throdgrain
Member
Can you supply me them statistics please?
Can you supply me them statistics please?
Do you have any from, say, a more neutral source ?
The article is froma website called Second Amendment. It may not seem strange to you, but my arguing opponants would just laugh at such a reference.
Yes, Americans kill each other far more often than residents of the UK do. We always have. Yet over the last two decades our homicide rates have been on a converging path - the UK's creeping up, and ours dropping significantly. The ratio between the US and the UK has been as high as 10:1. In 2008 it was about 2.5:1. Per capita violent crime? Scotland is the highest among "industrialized nations." England & Wales ranks #2. The US? I think we're fifth or sixth.*English person speaking here*
I dont don't know if per capita there is more violence here than in the USA, but it wouldnt suprise me.
Also, it is a fact that, also per capita, you guys kill each other far more than we do.
"Home invasion" ( a very American term) type crime here is pretty rare, however mugging in the cities I beleive is less rare, also fighting in pubs is MUCH more prevalent than anywhere I ever heard of.
Maybe we just like a fight
//edit
The point of comparison should not be US v UK, but UK before gun control v UK after gun control.
UK after gun control has more gun crime, an emerging criminial gun subculture, and more violent non-gun crime, than UK before gun control.
I concur with this. Gun ownership has never been very high in the UK, but violent crime back before say, 1954 was miniscule.We've often had this discussion on this forum, most American shooters seem to think that before the banning of handguns Great Britain was a safer nation because we had our guns to protect us. This is wrong. Fact is, hardly any of us had handguns anyway, it only affected a small minority like me. That's why the goverments could push through the legislation so easily - there was no-one to fight against it really.
It was made "not valid" with the 1953 "Prevention of Crime" act.In your country you're lucky enough to have lots and lots of gun owners, and that is your strength. Also remember that if you applied for a licence for a gun in this country citing self-defence as a reason you would have your application declined anyway. It's not a valid reason, apparently.
No, all you have to do is claim that the shotgun went off accidentally. It worked for this guy. I guess unlocking your gun safe, retrieving your shotgun, unlocking the ammo cabinet, retrieving some shells, loading your shotgun, pointing your shotgun at the intruder and putting your finger on the trigger(s) is reasonable in a home-invasion situation, but deliberately pulling those triggers is an act of murder or attempted murder.Would that stop me putting a round or two of buckshot in the face of a bad guy coming up my stairs in the middle of the night? Nope. But I wouldnt be suprised if I went to prison for it. And lost my licence too, of course.
Not just the gun laws.The gun laws in our country are a joke.
"No matter how one approaches the figures, one is forced to the
conclusion that the use of firearms in crime was very much less when
there were no controls of any sort and when anyone, convicted criminal
or lunatic, could buy any type of firearm without restriction. Half
a century of strict controls on pistols has ended, perversely, with a
far greater use of this class of weapon in crime than ever before."
My apologies if I offended - it was not my intention.
I've never personally had to comfort a rape victim in any case either, but I do not think I would be able to act in that situation regardless of what I was armed with. I'm not SWAT or a psychologist and if I stormed a building in that case the suspect might shoot the victim just like they would in the UK. The best I could do would be to try to establish communication and make it impossible for the suspect to flee.
When the content goes from discussion of the data regarding race and homicides and changes to an attempt to draw a causal relationship to a stereotypical culture.What part do you consider to be non sequitur? (I'm the author of the post in question.)
When the content goes from discussion of the data regarding race and homicides and changes to an attempt to draw a causal relationship to a stereotypical culture.
A complex system of socioeconomic factors.How do you explain it?
Ah. But the data indicates that causal relationship. Young, urban black males kill and are killed at six times the average rate. They are a tiny segment of the population, yet are a huge chunk of the victim pool.When the content goes from discussion of the data regarding race and homicides and changes to an attempt to draw a causal relationship to a stereotypical culture.
An unintended consequence of an economic ghetto. If you run the numbers on what those men can make doing legit jobs full time and then having to take care of themselves and a family, you will see that it is impossible. You make about $10-20K a year doing the jobs normally available to them. Conversely, for selling a bag of crack, you can get a whole week's wages in 45 minutes.