London murder rate rises higher than NY City

But the vast majority of mass murders are not.

 

True. Bombs are the likely alternative method if people who are bent on mayhem cannot get their hands on guns.

 

This thread is not about the american gun problem.

 

True. I'll remove the line in my post that dealt with America.

 

I'm just saying if you wanna discuss that in depth in here, with arguments that we on this forum have already been through countless times (not your fault ) at least do it in one of those threads. But don't be suprised when people tell you they have already been over your points there too for like at least 3 times (that's one of the rasons how those threads got so lengthy ) and don't feel like repeating themselves

 

TA

Can you explain your thinking here because it doesn’t seem to make sense in context

Been through many times before

I’ve seen knife fights in one the person without a knife just ran away from the one with one. In the other the person without a knife just stepped behind a table and the other couldn’t reach him with their knife and then the man without picked up a chair and used it like a lion tamer in a circus and pushed the knife guy back who then ran away.

Neither ploy would have worked if the knife had been a gun.

And that’s the thing guns are on the whole far far more lethal than other hand held weapons.

In the UK we have a gang problem but actually deaths are rare because most attacks involve knives not guns.

 

Now in that case, the guy prepared by sneaking more than twenty semiautomatic rifles with bump-stocks and 100-round magazines into a hotel room, and then cutting loose. Have you ever heard of a guy killing 32 people with pistols?

 

Gun availability has only a slight impact on homicide rates.

If there are many more guns in a society, the homicide rate will probably tick up slightly, but not significantly.

If there are far fewer guns in society, the homicide rate will probably drop slightly, but not significantly.

 

Ding ding ding

You're starting to get it!

 

TA

LOL and you get that from where

Ok to you there is not difference between a blunt pen knife and a fully loaded glock hey lets have a duel ten paces you have the knife I’ll take the glock

Hell I’m beginning to think of you as my new best friend

 

From statistics on homicide rates.

You posted some of them here:
Justice Thomas: 2a Won't be Touched

Your list was a bit sparse. But even that short list is enough to demonstrate the low correlation between gun availability and homicide rates.

 

TA

Sorry that still doesn't make much sense can you explain your thinking?

 

The fact that statistics show very low correlation between gun availability and homicide rates means that there is a very low correlation between gun availability and homicide rates.

 

LOL Sorry still makes no sense can you at least try ad put up a rational argument? What statistics are you using and then explain what you mean, don't just come out with pointless statements of what you think, explain.

 

Well what do you suggest? Do you want all guns banned or what?

 

Says who?

Thread title is London murder rate rises higher than NY City

So anything to do with murder in UK or US and its causes would be on topic

 

There is low correlation between gun availability and homicide rates.

Referring to statistics is perfectly rational.

You posted some of the stats on homicide rates here:
Justice Thomas: 2a Won't be Touched

It was the middle set of stats of the three sets that you listed.

Your list was a bit sparse. It should have at least included Taiwan. But even the seven countries that you listed are enough to demonstrate the low correlation between gun availability and homicide rates.

You can get stats on private gun ownership rates here:
Estimated number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia

What I mean is: Gun availability has very little impact on homicide rates.

 

Ok to you there is not difference between a blunt pen knife and a fully loaded glock hey lets have a duel ten paces you have the knife I’ll take the glock

OH for fuck sake Storch

I hope the right wingers that complain of gun issue arguments going circular take note of this.

Thing is that honest and rational debate is supposed to be linear – someone presents an argument, the presentation or statement is criticised, then the next step is the person addressing the criticisms or if unable to do so adapting or dropping that argument or taking back the statement.

The problem with many – as here - is that they don’t even fucking bother to read the post of those they are debating with they just repeat over and over and over the same fucked up crap

I and many others have already given the answer to that fucking question a thousand times you would have to be completely blind or incredibly dishonest or never read anything anyone else posted to say you’ve missed it.

Storch please go and read the fucking post

 

TA

You make statements but have produced on explanation as to why you have reached your conclusion beyond just claiming something is so because you say it is so

That makes no rational sense – why do you seem unwilling or unable to actually explain your thinking?