To show how effective Gun control is in England

[dustygoon]

Originally posted by Bring_Back_Shantz+Jun 2 2005, 05:10 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bring_Back_Shantz @ Jun 2 2005, 05:10 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Doesn't Canada have 10 times the guns per capita as the US but 1/10 the number of gun related crime per capita (or is that murders?). I am not exactly sure of the stat but it is something like that. So more guns does not neccessarily mean more crime. It is the kind of guns and the dim wits holding them that makes the difference.

No, that's wrong. The states have more guns per capita than Canada does.
As of 1998 (latest numbers I could find without putting much effort in)
Canada had .25 guns per capita and a deaths from firearms rate (per 100 000) of 4.3 (this includes suicides and accidents).
The US had .82 guns per capita (3.3 times higher) and 11.4 deatsh per 100 000 (2.7 times higher than Canada).

How this relates to crime I don't know, but There are definately mome guns in the US.

EDIT: Another quick thing to point out. The US had more than 60 times the number of handguns (So about 6x per capita) than Canada. [/b][/quote]
I defer to you. My stats obviously suck. As does my argument! :unsure:

[Lurch]

Here are what are described as violent crimes, from the article:

rape, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, and homicide.

Now combine that with the demographics in Canada and the US. Baby Boomers (huge swell in the population) all hit about 40 in the early 90s.

Guess what, 40+ year olds are less likely to commit violent crimes. Therefore, most juristictions in North America have seen a big decrease in violent crimes over the past decade. They're not doing anything better / smarter, just the majority of the population is now past their violent-crime-committing age.

You should read the book Freakanomics by Stephen Levitt. He examines the impact of various factors on falling crime rates, and finds no evidence that the aging population had an impact. The only real statistical link between violent crime he could find was with Roe versus Wade. Apparently, abortion is the number one crime prevention technique available to Western society. Many might find this disturbing, but the actual evidence is quite compelling.

Another interesting case study in the book looks at accidental gun deaths involving children versus accidental drownings in backyard pools. Apparently, a pool is about 10 times more likely to cause an accidental death than a registered firearm in the home.

Anyway, this is an absolutely amazing book that basically takes 'common sense' beliefs and actually looks at the facts behind the fallacy. Just because everyone believes does not make it true would be a good description of the theme.

[tjinaz]

Here is another example of the statistics on guns in the US

PHYSICIANS vs. GUN OWNERS

Physicians:
a. The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
b. Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.
c. Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.
(Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services)

Now think about this . . .

Guns:
a. The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000.
b. The number of accidental gun deaths per year (all age groups) is
1,500.
c. The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is 0.000188.

Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than
gun owners.

Remember, "Guns don't kill people; doctors do."

FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE
DOCTOR!

And doctors cost a hell of a lot more than guns.

[RedHot25]

Originally posted by tjinaz@Jun 2 2005, 06:55 PM
Here is another example of the statistics on guns in the US

PHYSICIANS vs. GUN OWNERS

Physicians:
a. The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
b. Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.
c. Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.
(Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services)

Now think about this . . .

Guns:
a. The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000.
b. The number of accidental gun deaths per year (all age groups) is
1,500.
c. The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is 0.000188.

Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than
gun owners.

Remember, "Guns don't kill people; doctors do."

FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE
DOCTOR!

And doctors cost a hell of a lot more than guns.

You actually just compared GUNS to DOCTORS? Ok.....

[CaramonLS]

If they wanted to reduce the crime in the UK they might want to consider giving regular cops (not their swat team), guns.

Cops over there regularily do raids, yes raids on places which are known to harbor drug trafficers and such like that - cops over there on a regular basis get stabbed to death because the criminals resist and it turns into a Billy club vs. Knife fight.

[dustygoon]

Originally posted by CaramonLS@Jun 2 2005, 07:35 PM
If they wanted to reduce the crime in the UK they might want to consider giving regular cops (not their swat team), guns.

Cops over there regularily do raids, yes raids on places which are known to harbor drug trafficers and such like that - cops over there on a regular basis get stabbed to death because the criminals resist and it turns into a Billy club vs. Knife fight.

I must say...i lived there for a quite a while and never heard of cops getting into mismatched fights like that. I did hear of perps getting away before armed cops could get there in time.

I blame it on the yardies......

[CaramonLS]

Originally posted by dustygoon+Jun 2 2005, 08:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (dustygoon @ Jun 2 2005, 08:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-CaramonLS@Jun 2 2005, 07:35 PM
If they wanted to reduce the crime in the UK they might want to consider giving regular cops (not their swat team), guns.

Cops over there regularily do raids, yes raids on places which are known to harbor drug trafficers and such like that - cops over there on a regular basis get stabbed to death because the criminals resist and it turns into a Billy club vs. Knife fight.

I must say...i lived there for a quite a while and never heard of cops getting into mismatched fights like that. I did hear of perps getting away before armed cops could get there in time.

I blame it on the yardies...... [/b][/quote]
Well most cops are able to subdue the perps, but I can promise you, criminals are at least 10x more likely to challange a cop whose best weapon is a Billy club vs. a cop with a gun.

This stuff wont be making front page news because generally the stabbings aren't lethal and it looks pretty damned bad on the police department and the whole not giving them guns arguments in general.

[kermitology]

England doesn't need guns because they don't have to protect their home from the King of England.. Only America does..

That's my only contribution to the discussion.. carry on.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

Yup, that is true. But normally people kill people quicker, much more efficiently, and in greater numbers with guns than they do with any other weapon. I get to see each day what impact guns have on American society, and it boggles the imagination to believe that anyone in their right mind still believes that the second ammendment has any validity in the 21st century. Guns are more powerful, easier to use, and much more lethal than they have been at any time in the past. A completely unskilled person can become a lethal killing machine inside of 50' after firing only six shots. Guns may not kill people by themselves, but they facilitate people killing people in huge numbers simply by their availability. If a gun is available and somone is inclined to harm someone, that person that is being harmed is going to die the vast majority of the time. Guns have no place in a civilized society. They were designed with one goal in mind, death.

[Resolute 14]

Originally posted by tjinaz@Jun 2 2005, 11:55 AM
Here is another example of the statistics on guns in the US

PHYSICIANS vs. GUN OWNERS

Physicians:
a. The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
b. Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.
c. Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.
(Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services)

Now think about this . . .

Guns:
a. The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000.
b. The number of accidental gun deaths per year (all age groups) is
1,500.
c. The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is 0.000188.

Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than
gun owners.

Remember, "Guns don't kill people; doctors do."

FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE
DOCTOR!

And doctors cost a hell of a lot more than guns.

Care to show me the stats comparing intentional deaths caused by guns vs intentional deaths caused by doctors?

Really, I am not certian what you are trying to argue there. That post is obviously a joke, and one I've heard before. You seem to be treating it as a serious argument without fully understanding what it is exactly you are saying.

[tjinaz]

No that was a joke.....


So now in Iraq they are using car bombs to kill people. You think they should draft legislation banning cars? Do you think the terrorists would say... Dang they banned cars what are we going to do now? Hmmm maybe a shopping cart bomb, that will work until they ban those...

Guns have been around and been part of Western culture for over 300 years. Repeating firearms have been around for almost 150 years. What has changed in the last 30 years that has made them that much more lethal? Firearm technology has not had a break through in very long time. The .45 pistol is roughly the same now as it was when it was invented in 1905. Maybe a little more reliable but it will not shoot any faster or further than it did when it was invented. The Semi Auto AR-15 (civilian version of the M-16) has been on sale to civilians in the US since 1960. Little clue here, the guns have not changed, the people have. Banning guns will not make the violence stop, but it will make it harder for the law abiding to defend themselves against a stronger more vicious foe. Instead of more laws banning weapons, like the example this post is based on "the awfully pointy Knife" maybe the money would be better spent (something something Canadian gun registry remember that) in actually finding out why people are more violent now and doing something about that?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by tjinaz@Jun 3 2005, 12:24 AM


So now in Iraq they are using car bombs to kill people. You think they should draft legislation banning cars? Do you think the terrorists would say... Dang they banned cars what are we going to do now? Hmmm maybe a shopping cart bomb, that will work until they ban those...

There is no legislation that outright bans guns, so it is not a very good comparison. Gun control does not mean "banning guns".

There is "car control" in Iraq though. People can't just drive their cars anywhere they want because of the fact some are being used as deadly weapons. If a car goes where the U.S. military does not want it to go, they will shoot it. That is a lot more severe than any form of gun control over on this side of the pond.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by tjinaz@Jun 2 2005, 06:24 PM
No that was a joke.....


So now in Iraq they are using car bombs to kill people. You think they should draft legislation banning cars? Do you think the terrorists would say... Dang they banned cars what are we going to do now? Hmmm maybe a shopping cart bomb, that will work until they ban those...

Guns have been around and been part of Western culture for over 300 years. Repeating firearms have been around for almost 150 years. What has changed in the last 30 years that has made them that much more lethal? Firearm technology has not had a break through in very long time. The .45 pistol is roughly the same now as it was when it was invented in 1905. Maybe a little more reliable but it will not shoot any faster or further than it did when it was invented. The Semi Auto AR-15 (civilian version of the M-16) has been on sale to civilians in the US since 1960. Little clue here, the guns have not changed, the people have. Banning guns will not make the violence stop, but it will make it harder for the law abiding to defend themselves against a stronger more vicious foe. Instead of more laws banning weapons, like the example this post is based on "the awfully pointy Knife" maybe the money would be better spent (something something Canadian gun registry remember that) in actually finding out why people are more violent now and doing something about that?

Can't you do both at the same time?

Find out why people commit crime and restrict access to weapons that are designed to kill people?

Say my daughter (Sally) enjoys lighting fires. This bothers me so I take her to a shrink to learn why she does it. So the Doctor takes a few months to figure it out. During those months should I continue to leave the trusty Zippo on the counter and a pile of oily rags in the hamper?

[tjinaz]

Eh you got me there rouge. That will never fly in the US though. Denying someone a right guarenteed in the constitution is not a small thing. Plus the culture is that of self reliance, ie I will not be wholly dependent on the police to protect me, I will take action to protect myself. Plus you got the "Black Helicopter" crowd on both the left and the right that think the government is completely out of control and that they need to be armed when the day comes when it goes either Fascist or Communist. Sigh. This is a big part of the resistance to gun control in the US.

The funny thing is the vast majority of the "gun" people are very nice sane folks that like to shoot as a hobby and for sport. Some people like cars, they like guns and they tinker with them incessantly to get the best accuracy and power. But there do exist those that buy arms to further their criminal aims. How to be fair to the law abiding but get rid of the criminals is the fine line.