Safer WITH, or WITHOUT, Gun Control? USA -vs- UK

I may be mistaken but I do believe that Canadians own more guns per capita than Americans and that it is easier to purchase guns in Canada vs USA. I may also be mistaken but I do believe that Canadians enjoy a far lower crime rate than Americans do. I don't know this for a fact but perhaps the Canadians on here will fill me in either yeah or nay.

Perhaps its just not the guns but the attitude and mindset of the people.

 

No Americans do own more guns then Canadians and can get them much easier. Crime as a whole is higher in the United States, especially violent crime, but non violent crime such as car theft and home robbery are high in Canada

 

United States Guns per 100 residents 90
Canada Guns per 100 residents 31.5

In and out in less than 10 minutes, pretty easy here too.
Don't you have to acquire a "possession and acquisition" license in Canada?

 

I've had people point guns at me, but the guns seemed to have took a neutral position in the exchange.

 

Did knowing that make you feel safer ?

Who were you robbing or vice versa ............

 

Thank you. I have heard that Windsor Ontario enjoys a much lower crime rate then Detroit.

stats anyone ?

 

It does, but it's not fair to compare Windsor to Detroit, they might be across the river from each other, but it's 2 very different worlds. You're comparing one of the worst cities in the US, both in it's crime and its epitome of urban decay to what I just found it is the 36th most dangerous city in Canada

 

i've said this once, and i'll say it again - US citizens have the right to bear arms for a reason, and it is my belief that anyone and everyone that wishes to bear arms does so...legally of course.

it isn't about gun control laws, it's about curving the black market of gun sales, because black market guns are guns used to commit crimes - not ones that have been bought and licensed through retail

 

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes-per-capita

Also for the record, Canada's rape rate is double what America's is


http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_bur_percap-crime-burglaries-per-capita

A higher burglary rate

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_car_the_percap-crime-car-thefts-per-capita

A higher car theft rate

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_ass_percap-crime-assaults-per-capita

and near even assault rate

Canada is not the paradise it once seemed

The fact is people like to say guns lead to America's ridiculous rate of homicide and violent crime, but it conveniently ignores the fact that the good deal of this crime is gang/drug related, and the statistics don't match up to other well armed western countries(Canada, Switzerland, Finland, Czech republic)

 

sounds like my house.

 

exactly. anyone who wants to make guns illegal
1. doesn't care about our rights and wants them taken aay
2. is naive if they think that'll fix everything.

If people really want to get ahold of guns, they will, especially "criminals". its better to have a gun and not need it then need a gun and not have it.

 

New York City has had some of the strongest gun control laws in the US.

Yet in 1992 some 3,000 people were murdered in New York City alone.
Compare that figure with casualty statistics in the Iraq war. War casualties that had our news media all in a twitter with nightly photo slides and tributes to our dead soldiers. Didn't anybody in the media care about dead New Yorkers, or dead Philadelphians or D.C. ers?

Well media could not wring thier hands about gun control in those cities because they have very strong gun laws, so the issue was largely ignored so as not to agitate the people.

New York City's new mayor and new police chief made enforcement of those laws a priority and murder is still decllining in New York to this day. People question agressive police tactics and its prominent failures in persons like Stephen Bell and Amodou Diallo.

Gun control laws are worthless without the political will to prosecute gun criminals, and accept the heat when aggresive police tacticts go wrong. Someting most American politicians lack.

New York City exercises a "monopoly on firearms" its citizens support such goverment monopoly of force.

Guns on the street are not legal guns, but illegaly purchased contraband. Banning guns is easy. Enforcing the ban is the tough part.

 

I'm not for making guns illegal, but I am for enforcing gun control.

 

First off lemme say that I read alot of the posts between Fyrenza, Aristartle Balbus and others and I wanna say that people need to calm the fuck down.

Second, I had a thought (I just posted this thought elsewhere, but it's relevant here as well.) I am very much against G-men intrusion into our daily lives. Stay with me here, this might seem like a tangent, but it's all tied back into the topic. I think the good green should be legalized (I have random drug tests at work, and I can't afford to lose my job over marijuana. And when they spring a random drug test, you don't get a chance to go drink a detox solution or get a bottle of clean urine out of your locker. So I haven't smoked weed in years. Damn.) Cocaine Heroine and those bastards I'm not sure about legalization, but I don't think someone should go to jail because he's an addict. Now, junkies can get their fix of H, coke, MJ, X or whatever the hell they need no probs, right? Right there on the street, right? Now, if we made guns illegal, I predict a bunch of Mexican (And maybe some Dominican, Haitian, Cuban and the rest) companies building a bunch of factories to manufacture guns with the sole idea of smuggling them into the USA. Now, guns would still be legal in these countries, and Washington has no right to tell another country what to do, right? So it's all legal, all good in the hood, until the smuggling operations begin. But we know that's no problem, smuggling people, drugs and guns into the USA, right? So, Obama is gonna come take my .38 away from me. And some criminal is going to buy a Guatemalan made gun on the street and come break into my house. And What am I gonna do? Poke him with a stick?

Can I have my gun back for just a minute, please Mr. Obama so I can shoot this bastard in the face?

 

Oh so this thread has been resurrected?

OK

Well reading through since my last contribution I’d have to say Piney (posts 30) was the most poignant, it points to a cultural mentality that is enamoured of violence. Most of the others seem like posturing and the same old pro-gun slogans without any real argument to back them up.

As I said the US gun debate seems to be a lot more about mentality and attitudes that has the effect of producing much more heat than light.


There seems to be a clash between a self-centred individualist approach and the more community based views of others.

For many pro-gunners it is personal, they want guns so they can protect themselves from the criminal intent of others. There is much talk of doors been kicked in and of family members being hurt, that kind of thing, tales of violence were they are cast in the role of hero.

But others see crime as a community, societal problem, it is not black and white or about hero’s and villains, but of exclusion, poverty, drugs, and hopelessness. Yes I believe someone should be able to defend themselves but I wonder why they fear attack so much, and why don’t they seem to be that much interested in doing something on a community level to tackle those fears?

*

Yes I know people don’t see it as fear but as genuine concern but as pointed out that seems to be part of the mentality and attitudes of those that use the self defence arguemet. They are in fact so unafraid of the society they live in that they like to have a lethal weapon with them to protect themselves from what might happen in it.

Yes I know many will claim they do think about the wider issues, but in my experience they always seem to give much more thought, time and energy to the pro-gun issue than to tackling the reasons they often give for wanting to own guns.

*

To me there needs to be a holistic approach that tackles the perceived threats that make people believe they need the personal protection of a gun, so that they stop feeling threatened and therefore stop feeling they need a gun.

 

I also see statistics are still being fought over well to fill out my earlier comments on that subject -

It is in fact very difficult to compare the crime figures from two different countries because there are so many variables that are not represented in the plain figures.

Both the UN and the Bureau of Justice warn against such comparisons.

The statistics cannot take into account the differences that exist between the legal definitions of offences in various countries, of the different methods of tallying, etc.Consequently, the figures used in these statistics must be interpreted with great caution. In particular, to use the figures as a basis for comparison between different countries is highly problematic.
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/crime_cic...y_seventh.html

Different definitions for specific crime types in different countries: The category in which any incident of victimization is recorded relies on the legal definition of crime in any country. Should that definition be different, and indeed this is often the case, comparisons will not in fact be made of exactly the same crime type. This is particularly the case in crimes that require some discretion from a police officer or relevant authority when they are identified. For example, the definitional difference between serious or common assault in different legal jurisdictions may be different, and this will be reflected in the total number of incidents recorded.
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/crime_cicp_surveys_3.html

Note: BJS cannot validate any data obtained from non-BJS sources, nor does BJS encourage comparisons of national data due to differences in classifications of crimes and methodological differences.
Bureau of Justice Statistics
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ijs.htm

Definitions of offences vary between countries due to both legal differences and statistical recording methods. For example, the USA and Canada do not appear to include minor assaults, intimidation, and threats within their definition of violent crime. However, New Zealand does include these crimes in its definition, and these offences comprise approximately half of all violent crime in this country. Also, New Zealand does not include sexual offences in violent crime, whereas Australia, USA, Canada, England and Wales do.
http://www.justice.govt.nz/pubs/repo...section-2.html

Additionally, the Home Office's July 2000 "Review of Criminal Statistics: A discussion document" indicates how difficult it is compare crime rates between their own forces, let alone conducting international comparisons, stating that amongst the England and Wales' Police:
"There is some confusion in what is counted as a recorded crime......(there are) two contrasting approaches to recording crimes that are currently in use by police forces. The first is a "prima facie" approach, by which the police accept all crime reports at face value and seek to include in their crime figures every apparent criminal event that comes to their attention. The second approach is the more traditional one, termed the "evidential", whereby the police sift and evaluate those events reported to them and only in those cases where they believe on the basis of the known facts that a crime has actually taken place do the police then record a crime. ......the lack of consistency makes it impossible to compare forces in a reliable fashion."
http://www.justice.govt.nz/pubs/repo...section-7.html

**

And there are other issues with comparisons. For example such figures don’t take into account local drives or crackdowns that may boost figures in certain areas. Encouraging rape victims to come forward (with such methods as granting animosity) can lead to higher rape figures, but in fact there has not been an increase in the number of rapes just the number being reported.

Also economic factors have an impact, higher unemployment leading to higher crime rates in those areas associated with financial gain, whereas high employment rates lead to more crimes related to drink as more people have the money to go out.

Demographics can have an effect as Susan Estrich says of the US “Eighteen years ago, the number of young men between the ages of 18 and 25 -- the prime crime years -- was set to decrease steadily for the next decade. Even if you did absolutely nothing, crime was likely to decrease because there would be fewer would-be criminals to engage in it”

The prevalence of insurance is another factor people are more likely to report criminal damage if that is what is needed to make a claim (and we saw how few people had such insurance in New Orleans).

Even the perceived efficiency of the police can be a factor. Some crime rates can be low because people think the police are useless and don’t report the crime but if the police become better at the job people do report those types of crime (again the crime rate hasn’t gone up just the reporting). This means that higher figures can actually point to a healthy and working system and low figures to a sick and dysfunctional system.

Even the prevalence of CCTV cameras can have an effect on crime, fight in bars that at one time were not reported or led to no conviction because of lack of evidence are now being captured on camera and as pointed out to me several times the UK has many more CCTV cameras than the US.

However there was one area that my friend said was less controversial when it came to comparisons (although it still depended on the countries being compared) and that was murder. Homicides are very much more likely to be reported when discovered and there is far less leeway in definition.

“In selected cases, most notably homicide, country to country comparisons are safer, although may still be subject to the drawbacks outlined above. In the case of some categories of violent crime - such as rape or assault - country to country comparisons may simply be unreliable and misleading.”
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/crime_cicp_surveys_3.html

**

As I said “there are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics”

 

There simply IS more crime today than in the recent past. And I don't see it as being influenced so much by a struggling economy as just the fact that 1. There IS more crime and THAT fact seems to make crime more acceptable to many who would eventually become criminals... Like the domino effect.
It grows over time as the population grows. Young folks see other young folks doing dirty deeds and they want in on the action too. Going to jail has actually become a rite of passage (into adulthood?) for many. So many young folks have gone to jail they sit around and compare jail stories and the FEAR of doing time is becoming less and less.
The other reason for so much crime is that there are SO MANY MORE THINGS TO WANT than ever before. From drugs to designer clothing to technological gadgets.

Now, being as how all this crime EXISTS, and we can expect more of it - even people who we thought were our friends may ultimately turn out to be thieves... It's really unfortunate.

Now, lets pretend. I am envisioning any city USA. Massive gun control measures have been implemented. But down in the "hood" or ghetto or whatever you want to call it, the GANGS still have plenty of weapons hidden away for just such an occasion. And with so many of the general population now like sitting ducks, they come out like giant "SLEEPER CELLS" of terrorists and start taking over... Then the cops show up after a while with THEIR big guns (if they are not too afraid of the gangs) and the war starts.
Everyone else either has to RUN and hope they don't get shot, or sit tight and hope they don't get shot... Because they don't have any weapons that stand up to what the gangs and the cops are using. At that point, your weapon could be the only thing to get you out of that mess.
Is there something we can do to keep this all from happening? Because I sure don't know what it would be, other than to stop trying to convince people to give up their source of protection from the guys who WOULD absolutely become a problem in this scenario.

There are plenty of things that we can ALL do to make the world a better place, but none of those things creates a guarantee that ALL violent crime will cease. Actually, making the world a better place can make you a target for those who don't believe in it. It angers some people when others try to get them to change their evil ways. Some folks just like the adrenaline rush and don't feel like giving it up. A real criminal is not about to stop doing what he loves just to please a bunch of "goody two shoes".

Take it from one who knows. You want to live a certain way, peaceably and without trouble. You have no weapons because you don't really WANT any. You have trouble with someone you know, you try to exclude them from your life. It pisses them off, they are not thinking straight to begin with, they come back to "get even". What do you do?

This is reality, and all the SHOULDS in the world don't change it.

 

What has been said above is a classic example of the mentality and attitudes that I’ve mentioned.

One part seems to be a basic acceptence that little or nothing can be done the belief that it nothing can really change.

And the problem is that when people promote the idea that things will not change then many people hear that there is no point in trying to change I mean since things cannot change they think, why bother trying.

It is a mentality that is often encouraged by conservative politicians as a means of upholding the status quo.

I prefer the more optimistic, dynamic and ‘can do’ philosophy of the more progressively minded.

The right so often like to promote the idea that people are alone and therefore rather impotent in the face of issues like crime and should therefore look to themselves rather than looking for collective answers.

I’m more of the view that I’m part of a community, a society, and that such things as crime, are societal problems and that if people work together for the common good that society can be changed for the better.

All that is needed is the political will.

*

Another part is the fear mongering, this time seeming to verge on paranoia - people are just waiting to attack others, even people you know and think of as friends will attack you. So be afraid because things will inevitably get worse and more dangerous.

This is scare mongering – to which I’m sure such people would reply ‘NO it’s just the reality’ – which frankly is just more scare mongering.

Pro-gunners like using scare mongering because it is a good way of promoting guns – ‘it is a darkening and increasingly dangerous world and so people have to have a gun because it is the best or only thing that can hold back that inevitably rising evil.’

It is the gun as a means of suppressing social problems and it seems to me that this can lead to the view that since guns can suppress societal problems then there is little or no need for any other measures, to tackle such problems.

*

But rather than just shrug and declare ‘nothing can change’ (with the implication that there is no point even bothering to try) or even if you try to change things they wouldn’t really change (again the impression that then there is little point trying) why not think of ways to make things better.

As I’ve said many do claim they would want to make things better but they often seem extremely reluctant to talk about them or when they do they seem to be things that could only make things worse.

And as I’ve also said if people were less fearful then they will most likely stop look to guns as a way of allaying that fear.

And as I’ve also said maybe the best way of tackling the problem of guns would have (at first) have nothing to do with guns.

What is needed is a holistic approach.

So to me the best place to start would be with drugs, there legalisation and regulation. Then there are a large number of other social and economic policies that could be tried.

*

Now I’m not saying that a society could be created with no crime, only that if people were less fearful they would be less susceptible to the scare mongering of the pro-gunners, as they come to realise they don’t need a gun because they don’t fear there society and there fellow citizenry.

But to get to that point many Americans would need to change those conservative or even right wing philosophical attitudes and mentalities that so often seem to underpin the debate on guns.

 

What would need to happen to come any where near this utopian ideal would be for MOST people to stop being passive about the problems surrounding them and stand up and say "ENOUGH!". Yes, absolutely, decriminalize drugs! that's a very good start. And stop keeping your mouths shut. If there is something not right, SAY SO, lose the apathy, lose the "group-think" mentality. I dare say if people would stop using ALCOHOL to anesthetize themselves to the ills of the world, this might be easier to accomplish.

And all people who HAVE should try to share SOMETHING with the "have-nots". For example, I know someone who lived in Florida for a while and fed all the homeless people in their neighborhood a Sunday dinner out of their own kitchen once a week. We need MANY people to do things like this, without expecting anything in return.


BUT. Human kind has a tendency at times to revert to their violent and thieving barbaric ancestry, no matter WHAT goodness abounds. I see no way to stop that as it is part of the way humans are.

Oh, there are a miriad of things that COULD be done to improve the situation. There is an EPIDEMIC of "mental illness" for example. Maybe we need to STOP filling everyone so full of LEGAL psychoactive drugs so that they can stop being zombies who cannot think. And maybe we need to begin a transition to a less stressful life in general, that might stop a lot of the mental illness from happening in the first place. Which would include teaching people that the race for money and things is not the way to a healthy mind. Personally, I would rather deal with a "mentally ill" person who was NOT on daily meds, as those meds many times cause a person to get WORSE rather than BETTER. Only the WORST dangerous cases should be medicated and only as long as they NEED it...

And maybe we need to completely alter our thinking in regards to the hows and whys of the LEGAL/PRISON SYSTEM, which works entirely from a NEGATIVE standpoint rather than trying to rehabilitate anyone in POSITIVE fashion. How about giving those prisoners some good old fashioned minimum wage jobs? Let them SAVE money while in prison, pay their child support and have a grub stake put away for when they are released. Give them a new start where they are already in the habit of working for a living and being responsible for themselves. Don't treat them like slaves.

And while we are working at creating utopia, lets completely change our educational system to include MANDATORY classes from Kindergarten on dealing with the ART OF GETTING ALONG WITH OTHERS.

And perhaps having MANDATORY courses for expecting parents-to-be on how to raise your kids without violence (yelling, threatening, spanking), as most people do not know how to do this.

Bringing communities together in a closer fashion, keeping families together in a closer fashion, keeping a "tribal" feeling among friends and family, would go a long way in bringing down the crime rates and fostering a feeling of responsibility towards each other. AND make people feel more secure.


I never complain about something unless I have some ideas on how to fix things. These ideas are VERY BASIC, I could go into extreme detail on how I think each and every issue could work, but it shouldn't be necessary, I think I've made my points.

So, yea, it should be easy enough to create a situation where NOBODY feels the need to have a source of protection from others who don't live such an honorable life...
But we are not there just yet, are we? And I see no signs of our civilization heading in that direction, except in small pockets.

So, what to do in the meantime when the crime rate is going UP and more and more people are doing BAD things to each other? Those "criminals" who everyone keeps saying will be the only ones left with a gun, how do you deal with them IN THE PRESENT climate? HOW??? Please, Balbus, TELL US HOW.

Why do I feel EXPOSED because I have no gun? Oh, I have knives, and a crossbow, and a fire poker and assorted cast iron pans that would make fine weapons, but HOW do I deal with someone who comes to my door WITH A GUN and bad intent??? TELL US. PLEASE. Do not respond to this unless you have ANSWERS.

 

Anyone who doesn't fear their fellow citizens is a fool. Humans are liars, cheats, incredibly self centered, money hungry, raping, weapon wielding, gang joining, drug using, murdering, sometimes mentally disturbed sons of bitches

Yes this sounds horribly bleak, doom and gloom, but it's also realistic