Support for Gun Control in US at its Lowest Level in More than 50 Years

[Centurion1]

I don't see why gun control automatically means a dictatorship. There are plenty of democratic countries out there that have gun control and no gun related crime.

name one country with no gun crimes or murder.

[Beskar]

name one country with no gun crimes or murder.

According to Wikipedia -

0.1 Gun Death per 100,000 population in the United Kingdom
3.5 Gun Death per 100,000 population in the United States

That's a pretty big difference...

[Centurion1]

name one country with no gun crimes or murder.

yeah and britains violent crime rate is 2.5 times higher than the US' and the murder rate has been climbing since 1997 when the total handgun ban was enacted. American murder rates are the lowest in 20 years. i would hope a country which bans guns would have lower gun murders what a completely worthless statistic and point to demonstrate.

[Beskar]

Yet the argument present in the thread from some posters was that: "Gun control doesn't work". Since there is a massive statistical difference, I would argue it does.

Not a worthless statistic or point to demonstrate.

[PanzerJaeger]

Yet the argument present in the thread from some posters was that: "Gun control doesn't work". Since there is a massive statistical difference, I would argue it does.

Not a worthless statistic or point to demonstrate.

And yet, the logic behind it is based on fallacy.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

yeah and britains violent crime rate is 2.5 times higher than the US' and the murder rate has been climbing since 1997 when the total handgun ban was enacted. American murder rates are the lowest in 20 years. i would hope a country which bans guns would have lower gun murders what a completely worthless statistic and point to demonstrate.

Britain has huge ghettoised immigrant populations and an underclass where no one has worked in three generations and most new parents are in their mid to late teens. We banned guns over here because of our social problems, banning guns did not create said problems or the violence that results from them.

[Major Robert Dump]

But the question for the last two posters is were guns saturated in that country inside and out? You cannot issue blanket statements on hgow gun control works without also addressing the amount of guns in the country when the ban is enacted.

Meanwhile, a large proportion of violent crime in the US involves a gun. If guns were banned, a large proportion of violent crime would still involve guns. How long would it take for that number to decrease significantly without making potential victims sitting ducks? Furthermore, prohibition of an item creates a blackmarket, and we can't even secure our borders. Crooks would still get guns.

[Shaka_Khan]

Who said it does?

Someone said that we have the right to bear arms because the first US government wanted the civilians to be able to rebel in case the government becomes bad.

yeah and britains violent crime rate is 2.5 times higher than the US' and the murder rate has been climbing since 1997 when the total handgun ban was enacted. American murder rates are the lowest in 20 years. i would hope a country which bans guns would have lower gun murders what a completely worthless statistic and point to demonstrate.

name one country with no gun crimes or murder.

i love people who cannot grasp the concept of zero gun crime and LESS gun crime......

I doubt you traveled much.

I have lived in NYC. My dad was robbed at gunpoint in the elevator of the building that we lived in. We moved out of NYC soon after our room got buglarized a few weeks later. We moved to a safer neighborhood in New Jersey. I watched news of at least one gun related crime in NYC each day. A lot of it was gang related and you would've noticed this if you were around in NYC or LA at that time. This was long before Gulliani became mayor of NYC and long before gun control in NYC. Even when the crime rate went down during the late 90s and the early 00s, I know of a person in San Francisco who experienced a gun related crime at that time. Imagine how much more worse it was before gun control in the major cities. Before gun control, gun related crime was happening more often in NYC at least from what I saw. The thing is that this really isn't gun control. It's hard to stop the flow of every single gun in a country that has plenty of it. The results of gun control is very different with a country like the UK. The UK has much much less gun problems than the US does. It does have crime. Now imagine if criminals owned guns in the UK. It would get a lot worse because guns make it easy for anyone to hurt someone.

What's the point of owning a gun in the US? Are you going to carry it around everywhere you go? A lot of the gun related crimes in the US happened in areas where a normal person wouldn't or wasn't allowed to carry a gun. Would you carry a gun in school or in a summer camp in the USA? No because you'd probably have the cops come over and aim at you pretty soon. The fact is that even the US of A isn't a guns-for-everywhere-for-an-innocent-civilian country. There are a lot of places in the US where you'd rather not carry a gun, but crime can still happen there. The right to bear arms hasn't protected a lot of American citizens because most Americans wouldn't own a gun. It just made it easier for a criminal to own a gun. In countries like South Korea, Japan, Singapore, etc., it's close to impossible for a criminal to own a gun. I'd really say 100% impossible because I know from what a lot of people from there told me and I have traveled to those countries for a long time. I haven't heard of a gun related crime in those countries for over a decade. Believe me, it's possible not to have a gun related crime for that long. Did you know that Cambodia banned guns? Cambodian civilians were urged to give their guns away to the government. Crime went down significantly over there. I traveled there to Angkor Wat by scooter and I felt much safer there than when I did in LA, NYC and San Francisco. The only thing I was concerned about were the mines that probably weren't found yet, but even that wasn't much of a big concern because the city areas and the tourist areas of Cambodia are safe from mines now.

Try walking the streets of Detroit or Washington D.C. I don't mean cruising around the neighborhood, making a few stops at the safer regions and return back home quickly. Then try walking the streets of Singapore, Tokyo or Seoul. You'll notice a huge difference.

[Major Robert Dump]

The previous post shows a lot about people's un-informed attitude, particularly the last paragraph.

"whats the point? are you carrying it everywhere?" Yes, I carry a gun everywhere I go. It does me no good leaving it in a closet. Yes, there are places we are not allowed to carry guns, like federal property and schools, and no, the "majority" of gun crimes in the US do not happen in places where you cannot carry a gun. Bot sities you mentioned, DC and Detroit, had gun bans. Oklahoma City does not, and the differences in the crime rate is staggering

[Shaka_Khan]

Yes, I carry a gun everywhere I go. Yes, there are places we are not allowed to carry guns, like federal property and schools, and no, the "majority" of gun crimes in the US do not happen in places where you cannot carry a gun.

I was saying that most Americans wouldn't own a gun. It's these whom the criminals would pick on. I wasn't talking only about you.

Bot sities you mentioned, DC and Detroit, had gun bans. Oklahoma City does not, and the differences in the crime rate is staggering

Then explain to me why cities like Tokyo, Seoul, Singapore, etc. have very low crime? These are huge cities. So I don't think the right to bear arms have to be a factor to decrease crime.

If you read my earlier post thoroughly, you'd see that I said that it's hard to stop the flow of guns getting into the US cities because there's a lot of them in the US already. That's why we still see gun related crime in these cities. The entire country needs to ban guns, which I admit would be hard to do in a country as large as the US is and which already has guns. I added that there's a big difference in NYC before and after the gun ban over there. NYC is much safer than it was when I was a kid. NYC is much larger in size and population than Oklahoma City so I don't think Oklahoma City is a good comparison. I'm sure you'd think differently if you traveled and experienced other places more.

Tbh, I find it sad that you need to carry a gun to feel safe. I want you to experience the feeling of being safe enough not to carry a gun everywhere you go. I like how I can trust any stranger even when that stranger knows that I don't have a gun. There are many places out there where you could experience this even in many parts of the US. I have experienced many of these places and I'm experiencing one right now. Surprise surprise, I never carried a gun everywhere I went even in the dangerous areas of certain US cites.

[Centurion1]

Someone said that we have the right to bear arms because the first US government wanted the civilians to be able to rebel in case the government becomes bad.




I doubt you traveled much.

I have lived in NYC. My dad was robbed at gunpoint in the elevator of the building that we lived in. We moved out of NYC soon after our room got buglarized a few weeks later. We moved to a safer neighborhood in New Jersey. I watched news of at least one gun related crime in NYC each day. A lot of it was gang related and you would've noticed this if you were around in NYC or LA at that time. This was long before Gulliani became mayor of NYC and long before gun control in NYC. Even when the crime rate went down during the late 90s and the early 00s, I know of a person in San Francisco who experienced a gun related crime at that time. Imagine how much more worse it was before gun control in the major cities. Before gun control, gun related crime was happening more often in NYC at least from what I saw. The thing is that this really isn't gun control. It's hard to stop the flow of every single gun in a country that has plenty of it. The results of gun control is very different with a country like the UK. The UK has much much less gun problems than the US does. It does have crime. Now imagine if criminals owned guns in the UK. It would get a lot worse because guns make it easy for anyone to hurt someone.

What's the point of owning a gun in the US? Are you going to carry it around everywhere you go? A lot of the gun related crimes in the US happened in areas where a normal person wouldn't or wasn't allowed to carry a gun. Would you carry a gun in school or in a summer camp in the USA? No because you'd probably have the cops come over and aim at you pretty soon. The fact is that even the US of A isn't a guns-for-everywhere-for-an-innocent-civilian country. There are a lot of places in the US where you'd rather not carry a gun, but crime can still happen there. The right to bear arms hasn't protected a lot of American citizens because most Americans wouldn't own a gun. It just made it easier for a criminal to own a gun. In countries like South Korea, Japan, Singapore, etc., it's close to impossible for a criminal to own a gun. I'd really say 100% impossible because I know from what a lot of people from there told me and I have traveled to those countries for a long time. I haven't heard of a gun related crime in those countries for over a decade. Believe me, it's possible not to have a gun related crime for that long. Did you know that Cambodia banned guns? Cambodian civilians were urged to give their guns away to the government. Crime went down significantly over there. I traveled there to Angkor Wat by scooter and I felt much safer there than when I did in LA, NYC and San Francisco. The only thing I was concerned about were the mines that probably weren't found yet, but even that wasn't much of a big concern because the city areas and the tourist areas of Cambodia are safe from mines now.

Try walking the streets of Detroit or Washington D.C. I don't mean cruising around the neighborhood, making a few stops at the safer regions and return back home quickly. Then try walking the streets of Singapore, Tokyo or Seoul. You'll notice a huge difference.

Don't assume things about people you have no idea about. I live in NYC for one, in the Bronx which im almost certain was likely worse than where you lived. I have lived in 5 different states throughout the US. I have been to Seoul, Singapore, and Tokyo (doesnt count was at the airport). Seoul's safety is more a product of the south korean culture than anything else, tokyo has some of the worst organized crime in the world and singapore is one of the strictest countries on earth. Oh and I spent quite a few of my teenage years 30 minutes away from DC.

also do you realize how much easier it is to control guns in places like japan, singapore, and the uk.......... simply because of geography alone.

[PanzerJaeger]

Someone said that we have the right to bear arms because the first US government wanted the civilians to be able to rebel in case the government becomes bad.

Yes, but who said 'gun control automatically means dictatorship'? No one did, apart from the straw man you seem to be arguing against.

By the way, as I alluded to earlier, using comparative circumstances of different countries as a basis for policy positions (in this case crime rates and gun control) involves a number of fallacies; so many, in fact, as to render such arguments virtually worthless. Heavy reliance on anecdote is even worse. What you need to provide are statistics from the same test group both before and after a gun ban has been implemented. Those stats still ignore a lot of headwind-type trends and other potentially misleading information, but are at least somewhat more demonstrative.

Here are some examples of the kind of information that, while not perfect, is a bit more useful.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Shaka_Khan]

I live in NYC for one, in the Bronx which im almost certain was likely worse than where you lived.

You're the one who's making an assumption.

I have lived in 5 different states throughout the US. I have been to Seoul, Singapore, and Tokyo (doesnt count was at the airport). Seoul's safety is more a product of the south korean culture than anything else, tokyo has some of the worst organized crime in the world and singapore is one of the strictest countries on earth. Oh and I spent quite a few of my teenage years 30 minutes away from DC.

If you lived in those countries then why did you posted these earlier?

name one country with no gun crimes or murder.

yeah and britains violent crime rate is 2.5 times higher than the US' and the murder rate has been climbing since 1997 when the total handgun ban was enacted. American murder rates are the lowest in 20 years. i would hope a country which bans guns would have lower gun murders what a completely worthless statistic and point to demonstrate.

This sounds like someone who never left your neighborhood. I'll repeat what I said to MRD: I find it sad that you need to carry a gun to feel safe. I want you to experience the feeling of being safe enough not to carry a gun everywhere you go. I like how I can trust any stranger even when that stranger knows that I don't have a gun. There are many places out there where you could experience this even in many parts of the US. I have experienced many of these places and I'm experiencing one right now. Surprise surprise, I never carried a gun everywhere I went even in the dangerous areas of certain US cites.

also do you realize how much easier it is to control guns in places like japan, singapore, and the uk.......... simply because of geography alone.

I did mention that it would be hard to ban guns in the US because of geography and the US is already saturated with guns. But I believe it's possible. There are countries like Cambodia that banned guns when a lot of the Cambodians owned these. A lot of the civilians in China (which is larger and more populous than the States) don't own guns. I felt pretty safe there.

Yes, there are places we are not allowed to carry guns, like federal property and schools, and no, the "majority" of gun crimes in the US do not happen in places where you cannot carry a gun.

I mentioned schools because I saw some gun crime in US schools on the news. Even before Columbine, some schools had metal detectors at the entrance to ban guns because gun crimes were happening. Gun crime in a school is unheard of in places like the UK, South Korea, Japan, Singapore, etc.
I mentioned that a normal summer camp in the US bans guns because someone in this forum mentioned the need for everyone to own guns after that tragedy in Norway happened. I also saw someone claim that this wouldn't happen in the US because of the right to bear arms.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Yes, but who said 'gun control automatically means dictatorship'? No one did, apart from the straw man you seem to be arguing against.

By the way, as I alluded to earlier, using comparative circumstances of different countries as a basis for policy positions (in this case crime rates and gun control) involves a number of fallacies; so many, in fact, as to render such arguments virtually worthless. Heavy reliance on anecdote is even worse. What you need to provide are statistics from the same test group both before and after a gun ban has been implemented. Those stats still ignore a lot of headwind-type trends and other potentially misleading information, but are at least somewhat more demonstrative.

Here are some examples of the kind of information that, while not perfect, is a bit more useful.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Judging from those graphs, banning guns had no ill effect on the level of crime.

[Shaka_Khan]

Yes, but who said 'gun control automatically means dictatorship'? No one did, apart from the straw man you seem to be arguing against.

Someone mentioned the Constitution having the right to bear arms so that the people can rebel against a dictatorship.

By the way, as I alluded to earlier, using comparative circumstances of different countries as a basis for policy positions (in this case crime rates and gun control) involves a number of fallacies; so many, in fact, as to render such arguments virtually worthless. Heavy reliance on anecdote is even worse. What you need to provide are statistics from the same test group both before and after a gun ban has been implemented. Those stats still ignore a lot of headwind-type trends and other potentially misleading information, but are at least somewhat more demonstrative.

Here are some examples of the kind of information that, while not perfect, is a bit more useful.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

You're only showing the US and the UK. The US still has guns outside those cities, which makes it difficult to ban guns in those cities. And the UK still has a lot less gun crime than in the US.

I'm saying what I experienced in the US and my different experience in other countries that clearly has zero gun worries.

I'm not picking a side just to annoy you. I was angry that a person I knew when I was a kid was shot. I was angry when I saw a girl run into the lobby and cry that her boyfriend was shot. (Both of these happened many years ago). It's ridiculous and a humiliation that innocent people go through this. In both of these cases, the crime wouldn't have happened if guns were harder for the criminals to obtain. Having been to safer areas, I don't think it's normal if there is a situation that makes the general population need to own guns. That situation just shows how dangerous a country is because of guns.

[Shaka_Khan]

name one country with no gun crimes or murder.

There are plenty in Europe and Asia that have no gun crimes. Note that guns make it easier to hurt a person. Having no guns would make that crime more unlikely to happen. I'll name a few countries of a lot of countries that have no gun crime: UK, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Cambodia, Vietnam, China, etc. I for one know for certain that the civilians in UK, Singapore, South Korea, Japan and Cambodia don't own guns and there is no gun crime there. I also know for certain that the murder rate in those countries are much much lower than the US.

[Centurion1]

i love people who cannot grasp the concept of zero gun crime and LESS gun crime......

[ajaxfetish]

There are plenty in Europe and Asia that have no gun crimes. Note that guns make it easier to hurt a person. Having no guns would make that crime more unlikely to happen. I'll name a few countries of a lot of countries that have no gun crime: UK, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Cambodia, Vietnam, China, etc. I for one know for certain that the civilians in UK, Singapore, South Korea, Japan and Cambodia don't own guns and there is no gun crime there. I also know for certain that the murder rate in those countries are much much lower than the US.

Data taken from this 2002 WHO report, listing numbers for the most recent data-year available between 1990 and 2000.

Gun-related homicides

UK: 45 (1999)
Japan: 22 (1997)
South Korea: 19 (1997)
Singapore: 0 (1998)
Taiwan: no data
Cambodia: no data
Vietnam: no data
China: 3 (1996, data only for Hong Kong)

45 ≠ zero
22 ≠ zero
19 ≠ zero
3 ≠ zero

I'm not sure whether those countries with no data were excluded because there was no firearm homicide or because they chose not to report their data to the WHO. Considering there was data for Hong Kong, but not for the rest of China, I wouldn't be surprised if at least some cases were due to a lack of transparency. Also, these figures cover only homicides, not other gun crime. Singapore had 5 gun-related suicides in that year, if you include those as instances of gun crime, and I have no idea what the figures might be for armed robbery or any other form of gun crime. As Centurion pointed out, there is a difference between zero gun crime and less gun crime. Try to be accurate in the claims you make. If you want to make a case that many countries have lower gun crime rates than the U.S., you're on firm ground. If you claim that countries like Japan, South Korea, and the UK have zero gun crime, you're simply wrong.

Ajax

[Beskar]

45 ≠ zero
22 ≠ zero
19 ≠ zero
3 ≠ zero

...If you want to make a case that many countries have lower gun crime rates than the U.S., you're on firm ground. If you claim that countries like Japan, South Korea, and the UK have zero gun crime, you're simply wrong.

That is being rather pedantic though, he is evidently meaning relative to the numbers in the United States.

Using your own source:
United States of America (1998) 11802

Now let's compare it to the quoted, lets take the highest one.
UK: 45 (1999)

11802 versus 45.

Why "zero" is incorrect, he is simply using the literary device to insinuate that it is effectively 'nothing'/'zero' in comparison to the United States to make forth his point and considering the difference, I feel there should be some fair usage. It isn't as if the United States number was 68, then that would be raising eyebrows at his use of that particular literary device.

[ajaxfetish]

Well, I'm feeling rather like a pedant tonight, and I was getting frustrated by Centurion and Shaka_Khan talking past each other on this point. As I said, lower gun crime? Sure. Obscenely lower? Why not. Zero? False.

Ajax

[PanzerJaeger]

That is being rather pedantic though, he is evidently meaning relative to the numbers in the United States.

Using your own source:
United States of America (1998) 11802

Now let's compare it to the quoted, lets take the highest one.
UK: 45 (1999)

11802 versus 45.

Why "zero" is incorrect, he is simply using the literary device to insinuate that it is effectively 'nothing'/'zero' in comparison to the United States to make forth his point and considering the difference, I feel there should be some fair usage. It isn't as if the United States number was 68, then that would be raising eyebrows at his use of that particular literary device.

If one compares those numbers to population size, they might as well both be 'zero' if we're using the term figuratively. The dirty little secret that those quoting stats from other countries never mention is that the chance of getting into a violent crime in the US involving a gun may be statistically higher than in the UK or the Asian nations mentioned, but it is still incredibily small. The anecdote expressed in this thread seems to be more of a function of a fearful imagination than reality. Is anyone really deathly afraid to ride a scooter in San Francisco for fear of getting shot?

The question is: Do we want to remove a fundamental freedom many Americans cherish and enjoy to to move the number from e-5 to e-7? (And that assumes that gun control does reduce gun crime, which has not at all been established.)

[Centurion1]

its not my fault if people simply want to ignore what i say and twist it to their own devices. I said zero, when I say zero i imply a value of 0 or a value of nothing if you prefer. I reiterated it multiple times.