Korat-Farang.com

Right to Bare Arms

Guest · 124 · 7970

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

lozz

  • Guest
Quote
US and UK murder – rate and weapon    April 17, 2007
Posted by fleshisgrass in events, Uncategorized.
trackback
In the UK (population c. 60.5m) there were 765 reported incidents of murder for 2005-6 (Home Office, undated) – a rate of about 1.1 per 100,000.

In the US (population c. 298.5m) there were an estimated 16,137 homicides in 2004 (FBI, 2006a) – a rate of about 5.4 per 100,000. Of these, 10,654 were carried out with guns (FBI, 2006b).

_________________________

Federal Bureau of Investigation (2006a). Bureau of Justice Statistics. Homicide trends in the U.S.. Long-term trends. Available from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/totalstab.htm.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (2006). Bureau of Justice Statistics. Homicide trends in the U.S.. Weapons used. Available from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/weaponstab.htm

Home Office (undated). ‘Homicide’ – long-term national recorded crime trends. Available from: http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/page40.asp.


lozz

  • Guest
Quote
Over 9,000 Murders by Gun in US; 39 in UK

Posted on 01/14/2011 by Juan
Number of Murders, United States , 2009: 15,241

Number of Murders by Firearms, US, 2009: 9,146

Number of Murders, Britain, 2008* : 648
(Since Britain’s population is 1/5 that of US, this is equivalent to 3,240 US murders)

Number of Murders by[pdf] firearms, Britain, 2008* 39
(equivalent to 195 US murders)

*The Home office reported murder statistics in the UK for the 12 months to March 2009, but these are 12-month figures).

For more on murder by firearms in Britain, see the BBC .

The international comparisons show conclusively that fewer gun owners per capita produce not only fewer murders by firearm, but fewer murders per capita over all. In the case of Britain, firearms murders are 48 times fewer than in the US.


Toddy

  • Guest
It seems obvious at first sight, but statistics and damned lies spring to mind.


Offline Anton

  • KFers in Korat
  • Wisdom in Forum
  • *****
    • Posts: 4297
Based on the OP by Toddy, I was focusing especially on the school shootings and similar mass massacres. Such sad and crazy events, I think, can only or almost only be carried out with modern firearms. I would be interested in that kind of statistics in particular. Maybe that's the meaning of the data reported by Loz: fewer gun owners per capita = fewer murders per capita over all. Meaning that firearms, especially the modern ones, make it so easy for one single person to mow down so many victims at one time. That is the point in my opinion. If we divert discussion from that point, those favorable to guns will always reply that anyway you cannot eliminate crime from society, that guns are needed for self-defence, that they save lives too, and blablabla...  ::)  In my opinion, the point is the level and type and amount of damage produced by those deadly war weapons.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2011, 05:10:31 PM by Anton »
Village idiots unwelcome here


Toddy

  • Guest
I agree Anton, you should not need any kind of gun for self defence in a modern civilized society.


lozz

  • Guest
It seems obvious at first sight, but statistics and damned lies spring to mind.

Are u suggesting that the British Home office and the US Federal Government might LIE to people?  :o


Toddy

  • Guest
It seems obvious at first sight, but statistics and damned lies spring to mind.

Are u suggesting that the British Home office and the US Federal Government might LIE to people?  :o

We are lied to by officialdom the world over!!  ;D In fairness, they may believe what they say when they say it.



Toddy

  • Guest

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Personal attack removed by Admin xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

JOHN R. LOTT JR.
June 11, 2010

Gun Control and Mass Murders
Multiple-victim shootings are, fortunately, very rare, but when they occur in the U.S. they skew the public's perceptions about gun control.


It wasn’t supposed to happen in England, with its very strict gun-control laws. And yet last week, Derrick Bird shot twelve people to death and wounded eleven others in the northwestern county of Cumbria. A headline in the London Times read: “Toughest laws in the world could not stop Cumbria tragedy.”
 
But surely this was an aberration. Because America has the most guns, multiple-victim public shootings are an American thing, right? No, not at all. Contrary to public perception, Western Europe, most of whose countries have much tougher gun laws than the United States, has experienced many of the worst multiple-victim public shootings. Particularly telling, all the multiple-victim public shootings in Western Europe have occurred in places where civilians are not permitted to carry guns. The same is true in the United States: All the public shootings in which more than three people have been killed have occurred in places where civilians may not legally bring guns.
 
Look at recent history. Where have the worst K–12 school shootings occurred? Nearly all of them in Europe. The very worst one occurred in a high school in Erfurt, Germany, in 2002, where 18 were killed. The second-worst took place in Dunblane, Scotland, in 1996, where 16 kindergartners and their teacher were killed. The third-worst, with 15 dead, happened in Winnenden, Germany. The fourth-worst was in the U.S.—Columbine High School in 1999, leaving 13 dead. The fifth-worst, with eleven murdered, occurred in Emsdetten, Germany.

It may be a surprise to those who believe in gun control that Germany was home to three of the five worst attacks. Though not quite as tight as the U.K.’s regulations, Germany’s gun-control laws are some of the most restrictive in Europe. German gun licenses are valid for only three years, and to obtain one, the person must demonstrate such hard-to-define characteristics as trustworthiness, and must also convince authorities that he needs a gun. This is on top of prohibitions on gun ownership for those with mental disorders, drug or alcohol addictions, violent or aggressive tendencies, or felony convictions.

The phenomenon is not limited to school attacks. Multiple-victim public shootings in general appear to be at least as common in Western Europe as they are here. The following is a partial list of attacks since 2001. As mentioned, all of them occurred in gun-free zones — places where guns in the hands of civilians are outlawed.

Zug, Switzerland, Sept. 27, 2001: A man whose lawsuits had been denied murdered 14 members of a cantonal parliament.

Tours, France, Oct. 29, 2001: Four people were killed and ten wounded when a French railway worker started shooting at a busy intersection.

Nanterre, France, March 27, 2002: A man killed eight city-council members after a council meeting.
Erfurt, Germany, April 26, 2002: A former student killed 18 at a secondary school.

Freising, Germany, Feb. 19, 2002: Three people killed and one wounded.

Turin, Italy, Oct. 15, 2002: Seven people killed on a hillside overlooking the city.
 
Madrid, Spain, Oct. 1, 2006: A man killed two employees and wounded another at a company that had fired him.

Emsdetten, Germany,bNov. 20, 2006: A former student murdered eleven people at a high school.
Tuusula, Finland, Nov. 7, 2007: Seven students and the principal killed at a high school.

Naples, Italy, Sept. 18, 2008: Seven dead and two seriously wounded in a public meeting hall. (This incident is not included in the totals given below because it may have involved the Mafia.)  

Kauhajoki, Finland, Sept. 23, 2008: Ten people shot to death at a college.
Winnenden, Germany, March 11, 2009: A 17-year-old former student killed 15 people, including nine students and three teachers.

Lyon, France, March 19, 2009: Ten people injured when a man opened fire on a nursery school.

Athens, Greece, April 10, 2009: Three people killed and two injured by a student at a vocational college.

Rotterdam, Netherlands, April 11, 2009: Three people killed and one injured at a crowded café.

Vienna, Austria, May 24, 2009: One dead and 15 wounded in an attack on a Sikh temple.
Espoo, Finland, Dec. 31, 2009: Four people shot to death at a mall.

Cumbria, England, June 2, 2010: Twelve killed by a British taxi driver.

So how does this compare with the United States? Bill Landes at the University of Chicago and I have collected data on all the multiple-victim public shootings in the United States from 1977 to 1999 (for a discussion of that information, see the just-released updated third edition of More Guns, Less Crime). If one looks at just those cases where four or more people have been killed in an attack, on average 10.6 people died in such attacks each year; the worst attack was the Luby’s Cafeteria shooting in Killeen, Texas, in 1991, in which 23 people died.  
 
I don’t have exactly comparable data for Europe; however, the data I have been able to collect for the nine and a half years from 2001 through now indicate that on average some 12.5 people per year have died in such attacks. To be sure, Western Europe has a lower per capita rate, since its population over the last decade has been about 48 percent larger than the U.S. population over the earlier period (about 387 million to 262 million). Still, the fact that there are such attacks at all belies the conventional wisdom.

Large multiple-victim public shootings are exceedingly rare events, but they garner massive news attention, and the misperceptions they produce are hard to erase. When I have been interviewed by foreign journalists, even German ones, they usually start off by asking why multiple-victim public shootings are such an American problem. And of course, they are astonished when I remind them of the attacks in their own countries and point out that this is not an American problem, it is a universal problem, but with a common factor: The attacks occur in public places where civilians are banned from carrying guns.

–John R. Lott Jr. is a FOXNews.com contributor, an economist, and the author of More Guns, Less Crime, the third edition of which has just been published by the University of Chicago Press.


I've just made the time to read most of your long post. Wow. My post took a millisecond to write. I have never been called a liberal. I am flattered.  ;D
« Last Edit: December 13, 2011, 03:47:50 PM by Administrator »


Toddy

  • Guest
Just reading through this tortured thread. What (or who) is a liberal pinko? Never heard that one before.  ;D


Toddy

  • Guest
I agree Anton, you should not need any kind of gun for self defence in a modern civilized society.

In the Caribbean I used to sleep with a machete under the bed. Bloody scary place, at least it can be. Not much use against a gun, but what can you do? Get a bigger gun?

Papua New Guinea is a really scary place. I had a pepper spray in my pocket. Useless against a gun.

Solomon Islands? You would need a bazooka. Bugger.  :(


Offline Ken

  • Member
    • Posts: 135
Fun little thread eh Alfie?
I have to say, it did help me make up my mind about some members.

Me too Jeff. ;D


Offline Alfie

  • Forum Guru
  • **********
    • Posts: 8567
It has certainly showed me that some people jump to (wrong) conclusions rather easily (poor reading skills?) and that some would rather insult someone than explore and discuss a topic. Could the latter be the result of a 'gun culture'? (Those with guns would rather shoot the other guy than discuss something rationally?)


lozz

  • Guest
A machete under the bed, jeepers. could it be that says more about u than them? When i stayed in Jamaica, albeit alone, i found locking the door most nights was enough to give peace of mind. My guess is neither of us suffered home invasion but, one of us may have been paranoid.... i wonder also if u‘d have fallen victim of said machete as ur wits elude u at 3 am and u might find it used against u. i‘m assuming uve not had special training.


Toddy

  • Guest
A machete under the bed, jeepers. could it be that says more about u than them? When i stayed in Jamaica, albeit alone, i found locking the door most nights was enough to give peace of mind. My guess is neither of us suffered home invasion but, one of us may have been paranoid.... i wonder also if u‘d have fallen victim of said machete as ur wits elude u at 3 am and u might find it used against u. i‘m assuming uve not had special training.

In Trinidad house breaking by nutters with machetes was common place. I was out in the country and vulnerable. Would it have done any good? Probably not.  :(


Offline Alfie

  • Forum Guru
  • **********
    • Posts: 8567
Just reading through this tortured thread. What (or who) is a liberal pinko? Never heard that one before.  ;D

No reply from Thairanger yet, Toddy. Perhaps he doesn't know the answer. Maybe we should ask the staff at Fox News directly!  :o




Offline Alfie

  • Forum Guru
  • **********
    • Posts: 8567


Toddy

  • Guest
Just reading through this tortured thread. What (or who) is a liberal pinko? Never heard that one before.  ;D

No reply from Thairanger yet, Toddy. Perhaps he doesn't know the answer. Maybe we should ask the staff at Fox News directly!  :o




Uncle Google tells me that liberal pinko means a person whose political view is left of centre. Not a full blown red, but pinko - a little bit red. As a fully paid up reader of the Daily Mail, I hardly think that I can be accused of being a lefty.  ;D


Offline Ken

  • Member
    • Posts: 135
Just reading through this tortured thread. What (or who) is a liberal pinko? Never heard that one before.  ;D

No reply from Thairanger yet, Toddy. Perhaps he doesn't know the answer. Maybe we should ask the staff at Fox News directly!  :o




No reply, because I suspect he really doesn't give a crap about what you think.  If you want to discuss in person I'll be at Sportsbar around 1 today.