Teenager shot dead...in Britain, where they banned and confiscated guns

[frigidweirdo]

Another teenager was shot, and this time killed..... you know, in Britain, where they banned and confiscated guns on the promise it would stop gun crime and lower violent crime rates......and the opposite has happened...

How do these teenagers keep getting guns in Britain....when they banned and confiscated guns.....?

Teenager shot dead in east London

teenager has died after he was shot in east London, sparking a murder probe.

The 19-year-old man was rushed to hospital by friends after the incident in Walthamstow, at around 11pm on Saturday night.

They confiscate guns and ban guns in the US too.

But hell, you don't care.

Millions of guns are in the hands of private citizens. And you know it.

 

[Markle]

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S.

But it's the rate of firearm homicides that matters when it comes to gun control. 'All types of violence' is a red herring. The favourite fish of the raving loonies.

I couldn't make this up if I tried! The Progressives want to change to the subject to whatever suits them best at the moment. ALL VIOLENCE is, to them, irrelevant, immaterial and unimportant. It is only guns that matter.

Sorry, sad, people.

 

[Markle]

They confiscate guns and ban guns in the US too.

But hell, you don't care.

Millions of guns are in the hands of private citizens. And you know it.

Where?

 

[Lastman]

It happens

 

[Markle]

It happens

Where and when?

 

[Lastman]

It happens

Where and when?

Everywhere all the time

 

[Markle]

It happens

Where and when?

Everywhere all the time

So show us.

I presume you are NOT talking about illegally possessed guns by criminals.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

Another teenager was shot, and this time killed..... you know, in Britain, where they banned and confiscated guns on the promise it would stop gun crime and lower violent crime rates......and the opposite has happened...

How do these teenagers keep getting guns in Britain....when they banned and confiscated guns.....?

Teenager shot dead in east London

teenager has died after he was shot in east London, sparking a murder probe.

The 19-year-old man was rushed to hospital by friends after the incident in Walthamstow, at around 11pm on Saturday night.

IOnGreeta Britain liuve 66 millions, in tehn USA live 325 million. In Great Britain 2003/2004 were 833 cases of murder. USA 2005 14,860. GB 73 times murder with guns. USA 10,100 times.

If the situation in the USA would be the same in GB then in GB would had happened more than 3000 cases of murder and more than 2000 of the people were murdered with guns. This means the situation of "murder with guns" is in the USA 2500% more disastrous for every citizen of the USA. The USA is a selfmade hell.

And as the other anti gunners show, you fail to understand the truth. Britain has always had a low murder rate.....they had a low murder rate before they banned guns, and then, when they banned guns, the gun murder rate increased....and then returned to the exact same rate as before they banned guns...showing, eir gun crime rate keeps going up, which means, again, that their gun control laws did nothing to change the access their criminals have to guns.

Meanwhile, in the United States, during the same period....

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 17.25 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2018...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades

You left out knife attacks and killings by car increased. The are banning knives I understand.

 

[cnm]

As if someone's less dead if a villain uses a knife, rather than a gun due to availability.

You come off like a retard.

At least I'm not Polish.

 

[cnm]

couldn't make this up if I tried!

You did try. The OP is about a firearms homicide, of which the US rate is multiples of the UK rate, where firearms are severely controlled, and where the total homicide rate is less than a fifth of that of the US. It's the standard raving loony deflection.

In the US, about half of homicides are committed with handguns yet raving loonies pretend that has nothing to do with their widespread availability. The rate of handgun homicides, let alone firearm homicides in the US is greater than the total rate of homicides in the UK. Raving loonies pretend that doesn't matter.

http://www.humanosphere.org/science/

 

[2aguy]

Another teenager was shot, and this time killed..... you know, in Britain, where they banned and confiscated guns on the promise it would stop gun crime and lower violent crime rates......and the opposite has happened...

How do these teenagers keep getting guns in Britain....when they banned and confiscated guns.....?

Teenager shot dead in east London

teenager has died after he was shot in east London, sparking a murder probe.

The 19-year-old man was rushed to hospital by friends after the incident in Walthamstow, at around 11pm on Saturday night.

They confiscate guns and ban guns in the US too.

But hell, you don't care.

Millions of guns are in the hands of private citizens. And you know it.

Yes....and in the United States guns in the hands of private citizens make us safer......in Britain, they confiscated and banned almost all guns except for a select few hunting shotguns for the wealthy on their estates...their gun crime is going up, our gun crime is going down...

Please explain how that is.....

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 17.25 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2018...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

 

[Toro]

Another teenager was shot, and this time killed..... you know, in Britain, where they banned and confiscated guns on the promise it would stop gun crime and lower violent crime rates......and the opposite has happened...

How do these teenagers keep getting guns in Britain....when they banned and confiscated guns.....?

Teenager shot dead in east London

teenager has died after he was shot in east London, sparking a murder probe.

The 19-year-old man was rushed to hospital by friends after the incident in Walthamstow, at around 11pm on Saturday night.

Math is hard

Derp derp derp

 

[2aguy]

In Great Britain live 66 millions, in the USA live 325 millions. In Great Britain 2003/2004 were 833 cases of murder. USA 2005 14,860 times murder. GB 73 times murder with guns. USA 10,100 times.

If the situation in the USA would be the same in GB then in GB would had happened more than 3000 cases of murder and more than 2000 of the people were murdered with guns. This means the situation of "murder with guns" is in the USA 2500% more disastrous for every citizen of the USA. So: The USA is a selfmade hell. How to solve this problem? Take your weapons, which make your life to a hell, and throw them into hell.

Then why are these the FACTS?

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S.
By James Slack
UPDATED:18:14 EST, 2 July 2009

Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it has been revealed.

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries.

The figures comes on the day new Home Secretary Alan Johnson makes his first major speech on crime, promising to be tough on loutish behaviour.

The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 920 and South Africa 1,609.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: 'This is a damning indictment of this government's comprehensive failure over more than a decade to tackle the deep rooted social problems in our society, and the knock on effect on crime and anti-social behaviour.

Read more: The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S. | Daily Mail Online

UK is violent crime capital of Europe

Sorry: But from which planet are you? Do you think because you bomb down people with nonsense this nonsense will become true? 25% of all prisoners worldwide are arrested in the USA.

Murder USA 5.4 per 100,000 inhabitants (2016)
Murder UK 1.2 per 100,000 inhabitants (2016)

Murder is one part of the issue ...

I spoke here not only about murder. I spoke also about murder with guns, when I wrote:

"If the situation in the USA would be the same in GB then in GB would had happened more than 3000 cases of murder and more than 2000 of the people were murdered with guns. This means the situation of "murder with guns" is in the USA 2500% more disastrous for every citizen of the USA. So: The USA is a selfmade hell. How to solve this problem? Take your weapons, which make your life to a hell, and throw them into hell."

In Great Britain were not murdered more than 2000 people with guns (if they had the same situation as in the USA) - it were only murdered 73 people with guns.

So if indeed the violence in GB grew on a astonishing new maximum (I do not have any serios German source for this) - then it is much more important to have strict weapon laws - more strict weapon laws - and much more strict weapon laws. And if the situation in the USA is on such a positive way, then it is not understandable, why anyone needs weapons at all.

Oh by the way. Your children in the USA still live in fear every day could a school shooter appear in their school. No one feels save in the USA any longer - not even children. That's one of the problems of the weapon politics which you propagate.

The weapon industry in the USA earns a lot of money - and the public security and social systems of the USA have the costs, which every company and citizen of the USA has to pay with tax. Could be interesting to compare the national economic deficits with the private profits of weapon producers and weapon traders.

They have....guns save more money and more lives than are taken by criminals when they use guns.


And you have a chicken and egg problem..... your violent crime rates were low when your citizens had access to guns, and then, when Britain banned and confiscated them, your violent crime rates went through the roof....

In the U.S......as more Americans own and carry guns, our gun crime and gun murder rates went down.....

You can't explain that......


Now...Lives saved...

Case Closed: Kleck Is Still Correct


Consider that in the 1992 NSDS 46% of those reporting DGUs believed someone “might have” – “probably would have” – or “almost certainly would have” been killed otherwise. Even of 1.1 million DGUs, nearly half may have saved a life (and we ought to assume, conservatively, that at least the 16% “almost certainly” did).
-----------------------
If this 1/3 vs. 2/3 ratio of deaths to injuries in actual shootings pertains in these DGUs, that makes for at least 176,000 lives saved—less some attackers who lost their lives to defenders. This enormous benefit dwarfs, both in human and economic terms, the losses trumpeted by hoplophobes who only choose to see the risk side of the equation.


Money saved when armed citizens stop violent criminals with guns.....

Annual Defensive Gun Use Savings Dwarf Study's "Gun Violence" Costs - The Truth About Guns

Our man Bruce Krafft — whose posts we dearly miss — did the math back in 2012. Here it is:
Our fearless leader suggested that I take a look at the flip side of the anti’s latest attack on our freedoms (a recycled strategy from the Clinton-era Public Health model of gun control): the monetary cost of gun violence.
For example, the Center for American Progress touted the “fact” that the Virginia Tech massacre cost taxpayers $48.2 million (including autopsy costs and a fine against Virginia Tech for failing to get their skates on when the killer started shooting).
It’s one of the antis’ favorite tricks: cost benefit analysis omitting the benefit side of the equation. So what are the financial benefits of firearm ownership to society? Read on . . .
In my post Dennis Henigan on Chardon: Clockwork Edition, I did an analysis of how many lives were saved annually in Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs). I used extremely conservative numbers. Now I am going to use some less conservative ones.
The Kleck-Gertz DGU study estimated that there are between 2.1 and 2.5 million DGUs a year in the U.S. The Ludwig-Cook study came up with 1.46 million. So let’s split the difference and call it 1.88 million DGUs per year.
In the K-G article Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun, 15.7 percent of people who had a DGU reckoned they almost certainly saved a life. Ignoring the ‘probably’ and ‘might have’ saved a life categories for simplicity, 15.7 percent of 1.88 million gives us 295,160 lives saved annually.
[NB: A number of people have questioned the 15.7 percent stat. Remember: many states regard the mere act of pulling a gun on someone a form of deadly force. In addition, virtually every jurisdiction in the nation requires that an armed self-defender must be in “reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm” before using (or in some places even threatening to use) deadly force.]
How can we get a dollar figure from 1.88 million defensive gun uses per year? Never fear, faithful reader, we can count on the .gov to calculate everything.
According to the AZ state government, in February of 2008 a human life was worth $6.5 million. Going to the Inflation Calculator and punching in the numbers gives us a present value of $6.93 million.
So figuring that the average DGU saves one half of a person’s life—as “gun violence” predominantly affects younger demographics—that gives us $3.465 million per half life.
Putting this all together, we find that the monetary benefit of guns (by way of DGUs) is roughly $1.02 trillion per year. That’s trillion. With a ‘T’.
I was going to go on and calculate the costs of incarceration ($50K/year) saved by people killing 1527 criminals annually, and then look at the lifetime cost to society of an average criminal (something in excess of $1 million). But all of that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the $1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) annual benefit of gun ownership.
When compared to the (inflation adjusted from 2002) $127.5 billion ‘cost’ of gun violence calculated by by our Ludwig-Cook buddies, guns save a little more than eight times what they “cost.”
Which, I might add, is completely irrelevant since “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil, and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility.”
So even taking Motherboard’s own total and multiplying it by 100, the benefits to society of civilian gun ownership dwarf the associated costs.

 

[2aguy]

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S.

But it's the rate of firearm homicides that matters when it comes to gun control. 'All types of violence' is a red herring. The favourite fish of the raving loonies.

No...it isn't......rape, robbery and beatings change lives....and they increase when you take guns away from normal people...

You don't want to count violent crime because British criminals don't commit murder as much as American thugs do....but you have to hide the fact that British criminals didn't commit murder before they banned guns...and it increased after they banned guns....

 

[2aguy]

couldn't make this up if I tried!

You did try. The OP is about a firearms homicide, of which the US rate is multiples of the UK rate, where firearms are severely controlled, and where the total homicide rate is less than a fifth of that of the US. It's the standard raving loony deflection.

In the US, about half of homicides are committed with handguns yet raving loonies pretend that has nothing to do with their widespread availability. The rate of handgun homicides, let alone firearm homicides in the US is greater than the total rate of homicides in the UK. Raving loonies pretend that doesn't matter.

http://www.humanosphere.org/science/

Wrong again....... the gun murder rate in Britain was low before they banned guns....it went up after they banned guns...showing that gun control had no effect on criminals using guns to commit murder......

The rate of knife homicides in the U.S. is higher than the total murder rate in Britain...the rate of empty hand homicides in the U.S. is higher than the total murder rate in Britain...

What you fail to grasp is that Britain is where the United States was entering the 1960s.....violent crime is starting to increase as Britain recovers from the trauma of World War 2......and the socialist welfare state has finally managed to destroy your families.....teenage girls are now raising too many young men without fathers.....who traditionally taught young males how to be responsible men. You see this is the violent murder that is now taking place in Britain with knives....you are too stupid to realize that it starts with knives...as it did here in the States in the 1950s, and will end up with guns......and your gun control laws can't keep guns out of the hands of your criminals especially as you attack the police, cut their resources, and burden them with politically correct policies......

 

[Toro]

In Great Britain live 66 millions, in the USA live 325 millions. In Great Britain 2003/2004 were 833 cases of murder. USA 2005 14,860 times murder. GB 73 times murder with guns. USA 10,100 times.

If the situation in the USA would be the same in GB then in GB would had happened more than 3000 cases of murder and more than 2000 of the people were murdered with guns. This means the situation of "murder with guns" is in the USA 2500% more disastrous for every citizen of the USA. So: The USA is a selfmade hell. How to solve this problem? Take your weapons, which make your life to a hell, and throw them into hell.

Then why are these the FACTS?

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S.
By James Slack
UPDATED:18:14 EST, 2 July 2009

Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it has been revealed.

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries.

The figures comes on the day new Home Secretary Alan Johnson makes his first major speech on crime, promising to be tough on loutish behaviour.

The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 920 and South Africa 1,609.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: 'This is a damning indictment of this government's comprehensive failure over more than a decade to tackle the deep rooted social problems in our society, and the knock on effect on crime and anti-social behaviour.

Read more: The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S. | Daily Mail Online

UK is violent crime capital of Europe

Sorry: But from which planet are you? Do you think because you bomb down people with nonsense this nonsense will become true? 25% of all prisoners worldwide are arrested in the USA.

Murder USA 5.4 per 100,000 inhabitants (2016)
Murder UK 1.2 per 100,000 inhabitants (2016)

Murder is one part of the issue ...

I spoke here not only about murder. I spoke also about murder with guns, when I wrote:

"If the situation in the USA would be the same in GB then in GB would had happened more than 3000 cases of murder and more than 2000 of the people were murdered with guns. This means the situation of "murder with guns" is in the USA 2500% more disastrous for every citizen of the USA. So: The USA is a selfmade hell. How to solve this problem? Take your weapons, which make your life to a hell, and throw them into hell."

In Great Britain were not murdered more than 2000 people with guns (if they had the same situation as in the USA) - it were only murdered 73 people with guns.

So if indeed the violence in GB grew on a astonishing new maximum (I do not have any serios German source for this) - then it is much more important to have strict weapon laws - more strict weapon laws - and much more strict weapon laws. And if the situation in the USA is on such a positive way, then it is not understandable, why anyone needs weapons at all.

Oh by the way. Your children in the USA still live in fear every day could a school shooter appear in their school. No one feels save in the USA any longer - not even children. That's one of the problems of the weapon politics which you propagate.

The weapon industry in the USA earns a lot of money - and the public security and social systems of the USA have the costs, which every company and citizen of the USA has to pay with tax. Could be interesting to compare the national economic deficits with the private profits of weapon producers and weapon traders.

They have....guns save more money and more lives than are taken by criminals when they use guns.


And you have a chicken and egg problem..... your violent crime rates were low when your citizens had access to guns, and then, when Britain banned and confiscated them, your violent crime rates went through the roof....

In the U.S......as more Americans own and carry guns, our gun crime and gun murder rates went down.....

You can't explain that......


Now...Lives saved...

Case Closed: Kleck Is Still Correct


Consider that in the 1992 NSDS 46% of those reporting DGUs believed someone “might have” – “probably would have” – or “almost certainly would have” been killed otherwise. Even of 1.1 million DGUs, nearly half may have saved a life (and we ought to assume, conservatively, that at least the 16% “almost certainly” did).
-----------------------
If this 1/3 vs. 2/3 ratio of deaths to injuries in actual shootings pertains in these DGUs, that makes for at least 176,000 lives saved—less some attackers who lost their lives to defenders. This enormous benefit dwarfs, both in human and economic terms, the losses trumpeted by hoplophobes who only choose to see the risk side of the equation.


Money saved when armed citizens stop violent criminals with guns.....

Annual Defensive Gun Use Savings Dwarf Study's "Gun Violence" Costs - The Truth About Guns

Our man Bruce Krafft — whose posts we dearly miss — did the math back in 2012. Here it is:
Our fearless leader suggested that I take a look at the flip side of the anti’s latest attack on our freedoms (a recycled strategy from the Clinton-era Public Health model of gun control): the monetary cost of gun violence.
For example, the Center for American Progress touted the “fact” that the Virginia Tech massacre cost taxpayers $48.2 million (including autopsy costs and a fine against Virginia Tech for failing to get their skates on when the killer started shooting).
It’s one of the antis’ favorite tricks: cost benefit analysis omitting the benefit side of the equation. So what are the financial benefits of firearm ownership to society? Read on . . .
In my post Dennis Henigan on Chardon: Clockwork Edition, I did an analysis of how many lives were saved annually in Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs). I used extremely conservative numbers. Now I am going to use some less conservative ones.
The Kleck-Gertz DGU study estimated that there are between 2.1 and 2.5 million DGUs a year in the U.S. The Ludwig-Cook study came up with 1.46 million. So let’s split the difference and call it 1.88 million DGUs per year.
In the K-G article Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun, 15.7 percent of people who had a DGU reckoned they almost certainly saved a life. Ignoring the ‘probably’ and ‘might have’ saved a life categories for simplicity, 15.7 percent of 1.88 million gives us 295,160 lives saved annually.
[NB: A number of people have questioned the 15.7 percent stat. Remember: many states regard the mere act of pulling a gun on someone a form of deadly force. In addition, virtually every jurisdiction in the nation requires that an armed self-defender must be in “reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm” before using (or in some places even threatening to use) deadly force.]
How can we get a dollar figure from 1.88 million defensive gun uses per year? Never fear, faithful reader, we can count on the .gov to calculate everything.
According to the AZ state government, in February of 2008 a human life was worth $6.5 million. Going to the Inflation Calculator and punching in the numbers gives us a present value of $6.93 million.
So figuring that the average DGU saves one half of a person’s life—as “gun violence” predominantly affects younger demographics—that gives us $3.465 million per half life.
Putting this all together, we find that the monetary benefit of guns (by way of DGUs) is roughly $1.02 trillion per year. That’s trillion. With a ‘T’.
I was going to go on and calculate the costs of incarceration ($50K/year) saved by people killing 1527 criminals annually, and then look at the lifetime cost to society of an average criminal (something in excess of $1 million). But all of that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the $1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) annual benefit of gun ownership.
When compared to the (inflation adjusted from 2002) $127.5 billion ‘cost’ of gun violence calculated by by our Ludwig-Cook buddies, guns save a little more than eight times what they “cost.”
Which, I might add, is completely irrelevant since “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil, and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility.”
So even taking Motherboard’s own total and multiplying it by 100, the benefits to society of civilian gun ownership dwarf the associated costs.

spam

 

[Markle]

couldn't make this up if I tried!

You did try. The OP is about a firearms homicide, of which the US rate is multiples of the UK rate, where firearms are severely controlled, and where the total homicide rate is less than a fifth of that of the US. It's the standard raving loony deflection.

In the US, about half of homicides are committed with handguns yet raving loonies pretend that has nothing to do with their widespread availability. The rate of handgun homicides, let alone firearm homicides in the US is greater than the total rate of homicides in the UK. Raving loonies pretend that doesn't matter.

http://www.humanosphere.org/science/

NO ONE is arguing about gun deaths.

The issue is all violent crime and you don't seem to care how someone is murdered or how many, just so they don't use a gun.

Why is that such an obsession for you?

 

[zaangalewa]

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S.

But it's the rate of firearm homicides that matters when it comes to gun control. 'All types of violence' is a red herring. The favourite fish of the raving loonies.

I couldn't make this up if I tried! The Progressives want to change to the subject to whatever suits them best at the moment. ALL VIOLENCE is, to them, irrelevant, immaterial and unimportant. It is only guns that matter.

Sorry, sad, people.

In Germany shoot all policemen together (about 240,000 men) in one year normally less than 100 times including warning shots - and have to kill less than 10 people on reason of [extended] self defence ("Notwehr" and "Nothilfe"). Guns are practically irrelevant and unimportant here. Even the reunion of Germany had happened without any shot.

 

[zaangalewa]

... In the U.S......as more Americans own and carry guns, our gun crime and gun murder rates went down.....

In Germany in 2013 54 people died because of the use of guns. This grafics here shows for 2013 about 11000 homicides and 21000 suicides in the USA (32,000 all together). If the situation in the USA would be the same as in Germany then only 54*4=216 people would had died in the USA in 2013. But it died 32,000! This are 14,800% more!!!

When the mountain of this problem is here in Germany high 1 yard - then the US mountain of the problem is high 8 miles and 720 yards! You love it big, isn't it? Even if it is disastrous. ...

But what about to hear to the little US-Americans around the size of a yard? The citizens who are still not citizens? The children? Your children have the right not to have to live any longer in a realistic fear of guns and school shootings.

 

[2aguy]

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S.

But it's the rate of firearm homicides that matters when it comes to gun control. 'All types of violence' is a red herring. The favourite fish of the raving loonies.

I couldn't make this up if I tried! The Progressives want to change to the subject to whatever suits them best at the moment. ALL VIOLENCE is, to them, irrelevant, immaterial and unimportant. It is only guns that matter.

Sorry, sad, people.

In Germany shoot all policemen together (about 240,000 men) in one year normally less than 100 times including warning shots - and have to kill less than 10 people on reason of [extended] self defence ("Notwehr" and "Nothilfe"). Guns are practically irrelevant and unimportant here. Even the reunion of Germany had happened without any shot.

Germany is a different culture from the United States...their society was destroyed twice in the 2oth century with massive death among their young male population. They are now catching up, having imported violent, 3rd world criminals into their country...... you assume that their violence levels will stay the same...you are wrong.