Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ban weapons of mass destruction.....NOW

616 posts in this topic

Posted

I never provided "numbers" I provided percentages. Debunked according to who?

I am not familiar with the NRA claim however, I will look it up.

Everything gets called into question in regards to a debate like this.

I am not familar with this claim and it sounds asinine. In my opinion of course, this is theology, not methodology.

I am going to look over your pdf because I like to keep an open mind. Did you research the percentages I suggested, or just dismiss them and call them false? I have a strong suspicion we will not find common ground on this topic.

It's interesting, I don't force anyone to own a firearm. Yet, some people try to force me to give up my gun(s).

I don't force anyone to hunt but people try to force me from hunting.

I don't force anyone to protect themselves but some try to force me into leaving me helpless.

Why is that?

In order to get percentages you have to have numbers first. And it is debunked by the number of deaths by firearms in Australia. Gun homicides went down dramatically after 1996. In 1996 22% of homicides were committed by guns The previous 7 the lowest percentage was 19% the highest was 25%. In the latest data I could find which was 2008, guns were used in 12% of homicides. IN 2007 it was only 9%. Before 1996 it was only lower than 20% once. Since 1996, it has only been higher than 20% once. And as I stated earlier homicide by gun overall dropped by 59%

The homicide per capita (100,000) went from 1.7 to 1.2

This is according to data from the AIC (Australian Institute of Criminology). Here is their website. It has all the actual numbers you need

http://www.aic.gov.au/index.html

And as Mav said provide a link for your numbers (ahem percentages). Part of having these conversations, at least for me, is to better educate myself on both sides of the fence. So I am genuinely interested in whatever you have to say, just as a favor if you provide statistics do your best to link the source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I realize the Huffington Post is activist journalism. However, their front page is pretty fugging profound right now.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

http://www.huffingto..._n_2348466.html

Basically it has links to all the murders that have been reported by guns since last Friday.

The Huffington Post spent the week tracking gun-related homicides and accidents throughout the U.S., logging more than 100 from Google and Nexis searches. This is by no means a definitive tally. In 2010, there were more than twice that many homicides alone in an average week.

PS- I wish I knew how to do a screen shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's a fact that fewer firearms = fewer homicides.

There hasn't been direct causation established, but it's an undisputed fact that fewer firearms = fewer homicides.

But please, tell us about your faith.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's a fact that fewer firearms = fewer homicides.

There hasn't been direct causation established, but it's an undisputed fact that fewer firearms = fewer homicides.

But please, tell us about your faith.

Harvard disagrees:

http://www.law.harva...auseronline.pdf

On the one hand, despite constant and substantially increasing gun

ownership, the United States saw progressive and dramatic reductions

in criminal violence in the 1990s. On the other hand, the

same time period in the United Kingdom saw a constant and

dramatic increase in violent crime to which England’s response

was ever-more drastic gun control including, eventually, banning

and confiscating all handguns and many types of long guns.

Nevertheless, criminal violence rampantly increased so that by

2000 England surpassed the United States to become one of the

developed world’s most violence-ridden nations.

If the mantra “more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less

death” were true, broad based crossnational comparisons

should show that nations with higher gun ownership per capita

consistently have more death. Nations with higher gun

ownership rates, however, do not have higher murder or suicide

rates than those with lower gun ownership. Indeed many

high gun ownership nations have much lower murder rates.

Consider, for example, the wide divergence in murder rates

among Continental European nations with widely divergent

gun ownership rates.

The noncorrelation between gun ownership and murder

is reinforced by examination of statistics from larger numbers

of nations across the developed world. Comparison of

“homicide and suicide mortality data for thirty‐six nations

(including the United States) for the period 1990–1995” to

gun ownership levels showed “no significant (at the 5%

level) association between gun ownership levels and the total

homicide rate.” Consistent with this is a later European

study of data from 21 nations in which “no significant correlations

[of gun ownership levels] with total suicide or homicide

rates were found.”

To reiterate, the determinants of murder and suicide are

basic social, economic, and cultural factors, not the prevalence

of some form of deadly mechanism. In this connection,

recall that the American jurisdictions which have the highest

violent crime rates are precisely those with the most stringent

gun controls.

Table 2: Murder Rates of European Nations that Ban

Handguns as Compared to Their Neighbors that Allow Handguns

(rates are per 100,000 persons)

Nation Handgun Policy Murder Rate Year

A. Belarus banned 10.40 late 1990s

[Neighboring countries with gun law and murder rate data available]

Poland allowed 1.98 2003

Russia banned 20.54 2002

B. Luxembourg banned 9.01 2002

[Neighboring countries with gun law and murder rate data available]

Belgium allowed 1.70 late 1990s

France allowed 1.65 2003

Germany allowed 0.93 2003

C. Russia banned 20.54 2002

[Neighboring countries with gun law and murder rate data available]

Finland allowed 1.98 2004

Norway allowed 0.81 2001

Notes: This table covers all the European nations for which the information

given is available. As in Table 1, the homicide rate data comes

from an annually published report, C

ANADIAN CENTRE FOR JUSTICE

STATISTICS, HOMICIDE IN CANADA, JURISTAT.

(sorry the table formatting didn't copy)

Of course the point of this analysis is not that the law should

allow lunatics and criminals to own guns. The point is that violence

will be rare when the basic sociocultural and economic

determinants so dictate; and conversely, crime will rise in response

to changes in those determinants—without much regard

to the mere availability of some particular weaponry or

the severity of laws against it.

Table 4: Intentional Deaths: United States vs.

Continental Europe Rates

In order of highest combined rate; nations having higher rates than the

United States are indicated by asterisk (suicide rate) or + sign (murder rate).

Nation Suicide Murder Combined rates

Russia 41.2* 30.6+ 71.8

Estonia 40.1* 22.2+ 62.3

Latvia 40.7* 18.2+ 58.9

Lithuania 45.6* 11.7+ 57.3

Belarus 27.9* 10.4+ 38.3

Hungary 32.9* 3.5 36.4

Ukraine 22.5* 11.3+ 33.8

Slovenia 28.4* 2.4 30.4

Finland 27.2* 2.9 30.1

Denmark 22.3* 4.9 27.2

Croatia 22.8* 3.3 26.1

Austria 22.2* 1.0 23.2

Bulgaria 17.3* 5.1 22.4

France 20.8* 1.1 21.9

Switzerland 21.4* 1.1‡ 24.1

Belgium 18.7* 1.7 20.4

United States 11.6 7.8 19.4

Poland 14.2* 2.8 17.0

Germany 15.8* 1.1 16.9

Romania 12.3* 4.1 16.4

Sweden 15.3* 1.0 16.3

Norway 12.3* 0.8 13.1

Holland 9.8 1.2 11.0

Italy 8.2 1.7 9.9

Portugal 8.2 1.7 9.9

Spain 8.1 0.9 9.0

Greece 3.3 1.3 4.6

(again, sorry for the formatting)

CONCLUSION

This Article has reviewed a significant amount of evidence

from a wide variety of international sources. Each individual

portion of evidence is subject to cavil—at the very least the

general objection that the persuasiveness of social scientific

evidence cannot remotely approach the persuasiveness of

conclusions in the physical sciences. Nevertheless, the burden

of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal

more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially

since they argue public policy ought to be based on

that mantra. To bear that burden would at the very least

require showing that a large number of nations with more

guns have more death and that nations that have imposed

stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions

in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are

not observed when a large number of nations are compared

across the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Harvard = NRA

"march on Harvard!!"

wait a minute, didn't Bush go to Harvard? there you go, his fault after all

knew we would come up with the real problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'd like to see what Yale or Stansbury have to say

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

When you have to bring Belarus and Russia in as examples, you know you're tricking the data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

And the fact the paper uses subjective phrases like "responsible gun owners" hints that it might not be blindly scientific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Amazing.

A close family friend's brother-in-law just shot and killed a 15-year old boy showing him one of his guns in Wendell.

I don't know the guy who did this personally, but he is the brother of the spouse of one of my good friends.

http://www.wral.com/15-year-old-dies-in-shooting-at-wendell-home/11909255/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

In order to get percentages you have to have numbers first.

Yeah, I was being a bit of dick sorry 'bout that.

And as Mav said provide a link for your numbers (ahem percentages). Part of having these conversations, at least for me, is to better educate myself on both sides of the fence. So I am genuinely interested in whatever you have to say, just as a favor if you provide statistics do your best to link the source.

Understood, however Nance just posted much better information than I did.

But please, tell us about your faith.

What does this have to do with anything? If you must know I haven't set foot in a church in almost twenty years and don't even own a bible. Take that as you wish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html

Harvard disagrees with Harvard. This was a review of all literature on the topic.

1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review).

Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.

Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. Firearm availability and homicide: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.

2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide.

We analyzed the relationship between homicide and gun availability using data from 26 developed countries from the early 1990s. We found that across developed countries, where guns are more available, there are more homicides. These results often hold even when the United States is excluded.

Hemenway, David; Miller, Matthew. Firearm availability and homicide rates across 26 high income countries. Journal of Trauma. 2000; 49:985-88.

3. Across states, more guns = more homicide

Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period (1988-1997).

After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.

Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. Household firearm ownership levels and homicide rates across U.S. regions and states, 1988-1997. American Journal of Public Health. 2002: 92:1988-1993.

4. Across states, more guns = more homicide (2)

Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003. We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide.

Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. State-level homicide victimization rates in the U.S. in relation to survey measures of household firearm ownership, 2001-2003. Social Science and Medicine. 2007; 64:656-64.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Was reading an editorial in the Charlotte Observer that had some interesting stats.

It said that gun homicides were down about 50% in the US from 30 years ago.

Also said that the states with strong mental illness commitment laws had substantially fewer gun related suicides and homicides.

Provides evidence that the real issue is mental illness....not gun ownership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites