An interesting statistic to discuss.

[OpSomBlood]

The total homicide rate in Japan (where guns are completely illegal) is 1.3 per 100,000. The rate in the U.S. of homicides by weapons other than firearms is 3.2 per 100,000.

So if all guns magically disappeared tomorrow, we'd still have almost three times the murder rate of Japan.

[MrBenchley]

1. Yeah?

What is the US murder rate with firearms?

"if all guns magically disappeared tomorrow, we'd still have almost three times the murder rate of Japan"
Well yippee-fuckin-doo! Let's have MORE guns then and see if we can't hit 6ten or fifteen times their rate!

[OpSomBlood]

2. I'm not celebrating the high rate.

But it is evident that American society is violent in general, and that the guns are merely a tool used by violent people.

The problem is bigger and more complex than guns.

[CO Liberal]

3. But Guns Make The Problem Worse

Whethey you pro-gunners want to admit it or not.

[MrBenchley]

5. You will notice

that the only solution the pro-gunners have is to make the country more of an armed camp...and that the politicans supporting this rancid and idiotic creed are those who are exacerbating the root causes of violence.

[slackmaster]

11. Straw Man

n/t

[slackmaster]

9. Not necessarily so, and very hard to prove

Australia implemented stricter gun controls several years ago. The rate at which guns were used in murders decreased as expected, but the overall homicide rate has remained the same.

I know it's "reasonable" and "common sense" to assume that with fewer guns there would be fewer gun-related crimes, but that does not mean the overall crime rate is fed by the existence of guns.

[MrBenchley]

4. Sure you are...

"The problem is bigger and more complex than guns"
And more guns is a foolproof way to make it even worse.

Even more to the point, show me any pro-gun politician who is doing anything but exacerbating the root causes.

[Wickerman]

6. Didn't think I would ever have to give you this award, Op

but you are today's winner of The Gungeon's Gratuitous Misuse of Stat to Frame Your Argument award.

[OpSomBlood]

7. Please elaborate.

Can you explain where my statistics are distorted or dishonest? Or was that a "hit and run"?

[Wickerman]

10. You know stat

I wouldn't call them dishonest or distorted, I would call them throwing an apple and an orange against the wall to see if they stick.

-You are comparing non-homogeneous groups.
-We don't know enough about the circumstances of the crimes to make judgment as to what weapons were INVOLVED, just what weapons completed the criminal act.

By the way, I think your hypothesis is correct, but your methodology lends nothing to your argument. Without testing, your conclusions are spurious at best. There's not enough data to complete a test, so what is an effective argument (differing cultures) gets invalidated immediately because of the attempt to frame it statistically. The fruit stick, but they don't become similar.

[CO Liberal]

14. Another Follower of the John Lott/Mary Rosh School of Statistics

"if the facts don't support your position, bend them."

[OpSomBlood]

15. I'm not sure I understand why it is invalid.

You claim that they are two non-homogenous groups (citizens in Japan and citizens in the U.S.). However, these groups both are of first-world industrialized and technologically advanced societies. What additional homogeneity are you looking for?

As for my spurious conclusion, I'm not sure I track there, either. In fact, if my data is invalid in either direction, it is against my argument because I am comparing all homicides in Japan (including those with guns) to non-gun homicides in the U.S.

If I compared non-gun homicides in Japan to non-gun homicides in the U.S., it would only further reinforce my point.

American society is notably more violent than Japanese society, and I think my statistics demonstrate this. Even when disregarding gun violence, we are significantly more violent.

I'm not arguing that less gun crime would be a bad thing. But we need to address our violence problem, not the tools the violent people choose to use.

[CO Liberal]

16. I Disagree....

I believe that as part of our need to address our violence problem, we MUST discuss the tools the violent people choose to use. They are totally intertwined and completely inseparable components of a common problem.

[OpSomBlood]

18. Why don't we concentrate on separating violent people from the tools...

...rather than separating the tools from everybody?

The next time you get a splinter, are you going to amputate your arm? It would certainly take care of the splinter problem.

Or perhaps cutting down all trees is the answer.

[CO Liberal]

20. When Has Anyone On This Board Advocated Total Confiscation???

I haven't. That's just the old slippery-slope/straw-man pro-gunner line that has no bearing on anything.

[slackmaster]

21. Speaking of slippery slopes and strawmen

Yesterday in a GD thread matcom expressed concern that if we allow the AWB to expire the gun lobby will start on its next major goal: Making it easier to buy machineguns.

:freak:

[CO Liberal]

22. I Can See The Pro-Gun "Logic" There

After all, if the public can be convinced that semi-autos won't harm them, why not full-autos???

:shrug:

All the more reason to renew the ban, IMHO.

[slackmaster]

23. Then to extend YOUR logic down its apparent slope

You'd ban all semi-autos, right?

[OpSomBlood]

24. The only way to eliminate the "loopholes" is to ban all semi-autos.

So yeah, one has to assume that that is the ultimate goal.

[CO Liberal]

25. Nope

Just regulate them so those who SHOULD have them can, while those who should NOT have them are kept gunless.

Remember (for the umpteenth time), gun control does NOT equal gun confiscation.

[RoeBear]

32. But then why do you...

...argue in favor of the AWB? It has nothing to do with keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them but has everything to do with banning guns.

[CO Liberal]

47. I'm Not Saying People Shouldn't Have ANY Guns, RoeBear

I'm saying that some guns need to be more tightly regulated than others. If you want a handgun to protect yourself, that's your right. But you don't need an Uzi to scare away burglars....

[OpSomBlood]

48. Is "scare away burglars" the only reason to own a gun?

n/t

[CO Liberal]

49. What Are The Reasons For Owning an Assault Weapon???

Hmmmmmm????

:shrug:

[OpSomBlood]

50. Target shooting and small-game hunting.

n/t

[CO Liberal]

53. Which Can Be Done Using Other Gun Types, Right????

[FatSlob]

54. Participating in the National Matches at Camp Perry, Ohio.

You must have an AR-style firearms to compete. The matches are held on military property on Lake Erie, under the direction of a government agency, the ODCMP. Also, they can be owned for varminting, self defense, three gun matches, the fun of shooting cheap surplus ammo, desire, fun, short range and long range matches, to look at, to collect militaria, or any other lawful purpose.

[CO Liberal]

56. It Sounds Like With the Exception of That One Event at Camp Perry...

...all those activities can be done with other types of guns.

Sorry, but I still see no compelling reason to let the ban expire.

[RoeBear]

57. Do you think that if the AWB was extended and strengthened...

...that it would remove people's desires to commit crimes? Or would they substitute other weapons?

[CO Liberal]

60. It Might Make It Harder To Commit Some Types of Crimes...

...like assassinations and drive-by shootings.

[beevul]

62. Please elaborate...

how a strengthened and renewed AW ban might make it harder for:


1. assassinations to be committed. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but have most of firearm related assassinations been committed with a bolt action rifle or handgun?

Unless you mean by "strengthened" to include as "assault weapons" -bolt action hunting weapons, like the .308 winchester for example, in which case, we can all look forward to another 4 years of some idiot in chief, like the one we have now.

2. Can you explain how an assault weapon is required for a drive by shooting? Since we aren't talking about fully automatic weapons, how is an assault weapon better suited for a quick pass past a house, in which there really isn't time to unload many rounds(relatively speaking) with any gun. We are talking about a drive by, right? Not a "stop, park, unload as much as a perp feels necessary, start vehicle and leave" type shooting.(which would be equally facilitated by many clips as it would be by hi-cap clips in any weapon.)

Would you include ANY semi-automatic rifle as an assault weapon?

I guess in a nutshell, please elaborate on exactly what you mean by strengthened, and what types of weapons would be included under a new "strengthened" ban, that aren't already.

[CO Liberal]

63. OK...

...I was talking off the top of my head. True, assassinations and drive-by shootings can be done with other types of guns, but imagine the carnage that would result if some sicko let loose with an AK-47 in Times Square on a busy afternoon.

I still don't see any good reason for expanded distribution of these guns. Sorry.

[FeebMaster]

64. Would a sicko letting loose with an AK-47 in times square be worse

than a sicko letting loose with any other semi-automatic rifle?

[beevul]

67. So far so good.

"imagine the carnage that would result if some sicko let loose with an AK-47"

Lets be clear here though. Do you mean a semi-auto AK-47, or a fully auto?

If you mean fully auto, the AW ban doesn't cover that, and they are already heavily regulated.

If you mean semi-automatic, there are literally dozens semi-automatic rifles that fire the 7.62 x 39 cartridge, which are currently legal.

like this one:



Under a strengthened ban, would you propose to ban them all?



"I still don't see any good reason for expanded distribution of these guns."

As I said above, there are dozens,which are currently legal. Anyone who can pass a background check can buy one brand new. How can distribution be expanded beyond that?

[MrBenchley]

68. What's hilarious is that

these guys want to make the corrupt gun industry's scofflaw attitude the reason why the law should not be strengthened...it's like saying "well, Enron swindled people out of millions so let's get rid of securities laws."

[OpSomBlood]

73. "Imagine the carnage!"

Those three words sum up the pro-AWB movement succinctly.

Semi-automatic rifles have existed and been widely owned for about 100 years. Why are they a threat to humanity now all of a sudden?

[RoeBear]

51. I appreciate your positive RKBA statement...

...I really do.

"If you want a handgun to protect yourself, that's your right."

But weren't you defending certain localities when they banned ownership of handguns recently?

[billbuckhead]

55. The more of these super weapons that are in the market place

the more will end up in criminals hands. It's obvious and logical.

[OpSomBlood]

58. What makes them "super weapons"?

Do you even know?

[billbuckhead]

59. That criminals and gunwackos want them so bad

[MrBenchley]

61. Of all the arguments the gun nuts peddle

this "they're no different than ordinary guns" might be about the stupidest...

Gee, if they were no different, the bullets for brains bunch would be able to muddle along without them...

[MrSandman]

65. Eloquence...n/t

[Wickerman]

26. Sorry, got called away - but you can't make that statement with those

stat.

Op, ya can't compare the pops because they are not heterogeneous samples. We don't have control of all the independent variables. What you appear to be saying is that Americans as a whole are more violent than the Japanese.
Again, I don't dispute that statement, but I can't let your stats demonstrate it. On the face, you are correct, but that is all ya got, face validity.

Because we do have entirely different cultures, and entirely different views of violence and defense of self and property, of course we will see difference in violence rates.

Look at these two points:

1. Were we to remove guns from the equation we would see a higher rate of violence. True.
2. Because we would see that higher rate of violence (sans guns) guns are not responsible for our violent culture. unknown.

We can't know #2. The culture of the gun in the US could be what drives the violence. Perhaps the whole premise of the 2nd Amendment is what perpetuates our violent society. We can't say. We have no control over the independent variables in this type of study.

Your argument would be better framed by noting that that Japan has lived by the principles of Buddhism and Shinto for centuries. The US is primarily Christian. The difference in those religions are night and day.

Buddhism and Shinto are religions that dedicate followers to lives on non-violence.

The US, on the other hand, was founded on a seat of violent overthrow, expanded through violent struggle with native populations.

This difference has permeated the societies for years. However, since the 1800's, as Japan underwent massive social change, and as Japan has Westernized, their violent crime rate is increasing.

Your argument is more accurately made as an opinion, or a suggestion of causation, not as a statistical study.

[slackmaster]

12. Is that sculpture made of bronze or chocolate?

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, chocolate.

[Wickerman]

17. Chocolate

Regrettably, its a trophy from the 1930's (mmm, really tasty) - we have no budget to work with here.

:shrug:

[slackmaster]

19. It would make a great master for a chocolate mold

Bon apetit!

[WMliberal]

8. i'd take three times the rate of Japan

over our current rate ANY day of the week.

[MrBenchley]

13. By the way

Japan not only had very strict gun control, but has been tightening it up recently. You don't suppose that their overall murder rate is so low because shooting deaths are not commonplace there, do you?

[billbuckhead]

27. Gee you don't think living in a gun crazed society has anything

to do with more crime in general. Btw do you have a link, I bet there's a bunch of other information in there that crushes your own extraordinarily weak argument.

[OpSomBlood]

28. If the argument is so crushable...

Then the onus is on you to crush it. I merely presented it.

[billbuckhead]

29. Wheres the link?

I get the impression you don 't want to show the extraordinary low amount of gun crime in Japan.
Furthermore, in war situations the Japanese were incredibly violent so it's not some genetic thing against violence that separates the nations. The big difference is the unregulated easy availability of guns which make the USA almost third worldlike in it's violence.

[billbuckhead]

30. Give me the link, I want an agreed on statisical base to debate

So many times the gunner side disputes the statistics, so if we have an agreed on statistical baseline, we can debate.

[billbuckhead]

31. OpSomBlood doesn't want to reveal Japans 0.02 murder rate

per 100,000 by guns. A shocking huge difference that can only be explained by the lack of guns in Japan.

[billbuckhead]

33. One has to believe Americans are 180 times more evil than the Japanese

That's the difference in murder by guns between Japan and the USA, 3.72 murders by gun per 100,000 in the USA vs only 0.02 in Japan.

Most of us have some Irish in us. Does anyone believe Americans are 120 times more violent than our Irish cousins because the difference is 120 times more gun murder in Ireland vs in the USA. What could be the difference? Could it be the USA is the ONLY large advanced nation with close to unlimited legal access to guns. you don't even have to be in a well regulated milita like Switzerland or Israel.

<http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html>

[RoeBear]

34. So if there were no guns

our impulse to kill would be gone?

[billbuckhead]

35. The International evidence doesn't prove that, but gun homocide is

much much lower in Japan, and slightly more in the EU where gun laws aren't as strict and since the USA is the only major advanced nation with this close to unlimited access to guns the correlation is very strong.

[MrBenchley]

36. You'll notice op generally doesn't want much truck

with facts.
You won't find many facts at all among the bullets for brains bunch...and if they've got a link, it's generally a link to some right wing cesspool.

[billbuckhead]

37. It's always checkmate on them when the facts are presented by worldview

When the Swedes, Dutch, Finns. Japanese, Germans, Irish, British, Kiwis, Aussies, Spanish, French, Belgians, Malaysians, Canadians, Danes, Norse, Greeks all disagree wiuth your policy they might be right. The statistics are so overwhelming, it's reveals the huge tragedy and terrorism that are America's combination of promiscuous gun regulations and lax enforcement enforcement of the weak laws there are.

[MrBenchley]

39. And you'll notice

that lies about the supposed "bloodbath" in the UK or Australia pop up with monotonous regularity.

It is a disgrace to let the corrupt gun industry set public policy, and the GOP has allowed it to.

[billbuckhead]

40. Unregulated "assault" rifles are basically a slow motion terrorist attack

More and better guns can only make for more and "better" violence. A sniper can paralyze a city or kill an important irreplaceable leader. Terrorists can cause a big traffic accident on an 8 lane hwy and walk up the stranded traffic with fast firing weapons with big clips killing hundreds of people or....................

[MrBenchley]

41. Exactly so...

There's no reason to have these on the market AT ALL.

[OpSomBlood]

42. It seems you've done more hypothesizing on this than the terrorists.

"A slow motion terrorist attack" is the most absurd description of a semi-automatic weapon I've ever fucking heard. Tell me, where have these creative attacks been the last 100 years? You know, throughout the history of semi-automatic rifles?

Goddamn Chicken Little over here.

[billbuckhead]

43. Easy way to destabilize a nation, Flood them with cheap powerful weapons

Think Somalia or Afghanistan or Columbia

[FeebMaster]

44. Somalia, Afghanistan, and Columbia have more problems

than a flood of cheap weapons.

[Columbia]

72. Yeah, like paying $2.35/gal from gasoline!

I'd welcome a flood of cheap weapons! It's such an expensive hobby these days.

[Columbia]

71. Hey, leave me out of this

[billbuckhead]

66. I'm declaring victory on this one. I wished I could say it was challenge

180 times more gun homicides in America than Japan vs 3 times the non-gun homocides between the US and Japan. There can be no rebuttal. Only shame. Only shame for nation with the most lax gun regulation of advanced nations that won't make the commitment, has't got courage, to stop this slow motion terrorism. The domestic gun crowd and it's lobby kills more Americans in one year then all the non-gun terrorism in this nation since 1776. I was very proud of John F. Kerry when he started his campaign on that aircraft carrier with a cannon shot over the bow of the NRA and it's whoring for more dangerous guns. I was very proud of Wes Clark when he said that if someone wanted an assult rifle they should join the military.

[Romulus]

75. cherry pick all you want

We could go pull out the Mexican, Brazilian, or *gasp* Northern Ireland firearms murder statistics, which would suck the wind out the anti-gun-owners' sails when they crow about "tough gun laws reducing gun murders."

BTW: Japan beats out ALL the EU countries for firearms homicides, even with the EU's supposed "glorious" firearms control laws.

[billbuckhead]

76. How dishonest. This shows the pathetic extremes gunners sink

to for their tin god. I'm cherry picking? All the countries with higher gun homocide statistics than the USA have weak enforcement of law or are at WAR. Japan tolerates no guns and Europe tolerates a lot less with stringent regulation, so it's obvious that Japan has the least gun homocide of advanced nations, though regular Ireland is close. Bring on any statistics you want, you lose when the big picture is looked at.

[DU GrovelBot]

38. ## Support Democratic Underground! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v2.0
==================
 
The time now is 9:11:38PM EDT, Monday, May 10, 2004.
 
There are exactly...
6 days,
2 hours,
48 minutes, and
22 seconds left in our fund drive.
 
This website could not survive without your generosity. Member donations 
pay for more than 84% of the Democratic Underground budget. Don't let
GrovelBot become the next victim of the Bush economy. Bzzzt.
 
Please take a moment to donate to DU right now. Thank you for your support.
 
- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot

Click here to donate.

[Wickerman]

52. stay on topic

dammit.

[DoNotRefill]

45. Japan's murder rate is underreported.

I understand that "murder-suicides" there tend to be reported as dual suicides.

[billbuckhead]

46. Any proof to make up for a 180 TIMES higher gun homocide rate?

BTW, something makes me want to trust the Japanese stattistics more than ours.

[DoNotRefill]

69. Nope...

just as there's no reason that their non-gun related homicides are so much lower than ours, too. If our homicide problem is caused by guns, how do you explain THAT?

[iverglas]

70. if the dog hadn't stopped

If our homicide problem is caused by guns, how do you explain THAT?

And if someone, anyone, had said the US homicide problem is caused by guns, then s/he would need to answer that question.

I do expect more of you than to engage in this sort of reduction of other people's words.

.

[billbuckhead]

74. They're 2/3's lower without guns&180 times lower with guns

EU countries mirror this as do Autralia and New Zealand. It's obvious guns have something to do with it.