defensive gun uses involving adolescents, the age group most likely to suffer a violent victimization.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]The authors concluded that defensive uses of guns are about three to four times as common as criminal uses of guns. The National Self-Defense Survey confirmed the picture of frequent defensive gun use implied by the results of earlier, less sophisticated surveys.[/SIZE]

This quote is repeated on all the pro-gun sites. However, overexposure does not make it so.
Look around, you'll find there are discussions of these numbers using simple math that show the survey and the extrapolations are complete rubbish.
 
Nice graph. It shows a per capita number on one side, but a total number on the other side. Then you can look at the compressed axes, to see how they wanted you to view the data. Additionally the numbers are speculatory, rather than coming from hard data, further invalidating the data. There may well be no more guns now than there have been in the past, as gun registration has been increasing with time. There might be 4 times as many guns as listed here.

I think that this chart says more about gun crime, than your graph ever could.

Exactly.

If you take the first graph and adjust ownership by population, the ownership curve becomes a flat line. What does this prove? Nothing, it only suggests that the number of guns has nothing to do with falling (violent) crime rates.

There is little ambiguity in the second graph. Despite the NRA's distorted video, the homicide rate by firearms in the US is 30 times that of England.
 
Exactly.

If you take the first graph and adjust ownership by population, the ownership curve becomes a flat line. What does this prove? Nothing, it only suggests that the number of guns has nothing to do with falling (violent) crime rates.

There is little ambiguity in the second graph. Despite the NRA's distorted video, the homicide rate by firearms in the US is 30 times that of England.

You also can't discount the overall disparity between the TOTAL per capita homicide rates. Looking at the numbers it's fairly obvious that having a fairly open gun culture likely has a relation to overall murder rates.
 
You people need to look up "mass stabbings" in places like Japan and China where guns aren't readily available. The number of victims in single attacks is an eye opener for those who think guns make it 'easier'.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-06-08-stabbing-tokyo_N.htm


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_school_massacre


http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/WeirdNews/2012/08/14/20100991.html

A Thai senator accidentally shot and killed his personal secretary with a
submachine-gun at a restaurant Sunday night, police say.
 
Whats that gotta do with my post?

Its obvious that mass killings happen just as easily and frequently with knives as they do guns. Deranged people will kill with whatever weapon they can get their hands on.

One guy plowed his truck into a group of people and then got out and killed a bunch more with a knife.

Dead is dead. Who cares what the weapon is.
 
Whats that gotta do with my post?

Its obvious that mass killings happen just as easily and frequently with knives as they do guns. Deranged people will kill with whatever weapon they can get their hands on.

One guy plowed his truck into a group of people and then got out and killed a bunch more with a knife.

Dead is dead. Who cares what the weapon is.

If this was true the stats can chart wouldn't look the way it does, as you can see, non gun related homicides remained constant throughout those countries, you didn't see a simple change of tools.
 
Whats that gotta do with my post?

Its obvious that mass killings happen just as easily and frequently with knives as they do guns. Deranged people will kill with whatever weapon they can get their hands on.

One guy plowed his truck into a group of people and then got out and killed a bunch more with a knife.

Dead is dead. Who cares what the weapon is.

But do they? What are the per capita murder rates in such places. My understanding is that the murder rate in Japan, for example, is comparatively low.

*EDIT* The homicide rate in Japan appears fractional; 0.49 per 100,000 in 2006. Compare to the chart that I posted.
 
Last edited:
Secretary - "I'm going to tell your wife about our affair!"

Senator (whispering) - "I don't think so, you cow."

< BANG! >

Senator (yelling) - "Oh my god! My gun went off. Accidentally. Yeah, that's the ticket."

ewww they were cousins!
 
Looks like as good a place to throw some NRA propaganda in as any....

I don't like your gif, its an instrument of death
 
Back
Top Bottom