 |

Gmburns2000
Dec 16, 2012, 9:11 AM
Post #1 of 19
(926 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 14394
|
From The Guardian from earlier this year. Someone in another thread told me that one of the eastern european countries has nearly 100% gun ownership and almost no gun violence. I think it was Adam, but I can't remember. This graph seems to show that isn't true. Japan is definitely true, though (low ownership and low violence)
|
|
|
 |
 |

crankinv9
Dec 16, 2012, 10:40 AM
Post #2 of 19
(910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 713
|
more to the point
|
|
|
 |
 |

tready
Dec 16, 2012, 11:20 AM
Post #3 of 19
(901 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 10, 2007
Posts: 166
|
Gmburns2000 wrote: From The Guardian from earlier this year. Someone in another thread told me that one of the eastern european countries has nearly 100% gun ownership and almost no gun violence. I think it was Adam, but I can't remember. This graph seems to show that isn't true. Japan is definitely true, though (low ownership and low violence) I remember that too. I think there was some little caveat where military service was mandatory, and thus, perhaps they wouldn't be represented in the above article since they wouldn't be classified as civilians. Maybe?
|
|
|
 |
 |

rrrADAM
Dec 16, 2012, 11:27 AM
Post #4 of 19
(898 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17535
|
Gmburns2000 wrote: From The Guardian from earlier this year. Someone in another thread told me that one of the eastern european countries has nearly 100% gun ownership and almost no gun violence. I think it was Adam, but I can't remember. This graph seems to show that isn't true. Japan is definitely true, though (low ownership and low violence) Not me... I didn't say 100% ownership... I said that the Czech Republic has a pretty open gun ownership policy, and that any citizen can conceal carry if they chose, but that they do not have near the gun violence we do... That is all I said. I never even speculated at the percentage of citizens there who own guns. Point... They have more laz policies than we do, but way less gun violence, suggesting that it is our CULTURE here in the US that is particularly violent. Data from your graph:In reply to: FIREARMS MURDERS AND CIVILIAN GUN OWNERSHIP Czech Republic 1,600,000 civilian firearms - 16.3 for every 100 people Ranked 38 in the world for civilian gun ownership In the latest year, there were 20 homicides by firearm - 0.19 per 100,000 population. 11% of all homicides are by firearm See... They are not near as homicidle as we are.
(This post was edited by rrrADAM on Dec 16, 2012, 11:32 AM)
|
|
|
 |
 |

Gmburns2000
Dec 16, 2012, 12:21 PM
Post #5 of 19
(886 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 14394
|
rrrADAM wrote: Gmburns2000 wrote: From The Guardian from earlier this year. Someone in another thread told me that one of the eastern european countries has nearly 100% gun ownership and almost no gun violence. I think it was Adam, but I can't remember. This graph seems to show that isn't true. Japan is definitely true, though (low ownership and low violence) Not me... I didn't say 100% ownership... I said that the Czech Republic has a pretty open gun ownership policy, and that any citizen can conceal carry if they chose, but that they do not have near the gun violence we do... That is all I said. I never even speculated at the percentage of citizens there who own guns. Point... They have more laz policies than we do, but way less gun violence, suggesting that it is our CULTURE here in the US that is particularly violent. Data from your graph: In reply to: FIREARMS MURDERS AND CIVILIAN GUN OWNERSHIP Czech Republic 1,600,000 civilian firearms - 16.3 for every 100 people Ranked 38 in the world for civilian gun ownership In the latest year, there were 20 homicides by firearm - 0.19 per 100,000 population. 11% of all homicides are by firearm See... They are not near as homicidle as we are. sorry, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. I just remember some comment about that. However, they're also on the low end of both gun ownership as well as homicide by gun. They may have lax policies, but they don't buy a lot of guns either.
|
|
|
 |
 |

rrrADAM
Dec 16, 2012, 1:31 PM
Post #6 of 19
(878 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17535
|
Gmburns2000 wrote: rrrADAM wrote: Gmburns2000 wrote: From The Guardian from earlier this year. Someone in another thread told me that one of the eastern european countries has nearly 100% gun ownership and almost no gun violence. I think it was Adam, but I can't remember. This graph seems to show that isn't true. Japan is definitely true, though (low ownership and low violence) Not me... I didn't say 100% ownership... I said that the Czech Republic has a pretty open gun ownership policy, and that any citizen can conceal carry if they chose, but that they do not have near the gun violence we do... That is all I said. I never even speculated at the percentage of citizens there who own guns. Point... They have more laz policies than we do, but way less gun violence, suggesting that it is our CULTURE here in the US that is particularly violent. Data from your graph: In reply to: FIREARMS MURDERS AND CIVILIAN GUN OWNERSHIP Czech Republic 1,600,000 civilian firearms - 16.3 for every 100 people Ranked 38 in the world for civilian gun ownership In the latest year, there were 20 homicides by firearm - 0.19 per 100,000 population. 11% of all homicides are by firearm See... They are not near as homicidle as we are. sorry, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. I just remember some comment about that. However, they're also on the low end of both gun ownership as well as homicide by gun. They may have lax policies, but they don't buy a lot of guns either. You mean a large portion of the CR are not 'gun nuts'? I agree with you. Also, you are reading the data wrong, as they are NOT on the "low end" of gun ownership... They are 38th out of how many contriesd in the world? I believe that puts them in or near the top quartile, not near the bottom. NOTE - I own a gun, and would like to get a Mini-14 too... I define 'gun nut' as someone with 6 or more guns, and that is being generous, as I don;t see much need for a few guns at most (e.g., 1 handgun, 1 shot gun, 1 rifle). And, it is those very 'gun nuts' (with 6 or more guns) who are paranoid that Obama is gunna come take their weapons away.
(This post was edited by rrrADAM on Dec 16, 2012, 1:34 PM)
|
|
|
 |
 |

Kartessa
Dec 16, 2012, 6:25 PM
Post #7 of 19
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2008
Posts: 7155
|
In reply to: FIREARMS MURDERS AND CIVILIAN GUN OWNERSHIP United States 270,000,000 civilian firearms - 88.8 for every 100 people Ranked 1 in the world for civilian gun ownership In the latest year, there were 9,146 homicides by firearm - 2.97 per 100,000 population. 60% of all homicides are by firearm [crazy chant] We're #1! We're #1! We're #1! [/crazy chant]
|
|
|
 |
 |

byran
Dec 16, 2012, 8:03 PM
Post #8 of 19
(827 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2006
Posts: 264
|
And even with having more guns than any other country we still have a pretty low firearm (and overall) homicide rate. And I'd wager that an overwhelming majority of those shooting deaths are gang related, leaving most of us lucky white folks in the suburbs and mountain towns insulated from that violence. So basically during any given year, there's less than a 0.00001% chance that you or someone in your immediate family will be shot to death by some random psycho. Although incredibly tragic and despicable, the media blows it way out of proportion. If we actually want to do something about school shootings then we should focus on low-income urban public schools where shootings and gang violence are actually a legitimate problem.
(This post was edited by byran on Dec 16, 2012, 8:05 PM)
|
|
|
 |
 |

rrrADAM
Dec 17, 2012, 4:19 AM
Post #9 of 19
(788 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17535
|
byran wrote: And even with having more guns than any other country we still have a pretty low firearm (and overall) homicide rate. And I'd wager that an overwhelming majority of those shooting deaths are gang related, leaving most of us lucky white folks in the suburbs and mountain towns insulated from that violence. So basically during any given year, there's less than a 0.00001% chance that you or someone in your immediate family will be shot to death by some random psycho. Although incredibly tragic and despicable, the media blows it way out of proportion. If we actually want to do something about school shootings then we should focus on low-income urban public schools where shootings and gang violence are actually a legitimate problem. Really? Did you just write that? Please, my friend... Bookmark that post of yours, then come back and read it in 10 years.
|
|
|
 |
 |

camhead
Dec 17, 2012, 7:47 AM
Post #10 of 19
(764 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20401
|
byran wrote: And even with having more guns than any other country we still have a pretty low firearm (and overall) homicide rate. And I'd wager that an overwhelming majority of those shooting deaths are gang related, leaving most of us lucky white folks in the suburbs and mountain towns insulated from that violence. So basically during any given year, there's less than a 0.00001% chance that you or someone in your immediate family will be shot to death by some random psycho. Although incredibly tragic and despicable, the media blows it way out of proportion. If we actually want to do something about school shootings then we should focus on low-income urban public schools where shootings and gang violence are actually a legitimate problem. You are a racist dipshit. We have the highest rate of firearms death in the industrialized world. More Americans die every year by gun violence than have died in the past 15 years in the "War on Terror."
|
|
|
 |
 |

chadnsc
Dec 17, 2012, 8:49 AM
Post #11 of 19
(751 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4400
|
byran wrote: And even with having more guns than any other country we still have a pretty low firearm (and overall) homicide rate. And I'd wager that an overwhelming majority of those shooting deaths are gang related, leaving most of us lucky white folks in the suburbs and mountain towns insulated from that violence. So basically during any given year, there's less than a 0.00001% chance that you or someone in your immediate family will be shot to death by some random psycho. Although incredibly tragic and despicable, the media blows it way out of proportion. If we actually want to do something about school shootings then we should focus on low-income urban public schools where shootings and gang violence are actually a legitimate problem. It's the inane, untrue, and racist remarks like this that have helped me to decide that I want nothing more to do with the site. Byran you're an idiot and fool.
|
|
|
 |
 |

macherry
Dec 17, 2012, 10:04 AM
Post #12 of 19
(735 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2003
Posts: 15520
|
byran wrote: And even with having more guns than any other country we still have a pretty low firearm (and overall) homicide rate. And I'd wager that an overwhelming majority of those shooting deaths are gang related, leaving most of us lucky white folks in the suburbs and mountain towns insulated from that violence. So basically during any given year, there's less than a 0.00001% chance that you or someone in your immediate family will be shot to death by some random psycho. Although incredibly tragic and despicable, the media blows it way out of proportion. If we actually want to do something about school shootings then we should focus on low-income urban public schools where shootings and gang violence are actually a legitimate problem. i stopped at lucky white folks. oh for fuck sakes
|
|
|
 |
 |

scrapedape
Dec 17, 2012, 11:16 AM
Post #13 of 19
(722 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 23, 2004
Posts: 2389
|
chadnsc wrote: byran wrote: And even with having more guns than any other country we still have a pretty low firearm (and overall) homicide rate. And I'd wager that an overwhelming majority of those shooting deaths are gang related, leaving most of us lucky white folks in the suburbs and mountain towns insulated from that violence. So basically during any given year, there's less than a 0.00001% chance that you or someone in your immediate family will be shot to death by some random psycho. Although incredibly tragic and despicable, the media blows it way out of proportion. If we actually want to do something about school shootings then we should focus on low-income urban public schools where shootings and gang violence are actually a legitimate problem. It's the inane, untrue, and racist remarks like this that have helped me to decide that I want nothing more to do with the site. Byran you're an idiot and fool. A more charitable reading of bryan's post would be that no one seems to care when poor kids, urban kids, or minority kids are getting shot, but but we get all up in arms about these mass shootings that occur predominantly in "picture-perfect country town with good schools, quiet streets and a strong sense of community." Moreover, that mass shootings, while tragic, constitute a very small share of our overall gun violence. Though yes, it may be somewhat racist to so casually conflate poor, urban, and minority individuals.
|
|
|
 |
 |

rmsusa
Dec 17, 2012, 11:47 AM
Post #14 of 19
(714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2004
Posts: 1017
|
Switzerland.
|
|
|
 |
 |

chadnsc
Dec 17, 2012, 12:16 PM
Post #15 of 19
(702 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4400
|
scrapedape wrote: chadnsc wrote: byran wrote: And even with having more guns than any other country we still have a pretty low firearm (and overall) homicide rate. And I'd wager that an overwhelming majority of those shooting deaths are gang related, leaving most of us lucky white folks in the suburbs and mountain towns insulated from that violence. So basically during any given year, there's less than a 0.00001% chance that you or someone in your immediate family will be shot to death by some random psycho. Although incredibly tragic and despicable, the media blows it way out of proportion. If we actually want to do something about school shootings then we should focus on low-income urban public schools where shootings and gang violence are actually a legitimate problem. It's the inane, untrue, and racist remarks like this that have helped me to decide that I want nothing more to do with the site. Byran you're an idiot and fool. A more charitable reading of bryan's post would be that no one seems to care when poor kids, urban kids, or minority kids are getting shot, but but we get all up in arms about these mass shootings that occur predominantly in "picture-perfect country town with good schools, quiet streets and a strong sense of community." Moreover, that mass shootings, while tragic, constitute a very small share of our overall gun violence. Though yes, it may be somewhat racist to so casually conflate poor, urban, and minority individuals. Yes this is true but Byran is still a racist dipshit. Also I think that these mass shooting occur simply because the media covers them so prolifically. You hear the name of the shooter(s) but yet you never hear the names of the victims. Because of the non stop media coverage I think those that do these mass shootings get the idea that they will be recognized by doing so and thus instead of simply committing suicide alone in their basements they go out and take other with them.
|
|
|
 |
 |

rmsusa
Dec 17, 2012, 12:31 PM
Post #16 of 19
(695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2004
Posts: 1017
|
So here's some international perspective from the UN. The data is available for download, I tried to post two xls files, but they're over 100K. Here's the link: http://www.unodc.org/...alysis/homicide.html This is probably the best global dataset around. Still, take them with a grain of salt. Somalia basically doesn't have a government so there's really no agency to report to. In many of the less developed countries, people are found dead and nobody worries how. They just get rid of the corpse somehow. In other places, political factors affect reporting. The most murderous regions of the world are Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America. The highest firearm rates are in the Caribbean and Latin America. The US has a homicide rate per 100,000 of 4.8 (2010), down from 8.1 (1995). It's been falling steadily for years. The biggest number I saw was Honduras: 91.6 (2011). Firearms follows the same sort of pattern. More of our homicides are committed with firearms, but it's not the highest rate. You can download the files and play with them.
|
|
|
 |
 |

camhead
Dec 17, 2012, 12:50 PM
Post #17 of 19
(684 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20401
|
rmsusa wrote: So here's some international perspective from the UN. The data is available for download, I tried to post two xls files, but they're over 100K. Here's the link: http://www.unodc.org/...alysis/homicide.html This is probably the best global dataset around. Still, take them with a grain of salt. Somalia basically doesn't have a government so there's really no agency to report to. In many of the less developed countries, people are found dead and nobody worries how. They just get rid of the corpse somehow. In other places, political factors affect reporting. The most murderous regions of the world are Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America. The highest firearm rates are in the Caribbean and Latin America. The US has a homicide rate per 100,000 of 4.8 (2010), down from 8.1 (1995). It's been falling steadily for years. The biggest number I saw was Honduras: 91.6 (2011). Firearms follows the same sort of pattern. More of our homicides are committed with firearms, but it's not the highest rate. You can download the files and play with them. That's why most informed people who talk about the dysfunctional nature of the US's gun and murder rates talk about us having the highest rates in the *industrialized* world. Yes, we're not as dangerous as Somalia or Central American countries. Pat on the back. Yes our murder rates have gone down, especially in most urban areas. Gold star on the forehead. I don't really think that is cause for complacency, or for us to assume that we don't need to radically rethink the way our laws approach guns and mental illness.
|
|
|
 |
 |

g
Dec 17, 2012, 3:56 PM
Post #18 of 19
(656 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2006
Posts: 270
|
rmsusa wrote: Switzerland. http://www.washingtonpost.com/...-gun-toting-utopias/
Janet Rosenbaum wrote: First of all, because they don’t have high levels of gun ownership. The gun ownership in Israel and Switzerland has decreased. For instance, in Israel, they’re very limited in who is able to own a gun. There are only a few tens of thousands of legal guns in Israel, and the only people allowed to own them legally live in the settlements, do business in the settlements, or are in professions at risk of violence. Both countries require you to have a reason to have a gun. There isn’t this idea that you have a right to a gun. You need a reason. And then you need to go back to the permitting authority every six months or so to assure them the reason is still valid. The second thing is that there’s this widespread misunderstanding that Israel and Switzerland promote gun ownership. They don’t. Ten years ago, when Israel had the outbreak of violence, there was an expansion of gun ownership, but only to people above a certain rank in the military. There was no sense that having ordinary citizens [carry guns] would make anything safer. Switzerland has also been moving away from having widespread guns. The laws are done canton by canton, which is like a province. Everyone in Switzerland serves in the army, and the cantons used to let you have the guns at home. They’ve been moving to keeping the guns in depots. That means they’re not in the household, which makes sense because the literature shows us that if the gun is in the household, the risk goes up for everyone in the household.
|
|
|
 |
 |

rmsusa
Dec 17, 2012, 4:21 PM
Post #19 of 19
(651 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2004
Posts: 1017
|
camhead wrote: rmsusa wrote: So here's some international perspective from the UN. The data is available for download, I tried to post two xls files, but they're over 100K. Here's the link: http://www.unodc.org/...alysis/homicide.html This is probably the best global dataset around. Still, take them with a grain of salt. Somalia basically doesn't have a government so there's really no agency to report to. In many of the less developed countries, people are found dead and nobody worries how. They just get rid of the corpse somehow. In other places, political factors affect reporting. The most murderous regions of the world are Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America. The highest firearm rates are in the Caribbean and Latin America. The US has a homicide rate per 100,000 of 4.8 (2010), down from 8.1 (1995). It's been falling steadily for years. The biggest number I saw was Honduras: 91.6 (2011). Firearms follows the same sort of pattern. More of our homicides are committed with firearms, but it's not the highest rate. You can download the files and play with them. That's why most informed people who talk about the dysfunctional nature of the US's gun and murder rates talk about us having the highest rates in the *industrialized* world. Yes, we're not as dangerous as Somalia or Central American countries. Pat on the back. Yes our murder rates have gone down, especially in most urban areas. Gold star on the forehead. I don't really think that is cause for complacency, or for us to assume that we don't need to radically rethink the way our laws approach guns and mental illness. That's all true. Don't mistake posting statistics for complacency or self congratulation. It's just perspective. I'm an international trader, so looking at international statistics is just something I do. Western Europe has 4-6 times fewer homicides per 100K than we do. Still, it's interesting to note that Costa Rica has twice as many and that little Belize 8 times as many. We're sort of on par with Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Russia has twice as many. You tell me what it all means, but now you've got numbers and perspective. Can the world be dichotomized into violent and non-violent places and why should it be so?
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|