Also, doing some legit research, I wanted to see the UK’s violent crime rate compared to ours. According to this research was is from 2009, the UK was the most violent country in the EU, with 2,034 crimes per 100,000 people. The US? 466. So the UK has more than 425% of the US’s violent crimes per 100,000 people.
Lets ban guns guys!
[/quote]
“Crimes” are quote loosely defined.
According to Wiki and the older data seen in other documentaries there are around 10,000 homicide gun related fatalities a year.
I hardly hold any value to that articles numbers without better description and measures.
Wait a minute… You’re not going to give my article any credit, so you link me to Wikipedia to prove your point?
My article clearly said all violent crimes, which include murder, assault, robbery and burglary, etc…
My article:
Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world’s most dangerous countries.
I never mentioned anything about gun-related violence because that’s not the issue here. We’re talking about a country that doesn’t allow every day citizens to have guns, thus making them more vulnerable to criminals. Would you break into a house where there was a possibility the owner had a gun and could legally kill you? Most likely not. Would you break into a house when you assume the owner is a law abiding citizen and does not own a gun? Chances are much greater. Of course gun related violence is down in the UK, but we’re talking all types of violence which would’ve prolly made sense to you had you actually read my article.
I have read your article and if you actually read the wikipedia you would see all the sources linked at the bottom. The day and age of making fun of wiki as a source is long over, certain schools even allow it as an academic source.
Did you even read your own article?
But criminologists say crime figures can be affected by many factors, including different criminal justice systems and differences in how crime is reported and measured.
New Home Secretary Alan Johnson is to make his first major speech on crime today
In Britain, an affray is considered a violent crime, while in other countries it will only be logged if a person is physically injured.
There are also degrees of violence. While the UK ranks above South Africa for all violent crime, South Africans suffer more than 20,000 murders each year - compared with Britain’s 921 in 2007.
Another article about 10,000 yearly homicides.
According to the FBI, in 2008 14,180 people were murdered in America.
Also there are about 30,000 injuries by a gun that didn’t end in deaths. Don’t you think most of those homicides and discharges that didn’t kill are well a crime?
Then there are plenty of statistics which show that some of the most lenient gun law states have some of the highest gun related deaths per capita.
Not to mention the amount of US school shootings vs UK school shootings if you want to go deeper into that. No guns in UK no school shootings in UK. Guns in US resulted in around 147 school gun homicides in the last 10 years alone.
Now before you go on, I’m all about looser gun laws, myself having as many guns as I want and for second amendment to defend myself but stating that Britain is more dangerous and has a higher crime rate because they don’t have guns is outrageous. Not to mention above you are solely trying to blame one party for these situations when it should be the entire government. Plenty of anti gun Republicans in history too.
Unless you want to argue that yes, them not having guns is the source of all evil and you single handedly solved the problem of the entire countries crime rate - give them all guns, I’m sure all statistics will drop down to 0, because of course there are no violent states in the world where people have access to guns.
Russia also has a gun ban on private ownership so statistics should be similar to UK then no? While homicide rate in Britain is low, Russia is worse than US, 2 or 3 times over.
This whole issue is a bit more complicated than just blaming liberals for anti gun laws and saying guns make you safer. You’re starting to sound like a Alabama born guy with a wife/sister living in a trailer home.
Talking about the issue and fighting for a change to make gun laws disappear is one thing, but trying to point finger at somebody on this complicated issue as I hear many gun owners do isn’t helping anybody or isn’t true either. It’s about as smart as saying that Sun revolves around Earth, ignoring the complicated scientific equation that proves that wrong.
ORLY? What schools have you been to where a professor allows Wikipedia as a source? Oh, just some school you heard about on the internet? Oh ok, must be legit then. If you’re gonna argue that, at least have the decency to link me to Wiki’s source directly, not Wiki as a blanket source.
Also there are about 30,000 injuries by a gun that didn’t end in deaths. Don’t you think most of those homicides and discharges that didn’t kill are well a crime?
Then there are plenty of statistics which show that some of the most lenient gun law states have some of the highest gun related deaths per capita.
Not to mention the amount of US school shootings vs UK school shootings if you want to go deeper into that. No guns in UK no school shootings in UK. Guns in US resulted in around 147 school gun homicides in the last 10 years alone.
Vlad, I don’t know if you’re having reading comprehension issues, or just enjoy showing ignorance, but did I EVER say anything about homicide rates or gun crimes? No. I simply said violent crimes, which include homicide (which is the only crime you’re willing to look at statistics for), assault, robbery/burglary, etc… You’re trying to break it down further into one specific type of crime in which I’m not even trying to argue because that is not what the argument was about in the first place. Sure, the US has more murders and gun crimes and I’m sure that’s because we allow our citizens to have the freedom to own guns without jumping through too many hoops, but can it be proven? Nope.
Now before you go on, I’m all about looser gun laws, myself having as many guns as I want and for second amendment to defend myself but stating that Britain is more dangerous and has a higher crime rate because they don’t have guns is outrageous. Not to mention above you are solely trying to blame one party for these situations when it should be the entire government. Plenty of anti gun Republicans in history too.
I’d like to see where in this argument I said anything about blaming one political party for all of this. Oh, that’s right, because I didn’t. A for effort. F for execution. And also, because you are arguing that their violent crime rate has nothing to do with their gun laws, I’m assuming that you can PROVE it has nothing to do with them? Please, provide me proof from a legitimate source. Good luck in your search.
Unless you want to argue that yes, them not having guns is the source of all evil and you single handedly solved the problem of the entire countries crime rate - give them all guns, I’m sure all statistics will drop down to 0, because of course there are no violent states in the world where people have access to guns.
Russia also has a gun ban on private ownership so statistics should be similar to UK then no? While homicide rate in Britain is low, Russia is worse than US, 2 or 3 times over.
This whole issue is a bit more complicated than just blaming liberals for anti gun laws and saying guns make you safer. You’re starting to sound like a Alabama born guy with a wife/sister living in a trailer home.
Talking about the issue and fighting for a change to make gun laws disappear is one thing, but trying to point finger at somebody on this complicated issue as I hear many gun owners do isn’t helping anybody or isn’t true either. It’s about as smart as saying that Sun revolves around Earth, ignoring the complicated scientific equation that proves that wrong.
Did I ever say that if everyone had guns, there’d be no crime? Nope. Thanks for playing though. There will ALWAYS be crime, no matter how loose or strict gun ownership laws are. Just like you will always argue with people when you don’t fully understand the argument to begin with.
You’re a lost cause to argue with. You’re so stubborn and refuse to see any reason to compromise, and then when you realize you’re wrong, you try to turn the debate into something it isn’t.
Go to SUNY Albany. Where did I EVER say it’s “schools I heard about on the internet?” Stop putting words in my mouth. I can use Wiki as a source all I want, if you don’t like it a source feel free to find other sourced disproving it. Until then, I and the rest of the world use Wiki as one of the primary sources that sum up other sources in a easy to read and digest way.
Cossey “Fruits are bad for you”
me “Oranges aren’t bad”
Cossey “Where did I say Oranges are bad? I know it’s a fruit, but you aren’t allowing to use blanket statements by breaking it down further”
Where did I say that their crime rate has nothing to do with their gun laws?
When did I ever say that you said that? Nope I didn’t. Thanks for playing. I mentioned a hypothetical counter point by you on an extreme, which also didn’t make sense.
Then stop arguing with me.
And it’s cute how you say I turn a debate into something that it isn’t as you’re bringing my personal self into a debate about guns and politics as part of your argument.
What IS your point then? You said UK has a gun ban and has a higher violent crime rate, followed by a sarcastic “Lets BAN Guns guys!”
Blanket statements are fun, I’ll just join that game.
Adults in their 20’s with guns are extremely dangerous and attribute to the most homicides in the country as they aren’t responsible or mature and make the rest of the gun owners look bad, encouraging anti gun legislation.
In 2008 The Independent reported that there were 42 gun-related deaths in Great Britain, a 20-year low.[50] However, in late 2009 The Telegraph reported that gun crime had doubled in the last 10 years, with an increase in both firearms offences and deaths. A government spokesman said this increase was a result of a change in reporting practices in 2001 and that gun crime had actually fallen since 2005. Chris Grayling, the Shadow Home Secretary (an opposition party spokesperson), attributed the rise to ineffective policing and an out-of-control gang culture
Studies show that gun crime has gone WAY up since the ban on guns in the UK yet the government comes out and says it’s not actually up but just a change in how everything is reported.
You guys can argue until you’re both blue in the face, one person is going to post an article saying gun crime is up even after the ban and five minutes later someone is going to post another article saying the previous one is wrong. This is a debate that has been going on for YEARS.
To further prove my previous point, heres an article showing the exact opposite is true. If you look hard enough you can find statistics to back up any arguement you want on this subject.
This, I was just going to mention that. The states with the strictest gun laws have some of the highest crime rates and DC is even worse then all states
This is why I want to move to VT, but the wife isn’t game for it.
The problem with this arguement is there are too many variables in the equation. Each society is different and you can’t say with any level of specificity whether or not changing the one finite thing in this case firearms legislation will do to crime rates. That being said I think responsible citizens should be able to own whatever firearms they want.
I agree.
The entire population of Vermont is about half of the size of the population of Albany.
Different mentalities and attitudes in each area.
The one thing I dont like is that Vermont has no permits what so ever for conceal carry or pistol ownership, so Vermonts conceal carry or open carry is not recognized. Take NY for example, since you have an act of congress and a parting of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans to go through when getting your conceal carry its recognized in many other states. Alaska will even issue a permit if you ask. That doesnt exist here.
I believe there are just over a dozen states that recognize NY permits. It is a pain in the ass to get and expensive. I just have to get one more reference form filled out then all my paper work will be in.
Even the mentality difference from Plattsburgh to Albany is crazy. Up here firearms ownership is the norm, down there where I’m from you bring up the subject people look at you like your crazy for owning firearms.
I literally think here, to own an NFA firearm we have to go through less shit than you guys do to get a conceal carry permit. I know my friends cousin just bought a M1919 or M1917 or whatever it is (30 cal version of a Ma Deuce).
FAR too many negatives about living in VT to move there just to be able to be easily armed at all times. What, are you going to pull a pistol on a cow?!:haha
