Yet another shooting in the USA

[sonnythebull]

Forum Sponsor

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.

Because you say so? I believe that guns have saved more people than killed them especially in the places where carry conceal is allowed. And even if you don't believe that , going down the gun ban more gun control path does nothing. Many things are illegal and or banned and people still find ways to find them or do them. Drugs, rape and murder come to mind as some.

 

[mmmnaked]

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.

I don't quite understand what in my post you're arguing against. I didn't mention homicide rate, I just stated that mass killings are just as likely to happen without guns. Japan, with its incredibly low homicide rate and extremely tight gun regulations, has had some seriously high profile mass stabbings. So has China.

I'm also gonna say that Canada has relatively few gun restrictions when compared to MANY first world countries. At best, our licensing system 'only' weeds out people with serious criminal backgrounds or mental illness. For "normal" folks, it could hardly be easier to get a gun... yet our homicide rates are extremely low. And the few homicides which we do have, are evenly divided between knife, firearm, and other means.

As far as homicide rates in the US... I've said it before and I'll say it again: that country is hugely varied, both culturally and economically. There are 10 states down there with a lower homicide rate than Canada, most of which probably have more guns than we do up here. There are also states known to have tight gun control (California, NY, etc.) which have much higher homicide rates.

I'm all for looking at statistics and attempting to draw conclusions, but until someone shows some actual proof that the availability of guns CAUSES higher homicide rates, I'm not convinced.

 

[jc100]

Because you say so? I believe that guns have saved more people than killed them especially in the places where carry conceal is allowed. And even if you don't believe that , going down the gun ban more gun control path does nothing. Many things are illegal and or banned and people still find ways to find them or do them. Drugs, rape and murder come to mind as some.

Everyone in the US seems to believe this as well...the only thing they don't believe are the stats for gun related deaths as they are so high.

I'm not sure all my neighbours do drugs, rape and murder people. It's a nice neighbourhood....no guns required.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

I don't quite understand what in my post you're arguing against. I didn't mention homicide rate, I just stated that mass killings are just as likely to happen without guns. Japan, with its incredibly low homicide rate and extremely tight gun regulations, has had some seriously high profile mass stabbings. So has China.

I'm also gonna say that Canada has relatively few gun restrictions when compared to MANY first world countries. At best, our licensing system 'only' weeds out people with serious criminal backgrounds or mental illness. For "normal" folks, it could hardly be easier to get a gun... yet our homicide rates are extremely low. And the few homicides which we do have, are evenly divided between knife, firearm, and other means.

As far as homicide rates in the US... I've said it before and I'll say it again: that country is hugely varied, both culturally and economically. There are 10 states down there with a lower homicide rate than Canada, most of which probably have more guns than we do up here. There are also states known to have tight gun control (California, NY, etc.) which have much higher homicide rates.

I'm all for looking at statistics and attempting to draw conclusions, but until someone shows some actual proof that the availability of guns CAUSES higher homicide rates, I'm not convinced.

What is it that I'm debating? Your assumption that mass killings are just as likely to occur with another weapon when you have no statistical evidence of such, and when the overall murder rates would tend (tend, I said) to reflect another conclusion.

 

[mmmnaked]

What kind of evidence could I possibly come up with when comparing one country to another? The US has a lot of available guns, and mass killings there seem to exclusively happen with firearms.

Japan and China have no guns, and mass killings there seem to happen with knives. What other kind of statistics can we possibly gather? Japan and China are excellent examples of countries where the general populace has almost no access to guns whatsoever.... yet lunatics still manage to kill groups of people. Why is that?

 

[OpenGambit]

I don't quite understand what in my post you're arguing against. I didn't mention homicide rate, I just stated that mass killings are just as likely to happen without guns. Japan, with its incredibly low homicide rate and extremely tight gun regulations, has had some seriously high profile mass stabbings. So has China.

I'm also gonna say that Canada has relatively few gun restrictions when compared to MANY first world countries. At best, our licensing system 'only' weeds out people with serious criminal backgrounds or mental illness. For "normal" folks, it could hardly be easier to get a gun... yet our homicide rates are extremely low. And the few homicides which we do have, are evenly divided between knife, firearm, and other means.

As far as homicide rates in the US... I've said it before and I'll say it again: that country is hugely varied, both culturally and economically. There are 10 states down there with a lower homicide rate than Canada, most of which probably have more guns than we do up here. There are also states known to have tight gun control (California, NY, etc.) which have much higher homicide rates.

I'm all for looking at statistics and attempting to draw conclusions, but until someone shows some actual proof that the availability of guns CAUSES higher homicide rates, I'm not convinced.

please show me the statistics that show that China has 3x a mass killing rate as the US ( or the same per capita, whichever you prefer). I have never see anything like that.

 

[mmmnaked]

please show me the statistics that show that China has 3x a mass killing rate as the US ( or the same per capita, whichever you prefer). I have never see anything like that.

There were 6 notable events in the last 2 years alone... arguably all more shocking than what we've seen in the US. I don't recall saying they had 3x the mass killings (good luck collecting realistic statistics from China) all I said was that mass killings happen in places without guns, too.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

What kind of evidence could I possibly come up with when comparing one country to another? The US has a lot of available guns, and mass killings there seem to exclusively happen with firearms.

Japan and China have no guns, and mass killings there seem to happen with knives. What other kind of statistics can we possibly gather? Japan and China are excellent examples of countries where the general populace has almost no access to guns whatsoever.... yet lunatics still manage to kill groups of people. Why is that?

Perhaps because there are 1.3 BILLION of them and, therefore, exists a greater statistical possibility for murderous wingnuts? Even if there are more spree killings in China that doesn't mean that there are more such killings per 100,000 population, and you haven't even demonstrated that there are more such killings there.

I found data comparing one country to another. Do the same.

 

[OpenGambit]

There were 6 notable events in the last 2 years alone... arguably all more shocking than what we've seen in the US. I don't recall saying they had 3x the mass killings (good luck collecting realistic statistics from China) all I said was that mass killings happen in places without guns, too.

you said "just as likely" so I put in 3x because that creates an approximate per capita number.

can happen and just as likely to happen are not at all the same thing.

1 implies that banning guns can't stop the occurance ( no one is arguing that they do )
the second implies that guns have zero effect whatsoever ( which is the part that people are debating)

 

[mmmnaked]

Perhaps because there are 1.3 BILLION of them and, therefore, exists a greater statistical possibility for murderous wingnuts? Even if there are more spree killings in China that doesn't mean that there are more such killings per 100,000 population, and you haven't even demonstrated that there are more such killings there.

I found data comparing one country to another. Do the same.

Post statistics from China? Gimme a break... their regime is so full of **** that it'd be impossible to get good statistics.

What point are you driving anyway? I see statistics, but I don't see any conclusions.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Post statistics from China? Gimme a break... their regime is so full of **** that it'd be impossible to get good statistics.

What point are you driving anyway? I see statistics, but I don't see any conclusions.

That's because, as I stated earlier, any conclusions would be merely speculatory. If you're asking me to speculate, then I will. I posit that the ability to make people you hate go away just by making a fist results in a much greater likelihood that people will do so.

 

[mmmnaked]

I posit that the unavailability of a fist will result in the use of a baseball bat to dispatch those hated individuals.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

I posit that the unavailability of a fist will result in the use of a baseball bat to dispatch those hated individuals.

Which if we're only considering the data that I posted, which would on its face appear to be reliable, would not seem to be the case.

 

[sonnythebull]

Everyone in the US seems to believe this as well...the only thing they don't believe are the stats for gun related deaths as they are so high.

I'm not sure all my neighbours do drugs, rape and murder people. It's a nice neighbourhood....no guns required.

Are all your gun owning neighbors going on shooting rampages ??

 

[mmmnaked]

Which if we're only considering the data that I posted, which would on its face appear to be reliable, would not seem to be the case.

This data?

I can easily draw an entirely different conclusion. Canada has far fewer restrictions on firearms, and while the method of homicide is representative of this fact, the overall homicide rate between our country and Australia and England is in the same ballpark. It seems to me that just as many folks there wanna kill each-other, they just use a slightly different means.

 

[jc100]

Are all your gun owning neighbors going on shooting rampages ??

My neighbours don't own guns..none of them are hunters or target shooters and they don't seem scared either.

 

[jc100]

This data?

I can easily draw an entirely different conclusion. Canada has far fewer restrictions on firearms, and while the method of homicide is representative of this fact, the overall homicide rate between our country and Australia and England is in the same ballpark. It seems to me that just as many folks there wanna kill each-other, they just use a slightly different means.

I don't know what the error is in that graph but the firearms homicide rate in Canada is 5 times that of the UK.....the UK is a country with arguably more gun restrictions and no real gun culture to speak of.

 

[Paul1000RR]

Are all your gun owning neighbors going on shooting rampages ??

sonny there's no hope. you have better luck convincing a wall

 

[jc100]

sonny there's no hope. you have better luck convincing a wall

Convince me of what? I have no need to carry a gun. It's really simple.

 

[mmmnaked]

I don't know what the error is in that graph but the firearms homicide rate in Canada is 5 times that of the UK.....the UK is a country with arguably more gun restrictions and no real gun culture to speak of.

I don't see any error, and the rest of your post is basically my point. There's no "gun culture" there and their laws are extremely restrictive, but people still seem to find a way to kill each-other. Does the method matter?

The UK has 62 million people and just under 2 million legally registered firearms. Compare to Canada with half the population and 5x the number of guns. What conclusion do we draw now? There is one gun for every 3 people in this country... compared to something like 1 gun for every 30 people in the UK. Our firearms homicide rate should be orders of magnitude greater than theirs, but it's not even close to that.

Forum Sponsor