Why the gun IS civilization

[Flash]

Have you seen how high Britan's violent crime rate has spiked in the last 15 years (since they have had some draconian gun bans?)?

When guns are outlawed, only the outlaws have guns. And they know it.

Sorry but while you are correct about the UK they still only have a fraction of the firearms deaths that we do and violent crime rates in Australia and Canada have declined or remained at very low levels with their restrictive gun laws, especially ones with firearms involved. And overall violent crime in the UK is much lower compared to the US, so even with the 'spike' the rate is still got a long way to catch up to the US.

In all of the above countries, firearms account for only a fraction of violent crime deaths.

The United Kingdom (50 murders by firearm in 2005/6, and a overall murder rate of 1.4 per 100,000)

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs07/hosb0207.pdf

Canada (183 murders by firearm in 2000, with an overall murder rate of 1.76 per 100,000)

http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/85-002-XIE/0090185-002-XIE.pdf

Australia (493 murders by firearm from 1991 to 2001, with an overall murder rate of 1.7 per 100,000)

"An examination of firearm related deaths in Australia between 1991 and 2001 found a 47 per cent decrease in numbers, with a fall in the number of suicides accounting for the largest part of that decrease........The incidence of both firearms suicides and firearms homicides almost halved over the 11 year period."

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi269t.html

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi261.pdf

And last but not least, the United States (10,100 murders by firearm and 5.6 murders per 100,000 inhabitants in 2005)

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_10.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/murder_homicide.html

Justifiable Homicide with firearms by Law Enforcement accounted for 337 of the total while Private Citizen with a firearm accounted for 143 of the total in 2005, only 4.75% of the total.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_13.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_14.html

Sometimes the facts get in the way of an argument.........

 

[highlyrandom]

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

 

[Cate]

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

Interestingly enough, catapult deaths have been on the rise in the UK since the mid-90s, particularly accidental catapultings of children.

 

[insanebikerboy]

Interestingly enough, catapult deaths have been on the rise in the UK since the mid-90s, particularly accidental catapultings of children.

Allright, for the Latin illiterate, translation?

 

[Brett327]

Allright, for the Latin illiterate, translation?

Just a fellow illiterate guess: When catapults are outlawed, then only outlaws will have catapults (or words to that effect).

Brett

 

[Flash]

Just a fellow illiterate guess: When catapults are outlawed, then only outlaws will have catapults (or words to that effect).

Brett

Amazing what happens when you copy, paste and Google.........

 

[Brett327]

Amazing what happens when you copy, paste and Google.........

How dare you. I sounded it out (cookie monster would have been proud) - helps to be fluent in a Latin based language.

Brett

 

[Lawman]

Sorry but while you are correct about the UK they still only have a fraction of the firearms deaths that we do and violent crime rates in Australia and Canada have declined or remained at very low levels with their restrictive gun laws, especially ones with firearms involved. And overall violent crime in the UK is much lower compared to the US, so even with the 'spike' the rate is still got a long way to catch up to the US.

In all of the above countries, firearms account for only a fraction of violent crime deaths.

The United Kingdom (50 murders by firearm in 2005/6, and a overall murder rate of 1.4 per 100,000)

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs07/hosb0207.pdf

Canada (183 murders by firearm in 2000, with an overall murder rate of 1.76 per 100,000)

http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/85-002-XIE/0090185-002-XIE.pdf

Australia (493 murders by firearm from 1991 to 2001, with an overall murder rate of 1.7 per 100,000)

"An examination of firearm related deaths in Australia between 1991 and 2001 found a 47 per cent decrease in numbers, with a fall in the number of suicides accounting for the largest part of that decrease........The incidence of both firearms suicides and firearms homicides almost halved over the 11 year period."

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi269t.html

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi261.pdf

And last but not least, the United States (10,100 murders by firearm and 5.6 murders per 100,000 inhabitants in 2005)

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_10.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/murder_homicide.html

Justifiable Homicide with firearms by Law Enforcement accounted for 337 of the total while Private Citizen with a firearm accounted for 143 of the total in 2005, only 4.75% of the total.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_13.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_14.html

Sometimes the facts get in the way of an argument.........

Flash, the reason those numbers dont add up is because it doesnt count Manslaughter just Murder ours take both acts into account. Add those factors in and Austrailia has the highest per capita violent crime rate followed by Great Britain and then us. Give me a couple minutes and Ill find the links.

Heres a couple news articles that talks about it.
http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.20876/pub_detail.asp

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2656875.stm

Also having worked with it directly and studied it in College the UCR system is widely accepted as antiquated and inferior to other methods of tracking criminal statistics due to the fact that it doesnt allow near the level of detail as others. Also neither of these reports work based off the differing levels in population demographics (urban vs rural etc) so its hard to use this effectively. BJS is considered about the most effective tool in terms of classiflying and tracking trends in the criminal justice system in this country.

 

[Flash]

Flash, the reason those numbers dont add up is because it doesnt count Manslaughter just Murder ours take both acts into account. Add those factors in and Austrailia has the highest per capita violent crime rate followed by Great Britain and then us. Give me a couple minutes and Ill find the links.

Heres a couple news articles that talks about it.
http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.20876/pub_detail.asp

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2656875.stm

Also having worked with it directly and studied it in College the UCR system is widely accepted as antiquated and inferior to other methods of tracking criminal statistics due to the fact that it doesnt allow near the level of detail as others. Also neither of these reports work based off the differing levels in population demographics (urban vs rural etc) so its hard to use this effectively. BJS is considered about the most effective tool in terms of classiflying and tracking trends in the criminal justice system in this country.

Linking a report from a very right-leaning think tank and an article that relies on only a single professor ain't the best way to anchor your argument. Especially when the professor uses a comparison of New York vs London, when New York's crime rate is at all time lows and is bucking the nationwide trend of slightly rising.

While the methodology might be different on how different countries count crime I seriously doubt that such a wide gap could be made up by solely counting manslaughter into the statistics. I will get back with more links and real stats when I get back from my appointment. Meanwhile, please post some real hard facts and I might buy into your argument more.

 

[Flash]

How dare you. I sounded it out (cookie monster would have been proud) - helps to be fluent in a Latin based language.

Brett

I know how to ask for beer and where to go to the bathroom in German, Italian and Spanish........and that is about it........

 

[Brett327]

I know how to ask for beer and where to go to the bathroom in German, Italian and Spanish........and that is about it........

I thought your chick was from Canadia, so she must be bi, right?

Brett

 

[Flash]

I thought your chick was from Canadia, so she must be bi, right?

Brett

If you mean bilingual, she does know conversational French. If you mean bi......bi, only in my dreams.........

 

[FMRAM]

I know how to ask for beer and where to go to the bathroom in German, Italian and Spanish........and that is about it........

Japanese translation of the same.

Moto biru O kudasai!!!

 

[Flash]

Flash, the reason those numbers dont add up is because it doesnt count Manslaughter just Murder ours take both acts into account. Add those factors in and Austrailia has the highest per capita violent crime rate followed by Great Britain and then us. Give me a couple minutes and Ill find the links.

Also having worked with it directly and studied it in College the UCR system is widely accepted as antiquated and inferior to other methods of tracking criminal statistics due to the fact that it doesnt allow near the level of detail as others. Also neither of these reports work based off the differing levels in population demographics (urban vs rural etc) so its hard to use this effectively. BJS is considered about the most effective tool in terms of classiflying and tracking trends in the criminal justice system in this country.

Okay, I looked up the Bureau of Justice statistics and found the following information:

According to the BJS here were 10,654 firearms murders in the US in 2004 (the latest statistics I could find) vs 9326 according to the Uniform Crime Report.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/weaponstab.htm

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/murder.html#table2_9

Doesn't relly help you that much........

The dramatic rise in crime in the UK can be attributed to a change in the laws there:

"The figure below shows a dramatic increase in recorded violent crime in England and Wales between 1998 and the present. Rather than indicating a sharp rise in actual violence, however, this increase is largely the direct result of major changes to the way crime data are recorded in the England and Wales. First in 1998 and then again in 2002, amendments were introduced to include a broader range of offences, to promote greater consistency, and to take a more victim-led approach where alleged offences were recorded as well as evidence-based ones. The changes affected recorded violent crimes more than property or other crimes."

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/cfi/cfi115.html

In comparison, a survey on violent crime in the UK shows that it has fallen dramatically:

Violent crime has fallen by around 43% since its peak in 1995 and has remained relatively stable between 2004/05 and 2005/06.

http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page63.asp

The claim that the UK does not include manslaughter in thier statistics is a bit suspect to me. The following paper has info on what people who were charged with murder and what they were convicted of, including the lesser conviction of homicide. So if you have something concrete back up your claim then show me, until then I will rely on the government statistics:

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs07/hosb0207.pdf

(It is on the bottom of page 12)

Also, crime rates in Australia are not rising dramatically when comapred when you look at the latest figures, as a matter of fact murders (and manslaughters) and even more specifically murders by firearm are dropping off. Only the figures for assaults and sexual assaults have risen:

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/facts/2005/02_selectedCrimeProfiles.html

All of the above statistics do not include other countries that have a very high rate of gun ownership, like South Africa. There the murder rate is one of the highest in the world, 40.3 murders per 100,000 fo the population in 2005:

http://www.iss.co.za/CJM/stats0905/murder.pdf

I am more than happy to look at the fugures you provide, when you do........

 

[Flash]

I agree with you and your article that our country and civilization is intact because we have the right to carry arms. In third world countries only the military and police have weapons and are mostly corrupt anyways so these countries are at the mercy of thugs so they can not progress in the developement of their society. I will always have a collection to keep me and my family safe.

Sidewinder7

That is one of the most ridiculous arguments that I have seen in a long time in favor of guns. You are ignoring the fact that many countries that have a long history of democracy have strict gun control laws, including the country where most of democratic traditions originated, the United Kingdom. Even one of the most direct democracies in the world, Switzerland (which has a high rate of gun ownership and usage and has a referendum on everything from joining the EU to buying F/A-18's), has very strict laws on the carrying and usage of guns.

You can make an argument that owning and carrying guns can make you safer but to argue that is keeps our civilazation and country intact while other countries that have made the choice for strict gun control (and strangely have not disintegrated into chaos and anarchy........) is not only arrogant but ignorant.