• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

So how's that gun prohibition working for you Brits?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

coreyb

Platinum Member
Aug 12, 2007
2,437
0
0
once again

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-...001011-eng.pdf

In Canada, there were 542 homicides in 2000 resulting in a national rate of 1.8 homicides per 100,000 population. By comparison, there were 15,517 homicides in the U.S., resulting in a rate (5.5) three times higher than Canada’s.

Similarly, the aggravated assault rate in the U.S. was more than double the Canadian rate in 2000. The U.S. also showed a higher rate of robbery (65% higher) than Canada. About 41% of robberies in the U.S. involved a firearm, compared to 16% in Canada.

I don't know where you're getting your information but the crime rate is far higher in the US.
 

Murloc

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2008
5,377
64
91
an interesting statistics would be bullet injures that the emergency department sees.
I bet that in the US there are way more.
And that is directly linked to the number of guns being around, you can't deny it.

anyway gun control wouldn't help in the US, americans are a violent population descending from cow boys and criminals :p
 
Last edited:

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,865
5
0
Completely RELEVANT numbers and FACTS have been posted. Yet you say they are somehow irrelevant without explaining why. Explain.
He has no answer, they do not fit into his myopic worldview. Everything that doesn't fit is clearly "irrelevant", "fail", or some other one-word dismissal.
 

daishi5

Golden Member
Feb 17, 2005
1,196
0
71
This. But what are really needed are the murder stats in the UK before and after their gun ban. Not that there aren't other variables at play, but those are the necessary data in judging the ban's efficacy.
I pulled those up a year or two ago, they were relatively stable per capita for a period of around 15 years before the gun ban. The year after the gun ban they shot up, and they stayed much higher for I think 4 years, and then started to go back down towards the pre-ban numbers. The problem is that the stats were per year, the spike in murders could have caused the gun ban, rather than been caused by it because of the difficulty in identifying exactly when the murders got worse. The biggest part of the spike was after the law was passed, but before it went into effect. So, while the spike itself could not have caused the law to be passed, the actual ban also could not have caused the spike. I think there was an underlying issue that drove up the murder rate, but also caught the governments attention to create the ban, causing both a gun ban and an increased murder rate at the same time.
 
Jul 10, 2007
12,050
3
0
If you are going to make comparisons, it has to be apples to apples. Homicide is a pretty good comparison, because the definition doesn't really vary from country to country. The murder rate in the U.K. is only a third of what it is in the U.S.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita

- wolf
what's the demographic of the UK vs the US?
how many illegals are there in the UK vs the US?
how many "ghetto" people and wannabe gangsters are there in the UK vs the US?
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/.3ndic.1t.4r@-eng.jsp?iid=57

Canada's homicide rate (1.85 victims per 100,000 people) was less than half of that of the United States (5.69)

I'm sick of your crime comparisons between US and Canada when the US is obviously a far more dangerous and crime ridden country.
Do you have the statistics for how many guns there are in Canadian households vs US households? That would help put those numbers in a more realistic light.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
If you are going to make comparisons, it has to be apples to apples. Homicide is a pretty good comparison, because the definition doesn't really vary from country to country. The murder rate in the U.K. is only a third of what it is in the U.S.
Yes, but how does UK's current homicide rate compare with their own rates prior to the gun ban? That is the only stat that matters when examining the effectiveness of said restrictions.

Apples-to-apples indeed...
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,240
2
76
exactly..theyare trying to sidestep the issue with an incorrect comparison that does nothing to debunk the claim being made.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,158
6
81
exactly..theyare trying to sidestep the issue with an incorrect comparison that does nothing to debunk the claim being made.
Yep.

Crime went up after the ban. They cant refute that so they try their best to spin the numbers, but at the end of the day crime still went up after the ban.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
Yep.

Crime went up after the ban. They cant refute that so they try their best to spin the numbers, but at the end of the day crime still went up after the ban.
But, but they're only stabbing them, and beating them with bats, it's much more civilized.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,158
6
81
But, but they're only stabbing them, and beating them with bats, it's much more civilized.
And when someone does go on a shooting spree, the police are unable to stop them since they do not carry weapons. Thats what happened a few weeks ago, that guy was shooting people left and right and the police could do nothing about it.
 

NeoV

Diamond Member
Apr 18, 2000
9,531
2
81
what has also not been mentioned by the pro-guns-for-everyone zealots is that the reporting of crimes in the UK changed at the same time - assaults were re-defined - which is largely the source of the spike in reported assaults - but don't let facts get in the way of the 'gun bans don't work' discussion.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
what has also not been mentioned by the pro-guns-for-everyone zealots is that the reporting of crimes in the UK changed at the same time - assaults were re-defined - which is largely the source of the spike in reported assaults - but don't let facts get in the way of the 'gun bans don't work' discussion.
I'm sure it did, and I'm sure it was.

:rolleyes:
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,865
5
0
what has also not been mentioned by the pro-guns-for-everyone zealots is that the reporting of crimes in the UK changed at the same time - assaults were re-defined - which is largely the source of the spike in reported assaults - but don't let facts get in the way of the 'gun bans don't work' discussion.
Source that.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
what has also not been mentioned by the pro-guns-for-everyone zealots is that the reporting of crimes in the UK changed at the same time - assaults were re-defined - which is largely the source of the spike in reported assaults - but don't let facts get in the way of the 'gun bans don't work' discussion.
Please feel free to show us the "redefinition" of assault.

On that note one could go on for days with the "redefinitions" that anti-gunners use to bolster their "statistics".
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
So here's the wiki link to violent crime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_crime

According to this violent crime in the UK is.
United Kingdom
[edit]England and Wales
Includes all violence against the person, sexual offences, and robbery as violent crime.[9]
This is what it says bout the USA.
United States
The United States Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) counts five categories of crime as violent crimes: murder, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault. According to BJS figures, the rate of violent crime victimization in the United States declined by more than half between the years 1994 and 2001.
Looks pretty identical to me.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
11
76
I was showing a British Captain my Texas Concealed Carry license the other day. He was envious. He pointed out that they were expected to carry a gun every day here in Afghanistan, but even showing an interest in firearms back in the UK gets you branded a loony. And you'd go to prison if you shot someone raping your mother in the UK, while we're free to shoot bank robbers if the opportunity arises. The rest of the Brits in the room agreed with him.

Of course, the UK military I work with are subject to the daily reality that just because everyone is armed doesn't mean there will be uncontrolled violence, or that people will shoot each other over disagreements. In fact, I've never seen people so angry as most of our coalition partners have been watching the world cup, everyone had guns, and yet no one was shot.

Gun control is a farce.
 

Medu

Member
Mar 9, 2010
149
0
76
So here's the wiki link to violent crime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_crime

According to this violent crime in the UK is.


This is what it says bout the USA.


Looks pretty identical to me.
Except it is not. Crime in the USA

As you can see here the violent crime in the US is just under 500 per 100,000, while 'property crime' is ~3,700 per 100,000. Burglary(which is only a part of property crime) is counted as a violent crime in the UK(at least in the stats in the the above post)- clearly it's not in the USA.
Also, common assaults are NOT included in the US violent crime stats- only aggravated assault.
 

WelshBloke

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
28,164
5,224
126
Oh dear, are you copy pasting things you dont understand again.

For anyone who hasn't seen this before look at the numbers on the right (# licensed firearms) and the change in violent crime on the left then think for a minute.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,164
0
0
Yes, but how does UK's current homicide rate compare with their own rates prior to the gun ban? That is the only stat that matters when examining the effectiveness of said restrictions.

Apples-to-apples indeed...
You're right. And the other poster above was essentially correct in pointing out that other variables may account for the lower murder rate in the U.K. besides gun control. I've said now twice in this thread that while there is a correlation with more gun control and fewer murders in Europe, that I don't believe the correlation necessarily means causation here. And it's certainly relevant what the murder rate was before and after the gun control was implemented, yet even THAT will not tell the whole story. Suppose the murder rate went down OR up after gun control - there could have been other shifting variables - cultural, legal and/or socio-economic - that could have caused the shift.

The bottom line is that this is actually not a simple issue. It's easy to spot correlations in data but very difficult to ascertain cause and effect because there are just too many variables that affect all categories of crime.

- wolf
 

ConstipatedVigilante

Diamond Member
Feb 22, 2006
7,671
1
0
And when someone does go on a shooting spree, the police are unable to stop them since they do not carry weapons. Thats what happened a few weeks ago, that guy was shooting people left and right and the police could do nothing about it.
British police don't carry guns? Now THAT'S retarded.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,158
6
81
British police don't carry guns? Now THAT'S retarded.
By and large, no.

Remember that shooting spree 2 months ago?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/06/02/uk.england.shootings/index.html

That guy was driving around and the local police were unable to do anything to him as he killed at will.


"Police in Cumbria have claimed they were powerless to stop Derrick Bird’s killing spree after disclosing how the taxi driver shot dead 10 of his victims within an hour. "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7804832/Cumbria-shootings-We-never-had-a-chance-to-stop-Derrick-Bird-say-police.html
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY