Gun Laws do Not Reduce Criminal Violence According to New Study
- Thread starter AnomalousEntity
- Start date
ris
New Member
are we rehashing this again?
uk gov statistics for crime, jan 2003
the trend overall trend shows violent crime down 2% from previous year.
homicides increased 1% from 2000/01, and use of firearms [excluding air weapons] in homicides leapt an incredible 32% to 12% of all homicides.
to a total of 23.
our population is 55million or so, so that makes a figure of around 0.5 cases per million.
its a shame that all that money was wasted because we are clearly riding a firearms epidemic
it's predominantly cultural...blah...there is not direct correlation between gun ownership numbers, gun crime and gun legislation..blah...as seen in many countries strong laws do not necessarily mean low or high crime rates...blah...weak laws equally irrelevent...blah...i found this very interesting and while being from relatively older data it still shows a basic principle i don't think has changed...blah..
uk gov statistics for crime, jan 2003
the trend overall trend shows violent crime down 2% from previous year.
homicides increased 1% from 2000/01, and use of firearms [excluding air weapons] in homicides leapt an incredible 32% to 12% of all homicides.
to a total of 23.
our population is 55million or so, so that makes a figure of around 0.5 cases per million.
its a shame that all that money was wasted because we are clearly riding a firearms epidemic
it's predominantly cultural...blah...there is not direct correlation between gun ownership numbers, gun crime and gun legislation..blah...as seen in many countries strong laws do not necessarily mean low or high crime rates...blah...weak laws equally irrelevent...blah...i found this very interesting and while being from relatively older data it still shows a basic principle i don't think has changed...blah..
ris
New Member
by the way, i did notice that gun use in crime overall up 35% to a little under 10,000. this is against a general reduction of crime to its lowest in over 20 years.
regardless of how you dress the figures up the uk still has a phenomenally low gun crime rate and the main problem with that is increases can hold massive percentages - if 20 more people are killed with firearms next year then we have a nearly 50% increase! shock! now 43 people have been killed, still under 1 per million.
regardless of how you dress the figures up the uk still has a phenomenally low gun crime rate and the main problem with that is increases can hold massive percentages - if 20 more people are killed with firearms next year then we have a nearly 50% increase! shock! now 43 people have been killed, still under 1 per million.
chcr
Too cute for words
That's why I rarely respond to one of these study threads, ris. Most of these "studies" start with the conclusion they wish to find and then present the data in a way that will show their conclusion in the best possible light. It's always a matter of how you present the data. 
AnomalousEntity
New Member
chcr said:That's why I rarely respond to one of these study threads, ris. Most of these "studies" start with the conclusion they wish to find and then present the data in a way that will show their conclusion in the best possible light. It's always a matter of how you present the data.
Well then what could follow from that is that gun laws have zero impact on crime one way or another....tighter gun laws dont reduce crime while liberal gun laws may not help much either.
So that brings us back to a basic premise. Cultural, sociological, and economical issues are the root cause of the problem.
So....why spend millions of dollars needlessly to ban guns, take away peoples hobbies of collecting, hunting, target shooting and or carrying for self defense when that money could be better spent dealing with the root cause of the crimes in the first place...ie. somthing that might actually help the situation?
Recently Ive run across editorials where gun control advocates are using gang murders or self defense uses on 16-18 year old "thugs" to pad their stastics of "kids being killed with guns"
chcr
Too cute for words
AnomalousEntity said:Well then what could follow from that is that gun laws have zero impact on crime one way or another....tighter gun laws dont reduce crime while liberal gun laws may not help much either.
So that brings us back to a basic premise. Cultural, sociological, and economical issues are the root cause of the problem.
So....why spend millions of dollars needlessly to ban guns, take away peoples hobbies of collecting, hunting, target shooting and or carrying for self defense when that money could be better spent dealing with the root cause of the crimes in the first place...ie. somthing that might actually help the situation?
Recently Ive run across editorials where gun control advocates are using gang murders or self defense uses on 16-18 year old "thugs" to pad their stastics of "kids being killed with guns"
Couldn't agree more. It's unfortunate that guns are so easily available to criminals, but I doubt changes in gun laws would change that in any significant way in America. Gun control advocates are worse than the right-to-lifers or anti-tobacco folks when it comes to spuriously presenting only evidence which supports their position, but everyone does it to some extent.
Gato_Solo
Out-freaking-standing OTC member
If you notice...in most, if not all, of the studies, there was some great upheaval in society that went along with the rise of violent crime. My final opinion is this...if you give people a job, with a living wage, then they really have no reason to resort to violent crime. You'll always have your violence in society regardless, but giving someone responsibility, and a legal way to make a life for themselves, and you'll see much less crime.
Gato_Solo
Out-freaking-standing OTC member
Kawaii said:OMIGOSH! 0,00005% of the population is killed each year by guns! Whatever shall we do?
MEH! I bet simple baseball bats kill more people.
Knives definitely kill more than guns. Though most have stiff arguments for and against this one, cars do as well.
unclehobart
New Member
In countries where guns are illegal... yes.
England bans guns ... people then get stabbed to death.
India bans all weapons ... people then get beaten to death with tree branches and broom handles.
Just check out the stats for the lowest common denominator means of doing in your fellow man for any given country.
England bans guns ... people then get stabbed to death.
India bans all weapons ... people then get beaten to death with tree branches and broom handles.
Just check out the stats for the lowest common denominator means of doing in your fellow man for any given country.
unclehobart
New Member
Then you just get down to innate nature and sociology. Some places have huge crime rates, and places like Japan have thin ones. Civility is a learned behavior. Some places are just flat out more peaceful/subjugated.Gato_Solo said:Even in the good old US of A, unc, knives kill more than guns...unless you're also counting deer, elk, wild boar, etc...
unclehobart
New Member
I'm thinking auto accidents.catocom said:
But if you really want to get down to it... Cancer and heart disease. Those two kill more than all other forms of death combined.
I think it has alot more to do with culture than with anything else. As Gato said, if you give people jobs, decent places to live, basically a good life, they don't see the need to resort to violence to get what they need. Now of course you'll still have your dead cheating wives and husbands, and the occasional dead neighbor over some silly dispute, but whether it be by gun or knife or broomstick, those are still likely to happen.
Gato_Solo
Out-freaking-standing OTC member
unclehobart said:
Japan's crime rate is actually 'artificially' low. Most crime in Japan, if not all crime in Japan, is of the organized, white-collar variety. Since it isn't of a violent nature, it's not as obvious. When there is a violent crime, however, 99 times out of 100 it's also of the organized variety (Yakuza ring a bell?).