Gun Control is Completely Useless.


JamesBondo
#6301
Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

Logic!! ....Guns in the US: The statistics behind the violence - BBC News

There were 13286 killed and 26819 injured by guns and that does not include the last week of the year, which is generally the highest in the year.

there were 372 mass shootings with 425 deaths. There were 64 school shootings.


The chart gives some idea of how well our laws work. I would say that is validation enough wouldn't you??

You still don't get it.

Show me Canadian stats that correlate to Canadian laws.

A Canadian law intended to create improvement, should actually create improvement.Correct?
 
JamesBondo
#6302
Here's a drawing for you. This is what you need to show in order to make a strong case for an existing Canadian law.
Attached Images
example.jpg (3.8 KB, 7 views )
 
JamesBondo
#6303
This, too, would suggest that a law works.
Attached Images
example1.jpg (3.3 KB, 4 views )
 
JamesBondo
#6304
This is NOT a logical way to validate a Canadian Law. A Canadian law is NOT valid simply because another country has stats that are much worse.
Attached Images
example3.jpg (3.2 KB, 4 views )
 
bobnoorduyn
Free Thinker
+1
#6305
Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

Logic!! ....Guns in the US: The statistics behind the violence - BBC News

There were 13286 killed and 26819 injured by guns and that does not include the last week of the year, which is generally the highest in the year.

there were 372 mass shootings with 425 deaths. There were 64 school shootings.


The chart gives some idea of how well our laws work. I would say that is validation enough wouldn't you??


Do you actually believe the BBC? The UK artificially understates their crime stats while the US overstates theirs. Both countries do this to bolster their own arguments; that the UK's draconian gun laws work, but they actually drove up violent crime. The US government also wants to do the same so they misrepresent their stats. They both use "gun crime" figures totally ignoring the use of any other weapon. Dead is dead whether by gun, knife, fireplace poker, bare hands... This fixation on firearms does nothing to get to the real issues.


Do you think the London riots would have happened here, where we still have some semblance of the right to defense of self and property? Something the British government denies its citizens, or subjects as the case may be now.
 
bluebyrd35
No Party Affiliation
#6306
Quote: Originally Posted by JamesBondo View Post

This is NOT a logical way to validate a Canadian Law. A Canadian law is NOT valid simply because another country has stats that are much worse.

Canada?s crime rate: Two decades of decline

Will government stats do it for you??

Quote: Originally Posted by bobnoorduyn View Post

Do you actually believe the BBC? The UK artificially understates their crime stats while the US overstates theirs. Both countries do this to bolster their own arguments; that the UK's draconian gun laws work, but they actually drove up violent crime. The US government also wants to do the same so they misrepresent their stats. They both use "gun crime" figures totally ignoring the use of any other weapon. Dead is dead whether by gun, knife, fireplace poker, bare hands... This fixation on firearms does nothing to get to the real issues.


Do you think the London riots would have happened here, where we still have some semblance of the right to defense of self and property? Something the British government denies its citizens, or subjects as the case may be now.

I do when the information correlates with the news I hear everyday here in a small region of eastern Florida. There has not been within my memory a single day without a shooting or three in this area on the morning news. Mind you the traffic accidents are taking out nearly as many here as well. In the last week, there have been two stories of people going the wrong way on the interstate. The one this morning wiped out a couple of vehicles but no deaths thankfully. So, perhaps Canada's laws and stats are fairly accurate.
 
DaSleeper
#6307
 
bluebyrd35
No Party Affiliation
#6308
Yup the cement walls of some intellects does make them somewhat difficult to permeate. I have learned to demand links and know what?? Very few decent ones emerge. When no links or provable stats present themselves, the cement walls, resort to put downs and personal attacks. It lets me know immediately the no-nothings have arrived with nothing but hot air to expel
 
B00Mer
No Party Affiliation
#6309
www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsVCHE7ayPE

www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2gCFOtaZPo

www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2gCFOtaZPo

www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTiLkkMCMQ4

www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzb7SLsFwtE


I love these Gunny & Glock Commercials.. wants to make me run out an buy another one.
 
JamesBondo
#6310
Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

Yup the cement walls of some intellects does make them somewhat difficult to permeate. I have learned to demand links and know what?? Very few decent ones emerge. When no links or provable stats present themselves, the cement walls, resort to put downs and personal attacks. It lets me know immediately the no-nothings have arrived with nothing but hot air to expel

I think you are projecting. I've been asking for stats and links from you for ages now.
 
bobnoorduyn
Free Thinker
#6311
Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

Canada?s crime rate: Two decades of decline

Will government stats do it for you??


I do when the information correlates with the news I hear everyday here in a small region of eastern Florida. There has not been within my memory a single day without a shooting or three in this area on the morning news. Mind you the traffic accidents are taking out nearly as many here as well. In the last week, there have been two stories of people going the wrong way on the interstate. The one this morning wiped out a couple of vehicles but no deaths thankfully. So, perhaps Canada's laws and stats are fairly accurate.


Of course you do, because you also believe what the news tells you, they give you the same information you present. Just think about it for a minute, 374 mass shootings and out of that 425 deaths, that tells me that mass shooters are very bad shots or someone is spiking the stats. You are not told how many incidents occur where criminal activity is already present, how many are actually police involved shootings. Stats have also included shootings in a home where firearms are present in the home when they were actually brought in by the assailants.
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
+1
#6312
Quote: Originally Posted by JamesBondo View Post

What you are really saying is:if my wife brings a gun into my house,it makes me more likely to murder.

This is assinine for several reasons but I only need a few to show how misinformed you are.

I already have a gun in my house. A second gun does not change my long standing commitment to love and cherish my spouse. The first gun didn't. The second gun won't. There is no room for discussion on this. You are absolutely wrong.

However, if I entertain your rediculous notion that a second gun will influence my mindset, then you have ignored the fact that a firearm has an equalizing quality to it. The world becomes much friendlier to armed men when wives stay unarmed, ie disarming the wife will remove any chance of equalization.

One again, I will point out that your views on firearms for women is down right cruel.


I think most of the sensible people on the forum understand and I believe it's almost a certainly that BB never will. I think she might be a lot happier if she switched over to knitting socks!
 
bobnoorduyn
Free Thinker
+1
#6313
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

I think most of the sensible people on the forum understand and I believe it's almost a certainly that BB never will. I think she might be a lot happier if she switched over to knitting socks!



You better watch it, that "stick to your knitting" expression sure got Peter McKay into a $h!t storm.
 
Tecumsehsbones
+2
#6314
She doesn't understand how statistics works.
 
JamesBondo
#6315
Yes. I can think of several strategies to win a debate. I have not seen Bluebyrd use any of them.
 
bluebyrd35
No Party Affiliation
#6316
Quote: Originally Posted by JamesBondo View Post

I think you are projecting. I've been asking for stats and links from you for ages now.

Yes you have now instead of giving you statistics, I am going to explain something about statistics.

First understand that Statistics have not been, not now and will not ever be accurate. You must look carefully at the sources, question the procedure and inform yourself on the credibility of those compiling those numbers. You must always examine the source or in other words who has the most to gain or lose by the belief put in them.

Mark Twain quotes Benjamin Disraeli as saying "There are 3 kinds of lies.......Lies, Damed Lies, & Statistics The proper appreciation of statistics strongly support conclusion.

Some like the stats they find supporting their wishes of course, but it sure doesn't make them accurate, nor believable to many others who dare to question them.

Quote: Originally Posted by bobnoorduyn View Post

You better watch it, that "stick to your knitting" expression sure got Peter McKay into a $h!t storm.

Yup and of course many here belong behind a garbage truck. By the way, I prefer carpentry, gardening, or reading. Never could knit and not really interested in doing so.
 
DaSleeper
#6317
Quote: Originally Posted by JamesBondo View Post

Yes. I can think of several strategies to win a debate. I have not seen Bluebyrd use any of them.

Birdie's anecdotal evidence and ramblings are waaaaay more accurate than statistics.....
Or the magazines at the grocery counter....
Don't you know that?
 
JamesBondo
#6318
oh goodie! I like Mark Twain quotes:

Quote:

I have carried a revolver; lots of us do, but they are the most innocent things in the world.
- "Mark Twain Put to the Question" interview, Adelaide South Australian Register, 10/14/1895

here's a george orwell quote:
Quote:

“That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”


― George Orwell

 
bluebyrd35
No Party Affiliation
#6319
LOL well most of what I posted about statistics comes from a course explaining using statistics.....So continue on showing me how intelligent the lot of you are.

By the way James, I have offered links to statistics but you will only accept those that agree with your mindset on guns. This becomes very obvious from your quote from George Orwell. You equate owning a gun with democracy. On the other hand I equate Democracy with being able to express my opinion, living as I wish to without needing a weapon to do so.

Quote: Originally Posted by bobnoorduyn View Post

Of course you do, because you also believe what the news tells you, they give you the same information you present. Just think about it for a minute, 374 mass shootings and out of that 425 deaths, that tells me that mass shooters are very bad shots or someone is spiking the stats. You are not told how many incidents occur where criminal activity is already present, how many are actually police involved shootings. Stats have also included shootings in a home where firearms are present in the home when they were actually brought in by the assailants.

Well, it is pretty hard to ignore the truth of a newscast with covered corpses lying on the pavement behind the newscaster. Tonight the news (which I turned on a bit late, and missed the beginning, there was a father upset about his 6 year old son shot dead by a stray bullet, a 17 shot dead in a drive by, and a small gun battle between police and a culprit of some sort, where an unfortunate person not involved was killed. .

As for those stats. Take a minute and think about them. It mentions deaths, not those injured and maimed in those stats. See what I mean about stats?
Last edited by bluebyrd35; Jan 30th, 2016 at 06:40 PM..
 
JamesBondo
#6320
Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post


By the way James, I have offered links to statistics but you will only accept those that agree with your mindset on guns.

I find your comment very dishonest.

I have recently drawn 3 graphs for you to describe what I will accept and won't accept. Not one of them has a 'mindset' designed into it.

To be clear, I want to see evidence that Canadian laws made a difference in Canada. It doesn't have to be statistical evidence. If you have any empirical evidence I would consider it as well.
 
JamesBondo
#6321
__________________________________________________ _____________________________


Here they are again. I'm too lazy to introduce them again,so scroll back to my original posts if you can't remember which one would validate a canadian law, and which one does not.
Attached Images
example.jpg (3.8 KB, 6 views )
example1.jpg (3.3 KB, 2 views )
example3.jpg (3.2 KB, 3 views )
 
bluebyrd35
No Party Affiliation
#6322
This is from the last one I posted which you apparently do not accept. It does have charts which have decent sources, & shows a downward trend, so our laws do seem to have an effect. You do not seriously believe that humans are basically genetically that different in intelligence and/or violent behavior between Canada and the US . What is different though are the laws.

"Homicide rate also following downward trend
Chart 2 - Homicides and attempted murders, Canada, 1962 to 2013
Description for Chart 2
The homicide rate, due to its consistent and reliable reporting to police, is often used as an indicator of the level of violence in a society. In Canada, the homicide rate more than doubled between 1961 and 1975, when it reached its highest point. While there is variance in the homicide rate year-to-year, due to relatively small numbers, since peaking in 1975 the homicide rate has generally been declining.

Homicide was a relatively rare event in Canada in 2013, representing less than 1% of all violent crime. In total, police reported 505 homicides in 2013, 38 fewer than the previous year. As a result, the national homicide rate declined to 1.44 per 100,000 population in 2013, marking an 8% decrease from the previous year and the lowest homicide rate recorded since 1966.

The attempted murder rate also decreased in 2013 to 1.83 victims per 100,000 population, marking a 5% decline from the previous year and the lowest attempted murder rate since 1971.

Similar to the overall crime rate, many countries have also reported declines in their homicide and attempted murder rates in recent years.

Motivations related to the decline
Several factors commonly mentioned by experts as possible explanations for the decline in crime may be related primarily to certain types of crime. For example, multivariate analysis performed by the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics indicated that changes in inflation tend to have the most association with changes in crime that is financially motivated (i.e., robbery, break and enter, motor vehicle theft), while changes in alcohol consumption and unemployment rates are correlated with changes in the homicide rate, and changes in the population's age and gender are associated with changes in the rate of break and enters.

As well, legislative changes introduced in Canada—such as amendments to the Criminal Code regarding sexual assault and the Young Offenders Act, which was followed by the Youth Criminal Justice Act on April 1, 2003 (Department of Justice)—have the potential to affect crime rates by expanding definitions and criminalizing certain behaviours not previously considered a crime, or by decriminalizing others."

It appears simply changing how the law now treats sexual assault; and the young offenders Act and then the youth Criminal Justice Act and how such behaviors will be treated has had an effect. For example many children leave school knowing through ethics classes the difference between right and wrong re sexual assault. Many of these cruelties were sometimes not recognized by the adults raising these children

You do realize keeping guns out of the hands of children, the mentally ill and those with a criminal record is only one part of the law resulting in the lowering of violence in Canada. The law lays down the standards expected by Canadian Society and they are all related and all work together.

It seems there are many in all societies who were never taught what is acceptable in a civilized society. There are still people who beat dumb animals, and their own children, leave them in a car on hot days, drive without learning the road rules or simply disobeying them. Laws set the standards for society. So whether a law sets the standards for the treatment of others or how to lower the death rates on the road, or by guns, they have an affect.
Last edited by bluebyrd35; Jan 31st, 2016 at 09:55 AM..
 
JamesBondo
+1
#6323
Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

This is from the last one I posted which you apparently do not accept.

You posted a link but made no assertions.

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

It does have charts which have decent sources, & shows a downward trend,

There is no chart labeled "Success due to Canadian Gun Laws" therefore you, Blueblue, must be more specific.

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

so our laws do seem to have an effect.

Which laws? effect or affect? on what?

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

You do not seriously believe that humans are basically genetically that different in intelligence and/or violent behavior between Canada and the US . What is different though are the laws.

That is an overly simplistic and inaccurate conclusion. There are many differences between Canada and the US. Some of them being culture, prevalence of inner city projects, standard of living, social welfare. Even the reason why we own firearms are different. Americans own firearms for self defense, Canadians don't(atleast not officially)

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

"Homicide rate also following downward trend
Chart 2 - Homicides and attempted murders, Canada, 1962 to 2013

Cool, show me how the downward trend reacted to any of the Canadian gun laws implemented from 1962 to present? How many lives were saved when the FAC was implement? PAL? mandatory firearms safety training? How about any situation when a firearm was reclassified from non-restricted to prohibited, or non-restricted to restricted? The gun registry?

Did any of these cause even a marginal improvement in trends? Something significant enough to get Wendy Cuckier to transition from rhetoric to soecifics?

Can anyone confidently say " With these new laws, we can show that our murder(by firearm) rated dropped from an average of 180 people per year to 179 per year"

Please, I want to know...did any of this save a life? did any of this stop one bullet?

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

The attempted murder rate also decreased in 2013 to 1.83 victims per 100,000 population, marking a 5% decline from the previous year and the lowest attempted murder rate since 1971.

That is great news, but you still need to tie some of it to Canadian gun laws.


Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

Similar to the overall crime rate, many countries have also reported declines in their homicide and attempted murder rates in recent years.

OMG!!! You aren't suggesting that Canadian gun laws are responsible for an overall crime rate in Canada, when there is a worldwide trend that hasn't been separated from from our stats?


Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

Motivations related to the decline
Several factors commonly mentioned by experts as possible explanations for the decline in crime may be related primarily to certain types of crime. For example, multivariate analysis performed by the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics indicated that changes in inflation tend to have the most association with changes in crime that is financially motivated (i.e., robbery, break and enter, motor vehicle theft), while changes in alcohol consumption and unemployment rates are correlated with changes in the homicide rate, and changes in the population's age and gender are associated with changes in the rate of break and enters.

Wow, this doesn't help your assertion. Canadian firearms laws don't even make the list of "possible explanations". Are you claiming to be smarter than StatsCan analysts?

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

As well, legislative changes introduced in Canada—such as amendments to the Criminal Code regarding sexual assault and the Young Offenders Act, which was followed by the Youth Criminal Justice Act on April 1, 2003 (Department of Justice)—have the potential to affect crime rates by expanding definitions and criminalizing certain behaviours not previously considered a crime, or by decriminalizing others."

Yes, this doesn't help your assertions, too. Because it talks about Changes in criminal code and young offenders act. It states that they have the potential to affect crime rates by changing the definitions. So, after all the expansions in the definitions for firearm related crimes, where are the reductions in homicides?

Some of these gun laws were create 20 and 30 years ago. Simply saying that they had a potential doesn't cut it with historical data. The correct question would be " did it's potential actually happen?"

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

It appears simply changing how the law now treats sexual assault; and the young offenders Act and then the youth Criminal Justice Act and how such behaviors will be treated has had an effect.

What kind of measurable affect has it made?

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

For example many children leave school knowing through ethics classes the difference between right and wrong re sexual assault. Many of these cruelties were sometimes not recognized by the adults raising these children

That lends towards education and culture.

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

You do realize keeping guns out of the hands of children, the mentally ill and those with a criminal record is only one part of the law resulting in the lowering of violence in Canada.

That is truly a feel good statement with no substance.

When were these laws enacted and again please show me the trends that resulted from them?

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

It seems there are many in all societies who were never taught what is acceptable in a civilized society. There are still people who beat dumb animals, and their own children, leave them in a car on hot days, drive without learning the road rules or simply disobeying them. Laws set the standards for society. So whether a law sets the standards for the treatment of others or how to lower the death rates on the road, or by guns, they have an affect.

What is the affect? Where is the affect? How much is affected? Without these sorts of details, you have nothing to support your assertions.
Last edited by JamesBondo; Jan 31st, 2016 at 03:18 PM..
 
bluebyrd35
No Party Affiliation
#6324
Quote: Originally Posted by JamesBondo View Post

__________________________________________________ _____________________________


Here they are again. I'm too lazy to introduce them again,so scroll back to my original posts if you can't remember which one would validate a canadian law, and which one does not.

You do not accept stats of the Government of Canada??? Not my problem!!
 
JamesBondo
+1
#6325
Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

You do not accept stats of the Government of Canada??? Not my problem!!

I accept the stats. They just don't support your assertions. Not my problem!
 
bobnoorduyn
Free Thinker
+1
#6326
Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

Yup and of course many here belong behind a garbage truck. By the way, I prefer carpentry, gardening, or reading. Never could knit and not really interested in doing so.

It's a common East Coast saying and was used as a retort by an East Coast Minister, (of Defense at the time), to a female East Coast Opposition member during question period. She tried in vain to twist it into a sexist remark, it worked for a but, until everyone realized the idiocy of her angst given the banality of the expression. BTW, he was considered Canada's most eligible bachelor and there were rumours that he and then Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice had eyes for each other, but I digress.

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35 View Post

You do not accept stats of the Government of Canada??? Not my problem!!

Sorry, there's a lot of blank space here, I had a a hard time copying this article as it was and it still didn't turn out right, but here goes;

AMERICA’S HIGH HOMICIDE RATE AND OTHER LIES


by Bruce Gold, Canadian Firearms Journal – January - February 2016

https://nfa.ca/canadian-firearms-journal

The high US gun ownerships rate is frequently cited as the causation of the high US homicide rate. Both are presented as extreme aberrations, far above rates in the rest of the world; a sign of US backwardness or the perverse influence of the "gun lobby". This supposed linkage is then used to support an argument for restrictions and confiscations. Some authors claim that the US homicide rates and/or firearms homicide rates are the highest in the world. More sophisticated versions of this argument restrict the highest rates claim to comparisons with the developed world or to "comparable" nations. These claims have gone unexamined for too long.

We can start by noting that there is a general principle in the social sciences that cross jurisdiction comparisons should compare roughly similar jurisdictions to better understand how factors interrelate. Following this practice researchers often restrict their comparisons of the US to OECD or developed nations where the US stands out with both a high homicide rate and a high gun ownership rate.

However, we can note that anti-gunners are not doing policy studies to sort out policy effects between similar jurisdictions. Anti-gunners are arguing that there is a universal law governing the relationship between two factors, civilian gun ownership rates and homicide rates. Of course if such a universal law exists we should see it playing out across all cultures and societies, not just developed nations. If it is a universal law, then legislation and control efforts might modify the numbers and shift the final results but the pattern should remain discernable to researcher’s investigations.

Following on from this reasoning, let’s examine the homicide rates across all countries where there is data available and look for this universal relationship. The first revelation is that the US does not have the highest homicide rate. We find that some 93 countries have higher homicide rates than the US. The highest, Honduras, has a homicide rate of 90.4 per hundred thousand (all numbers from UN Office of Drugs and Crime, 2012 figures). This is almost 20 times the US rate of 4.7. Some 22 countries have rates 4 times as high including Mexico with 21.5. Some 57 countries have rates more than twice as high as the US. The "horrific" US homicide rates start to look a lot different when put into perspective with the rest of the world where the average homicide rate is 8.6, over twice the US rate. Those who sneer at the "violent" US while praising other cultures have some explaining to do. The numbers also explain why anti-gunners want to limit the comparison to a carefully chosen subset of countries where they get the preferred outcomes.

But how do these homicide rates relate to civilian firearms ownership rates? Let us examine the countries with the top 20 homicide rates where we also have firearms ownership rates:

country
homicide per 100,000
Average firearms per 100 people
Honduras
90.4
6.2
Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)
53.7
10.7
Belize
44.7
10
El Salvador
41.2
5.8
Guatemala
39.9
13.1
Jamaica
39.3
8.1
Swaziland
33.8
6.4
South Africa
31
12.7
Colombia
30.8
5.9
Bahamas
29.8
5.3
Democratic Republic of the Congo
28.3
1.4
Trinidad and Tobago
28.3
1.6
Brazil
25.2
8
Rwanda
23.1
0.6
Dominican Republic
22.1
5.1
Mexico
21.5
15
Nigeria
20
1.5
Equatorial Guinea
19.3
19.9
Botswana
18.4
4.9
Namibia
17.2
12.6
average
32.9
7.74

SOURCES: UNODC & Small Arms Survey

If we look at this chart we can see at once that homicide rates are not a determined by the rate at which civilians own firearms. The worst two have very modest firearms ownership rates and the average of all these countries is a mere 7.74%.

Some readers will note that I have not included firearms homicide rates in these comparisons as so many anti-gun authors do. Unlike them, I see no reason to prioritize the means of death over the fact of death. Dead is dead and one wonders at the mental process of those who consider a death by firearm more important, or immoral or ritually unclean than a stabbing or being beaten to death with a tire iron. One might suspect that there is some religious or cult like superstition that justifies the precedence anti–gunners give to one means of death by an inanimate object and consider it more important that other means, also accomplished with inanimate objects – though of a different kind.

There are some other revelations in this little chart and the data behind it. For one, it brings into question the multicultural piety that all cultures are equal. Are we to draw no distinction between Canada’s culture and the incredibly violent culture of Honduras with one hundred and seventy seven

times our homicide rate? Or even more bizarrely, are we to feel morally inferior because we have three times their firearms ownership rate? Perhaps the multiculturalists can enlighten us as to how, specifically, these cultures are "equal" or of "equal worth".

Another revelation is how our little chart explains why Boko Haram terrorists can raid a Nigerian village kidnap hundreds of girls into sex slavery and murder hundreds of villagers with impunity. The gun ownership rate of 1.5 % explains it all. The villagers are completely disarmed and helpless before a murderous military force. What local police protection exists, assuming it exists at all, would be hopeless outclassed and hard put to defend itself much less anyone else. Under these conditions one might conclude that the old Anglo Saxon tradition of a citizen’s militia, which still survives in countries like Canada, was the obvious policy response. The complete absence of any discussion, much less action towards forming a militia is proof that there are powerful people, both in Nigeria and internationally, who quite literally prefer sex slavery and butchery of their citizens to those citizens being armed.

Let us look at the claim of a universal law by examining the homicide rates in the 20 highest gun ownership jurisdictions.

Country
Average firearms per 100 people
homicide rate per 100,000
United States
88.8
4.7
Switzerland
45.7
0.6
Finland
45.3
1.6
Serbia
37.8
1.2
Cyprus
36.4
2
Saudi Arabia
35
0.8
Iraq
34.2
8
Uruguay
31.8
7.9
Sweden
31.6
0.7
Norway
31.3
2.2
France
31.2
1
Canada
30.8
1.6
Austria
30.4
0.9
Germany
30.3
0.8
Iceland
30.3
0.3
Oman
25.4
1.1
Bahrain
24.8
0.5
Kuwait
24.8
0.4
Macedonia
24.1
1.4
Montenegro
23.1
2.7
average
34.6
2.02

SOURCES: UNODC & Small Arms Survey, 2012 data
This second look confirms the findings of the first. That there is no universal law that more guns = more homicide. If anything the relationship is reversed. In the top and bottom 20 countries (with data available) high civilian gun ownership is tied to low homicide rates and low gun ownership is tied to high homicide rates. We can also see the hollowness of the anti-gun argument in Canada. Our low homicide rate of .51 per hundred thousand, far below the world average of 8.6 per hundred thousand, does not justify the crime wave hysteria. We can also note that our finding of more guns = less crime can be identified in the US as well where between 1994 and 2010 the firearms stocks increased by 93 million. Over the same period all homicides dropped by 37%. (ATF and Justice Dept. statistics)
Conclusion
The true state of our violent world is being hidden by studies that conceptualize violence as a problem of the developed world or somehow of a different nature than violence in the rest of the world. This false exclusion seem to imply that somehow human nature is different elsewhere or the use of intentional violence for political power or criminal profit is not a universal problem. Anti-gun activists who insist on demonizing the US firearms policies for high homicide rates without putting it in context are either dishonest of willfully ignorant.
References:
GLOBAL STUDY ON HOMICIDE 2013, TRENDS, CONTEXTS, DATA
UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME, Vienna, 2013.
United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime.
United Nations Small Arms Survey, 2012 data.
Firearms Commerce in the United States, Annual Statistical Update 2012. United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Special Report, Firearm Violence, 1993-2011. U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics May 2013, NCJ 241730.
Canadian Firearms Journal


https://nfa.ca/canadian-firearms-journal
Want to get all the great articles as soon as their published? Become a member now and get 6 issues of the Canadian Firearms Journal. More benefits to being a member here! All this, for a little as $35.00/ year! Get the stories and information you need by joining today. Click here
Last edited by FiveParadox; Feb 1st, 2016 at 03:16 AM..Reason: Pages, and pages, and pages of white space.
 
FiveParadox
Liberal
#6327
Bob, I've edited your post to remove the pages, and pages, and pages of white space. I had to strip most of the BB code from your post (there were 701 font tags), so it has lost some of its formatting (sorry about that). Next time, if a copy-and-paste just isn't coming out right, consider quoting just a bit, and linking to the article instead.
 
JamesBondo
#6329
White space or not. Thanks for that article.
 
bluebyrd35
No Party Affiliation
#6330
Quote: Originally Posted by JamesBondo View Post

White space or not. Thanks for that article.

First ...Statistics are simply a list of events of a particular category. They give no conclusions. Those doing the stats may draw theirs just as you do yours.

Secondly, In 2013 gun violence was the lowest rate since 1969. Canada has a long history of enacting laws to reduce such violence for many years before this. May 13, 2003 Bill C=10A, an Act to amend criminal laws re firearms. In 2005, that Act was amended again. When, through stats, an increase occurs, by looking at the circumstances surrounding those events becomes clear, the laws are changed again.

The laws in the US have become more lenient over the years as have the rising of gun violence. I have drawn my conclusions. Now you cite your conclusions
Last edited by bluebyrd35; Feb 5th, 2016 at 10:26 AM..