Mon Jul 30, 2012, 11:23 AM

samsingh (10,394 posts)

It's time to unemotionally look at the real facts around the impact of gun control

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by SunsetDreams (a host of the General Discussion forum).

Here's a very interesting read with real statistics:

Time to face facts on gun control
by Fareed Zakaria

Look at the map below. It shows the average number of firearms per 100 people. Most of the world is shaded light green – those are the countries where there are between zero and 10 guns per 100 citizens. In dark brown, you have the countries with more than 70 guns per 100 people. The U.S. is the only country in that category. In fact, the last global Small Arms Survey showed there are 88 guns for every 100 Americans. Yemen is second at 54. Serbia and Iraq are among the other countries in the top 10.

We have 5 percent of the world's population and 50 percent of the guns.

But the sheer number of guns isn’t an isolated statistic. The data shows we compare badly on fatalities, too. The U.S has three gun homicides per 100,000 people. That’s four times as many as Switzerland, ten times as many as India, 20 times as many as Australia and England.

Whatever you think of gun rights and gun control, the numbers don’t flatter America.

I saw an interesting graph in The Atlantic magazine recently. A spectrum shows the number of gun-related deaths by state. Now if you add one more piece of data – gun control restrictions – you see that the states with at least one firearm law (such as an assault weapons ban or trigger locks) tend to be the states with fewer gun-related deaths.

link:
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/27/time-to-face-facts-on-gun-control/

17 replies, 1125 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Cannot reply in locked threads

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

17 replies	Author	Time	Post
It's time to unemotionally look at the real facts around the impact of gun control (Original post)	samsingh	Jul 2012	OP
One would think this would be obvious to most people.	HopeHoops	Jul 2012	#1
K/R	moondust	Jul 2012	#2
So what about the facts that show a 50% decline in murder and manslaughter deaths due to firearms	hack89	Jul 2012	#3
And do you think that's because we have so many guns? N/T	mcranor	Jul 2012	#6
No. The causes of violent crime are complex	hack89	Jul 2012	#7
LOL	bongbong	Jul 2012	#9
As soon as you can present some actual evidence to the contrary	hack89	Jul 2012	#15
LOL	UnrepentantLiberal	Jul 2012	#12
The fact remains that our murder rate has decline to 1950 levels	hack89	Jul 2012	#14
Why did you not post this in the RKBA forums?	ProgressiveProfessor	Jul 2012	#4
Why not homicides per 100,000?	clffrdjk	Jul 2012	#5
It is also a matter of common sense	nadinbrzezinski	Jul 2012	#8
Host lock in 3.....2......1.....	aikoaiko	Jul 2012	#10
Interesting	kctim	Jul 2012	#11
Yep.	UnrepentantLiberal	Jul 2012	#13
IBTL and LOL @ "...getting automatic weapons has become easier."	slackmaster	Jul 2012	#16
Locking	SunsetDreams	Jul 2012	#17

Response to samsingh (Original post)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 11:39 AM

HopeHoops (47,675 posts)

1. One would think this would be obvious to most people.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to samsingh (Original post)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 11:39 AM

moondust (8,361 posts)

2. K/R

Good clip. Saw it yesterday on GPS. Gun control sure works in Japan where their constitutional default is that nobody can have guns, (then they apparently make a few exceptions where needed).

Also of note, Piers Morgan had Michael Moore on last night for an hour to talk about the gun issue.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to samsingh (Original post)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 11:42 AM

hack89 (21,550 posts)

3. So what about the facts that show a 50% decline in murder and manslaughter deaths due to firearms

since 1992? We have dropped our murder rate to 1950s levels and they are still dropping - and you consider this a failure?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to hack89 (Reply #3)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:01 PM

mcranor (55 posts)

6. And do you think that's because we have so many guns? N/T

Last edited Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:03 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to mcranor (Reply #6)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:03 PM

hack89 (21,550 posts)

7. No. The causes of violent crime are complex

All we can say is that more guns did not cause more gun violence.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to hack89 (Reply #7)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:10 PM

bongbong (5,436 posts)

9. LOL

> All we can say is that more guns did not cause more gun violence.

Still a lie, no matter how much you repeat it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to bongbong (Reply #9)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:40 PM

hack89 (21,550 posts)

15. As soon as you can present some actual evidence to the contrary

instead of your unsupported "logic" we can talk.

Here are the FBI crime stats - feel free to make your case:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to hack89 (Reply #7)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:27 PM

UnrepentantLiberal (11,700 posts)

12. LOL

Is there a way to shoot someone without pulling a trigger?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to UnrepentantLiberal (Reply #12)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:39 PM

hack89 (21,550 posts)

14. The fact remains that our murder rate has decline to 1950 levels

and that there are fewer shootings and fewer gun deaths. Those numbers are continuing to decline.

Basic, undisputed facts. Care to discuss them?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to samsingh (Original post)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 11:45 AM

ProgressiveProfessor (22,144 posts)

4. Why did you not post this in the RKBA forums?

It is where such threads belong

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to samsingh (Original post)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:01 PM

clffrdjk (153 posts)

5. Why not homicides per 100,000?

Now I am not an anti gun guy but your argument would do a heck of a lot better if you used homicides per 100,000 then linked a high murder rate to the high number of guns. But when you need to cherry pick statistics like "gun homicides per 100,000" to anyone who notices it sounds something like this

Sam has 4 red cats
Katie has 4 blue cats
katie is 1,000,000x more likely to have a blue cat run away than Sam is.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to samsingh (Original post)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:05 PM

nadinbrzezinski (121,689 posts)

8. It is also a matter of common sense

but that left the building a while ago. I think it left with Elvis.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to samsingh (Original post)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:12 PM

aikoaiko (16,629 posts)

10. Host lock in 3.....2......1.....

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to samsingh (Original post)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:18 PM

kctim (3,575 posts)

11. Interesting

So urban areas with tougher firearm laws have fewer gun-related deaths than rural areas without such laws?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to kctim (Reply #11)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:36 PM

UnrepentantLiberal (11,700 posts)

13. Yep.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to samsingh (Original post)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:42 PM

slackmaster (60,567 posts)

16. IBTL and LOL @ "...getting automatic weapons has become easier."

Cannot reply in locked threads

Response to samsingh (Original post)

Mon Jul 30, 2012, 12:48 PM

SunsetDreams (8,300 posts)

17. Locking

Locking

Statement of Purpose

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news. No conspiracy theories. No whining about DU.

Please consider posting in Gun Control & RKBA group.

Thanks for your understanding

SunsetDreams
GD Host

FYI Skinner announcement

Skinner (56,085 posts)

You can once again enforce the prohibition against gun threads in GD.

I think it is clear that members' interest in discussing Guns has died down, and we are now focusing on other issues. (Thanks, Mitt!) So you can once again start enforcing the prohibition against gun threads in GD.

Of course, if you do want to lock any threads about guns, you should probably discuss it in here before you do.

FWIW, my personal opinion is that some narrowly-targeted discussion of the tragedy in Colorado might still be on-topic for GD. But we no longer need to provide an open environment in GD for all gun discussion.

Cannot reply in locked threads

General Discussion (Forum)