MonroeTalks.com > Categories > Politics and Government > In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?


Poll

Does America need more restictive gun laws?

Yes, all "guns" should be banned.
- 5 (6.8%)
No, we should not ban any weapons.
- 9 (12.2%)
No, but those with a history of mental illness (including childhood) should not have guns.
- 11 (14.9%)
Yes, Americans should not have any "automatic" weapons.
- 10 (13.5%)
New laws will not change "violent" people from doing "violent" acts.
- 39 (52.7%)

Total Members Voted: 74

Voting closed: December 20, 2012, 09:19:48 AM


Pages: 1 ... 42 43 [44] 45 46 ... 61   Go Down

Author Topic: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?  (Read 19470 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

The Fuzz

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17718
  • Fish Lake Michigan!
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #645 on: December 29, 2012, 10:38:36 AM »

Not speaking for Will, T, but I don't think he nor the data is suggesting doing nothing.  Just pointing out statistical fact based on what appears to me to be sufficient sample size and isolated variables. 

No doubt something needs to be done, but I believe the area that needs to be addressed is mental health and identification of those that have the propensity to commit these insane acts.
Logged
Support the local economy as much as possible!

SidecarFlip

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12063
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #646 on: December 29, 2012, 10:47:11 AM »

But that isn't how it works in this country.  You spank everyone and hope the selected group in question gets the message..... and everyone suffers the consequences.

In this particular case, however, 'everyone' else has the propensity for civil unrest.  Will be interesting...

Sort of like the reelection of Obama.  The clown is playing golf while Rome burns.  Thats leadership at it's finest IMO.

Bet FF would like to golf with Obama.  Probably wipe his balls for him........
Logged
AN ARMED SOCIETY IS A POLITE SOCIETY

Will Sweat

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4166
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #647 on: December 29, 2012, 11:07:45 AM »

So you are arguing that no further action is necessary because murder rates are declining?  We're middle-of-the-pack and that's good enough for you.

Death rates from cancer have dramatically decreased over the past few decades.  That doesn't mean we should stop researching and exploring any possible avenues to further reduce those rates.


Not arguing that at all.  What I will argue is that based on the most up to date statistical evidence murder is not at epidemic levels in America and that banning weapons will not cause a reduction in crime.  It is less my opinion than it is that of the UCR, UNODC and the CDC.

Would I love to be much lower on the rank of 206 countries in regards to murder?  Yes, of course.  However when all variables are taken into account the US is not in a "bad" place considering we are much less monolithic than many other countries and I believe this is an underlying factor. 

Notice that I do not say this is "good enough" but all things considered I find our current murder rate in comparison to the rest of the world a reasonable risk.  Just as I find the risk of driving a car reasonable and the rate of death in accidents is more than double the rate of murder (11.0 v 4.7). 

I believe that having a conversation on ways to continue or even accelerate the reduction in murder is a wonderful thing and we should, as a civil society, continue this.  But, we need to do so based on the best data we have and understand that solutions must address the root cause of criminal behavior and not simply respond in a reactionary manner and blame the tool used in many cases; weapons. 

Risk is inherent to the human condition and while limiting risk is a terrific thing doing so if it erodes the rights of citizens away is not, IMO, an admirable course.  Particularly when simply removing rights (banning weapons) does not address the root cause of crime but only one variable. 

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1103.pdf
« Last Edit: December 29, 2012, 11:10:20 AM by Will Sweat »
Logged
"While we try to teach our childern about life, our childern teach us what life is about"  - Angela Schmidt

livewire

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12126
  • "SHALL NOT be infringed". Got it?
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #648 on: December 29, 2012, 12:28:09 PM »

Most college grads know the difference between statistical and anecdotal evidence. 

The evidence on this site does not support your theory.

If it were true, why do most liberals (especially those with college degrees) on this site refuse to acknowledge the information that has been posted, with real, statistical proof that murder rates are dropping, while gun ownership is climbing dramatically?

Why do those same people refuse to see the countless cases where the mere presence of a legally owned firearm has prevented a violent crime - in many cases a rape or murder?

Why do these same people refuse to understand that gun free zones statistically are magnets for nut jobs looking for a place to commit a mass shooting, for obvious reasons?

Instead, these same "educated" liberals insist on doing "something" to prevent another school shooting.  It doesn't matter if what they do will actually work or not.  Bans are being proposed, that have been tried before, with absolutely no effect on violent crime, STATISTICALLY. 

Why are liberals (especially those with degrees) pushing for these feel-good laws, instead of looking at more ways to prevent crime, and spot those that are more likely to commit these crimes, before they occur?
Logged
The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it.
~ Albert Einstein

livewire

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12126
  • "SHALL NOT be infringed". Got it?
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #649 on: December 29, 2012, 12:42:45 PM »


Death rates from cancer have dramatically decreased over the past few decades.  That doesn't mean we should stop researching and exploring any possible avenues to further reduce those rates.

That is true, and I totally agree.  We should continue to do research, and save as many people as we can.

However, if that cancer research and exploration actually put thousands of people at additional risk, and it actually caused more death and injury, it wouldn't even be considered. 

That is my position regarding gun control.  I have NO problem with much stricter punishments for gun crimes, and reasonable methods to determine who is mentally capable of owning and operating a firearm safely.  But when legislation is proposed that might possibly reduce the number of guns bought legally, with the hopes that it might some day reduce the number of guns in the hands of criminals, while at the same time preventing law abiding citizens from having the option of buying a firearm for personal protection, I will always be totally against it.  It might, maybe save some lives at a later date, but it WILL definitely prevent many law abiding citizens from protecting themselves, and it will cost more lives than it might save.

The statistics support my position.  But many people don't consider that.
Logged
The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it.
~ Albert Einstein

livewire

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12126
  • "SHALL NOT be infringed". Got it?
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #650 on: December 29, 2012, 12:48:05 PM »

Here is yet ANOTHER case where the mere presence of a LEGALLY OWNED FIREARM prevented a crime - possibly a murder.

And the gun was never even fired, so cases like this never get tallied in any kind of statistic.



Police learned the five suspects ordered 10 pizzas and soda. They told the pizza delivery driver to call when he was ten minutes away.

The driver was suspicious.

He parked a few doors down from the delivery address. The driver told police he saw five people step out of a vehicle – one was wearing a mask and holding a gun.

The suspect revealed his gun, but the driver had a legally registered weapon of his own.

When the suspects saw it they fled the scene. The driver followed them and called police.


http://www.wishtv.com/dpp/news/crime/delivery-man-helps-police-arrest-5
Logged
The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it.
~ Albert Einstein

livewire

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12126
  • "SHALL NOT be infringed". Got it?
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #651 on: December 29, 2012, 01:10:33 PM »

More guns = less crime.  That is a fact.

Yet another case in point:


 Gun deaths and injuries have dropped sharply in California, even as the number of guns sold in the state has risen, according to new state data.

Dealers sold 600,000 guns in California last year, up from 350,000 in 2002, according to records of sale tallied by the California Attorney General's office.

During that same period, the number of California hospitalizations due to gun injuries declined from about 4,000 annually to 2,800, a roughly 25 percent drop, according to hospital records collected by the California Department of Public Health.

Firearm-related deaths fell from about 3,200 annually to about 2,800, an 11 percent drop, state health figures show.

Most of the drop in firearm-related injuries and deaths can be explained by a well-documented, nationwide drop in violent crime.



http://www.sacbee.com/2012/12/27/5079151/california-gun-sales-increase.html
Logged
The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it.
~ Albert Einstein

The Fuzz

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17718
  • Fish Lake Michigan!
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #652 on: December 29, 2012, 06:25:43 PM »

Would like to know more about where the stats came from, but interesting nonetheless.

After Newtown, Americans want their guns, with some restrictions

http://news.yahoo.com/newtown-americans-want-guns-restrictions-232939287.html

(Reuters) - Nearly seven in 10 Americans support the idea of placing strong or moderate limits gun ownership following the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, a Reuters/Ipsos poll said on Thursday.

But laws that permit citizens to carry concealed weapons or use lethal force for protection while in public were just as popular, the poll said.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which surveyed 1,477 Americans online between December 23 and 27, highlighted the difficulty U.S. policymakers face in devising ways to curb gun violence: gun control laws enjoy fervent support in the abstract, but laws preserving specific gun ownership privileges are also well liked.

The poll results come roughly two weeks after police say 20-year-old Adam Lanza shot his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, using a semi-automatic weapon to kill 20 first graders and six school staff members. Ahead of the rampage, he had killed his mother, Nancy Lanza, in their home five miles away. Lanza killed himself as police arrived at the school.

It was the second deadliest school shooting in U.S. history after the 2007 massacre at Virginia Tech University in Blacksburg, Virginia, which left 32 dead.

The Reuters/Ipsos survey found that 48 percent of respondents agreed that "gun ownership should have strong regulations or restrictions." Meanwhile, 69 percent and 68 percent either strongly supported or somewhat supported laws allowing law-abiding citizens to get a concealed-weapon permit and "laws allowing citizens to use deadly force to protect themselves from danger in public places," respectively.

Some restrictions on gun ownership enjoyed even more support than concealed carry rights. Nearly nine in 10 Americans favored laws requiring background checks before someone purchases a gun, and just over seven in 10 favored limits on the number of guns someone could purchase in a particular time frame.

But nearly four in 10 Americans said they supported allowing law-abiding citizens to bring a firearm into a "church, workplace, or retail establishment," according to the poll. Several states currently ban guns in such places.

An equal number said they were "very concerned" about increased purchases of semi-automatic weapons following the shooting in Connecticut, further illustrating the dissonance.

The latest poll results echoed attitudes expressed by Americans surveyed immediately after the Newtown massacre and differed sharply from Reuters/Ipsos polls conducted prior to it. The share of Americans supporting strong limits on gun ownership rose by 8 percentage points to 50 percent in the days after the shooting.

The poll's findings had a credibility interval, which is similar to a margin of error, of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points.
Logged
Support the local economy as much as possible!

SidecarFlip

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12063
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #653 on: December 29, 2012, 08:06:39 PM »

Fuzz....  Obviously the public is asleep or believes what the media says, if in fact true or false...

Would like to know more about where the stats came from, but interesting nonetheless.

After Newtown, Americans want their guns, with some restrictions

http://news.yahoo.com/newtown-americans-want-guns-restrictions-232939287.html

(Reuters) - Nearly seven in 10 Americans support the idea of placing strong or moderate limits gun ownership following the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, a Reuters/Ipsos poll said on Thursday.

But laws that permit citizens to carry concealed weapons or use lethal force for protection while in public were just as popular, the poll said.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which surveyed 1,477 Americans online between December 23 and 27, highlighted the difficulty U.S. policymakers face in devising ways to curb gun violence: gun control laws enjoy fervent support in the abstract, but laws preserving specific gun ownership privileges are also well liked.

The poll results come roughly two weeks after police say 20-year-old Adam Lanza shot his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, using a semi-automatic weapon to kill 20 first graders and six school staff members. Ahead of the rampage, he had killed his mother, Nancy Lanza, in their home five miles away. Lanza killed himself as police arrived at the school.

It was the second deadliest school shooting in U.S. history after the 2007 massacre at Virginia Tech University in Blacksburg, Virginia, which left 32 dead.

The Reuters/Ipsos survey found that 48 percent of respondents agreed that "gun ownership should have strong regulations or restrictions." Meanwhile, 69 percent and 68 percent either strongly supported or somewhat supported laws allowing law-abiding citizens to get a concealed-weapon permit and "laws allowing citizens to use deadly force to protect themselves from danger in public places," respectively.

Legal gun ownership, especially hand guns already does and even more so with a Concealed Carry Permit

Some restrictions on gun ownership enjoyed even more support than concealed carry rights. Nearly nine in 10 Americans favored laws requiring background checks before someone purchases a gun, and just over seven in 10 favored limits on the number of guns someone could purchase in a particular time frame.

Everytime you purchase a firearm from a licenced dealer, the background check is automatic and there are already limits on how many firearms can be purchased in a given timeframe

But nearly four in 10 Americans said they supported allowing law-abiding citizens to bring a firearm into a "church, workplace, or retail establishment," according to the poll. Several states currently ban guns in such places.

Michigan is one BTW.  I have no issue with the prohibition and most employers (mine) included specifically don't want firearms in the workplace.

An equal number said they were "very concerned" about increased purchases of semi-automatic weapons following the shooting in Connecticut, further illustrating the dissonance.

Feinstein has no idea the difference from what I read concerning her proposed legislation.  I don't believe there are any left to buy, people bought them all last week...lol

The latest poll results echoed attitudes expressed by Americans surveyed immediately after the Newtown massacre and differed sharply from Reuters/Ipsos polls conducted prior to it. The share of Americans supporting strong limits on gun ownership rose by 8 percentage points to 50 percent in the days after the shooting.

The poll's findings had a credibility interval, which is similar to a margin of error, of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points.


I have an issue with more government control on firearms.  Making it hard for law abiding citizens to purchase and hold/use firearms will do nothing, NOTHING to remove them from individuals with ill intent or those who obtain them illegally for use in violent crimes.
Logged
AN ARMED SOCIETY IS A POLITE SOCIETY

lilly

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1716
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #654 on: December 29, 2012, 10:09:33 PM »

Good point and the very reason why I don't believe the national discussion is being driven by statistical facts but rather by an agenda. 

I believe if this were just about an honest analysis of the statistics there would be no discussion at all.  When you examine the Federal Bureau of Investigations; Uniform Crime Report and the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime data both show that murder in America has been tracking downward for the last several years (1980 till current for the UCR and 1997 to 2011 for UNODC).  So then what is the grand "push" at this time if our "intelligent" leadership understands the difference between statistical and anecdotal evidence as you suggest they should? 

Instead of just being honest about the goal many are attempting to paint this discussion as if we have an epidemic of violent crime when the hard scientific statistics show just the opposite.  This just proves that while figures don't lie, liar's know how to figure.  This, IMO, is more troubling because of the number of people who are lining up to support a position that has no statistical merit while at the same time behaving as if they have the high ground.  It lacks basic logic.  I would rather hear people who are honest about the position they hold and who admit they don't like or want weapons in our society.  IMO, those few who do so are not only being sincere but are not trying to utilize a horrible tragedy in a manipulative and ghoulish manner and I can respect the position they hold even if I disagree with it. 

Anyhow, the best statistical evidence we have from the UCR is that: 

Today's murder rate is essentially at a low point of the past century. The murder rate in 2011 was lower than it was in 1911.
 
And the trend is downward. Whatever we've been doing over the last 20-30 years seems to be working, more or less. The murder rate has been cut by more than half since 1980: from 10.7 to 4.7.


And from the UNODC we find that: 

Murder in the United States has continued a downward trend from 1995 - 2011.  Further the murder rate (per 100,000) places the US not even near the top in a list of 206 countries but squarely in the middle at 103.  

Of course it is possible that these two studies are incorrect.  The difficulty for those wishing to ban weapons is not just that the UCR and UNODC analysis would not seem to warrant this based on supposed "crime prevention" (in essence how do you "prevent" something that is already tracking lower over the last 30 years) but the CDC's report; "Evaluating the Effectiveness of Preventing Violence:  Firearms Laws" from 2003 that stated;

In summary, the Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence.

I would think that three independent studies would be enough to give pause that the statistical data does not merit a discussion regarding gun laws in spite of the horror that was perpetuated in Newtown. We can have a discussion on banning weapons but we should do so with honesty.  Those who wish to ban weapons should simply say that ridding our society of something they find repulsive (firearms) is the goal.  This must be the case if they understand the difference between "statistical and anecdotal" evidence, right?  To try and give the illusion that the discussion is about reducing crime is, IMO, dishonest as the clear statistical evidence is that the murder rate in America has continued to go in a southern direction even with more and more weapons in the hands of our citizens.     

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-1

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/homicide.html

http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/publications/by-type/yearbook/small-arms-survey-2012.html

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/listening_to_the_latest_media.html#ixzz2GRvP6SA9
First off, I'm not advocating for the removal of guns from everyone. Far from it.

However, your statistics are of murder, not of crimes committed with guns.

Bank robberies, muggings, etc etc.
Logged
Contestant 1: I'll take "Emotions of the Conservatives" for 1000 Alex.
Alex Trebek: These two emotions are the bane of Conservative existence.

Contestant 1: What are "empathy and compassion?"
Alex Trebek: "You're right for $1000"

lilly

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1716
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #655 on: December 29, 2012, 10:22:00 PM »

Did a search for murders with firearms world wide and got this.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms


Rank      Countries     Amount
# 1        South Africa:    31,918     
# 2        Colombia:    21,898     
# 3        Thailand:    20,032     
# 4        United States:    9,369     
# 5        Philippines:    7,708     
# 6        Mexico:    2,606     
# 7        Slovakia:    2,356     
# 8        El Salvador:    1,441     
# 9        Zimbabwe:    598     
# 10        Peru:    442     
# 11        Germany:    269     
# 12        Czech Republic:    181     
# 13        Ukraine:    173     
# 14        Canada:    144     
# 15        Albania:    135     
# 16        Costa Rica:    131     
# 17        Azerbaijan:    120     
# 18        Poland:    111     
# 19        Uruguay:    109     
# 20        Spain:    97     
# 21        Portugal:    90     
# 22        Croatia:    76     
# 23        Switzerland:    68     
# 24        Bulgaria:    63     
# 25        Australia:    59     
# 26        Sweden:    58     
# 27        Bolivia:    52     
# 28        Japan:    47     
# 29        Slovenia:    39     
= 30        Belarus:    38     
= 30        Hungary:    38     
# 32        Latvia:    28     
# 33        Burma:    27     
# 34        Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of:    26     
# 35        Austria:    25     
# 36        Estonia:    21     
# 37        Moldova:    20     
# 38        Lithuania:    16     
= 39        United Kingdom:    14     
= 39        Denmark:    14     
# 41        Ireland:    12     
# 42        New Zealand:    10     
# 43        Chile:    9     
# 44        Cyprus:    4     
# 45        Morocco:    1     
= 46        Oman:    0     
= 46        Luxembourg:    0     
= 46        Iceland:    0     
   Total:    100,693      

Logged
Contestant 1: I'll take "Emotions of the Conservatives" for 1000 Alex.
Alex Trebek: These two emotions are the bane of Conservative existence.

Contestant 1: What are "empathy and compassion?"
Alex Trebek: "You're right for $1000"

Will Sweat

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4166
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #656 on: December 29, 2012, 10:31:49 PM »

First off, I'm not advocating for the removal of guns from everyone. Far from it.

However, your statistics are of murder, not of crimes committed with guns.

Bank robberies, muggings, etc etc.

Lilly, that was expressly stated as the conversation was sparked by the murder of school children in Connecticut.  Having said that the reality is that the murder rate in America has continued to decline since 1980 according to the UCR and since 1995 according to the UN.

Oh, in terms of other violent crimes according to the UCR for 2011 crime is on a downward turn.  It would seem that we should be happy about this, no? 
Logged
"While we try to teach our childern about life, our childern teach us what life is about"  - Angela Schmidt

lilly

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1716
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #657 on: December 29, 2012, 10:33:20 PM »

Another way of looking at it.

We have 5% of the worlds population and 10% of the murders.

Again, not advocating for the removal of guns, just want to have the correct information out there for discussion.
Logged
Contestant 1: I'll take "Emotions of the Conservatives" for 1000 Alex.
Alex Trebek: These two emotions are the bane of Conservative existence.

Contestant 1: What are "empathy and compassion?"
Alex Trebek: "You're right for $1000"

Will Sweat

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4166
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #658 on: December 29, 2012, 10:39:40 PM »

Did a search for murders with firearms world wide and got this.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms


Rank      Countries     Amount
# 1        South Africa:    31,918     
# 2        Colombia:    21,898     
# 3        Thailand:    20,032     
# 4        United States:    9,369     
# 5        Philippines:    7,708     
# 6        Mexico:    2,606     
# 7        Slovakia:    2,356     
# 8        El Salvador:    1,441     
# 9        Zimbabwe:    598     
# 10        Peru:    442     
# 11        Germany:    269     
# 12        Czech Republic:    181     
# 13        Ukraine:    173     
# 14        Canada:    144     
# 15        Albania:    135     
# 16        Costa Rica:    131     
# 17        Azerbaijan:    120     
# 18        Poland:    111     
# 19        Uruguay:    109     
# 20        Spain:    97     
# 21        Portugal:    90     
# 22        Croatia:    76     
# 23        Switzerland:    68     
# 24        Bulgaria:    63     
# 25        Australia:    59     
# 26        Sweden:    58     
# 27        Bolivia:    52     
# 28        Japan:    47     
# 29        Slovenia:    39     
= 30        Belarus:    38     
= 30        Hungary:    38     
# 32        Latvia:    28     
# 33        Burma:    27     
# 34        Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of:    26     
# 35        Austria:    25     
# 36        Estonia:    21     
# 37        Moldova:    20     
# 38        Lithuania:    16     
= 39        United Kingdom:    14     
= 39        Denmark:    14     
# 41        Ireland:    12     
# 42        New Zealand:    10     
# 43        Chile:    9     
# 44        Cyprus:    4     
# 45        Morocco:    1     
= 46        Oman:    0     
= 46        Luxembourg:    0     
= 46        Iceland:    0     
   Total:    100,693      


Point?  The reality is that yes there are people in America and elsewhere that kill others with firearms.  But showing simple raw numbers and not taking into account population size or rate of murder. 

When this is done according to the United Nations of 206 nations surveyed the US placed 103 for rate of murder.  Our current rate is lower today than it was in 1980 and has continued, since that time, to move in a southern direction. 

Logged
"While we try to teach our childern about life, our childern teach us what life is about"  - Angela Schmidt

livewire

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12126
  • "SHALL NOT be infringed". Got it?
Re: In the wake of the Connecticut and Oregon should the US consider "gun laws"?
« Reply #659 on: December 29, 2012, 10:42:55 PM »

Lilly, I agree that having the correct information is crucial.  Looking at the total number of murders is misleading, to say the least.  It should be looked at on a per capita basis, if the comparison is at all accurate.

Here is the same chart, from the same source, showing the murders with a firearm per 100,000 population.

In spite of the fact the United States has FAR more guns per capita than ANY other country in the world, by far, we rank number eight, with only 3.6 murders with a firearm per 100,000 people.  Looking at ALL murders, it is much lower than that.

Sure, it would be great if it were zero.  But in the grand scheme of things, the risk is relatively low.  What this chart doesn't show is the fact that a large amount of these murders happened in areas with very strict gun laws, or outright gun bans (Chicago, Washington D.C., etc.).  The number COULD be much lower, if people were allowed to protect themselves.



Countries     Amount
# 1        South Africa:    74.5748      
# 2        Colombia:    51.7683      
# 3        Thailand:    33.0016      
# 4        Guatemala:    18.5      
# 5        Paraguay:    7.3508      
# 6        Zimbabwe:    4.746      
# 7        Mexico:    3.6622      
# 8        United States:    3.6      
# 9        Belarus:    3.31      
# 10        Barbados:    2.9963      
# 11        Uruguay:    2.5172      
# 12        Lithuania:    2.2463      
# 13        Slovakia:    2.1659      
# 14        Côte d'Ivoire:    2.068      
# 15        Estonia:    1.534      
# 16        Macedonia, Republic of:    1.2802      
# 17        Latvia:    1.2648      
# 18        Portugal:    0.8488      
# 19        Bulgaria:    0.7714      
# 20        Slovenia:    0.6036      
# 21        Germany:    0.4672      
# 22        Moldova:    0.4671      
# 23        Hungary:    0.44      
# 24        Poland:    0.4289      
# 25        Ukraine:    0.3495      
# 26        Australia:    0.3073      
# 27        Czech Republic:    0.2624      
# 28        Spain:    0.2456      
# 29        Azerbaijan:    0.2236      
# 30        New Zealand:    0.1827      
# 31        Chile:    0.1776      
# 32        Singapore:    0.0249      
   Weighted average:    6.9      
« Last Edit: December 29, 2012, 10:46:22 PM by livewire »
Logged
The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it.
~ Albert Einstein
Pages: 1 ... 42 43 [44] 45 46 ... 61   Go Up