President Barack Obama made the following statement about “gun violence”: ‘There’s no advanced, developed country on Earth that would put up with this. This is becoming the norm and we take it for granted in ways that, as a parent, are terrifying to me… If public opinion does not demand change in Congress, it will not change.” “Gun violence” is a propaganda term. It emphasizes violence committed with guns as somehow worse than violence committed with bombs, axes, nerve gas or machetes. This is done to push for political outcomes that would otherwise not be defensible or acceptable . . .
Let us put that aside, and assume that Barack Obama really meant that “there is no advanced, developed country on Earth that would put up with this,” meaning the level of unjustified violence in the United States. For the sake of simplification, I will assume that he means unjustified homicides.
What countries does this put outside of Barack Obama’s definition of “advanced, developed countries”? Clearly, it means any that have a higher level of unjustified homicides than the United States, because by his definition, the United States is higher than any other “advanced, developed country”.
These would include Russia, Ukraine, Estonia, Brazil, Mexico, Jamaica, South Africa, Venezuela, Ecuador, Paraguay, and Chile, among others. Rather interesting that Russia is not considered “advanced” or “developed” by Barack Obama.
The article from which the chart was taken by the Crime Prevention Research Center has a much more sophisticated analysis of the “advanced and developed” scam. It’s just another way to cherry pick data to arrive at predetermined conclusions.
We could as easily make up another category, such as “New world counties” or “Large, multi-ethnic countries”, both of which would show that the U.S. does rather well in comparison to the others. The United States is much closer to Russia in its scope and diversity than it is to Finland. International comparisons are quite complex; simplistic comparisons mislead more than inform.
It is culture that is the predominant factor in homicide rates, not the availability of a certain weapon type. If the culture trusts the justice system and believes that the rule of law will prevail, homicide rates drop like a rock. In the United States there are significant subgroups that do not trust the rule of law, and that is where most of the homicide occurs.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Gun Watch
Obamas too stupid to realize those murder rates in the US skyrocketed when he became president. He has been a success at destroying jobs, the economy and raising the murder rate.
…what? No it didn’t. It’s been declining since he became President, since Bush became President, and since Slick Willy became President. The murder rate is not increasing.
And the economy tanked before Barry took office. That too.
Yeah, I’d be leery of falling into the same fallacy as the “Bush is responsible for all our problems” crowd.
What is Bush not responsible for? He started two unnecessary wars, and the economy was heading downward during his watch.
The so-called “party of responsibility” doesn’t want to take any responsibility lately.
Iraq perhaps, and the Congress voted for that as well, Afghanistan however was very necessary. The economy did fine under Bush. It’s ironic that during the Bush years, the Left always said the economy was terrible, then when the bubble blew in 2008, it was said we had been in a bubble (where things seem more prosperous than they are). So really the economy seemed fine to anyone who looked at the numbers. Consumption rates were up, unemployment was at a healthy level, economic growth was at a healthy level, etc…so really for most of the Bush years, the economy was fine.
However, when the financial bubble popped in 2008, things went south. Bush had nothing to do with that though. There is not any particular policy he supported that contributed to that.
Except for that huge deficit that Bush ran to run two wars and which wasn’t even in the official budget. Face it – Clinton left Bush with a solvent economy and Bush stuck President Obama with a huge deficit and a rapidly falling economy.
What a load of BS. Those so called surpluses were fake.Republians forcethrough a capital gains cut which resulted in a huge increase in tax revenues from stock sales. Clintons people claimed that level of tax revenues would continue for at least 10 years and even increase. It was all a lie and people like you believed every word of it. And don’t forget that worthless SOB prevented the investigation of the 911 hijackers allowing them to complete their plans and training in order to murder thousands of americans. What about the first World Trade Center bombings. He ignored it and said it was a law enforcement matter, and he refused to take custody 3x of Bin Laden resulting ahain in 911. Lets not forget he murdered innocent civilians in foriegn countries by launching over 1000 cruise missiles to send messages to everyone, he murdered the people in waco, cause millions of peple to lose everything they had because of the tech bubble, caused the current economic crises by forcing banks to loan money to people who couldnt pay it back, etc etc etc. Get the koolaide IV drip out of your arm.
Had we not gone into Iraq the 1st time, probably the 2nd time and Afganistan would not have happened. We had no business being involved in middle east affairs. Those people have been killing each other for thousands of years. Let them have at it ! ! ! !
DBM –
How old are you Einstein? You English grammar is horrible, your spelling worse. Your conspiracy theories are right out of the craziest reichwing web sites.
How can anyone possibly take you seriously?
Sorry John but I am dyslexic and do not always catch my bad spelling and grammar because of it. However it does have its positives. Although not done intentionally the bad spelling always pulls out dirt bags like you who cannot prove their points and have to go on personal attacks to avoid having to defend their position.
@ Virgil: You don’t seriously believe what you typed there did you? If so, I’m surprised you didn’t go all the way to the America’s war against the Muslim Barbary Pirate States in the early 1800’s.
JonG,
the seeds for the mortgage crisis and the recession it caused were all laid down under Clinton who created a bubble of bad debt. The economy did well under Clinton due to the fruition of Reagan era policies, and Clinont did nothing but set us up for disaster.
As far as the two wars those were also 100% Clinton. He let Bin Laden and AQ do their preparation unmolested which caused us to have to g into Afghanistan.
In Iraq Clinton killed 500,000 Iraqi infants in Americans name with his own WMD sanctions. Bush cut to the chase, and effectively until Obama decided to surrender it and throw away our victory.
John G., you ignorant slut, The 2000 recession started a full 5 months prior to the election and 7 months prior to Bush’s inauguration. Of course it is Bush’s fault, troll boy
First? Eh, no, thats what I get for blathering on…
Personally, even though I find the guy reprehensible, politically, and despicable personally- for his moral decisions- going to Vegas to raise money from a thug party, while his personal representative, the Ambassador is getting dragged thru the streets and gang raped, by Islamofascists…
I’m at the place where I believe that any discussion about what he says and does about guns, or anything, for that matter, only gives him credibility, by addressing anything coming out of his mouth, as being worthy of debate by reasonable, informed, and responsible citizens.
Even Democrats are realizing this POTUS is an empty suit, at best a talking dummy for some very Anti-American interests.
I like what someone else said here- never interrupt a Progtard when they are in the process of destroying themselves and the agenda.
But, I get the need to educate those not so familiar with the ground, and the circumstances, and clicks are good, too. I’m more interested in the way ahead, and what to do to prepare for that.
My take on that- do what we can now to take the Senate- money and time spent working for candidates that can win, to replace Democrats and vulnerable RINOs. Then pump up the TeaParty supporting new blood by electing them in the House, as the grass roots for the conservative ideals sweeping the country, as polls show increasing. That automatically takes care of gun-rights, as 2A is a basic natural human right also enshrined in our Constitution, with laws growing slowly in the right direction thanks to patient hard work, grassroots up, and support by entities like NRA and SAF and states groups.
Slow, tedious, hard work, but it works, in this Republic of ours, and dont forget that organized hard work over the years is exactly how the progtards got where they are today, so the longer we take B1tching about it, instead of doing the work, the longer it will take to git-r-done…
Sorry Dean- got distracted by first paragraph.
To answer the lede- no Russia is not an advanced country.
Its a thoroughly corrupt oligarchy, borderline third world country economically, led by a brilliant power manipulator, with a vision for a resurgent Russia, on outmoded Tsarist dreams. It wont end well, but in the mean time Putin can do a lot of mischief in the world, just as Joe Stalin did, internally, and worse- by leveraging trouble overseas, as is obvious now in Syria and Ukraine. He wont be held account by his own people, nor do we have a Reagan to call it like it is, standing in the wings in the GOP.
So get ready for a rough ride for 10 years or so. Hate to sound apocalyptic, but some of those theories about the End Times are getting spookier and spookier as current events in that part of the world converge…
It’s like I tell my congregation…”I’m not saying we’re living in the End Times, but every day is one day closer.”
I’m with you on Ukraine, but what trouble in Syria are you referring to? Last I checked, the pertinent trouble in Syria is that it was just used as a staging ground for a bunch of ultra-extremist Islamist thugs to take over the neighboring country, and those thugs were previously funded and armed by US (and now, after taking over some more US arsenals in said neighboring country, are driving around on Abrams tanks armed with M4 carbines).
You’d think we (the U.S.) would have figured out by now that when you give arms to people that openly dislike you, those arms are highly likely to be used against your interests. The fact that the people on both (or all if more than two) sides of a nasty conflict don’t like you will not change this rule, even if they pretend to like you for a little while to get stuff from you. We’ve had this blow up in our face (literally) for 30 years now.
In Syria, the strange part is that Assad did not even particularly hate US. His dad might have, but he looked much more reasonable in many ways.
AIDS kills more, and ruins the lives of more people, annually around the world than guns, but homosexual sex, in the right hands of course, is equal to marriage.
Not sure what your getting at but…. In Africa, AIDS is primarily spread by heterosexual sex. You are jumbling a common mode of spread of HIV in US with low mortality in US, and the high mortality seen in Africa with heterosexual spread. But, whatever.
Live in the reality you create in your mind if that makes you feel better.
Men that claim to get AIDS though heterosexual sex are lying.
While I don’t doubt that many man contract HIV through homosexual sexual contact, the fact that women contract and die from HIV clearly indicates that it spreads through heterosexual contact as well.
Sex and marriage are the same thing in the eyes of the law? I know some bigamists I should warn to turn themselves in…
Homicide, gun murder, violence etc. — vary *VERY* widely in the US.
Northern New England states have gun murder/other violence rates on par with Scandinavia and a full order of magnitude less than many US states.
ALL of the “ANTI” studies that you see that try to correlate (negatively) “gun friendly” or high gun ownership states — simply ignore VT, NH, ME and millions of square miles elsewhere…..
Actually, I am happy to be living in this age of the new wild west. Yep, the wild west of the movies is finally here.
http://www.usaholidayplanner.com/2014/06/wildwest.html
That site is a class action copyright infringement lawsuit of epic proportions just waiting in the wings.
The first few lines lets me know to not take that site seriously.
If you look at each state and compare how many gun homicides per 100K people, there is no solid correlation between the percentage of people owning and gun homicides. Sorry. The murder rate as a whole is has been on the decline if you trust government sources like the CDC, FBI, BoJ, etc.
Keep that tin foil hat on and don’t worry about facts. Just chant “Its how I feel, not what is true…”
And they exclude many very calm Western and Mid-western states; Idaho, Utah, the Dakotas, Wyoming, Montana – states like these have very high gun ownership rates but very low murder rates. Wyoming, for example, has nearly 60% gun ownership, but a murder rate of less than 1 per 100k. The others are similar.
It’s interesting how they always exclude DC, too; a gun ownership rate of 3.6% and a murder rate of 16.5 per 100k.
This is a handy reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
WHOA! Don’t vacation in Honduras!
Maybe Iceland.
Actually, the violent crime in Honduras is similar to what it is here in the US…mostly gang related and mostly in a few (geographically) small densely populated cities like the capital.
Outside those bubbles of modern utopia, it’s not that bad especially if you look in small coastal towns.
The larger point is, of course, that a single number does not tell the whole, proper story.
Yeah Barry and those pesky “assault weapons” which are so demonized are used less than feet and fists to kill. Funny but the actual numbers don’t prop up Obamas statements although this fool has told so may lies he would not know the truth if it smacked him in the forehead.
It’s interesting to see so many countries with extremely stringent drug laws, the kind that get you executed pretty easily by comparison, also have homicide rates lower than that of the U.S. So much for the “drug war is the driver of our homicides and if only we legalized drugs, then all of these vicious gangbangers would renounce the Life, turn into gentle little lambs, and play nice” myth.
most countries lie about their homicide rates this list cannot be taken with more than a grain of salt extreme example but when I was in China they claimed they had four murders a year in the whole city of Shanghai which is just a flat out lie
Hmmm…my brother has been to Russia. He also lived in Poland for several years. He thought Russia was much worse than even the very third world Poland.
Well to be fair, Russia doesn’t “put up” with gun violence either, officially. Guns are for the most part outlawed. However, considering the country is to a good degree one big criminal enterprise, and criminal activity is built into the psych of the Russians from the old Soviet system where the whole economy became one big black market, the strong gun laws don’t stop lots of violence from occurring.
Guns are not outlawed, there’s just a ridiculous amount of red tape to wade through to get one. And then there’s that whole system where you have to own smoothbore for 5 years before you can be licensed for a rifle (yes, even a .22!). But it’s all doable, and many people do it.
Handguns, now, yeah. If you’re a “civilian”, forget it.
It’s interesting to note how low the Czech Republic’s murder rate is, especially as it has quite relaxed gun laws.
That’s because the Czechs are an advanced, industrialized first world people with a largely homogeneous population.
Yikes!
In reading the list, I’ve been in quite a few of the top 25.
Obeyme is just repeating drivel that he hopes will become truth because he says it often enough.
Having actually been to Russia, I must answer the tagline question a resounding “NO!”
Most appearances of advancement and development in Russia are just that, “appearances;” a facade put on by those in power in an attempt to show the world how grand Russia’s ruling elites are. Meanwhile the majority of its citizens suffer deplorable living standards and egregious deprivations of liberty. The farther you get from Moscow, the clearer that becomes. Think Pongyang vs. the rest of North Korea.
I truly miss taking the train into various areas of Russia to meat with the real Russians. Their situation really is a pity since I’ve experienced so many of them to be wonderful and generous people who are just trying to make the best of a bad situation.
As a Russian, I concur. Russia is basically a third world country that is above average in terms of infrastructure and economy largely because it has inherited the Soviet legacy. For all the fun that’s made of Soviet economy, it was surprisingly good at many things, and heavy industry and public infrastructure (roads etc) were one of them. To the extent that those still keep going, it gives Russia an edge, but its overall vector is down, not up – all that infrastructure grows old and eventually gives up, and replacements are not on par. Sometimes this manifests in major disasters, like the explosion on Sayano-Shushenskaya Dam in 2009, but more often it’s just slow rot that people don’t notice directly.
Soviet heavy industry wasn’t very good. It polluted horribly and it was joked that the Soviet Union had the world’s most advanced 19th century economy.
They designed 1st rate stuff and built junk. They also hired 5-10 people per job to claim they had 100% employment. If people showed up for work they were often drunk.
Pollution was not a significant concern anywhere when it was originally built, though USSR persisted in that delusion far longer than anyone else.
As far as quality, it was top notch for some period of time (I would say, roughly up to mid-60s), and gradually declining from there. Coincidentally, it’s also a period of time during which USSR switched to basically selling its natural resources to prop its economy. In most other industries, there was a period of decline, partly masked by actively copying new Western designs. This is very visible in electronics – Soviet mainframe computer designs up to late 60s were designed completely in-house and spotted quite a few innovations of its own, but beyond that they just started to blindly copy whatever Western design they could get their hands on, which ultimately ruined the industry as it was reduced to a giant copy machine.
There’s a reason why we call Brezhnev’s rule after the first few years “The Era of Stagnation”.
But even so, the point is that what Russia had as its starting capital after the dissolution of the USSR was still way more than what a third world country normally has – even if not quite a match for the first world.
A president’s private opinion should not mean anything. Just do the job, support the constitution, and stop advancing ideologies.
Unless, of course, you have Reagan wanting to take credit for the end of the Cold War or you have Dubya Bush wanting to start two unnecessary wars. Then somehow that’s different from the Democratic President in office who just happens to be black. Right?
You but Kool-aide by the semi truck load don’t you John. And playing the race card. That’s just juvenile. Obama is the worst president in 100 years and you claim we say that because he’s black. Very sad that people like you can’t bring themselves to admit Obama is a bigger crook than Nixon and more incompetent than carter.
Reagan played a major role in ending the Cold War. Even Gorbachev himself admitted to that.
Think you can find an example of that which isn’t in the US conservative propaganda media? Because Gorbachev was an economist by profession, said that the fall of the Soviet Union came about because of an economic collapse that literally meant there was a danger of millions starving, and he barely mentions Reagan in the books that he has written.
Reagan just happened to be President when the Soviets imploded on their own accord. They couldn’t keep up the spending to build their military, but as any fool can see from today’s US economy neither could we. We are still paying for Reagan’s Star Wars plans and the Midgetman missile and other failed Reagan-era programs.
John, You are out of your mind. The only part you had correct was the soviets were on the verge of an economic meltdown. Reagan knew it and he pushed them over the brink. Gorbi wasnt going to admit Reagan had anything to do with it because it would reflect badly on him. Reagans economc policies caused our economy to skyrocket unfortunaley the democrats saw it was an oppertunity to drastically increase spending. Reagans biggest failing was not controlling the democrats spending us into banruptcy. ou probably tin carter was a great president.
Once again, it’s hard to take you seriously when you cannot write a cohesive sentence in English.
Why would Gorbachev not tell the truth? He was pragmatic, my understanding is that he attended Reagan and Thatcher’s funerals, and he doesn’t seem to have an axe to grind.
Whereas US conservatives go out of their way to make Reagan look decent.
Reagan’s economic policies caused our economy to skyrocket because he borrowed heavily. He preached conservative economics but in reality ran a huge deficit. This isn’t hard to understand.
In reality it’s been the Democrats from the last 20 years – Clinton and President Obama – that have reduced spending. Republicans got us into hugely expensive wars.
You are smoking some serious dope aren’t you. Your so far out in lefty field trying to explain facts to you would be a waste of time. Hope you don’t have kids. We have enough stupid people in this world as it is.
Jon G. every every that has had an “economist by profession” lead has gone down the tubes. Economists don’t create jobs.
And I can see you are upset that Reagan effectively ended the cold war. Unlike Democrats who created hot wars Reagan actually cut to the chase and sent the USSR tumbling. The Dems then squandered that victory as they do with every victory
Ahhh Like Obama is pure as the driven snow… *cough cough* There is a reason that he is called Bush 3. He continued many of the policies that liberals cried about when he was in office.
He continued warrant-less wiretapping, renewed the patriot act, allowed the NSA to expand its big brother activities unchecked (until Snowden spilled the beans).
Look how long it took him to get us out of Iraq and now he is trying to clear Guantanamo illegally before election time.
But its all good once its YOUR guy doing things. Right? 😉
USSR was going down the drain either way, and I doubt it’d last for 10 more years than it did in any case. But Reagan’s hawkish policies and the response they triggered in the Soviets did help accelerate it by those few years.
Obama has been saying things that are not true for a very long time. It is one thing to speculate about his motivation for making statements of fact that do not reflect reality, it is another thing to simply conclude that he is detached from reality, the mental health people call it psychosis. I would prefer to believe Obama is a liar and, he knows when he is lying (a truly psychotic president would worry me). After all, he is a politician and propaganda is a useful tool for such creatures.
He does have issues with the 2nd amendment and anyone who seeks to exercise their natural, civil right to keep and bear arms. He has clearly demonstrated that he will say just about anything, break federal laws and use people shamelessly to further his civilian disarmament agenda. I look forward to the November election results that will give us solid non-democrat majorities in the House and Senate. When Obama is secluded in the White House and reduced to making whimpering noises, the smile on my face will be extra wide every time I head to the range.
I look forward to the November election results that will give us solid non-democrat majorities in the House and Senate.
And I am fervently praying very hard that all those voting machines are not hacked. And that the counts are tallied honestly and accurately. Because we really have no way of knowing about either any more.
…and that deceased citizens with multiple addresses don’t miraculously emerge from the grave to cast votes for Democrat politicians.
And you’d better hope that you can get away with disqualifying millions of Latin and black American citizens who live in rural areas that will have trouble producing ID to your level of acceptance.
But don’t worry. It’s only a matter of a few years when minorities will be more plentiful than T-baggers and it won’t make any difference.
Jon, You are upset the voters made your messiah the earliest lame duck in US history?
As far as latinos, the evidence is as they get established they become conservatives – ass do most people as they move from illiteracy.
The GOP would win every election if not for the advantage the Democrats have in votes of non high school educated Americans
So the Democrats are facing a demographic time bomb as the base they depend on becomes literate
Well, as I just commented in today’s post How Would You Win the Gun Control Debate,
“We should STOP justifying our natural right to keep and bear arms based on cost-benefit statistics. First of all, many people do not understand or have no interest in statistics. Second, there is no way to immediately confirm statistics during a casual face-to-face real time discussion with someone. Finally, many statistics are misleading or even bogus and it is very difficult to explain the fault with the presentation of the statistics or the statistics themselves.
Rather, we should keep it simple. I have told people that it is patently offensive and degrading when they or politicians tell me what personal property I can own and possess in public. It is an affront to my humanity. That illustrates their actions for exactly what they are: an attack on my human dignity.”
I agree. Why should we hold ourselves to the standards of enslaved people? So, Europeans are happy with no guns and cameras on every corner, so what? They also like ridiculous sports that make no sense, and sing very silly songs that they for some reason think sound great. We do everything better than them, including our guns (which, ironically, they also use to secure their freedom), and there is no need at all to do anything other than point and laugh.
So I guess a sucker punch is out of the question?
Presidents don’t always say the most rational or supportable things:
http://xkcd.com/753/
Let’s be brutally honest here. There is no “gun violence” problem across the United States. The problem is almost exclusively isolated within urban islands in the United States. The homicide rate in rural and suburban regions is almost zero — regardless of the murder weapon that the criminal used to kill.
This is why we must not debate statistics which are often inaccurate or misleading. More importantly, a right is not a function of statistics. Is our free speech limited to words that meet certain (and of course arbitrary) statistical criteria? No? Neither is our right to keep and bear arms.
America does not have a Gun violence problem, it has a Gangs violence problem.
We need stronger Gang control, not Gun control.
In one sentence- 90% of the truth.
Reality, what a concept.
Never going to get it from the StateRunMedia…
Is our free speech limited to words that meet certain (and of course arbitrary) statistical criteria?
http://www.progressivestoday.com/feds-strip-washington-redskins-of-six-trademarks-deemed-offensive-to-native-americans/
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
“Homicide rates across all countries” except the UK which is not a country for the purposes of this list of apples, oranges, kumquats, and cow patties.
Homicides rates in the UK are not useful. They only count closed cases
Russia is hardly a developed country. Once away from the cities, modern amenities are few and far between. Aside from cars, tractors, and electricity, life hasn’t changed much in the rural areas for generations.
Russia and the former USSR realized that if they weren’t strong they had to at least look strong. They tried to take over the world with the same GDP as Canada. This resulted in a lopsided economy where defence related spending was almost 50% of GDP. During WW2 when the USA was The Arsenal of Democracy, defence related spending was still less than 20% of GDP. Eventually the Soviet era economy just collapsed.
“I don’t believe people should be able to own guns,” Obama told Lott one day at the University of Chicago Law School.
….”If public opinion does not demand change in Congress, it will not change.”
So is Obama admitting law enforcement (or legal processes) is no longer trying to enforce current laws? Unofficially acknowledging that police are no revenue enforcement and post-incident respondents?
How I would have loved to hear some lone voice shout out, “BULLSHIT” or LIAR” during his pleading.
According to my maps Russia together with the rest of Eastern Europe is just a bunch of dirty, godless commie bastards, thusly they can’t be “advanced” or “developed”.
/sarc
Russia is by no means an advanced or developed country. From whatever point of view you look at it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developed_country
Sorry, but among the developed countries, USA’s homicide rate really is unique and truly horrific.
Greetings from the Czech Republic, where rules are in place to make guns accessible to law abiding citizens and inaccessible to criminals and nutjobs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_Czech_Republic (I am in no way saying that this should be the American answer to the problem, do whatever you think is best in your own country)
We have a gang violence problem and they get guns illegally. An outright ban on guns won’t work in this country with the amount of guns we have right now. What we need to end is our gang violence problem, which is more complex.
We don’t have a gun ban either, just sensible regulation.
I understand that gang problem is the one statistically most relevant, however, as it has been pointed elsewhere in the article, that is taking place in a limited number of urban spaces.
The spree killings that are happening horrifyingly often in US, however, are happening countrywide, are they not? If SENSIBLE gun regulation is not appropriate answer for Americans, then the least you should do is introduction of properly accessible medical care for mentally ill, and that completely independent of one’s health insurance.
Don’t take me wrong, I CCW on daily basis and believe that any law abiding citizen should be able too (and they are able, in my country).
Not really, because shootings in school have always taken place in urban settings, only they didn’t garnish racist media attention because it was black on black crime or gang related violence. Plus the term “mass” shooting seems to fluctuate according to agenda. Are two students shot but only wounded considered a mass shooting? What happens if other weapons were used in the crime, not just a gun? There is no standard to the term, so it gets thrown around a lot.
The problem with the word “sensible” is that it is misused to the point of being serious. My idea of sensible is a strict adherence to the 2A as close as you can. Violence and mental illness are a separate issue altogether that needs to be addressed without always talking about gun control. But politicians don’t believe in that. They try to trick the people into thinking gun violence is the only type of violence out there, and think gun violence is the cause, not the symptoms of our overall problems in America.
Both in Canada, and on average in Europe, MORE non criminals are murdered per capita than in the USA
Si if you are a gang member, or drug dealer, felon, or career criminal with several arrests, your risk of being murdered in the US is very high.
If you are not one of those you are safer in the armed US than in disarmed Canada, Australia, France or the UK.
This study reflects what a dozen studies have also found:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-08-31-criminal-target_N.htm
I very much doubt that, but lets assume you are right.
Isn’t that maybe connected with the fact that US labels much larger part of population as criminal than Canada or developed Europe? For example, in the Czech Republic you can grow up to 5 plants of marijuana for own purposes legally, carry up to 1g of cocaine (or other drugs) for own purposes legally, prostitution is also legal. What lands you in jail in US does not raise an eyebrow in many European jurisdictions, hence people that would fall within the “criminal casualty” statistic in US are considered upstanding citizens here.
In a broad sense that parallels the laws in Mexico. And contrary to what US gun freaks say about Mexico outlawing legal firearms a Mexican national or a foreigner with legal credentials can indeed possess firearms in Mexico with the caveats that 1) you cannot own anything of military caliber (so you are restricted to shotguns and hunting rifles and low power pistols) and 2) you have to have the means to make a trek to the only gun store in the country, which is in Mexico City.
So … conservatives … jump in there and tell us how “free” we are in the USA and how every other nation lives in “oppression” because they don’t have that famous “American exceptionalism”
John G, for all your diatribe against America not being an exceptional place, I think you failed to consider that given the diversity of the people, simplicity of the original Constitution (unparalleled than) and the natural impulse of people in power to restrict individual rights, our form of government would have failed anywhere else more than 200 years ago. But it didn’t and if we as a nation presently fail to uphold those ideals, we have no one to blame besides ourselves for outsourcing our own duties to the bureaucracy and politicians.
Also your overall analysis about Mexico is incorrect, in the sense that technically they allow citizens to have firearms but there are substantial regulations and caveats in place that a lawful citizen has to go through to legally own a firearm. Of course that doesn’t seem to stop the cartels from amassing vast numbers of “military grade” firearms for their own criminal use. But that black market in arms can also extends to the citizenry, which is why you will notice that many members of the auto defensas appear to have AKs, ARs and SKS type firearms.
Jhn G in our last run around you claimed US murder rates were up.
Pew found of the 30% (and falling according to gallup March 2014) 0f Americans who want more gun control, 98% thought gun murder was up.
Your problem John is you belong to an anti fact paranoid movement.
The science shows equal demographic juristicuons in US with more guns have less crime (the most apt comparison is Virginia vs Maryland).
Does it bother you that if you are not selling drugs or in a gang your risk of murder is lower in the US than Australia or Canada?
Costs a lot to hold people in jail that could go to social welfare programs. Also if countries like england and canada published their true crime stats they couldnt claim to me so safe anymore .
Of course, Texas cops avoid taking reports so they can claim lower crime rates. Perhaps your comment about unpublished crimes in other countries is a right wing fantasy?
Actually its not fantasy. England for example no longer even hides the fact they under report crime. Their murder rates are a fantacy. They don’t record a murder as a murder unless there is an arrest and convicion.
John the places accused by non partisan crime prevention groups of under reporting of crime are the democratic controlled cities.
And you missed the point on the UK, it only counts conviction cases in its murder numbers, not incidents.
I believe I pointed that last item out. Crimes are under reported everywhere. These so called safe countries grossly under report crime. There is one additional aspect point out by someone else. Many of the “safe’ countries have very homogeneous population groups who share all societal traits from religion to culture. These leads to social stability and low crime rates. Here in the US we have a melting pot of races cultures and religions (or lack of) and this always leads to social disfunctions.
Look at the FBI crime stats and remove non-white crime and you will see we have the lowest crime rate in the world. Could care less about how people feel about that FACT but its true.
It is funny how anti gun rights advocates “doubt” the outright facts. there are a few dozen studies and they range about 90% of murder victims being in gangs, felons or drug dealers or persons with several arrests.
Are you in that group? if not you are SAFER in the US than Canada, and 40% LESS likely to be murdered here than there.
You also might want to consider that if you are not in a gang or do not have a gang member or criminal domiciled in your home, armed homes are 20% safer for their occupants than unarmed homes.
Chris, I am not anti-guns, I CCW regularly. What I am saying is that US labels very large part of population as criminals compared to the rest of the developed world.
Look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate
From developed countries you have:
USA – 707
Israel – 249
Slovakia – 188
Czech Republic – 163
and if I didn’t miss anything, all other developed countries (by OECD standard) have less than 150 prisoners per 100.000 population.
So the fact that in US criminals are more likely to die may be also due to the fact that the same person would not be considered criminal elsewhere.
Ofcourse Russia is a developed an advanced country.Its Human development is high and it has a great contribution in the field of science and technology till now. Its economic situations are also standard,and it is one of the five permanent members of UNO.
Comments are closed.