...No, guns don't jump off a table. However a person with a gun (especially men) feel a lot more empowered with guns. Those who are more of the criminal mind are more likely to use them.
It doesn't matter whether you remove black-on-black gang murders, there are such things in Europe too. But no, I doubt it. But you can go try and figure that out if you wish.
However poverty is a big thing. If you were to deal with poverty, you'd see crime drop.
Correct. Some people, but that's mental illness. Most people it's cultural to either be social or violent.
Nice dodge on the black-on-black murders. Is homicide the #1 killer of black men age 15-34 in Europe too? Specifically black-on-black murder? Again, this is cultural, not genetic. There is no magic wand to fix it, but banning guns across the nation is a misguided, anti-American authoritarian "one-size fits all" "magic wand" solution to a cultural issue.
While there are correlations between poverty and crime, how does banning guns produce jobs? Self-respect? Improved civic works?
Violence exists within most people. However different circumstances might change this.
It might be cultural that there's lots of black on black crime. But is this about black people or about the situation of people in poverty, especially in inner city areas. The country has created ghettos, sort of like the underneath of the rug where all the problems get swept in the hope that they'll disappear.
No, banning guns does not produce jobs, increase self respect etc. But to quote you "nice dodge".
Switzerland has a higher gun homicide rate than the UK (0.23 for Switzerland and 0.06 for the UK) but a lower murder rate (0.5 for Switzerland and 0.9 for the UK).
Switzerland has a higher GDP than the UK, less poverty, less of those problems, so why does it have a firearms homicide rate that is 4 times higher than the UK's? Well it's simple isn't it? People who want to kill are more likely to have a go with a gun than with a knife. Nearly half their murders are with guns, why? Because they have them.
It doesn't necessarily make people kill, but it makes it easier for those who do want to kill to do so.
Now, what impact does this have on the US? Well it appears to have a large impact. The UK had gangs, the Cray brothers for example. But they didn't have guns and this meant that you didn't have the upping of the stakes in any gang warfare. It didn't resort to shootouts, it might just be a punch up. Therefore the attitude of those people in gangs changed in the US to one where killing was a realistic option.
Do jobs help those kids living in ghettos? Not always because the lure of the gangs is too high.
Yes, I've spoken in the past about how a change in the US might make a massive difference. But it doesn't stop the fact that guns in society do have a negative impact. Yes, there are other factors that can change things. I was looking for articles about poverty and crime and they said when a recession starts crime goes down. Why? You'd think more poverty = more crime. However many people are less likely to spend their money, less likely to go out drinking (less crime) and less likely to be away from home (harder to steal from) and less likely to buy stuff (so you're less likely to profit from crime). It's never black and white, it's never simple to just equate things. Guns aren't the only reason, but reducing the impact of guns would make the job of police officers much safer. This would then mean that the police are less likely to be trigger happy. It's known that put a person's life in danger, and the stress levels are higher, give them a gun and they're more likely to shoot it than if their life isn't in danger.
For the police it's a matter of whether the other guy has a gun or not. They have guns, they can deal with guys with knives a lot more easily, but guns are a problem, hence why the US has a police in the line of duty death rate that is 20 or 30 times higher than the UK.
