In a world without guns...the strong and the many can brutally beat the weak and outnumbered...

[2aguy]

Where did you get that...it is good information...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"In a world without guns...the strong and the many can brutally beat the weak and outnumbered..."

In a world without intelligence, we get moronic threads such as this.

 

[2aguy]

Clayton...why aren't you in bed...your mother told you you can't watch cartoons if you get up too early and bother the nice people...

 

[Toro]

The 15-year average murder rate in 93% white Idaho with lax gun control laws is 40% higher than it is in 77% white Canada with strict gun control laws.

The Canadian prairie provinces have a higher rate of homicide than Idaho.

And there aren't many black people or gangs in the prairies.

Not many in Idaho either and, as you note, Idaho has a higher rate of firearm ownership than Canada.

And a higher murder rate.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Jesus wept....

Perhaps the OP can explain why countries with very few guns invariably also have very few murders?

No, of course he can't.

Carry on.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

It's foolish to compare the United States to other countries in this regard.

 

[2aguy]

But the anti gunners do it all the time...complain to them...

 

[2aguy]

This is the kind of nonsense the pro 2nd amendment side has to contend with when we debate anti gunners...here is a look at a figure that compares the British violent crime rate to the American violent crime rate...now...both the Skepticallibertarian and politifact actually show that the violent crime rate is higher in Britain...just not as much as is reported in the 2000 per 100,000 violent crimes for Britain vs. the U.S. rate....

But the rate is still higher...and both the Skepticallibertarian and politifact rule it as untrue...what morons....

Social media post says U.K. has far higher violent crime rate than U.S. does PolitiFact

Politifact does their own numbers to check skepticalibertarian...and get this...

For England and Wales, we added together three crime categories: "violence against the person, with injury," "most serious sexual crime," and "robbery." This produced a rate of 775 violent crimes per 100,000 people.

For the United States, we used the FBI’s four standard categories for violent crime that Bier cited. We came up with a rate of 383 violent crimes per 100,000 people.

So, crunching their own numbers politifact finds twice the violent crime rate in Britain...keeping in mind the claim that Britian is more violent than the United States....

And what do they conclude...as to the truth of wether Britain is more Violent than the U.S.....

Our ruling

The meme said "there are over 2,000 crimes recorded per 100,000 population in the U.K.," compared to "466 violent crimes per 100,000" in the United States. Our preliminary attempt to make an apples-to-apples comparison shows a much smaller difference in violent crime rates between the two countries, but criminologists say differences in how the statistics are collected make it impossible to produce a truly valid comparison. We rate the claim False.

So, the anit gunners see that the claim that Britain is more violent than the U.S. is false...and they go with it....when it is completely wrong...

Britain, with all of it's gun control laws is twice as violent than the United States....with innocent victims helpless in the face of rapists, robbers, and violent criminals.....

so please...don't tell me gun control makes people safer....

 

[Saigon]

Jesus wept....

Perhaps the OP can explain why countries with very few guns invariably also have very few murders?

No, of course he can't.

Carry on.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

It's foolish to compare the United States to other countries in this regard.

Of course it is - because it makes the US look bad.

By any other standard, comparing the US with France, Germany, the UK or Canada makes perfect sense.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Guns per capita & homicides per capita:

USA : 90 guns per 100 people
Holland: 3.9

USA 4.7
Holland: 0.9

And another myth bites the dust.....

And another false comparison fallacy.

Do you believe that the United States and Holland are in any way similar with regard to population, demographics, history, and culture.

 

[Rikurzhen]

The 15-year average murder rate in 93% white Idaho with lax gun control laws is 40% higher than it is in 77% white Canada with strict gun control laws.

The Canadian prairie provinces have a higher rate of homicide than Idaho.

And there aren't many black people or gangs in the prairies.

Not many in Idaho either and, as you note, Idaho has a higher rate of firearm ownership than Canada.

And a higher murder rate.

Canada's homicide rate in 2010 was 1.62 per 100,000. Idaho's homicide rate in 2010 was 1.4. Neighboring Alberta's homicide rate in 2010 was 2.07.

We were talking about a correlation between levels of gun ownership and homicide.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Jesus wept....

Perhaps the OP can explain why countries with very few guns invariably also have very few murders?

No, of course he can't.

Carry on.

Well, maybe because you are misleading your question.
A number of countries that have few guns in the hands of it's citizen and more in the hands of the government and drug lords or warlords have a high murder rate, assault or sexual assault either by other type weapons or at the hand of the government and or those drug lords and warlords with those guns.

 

[2aguy]

Ruwandan genocide was conducted with machetes....over 800,000 people were murdered in a 100 day period...

Rwandan Genocide - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The Rwandan Genocide was a genocidal mass slaughter of Tutsi and moderate Hutuin Rwanda by members of the Hutu majority. During the approximate 100-day period from April 7, 1994 to mid-July, an estimated 500,000–1,000,000 Rwandans were killed,[1] constituting as much as 20% of the country's total population and 70% of the Tutsi then living in Rwanda.

Most of the victims were killed in their own villages or in towns, often by their neighbors and fellow villagers. The militia typically murdered victims by machetes, although some army units used rifles. The Hutu gangs searched out victims hiding in churches and school buildings, and massacred them. Local officials and government-sponsored radio incited ordinary citizens to kill their neighbors, and those who refused to kill were often murdered on the spot. "Either you took part in the massacres or you were massacred yourself."[144][page needed]

It doesn't take guns to commit genocide...which is why we have the 2nd Amendment to help prevent this madness from ever happening here...

this is something the anti gunners will never understand...

During the remainder of April and early May, the Presidential Guard, gendarmerie and the youth militia, aided by local populations, continued killing at a very high rate.[115] Gerard Prunier estimates that during the first six weeks, up to 800,000 Rwandans may have been murdered,[115] which would represent a rate of killing five times higher than during the Holocaust of Nazi Germany.[115]

The goal was to kill every Tutsi living in Rwanda[116] and, with the exception of the advancing RPF army, there was no opposition force to prevent or slow the killings:[115] the domestic opposition had already been eliminated, while UNAMIR were expressly forbidden to use any force except in self-defence.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Jesus wept....

Perhaps the OP can explain why countries with very few guns invariably also have very few murders?

No, of course he can't.

Carry on.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

It's foolish to compare the United States to other countries in this regard.

Of course it is - because it makes the US look bad.

By any other standard, comparing the US with France, Germany, the UK or Canada makes perfect sense.

Incorrect.

In order for your argument to be valid, you must compare two entities which are identical, otherwise the comparison isn't valid.

Moreover, your premise also fails as a post hoc fallacy, as there's no evidence the availability of guns necessarily results in higher murder rates, or that prohibiting the possession of firearms will decrease the rate of murder.

 

[Rikurzhen]

More Canadian data for 2010 broken down by province.

Nova Scotia = 2.22
Ontario= 1.43
Manitoba = 3.64
Saskatchewan = 3.26
British Columbia = 1.83
Yukon = 2.89
NWT = 2.28
Nunavit = 18.28 (not a typo)

Idaho, again, was 1.4.

 

[Toro]

The 15-year average murder rate in 93% white Idaho with lax gun control laws is 40% higher than it is in 77% white Canada with strict gun control laws.

The Canadian prairie provinces have a higher rate of homicide than Idaho.

And there aren't many black people or gangs in the prairies.

Not many in Idaho either and, as you note, Idaho has a higher rate of firearm ownership than Canada.

And a higher murder rate.

Canada's homicide rate in 2010 was 1.62 per 100,000. Idaho's homicide rate in 2010 was 1.4. Neighboring Alberta's homicide rate in 2010 was 2.07.

We were talking about a correlation between levels of gun ownership and homicide.

That's one year, which was the third lowest in over 40 years. The 15 year average in Idaho is ~2.4/100k v ~1.7/100k in Canada.

Idaho Crime Rates 1960 - 2012

The reason why I use 15 years is because that's the longest I could find for Canada.

 

[Saigon]

Incorrect.

In order for your argument to be valid, you must compare two entities which are identical, otherwise the comparison isn't valid.

Moreover, your premise also fails as a post hoc fallacy, as there's no evidence the availability of guns necessarily results in higher murder rates, or that prohibiting the possession of firearms will decrease the rate of murder.

They must be Identical? Really?

So we cannot compare any two countries on any parameter, ever?

Damned if this isn't some real desperation in that claim.

OF COURSE we can compare any two (or more) large, western democracies. Particularly countries like France, Germany and the UK ALL have gangs, all have immigrants, all have cities, all have Muslims, all have crime.

And we all know what those statistics show - the higher the rate of gun ownership, the higher the rates of homicide. Everyone knows that.

 

[Rikurzhen]

The Canadian prairie provinces have a higher rate of homicide than Idaho.

And there aren't many black people or gangs in the prairies.

Not many in Idaho either and, as you note, Idaho has a higher rate of firearm ownership than Canada.

And a higher murder rate.

Canada's homicide rate in 2010 was 1.62 per 100,000. Idaho's homicide rate in 2010 was 1.4. Neighboring Alberta's homicide rate in 2010 was 2.07.

We were talking about a correlation between levels of gun ownership and homicide.

That's one year, which was the third lowest in over 40 years. The 15 year average in Idaho is ~2.4/100k v ~1.7/100k in Canada.

Idaho Crime Rates 1960 - 2012

The reason why I use 15 years is because that's the longest I could find for Canada.

Firearm rights have been expanding over time. The rates from 15 years ago are pretty meaningless. The deterrence effect is diminished when we go back so far. As more people become gun owners "politeness" increases. The last 5 years in Idaho have had lower rates than most all years prior, plus we're dealing with a small population base so year by year spikes of a few additional murders are going to show significant change in the state-wide statistics.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Incorrect.

In order for your argument to be valid, you must compare two entities which are identical, otherwise the comparison isn't valid.

Moreover, your premise also fails as a post hoc fallacy, as there's no evidence the availability of guns necessarily results in higher murder rates, or that prohibiting the possession of firearms will decrease the rate of murder.

They must be Identical? Really?

So we cannot compare any two countries on any parameter, ever?

Damned if this isn't some real desperation in that claim.

OF COURSE we can compare any two (or more) large, western democracies. Particularly countries like France, Germany and the UK ALL have gangs, all have immigrants, all have cities, all have Muslims, all have crime.

And we all know what those statistics show - the higher the rate of gun ownership, the higher the rates of homicide. Everyone knows that.

Estonia.

 

[2aguy]

OF COURSE we can compare any two (or more) large, western democracies. Particularly countries like France, Germany and the UK ALL have gangs, all have immigrants, all have cities, all have Muslims, all have crime.

And the U.Ks violent crime rate is twice that of the United States...how do you explain that...

 

[Rikurzhen]

the higher the rate of gun ownership, the higher the rates of homicide. Everyone knows that.