Gun research being kept in the dark ages

[Saigon]

Here is a more broad sample:

Switzerland 45.7/100
Finland 45.3
Norway 31.2
France 31.3
Iceland 30.3
Belgium 17.2
Italy 11.9
England 6.2

Looking at the violent crime rates of many of these:

Switzerland 1.1/100,000
Finland 6.6
Norway 4.6
France 4.1
Iceland almost nothing
Belgium 5.8
Italy 1.3
England 13.4

If we take out the very obvious canard of Switzerland I think you have just proven my case....

Rank by gun ownership:

Finland 45.3
Norway 31.2
France 31.3
Iceland 30.3
Belgium 17.2
Italy 11.9
England 6.2

Rank by homicide rates:

Finland 2.2
Belgium 1.7
England 1.2
France 1.1
Italy 0.9
Norway 0.6
Iceland 0.3

There is a VERY obvious pattern there, which anyone who knows the countries involved will see at once.

Firstly, the larger, more urbanised societies tend to perform worse than the more rural, farming socieities where guns are often held on farms.

Balance for population, and the lists match perfectly.

If we actually compare like-on-like bycomparing only larger, more industrialised countries - something I know many posters here absolutely refuse to do - the countries will match with 19/20 accuracy. Which is enough to be considered a statistical fact.

 

[Saigon]

This is also a VERY useful graphic:

Chart: The U.S. has far more gun-related killings than any other developed country

 

[Saigon]

Here is a like-on-like comparison, excluding countries with only 300,000 people!!

Gun ownership:

1. USA 94.3

2. France 31.2
3. Canada 30.8
4. Germany 30.3

5 .Belgium 17.2
6. Italy 11.9
7. Spain 10.4
8. UK 6.2
9. Holland 3.9

Ranking by total homicide rate:

1. USA 4.8

2. Belgium 1.7
3. Canada 1.6
4. UK 1.2
5. France 1.1
6. Holland 1.1
7. Italy 0.9
8. Germany 0.8
9. Spain 0.8

Number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So with the exception of a relatively high homicide rate for the UK, the rankings show a very link between high levels of gun ownership and high homicide rates (the US) and low levels of gun ownership and low homicide rates (Spain, Italy).

Simply put - countries like Spain, Holland and Italy have low homicide rates and low levels of gun ownership. Countries like the US show the opposite trend. The more countries we include, the clearer the trend becomes.

There is Harvard research on this which establishes this as a fairly clear statistical fact, but it is not vailable free. I bought it, and recommend it to anyone interested.

 

[jtpr312]

Here is a more broad sample:

Switzerland 45.7/100
Finland 45.3
Norway 31.2
France 31.3
Iceland 30.3
Belgium 17.2
Italy 11.9
England 6.2

Looking at the violent crime rates of many of these:

Switzerland 1.1/100,000
Finland 6.6
Norway 4.6
France 4.1
Iceland almost nothing
Belgium 5.8
Italy 1.3
England 13.4

If we take out the very obvious canard of Switzerland I think you have just proven my case....

Rank by gun ownership:

Finland 45.3
Norway 31.2
France 31.3
Iceland 30.3
Belgium 17.2
Italy 11.9
England 6.2

Rank by homicide rates:

Finland 2.2
Belgium 1.7
England 1.2
France 1.1
Italy 0.9
Norway 0.6
Iceland 0.3

There is a VERY obvious pattern there, which anyone who knows the countries involved will see at once.

Firstly, the larger, more urbanised societies tend to perform worse than the more rural, farming socieities where guns are often held on farms.

Balance for population, and the lists match perfectly.

If we actually compare like-on-like bycomparing only larger, more industrialised countries - something I know many posters here absolutely refuse to do - the countries will match with 19/20 accuracy. Which is enough to be considered a statistical fact.

If you remove all the gun deaths committed by negroes and Hispanic gang bangers in this nation you would have one of the lowest gun related deaths levels in the world. We don't have a "too many firearms" problem in this nation, we have a too many negroes and Hispanic gang bangers problem in this nation.

 

[skookerasbil]

Here is a more broad sample:

Switzerland 45.7/100
Finland 45.3
Norway 31.2
France 31.3
Iceland 30.3
Belgium 17.2
Italy 11.9
England 6.2

Looking at the violent crime rates of many of these:

Switzerland 1.1/100,000
Finland 6.6
Norway 4.6
France 4.1
Iceland almost nothing
Belgium 5.8
Italy 1.3
England 13.4

If we take out the very obvious canard of Switzerland I think you have just proven my case....

Rank by gun ownership:

Finland 45.3
Norway 31.2
France 31.3
Iceland 30.3
Belgium 17.2
Italy 11.9
England 6.2

Rank by homicide rates:

Finland 2.2
Belgium 1.7
England 1.2
France 1.1
Italy 0.9
Norway 0.6
Iceland 0.3

There is a VERY obvious pattern there, which anyone who knows the countries involved will see at once.

Firstly, the larger, more urbanised societies tend to perform worse than the more rural, farming socieities where guns are often held on farms.

Balance for population, and the lists match perfectly.

If we actually compare like-on-like bycomparing only larger, more industrialised countries - something I know many posters here absolutely refuse to do - the countries will match with 19/20 accuracy. Which is enough to be considered a statistical fact.

If you remove all the gun deaths committed by negroes and Hispanic gang bangers in this nation you would have one of the lowest gun related deaths levels in the world. We don't have a "too many firearms" problem in this nation, we have a too many negroes and Hispanic gang bangers problem in this nation.

The statistics support that assertion >>>>

Stuff Black People Don't Like - SBPDL: Guns Don't Kill People; Dangerous Minorities Do -- The Chicago Edition


Not even debatable.

 

[skookerasbil]

Lets be clear on something though.......the gun grabbers on this thread envision a world, particularly in the US, of no guns.......which is never going to happen. People in other countries have happily turned in their guns in countries all over the world. Wont happen here.

 

[Survivalist]

Here is a more broad sample:

Switzerland 45.7/100
Finland 45.3
Norway 31.2
France 31.3
Iceland 30.3
Belgium 17.2
Italy 11.9
England 6.2

Looking at the violent crime rates of many of these:

Switzerland 1.1/100,000
Finland 6.6
Norway 4.6
France 4.1
Iceland almost nothing
Belgium 5.8
Italy 1.3
England 13.4

If we take out the very obvious canard of Switzerland I think you have just proven my case....

Rank by gun ownership:

Finland 45.3
Norway 31.2
France 31.3
Iceland 30.3
Belgium 17.2
Italy 11.9
England 6.2

Rank by homicide rates:

Finland 2.2
Belgium 1.7
England 1.2
France 1.1
Italy 0.9
Norway 0.6
Iceland 0.3

There is a VERY obvious pattern there, which anyone who knows the countries involved will see at once.

Firstly, the larger, more urbanised societies tend to perform worse than the more rural, farming socieities where guns are often held on farms.

Balance for population, and the lists match perfectly.

If we actually compare like-on-like bycomparing only larger, more industrialised countries - something I know many posters here absolutely refuse to do - the countries will match with 19/20 accuracy. Which is enough to be considered a statistical fact.

Yes if we take out facts, then we can make better points. I was based over in Germany for two years and visited 7 other countries while over there. I'm not Mr. Condi Nast, but I have a very good understanding of peoples and places around the world.

"Balance for population" that is my entire point. It isn't the guns, it's the people, their culture, their location and the legal environment they exist in that drives crime.

I'm not saying that guns play no part in crime, but they don't play a significant part in comparison to those 4 above factors.

As I have metioned previously in this thread, crime is lowest in the US in areas of the rural mountain West. Crime is just going to be lower when people are more spread out from one another, as opposed to be crowed together. Less chance of human interaction = less crime. In fact, if all the dangerous urban cities were taken out of the equasion, then violent crimes in the US would be just as low, on average, as most of Western Europe.

As I pointed out before, the homocide rates in states like Wyoming are around 1.4/100K---hardly different than in the safest countries on the W. European continant. Wyoming also has expontially more firearms per person than anywhere in Europe. Like many people in the "American gun culture" I've got a dozen firearms locked away in my home. Ask yourself this question: are you really going to more at risk being attacked in safe rural areas of the US and Europe that have more guns per person, or in the bad urban areas or the US and Europe like Detroit, Chicago and London that don't have as many guns per household? The "gun collector or gun nut" with a hundred guns isn't going to take his $5,000 machine gun or .50 cal target rifle and rob a convenience store with it. The gangbanger/druggie with his one chheap stolen gun is the one who will do it.

It is not a hip or sexey topic, but race and culture ARE the primary risk factors for crime around the world. The very worst areas of the world all share these common factors: Black/Hispanic enclaves living in a large urban (crowded) environment with violent gangs running unchecked by weak governments and laws with whatever weapons they can acquire. They will use handguns in Detroit, shotguns in Helsinki and machetes in Rawanda.

I'm not blind or especially dull, but I'm not seeing any good evidence crime is more influcened by guns than by demographics.

 

[asterism]

Police kill armed 14-year-old boy on NYC street

Give citizens and lawmakers information to make smart decisions....

In the 1980s and 1990s, researchers studied what happens when people buy guns to protect themselves and their families. You might think they'd be safer, but studies concluded it's actually far more likely that a gun kept in the home would be involved in a suicide, a domestic homicide or an accidental shooting than to shoot an intruder.

Those findings predictably enraged gun groups such as the NRA, which responded by attacking the research and the researchers. Since 1996, under the influence of gun groups, Congress has essentially shut down government-funded research about guns, taking away money from a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention division that funded firearms studies and forbidding any government-funded investigation that would "advocate or promote gun control." The result: Much of the policy debate over guns has taken place in an information vacuum. It's time to start filling that void.

There's a link to an opposing pov at the above link.

So what do you think? Do want to know facts or should we just believe the nutters who say more guns is the answer to everything?

So are you saying that any research not done by a government medical entity is "the dark ages?"

That's what research is blocked, the funding of gun research by the CDC.

Gun violence research: NRA and Congress blocked gun-control studies at CDC. - Slate Magazine

Not all federally funded research, just using the CDC for it. Doctors and medical researchers are not firearm experts and gun ownership is not a disease.

 

[Saigon]

Survivalist -

I do agree with you about rural areas - which is why countries like Norway and Iceland make for poor comparisons with Germany or France. I think rural areas like Wyoming are, in that sense, not so different from rural Norway.

Farmers will always own guns, but they also know what use them for, and aren't likely to play games with them. They use them as working tools, and respect them as such.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

When liberals aren't interpreting the constitution away, they engage in "scientific studies" to negate it.

The phrase social science is an oxymoron. Taking surveys, cooking statistics and drawing erroneous conclusions is not science.

I do wish they'd find something constructive to do.

 

[Saigon]

Crackerjaxon -

It is important that you try and avoid recognising facts.

 

[asterism]

Survivalist -

I do agree with you about rural areas - which is why countries like Norway and Iceland make for poor comparisons with Germany or France. I think rural areas like Wyoming are, in that sense, not so different from rural Norway.

Farmers will always own guns, but they also know what use them for, and aren't likely to play games with them. They use them as working tools, and respect them as such.

Go wander onto a farm in Wyoming and see if you don't get shot for looking suspicious. If they don't know you and you're on their land, you'll be considered suspicious. If you're hiking on federal land that borders a farm you'll be chased and held at gunpoint until you can explain what you are doing.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Crackerjaxon -

It is important that you try and avoid recognising facts.

I have nothing against facts. I do have a quibble with silly interpretations from social scientists being passed off as facts, though.

I have little doubt that you lack the discernment to know the difference.

Once again, we see the seeds of public education taking root.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Strange.

Can anyone explain to me why @Saigon hasn't responded to my post explaining why the study he thinks of as definitive isn't? Does he not want to defend his position that owning guns causes people to get beat to death?

Because your comments were an obvious red herring, just designed to avoid the real topic. I don't think the study is "definitive", I think it isone of many very good studies that prove beyond any rational doubt that guns in homes increase the risk to people living in that home. This is something we all know to be true, though you may pretend to think otherwise.

Post something sensible, and I'll respond to it.

Pointing out the flaws in the only study you posted is a red herring? i think you should look up fallacies again, just so you understand the difference between a fallacious and a non fallacious argument. If there are other studies out there that actually are any good feel free to post them.

Alternatively, you could just admit that there is no data that supports your position.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This is also a VERY useful graphic:

Chart: The U.S. has far more gun-related killings than any other developed country

Useful for what? Proving that you don't actually have real data?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Here is a like-on-like comparison, excluding countries with only 300,000 people!!

Gun ownership:

1. USA 94.3

2. France 31.2
3. Canada 30.8
4. Germany 30.3

5 .Belgium 17.2
6. Italy 11.9
7. Spain 10.4
8. UK 6.2
9. Holland 3.9

Ranking by total homicide rate:

1. USA 4.8

2. Belgium 1.7
3. Canada 1.6
4. UK 1.2
5. France 1.1
6. Holland 1.1
7. Italy 0.9
8. Germany 0.8
9. Spain 0.8

Number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So with the exception of a relatively high homicide rate for the UK, the rankings show a very link between high levels of gun ownership and high homicide rates (the US) and low levels of gun ownership and low homicide rates (Spain, Italy).

Simply put - countries like Spain, Holland and Italy have low homicide rates and low levels of gun ownership. Countries like the US show the opposite trend. The more countries we include, the clearer the trend becomes.

There is Harvard research on this which establishes this as a fairly clear statistical fact, but it is not vailable free. I bought it, and recommend it to anyone interested.

Is there a particular reason you picked an article that omits the countries with higher homicide rates?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Crackerjaxon -

It is important that you try and avoid recognising facts.

Good to see you taking your own advice.

 

[Saigon]

QW -

As mentioned earlier, if you post anything on-topic, coherent and honest, I'll respond to it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

QW -

As mentioned earlier, if you post anything on-topic, coherent and honest, I'll respond to it.

**** off asswipe. Until you deal with the on topic critique of your alleged study all you are getting from is the fact that you cannot support your position. If you don't like it, report me to the mods.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Survivalist -

I do agree with you about rural areas - which is why countries like Norway and Iceland make for poor comparisons with Germany or France. I think rural areas like Wyoming are, in that sense, not so different from rural Norway.

Farmers will always own guns, but they also know what use them for, and aren't likely to play games with them. They use them as working tools, and respect them as such.

Go wander onto a farm in Wyoming and see if you don't get shot for looking suspicious. If they don't know you and you're on their land, you'll be considered suspicious. If you're hiking on federal land that borders a farm you'll be chased and held at gunpoint until you can explain what you are doing.

one dont need to travel to Wyoming to learn that lesson