America - Gun Control

General Social Discussion
Munk
Member
Member
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri 06 Oct, 2017 4:20 pm
Has liked: 6 times
Been liked: 9 times

Re: America - Gun Control

Unread post by Munk » Sat 11 Nov, 2017 9:14 pm

voice of reason wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 1:29 pm
This is a reasonable item - originated here - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/worl ... ional.html

What Explains U.S. Mass Shootings? International Comparisons Suggest an Answer

When the world looks at the United States, it sees a land of exceptions: a time-tested if noisy democracy, a crusader in foreign policy, an exporter of beloved music and film.

But there is one quirk that consistently puzzles America’s fans and critics alike. Why, they ask, does it experience so many mass shootings?

Perhaps, some speculate, it is because American society is unusually violent. Or its racial divisions have frayed the bonds of society. Or its citizens lack proper mental care under a health care system that draws frequent derision abroad.

These explanations share one thing in common: Though seemingly sensible, all have been debunked by research on shootings elsewhere in the world. Instead, an ever-growing body of research consistently reaches the same conclusion.

The only variable that can explain the high rate of mass shootings in America is its astronomical number of guns.

A Look at the Numbers

The top-line numbers suggest a correlation that, on further investigation, grows only clearer.

Americans make up about 4.4 percent of the global population but own 42 percent of the world’s guns. From 1966 to 2012, 31 percent of the gunmen in mass shootings worldwide were American, according to a 2015 study by Adam Lankford, a professor at the University of Alabama.

Adjusted for population, only Yemen has a higher rate of mass shootings among countries with more than 10 million people — a distinction Mr. Lankford urged to avoid outliers. Yemen has the world’s second-highest rate of gun ownership after the United States.

Guns per 100 people
The New York Times |Source: Adam Lankford, The University of Alabama (shooters); Small Arms Survey (guns).
Worldwide, Mr. Lankford found, a country’s rate of gun ownership correlated with the odds it would experience a mass shooting. This relationship held even when he excluded the United States, indicating that it could not be explained by some other factor particular to his home country. And it held when he controlled for homicide rates, suggesting that mass shootings were better explained by a society’s access to guns than by its baseline level of violence.

Factors That Don’t Correlate

If mental health made the difference, then data would show that Americans have more mental health problems than do people in other countries with fewer mass shootings. But the mental health care spending rate in the United States, the number of mental health professionals per capita and the rate of severe mental disorders are all in line with those of other wealthy countries.

A 2015 study estimated that only 4 percent of American gun deaths could be attributed to mental health issues. And Mr. Lankford, in an email, said countries with high suicide rates tended to have low rates of mass shootings — the opposite of what you would expect if mental health problems correlated with mass shootings.

Whether a population plays more or fewer video games also appears to have no impact. Americans are no more likely to play video games than people in any other developed country.

Racial diversity or other factors associated with social cohesion also show little correlation with gun deaths. Among European countries, there is little association between immigration or other diversity metrics and the rates of gun murders or mass shootings.

A Violent Country

America’s gun homicide rate was 33 per million people in 2009, far exceeding the average among developed countries. In Canada and Britain, it was 5 per million and 0.7 per million, respectively, which also corresponds with differences in gun ownership.

Americans sometimes see this as an expression of deeper problems with crime, a notion ingrained, in part, by a series of films portraying urban gang violence in the early 1990s. But the United States is not actually more prone to crime than other developed countries, according to a landmark 1999 study by Franklin E. Zimring and Gordon Hawkins of the University of California, Berkeley.

Rather, they found, in data that has since been repeatedly confirmed, that American crime is simply more lethal. A New Yorker is just as likely to be robbed as a Londoner, for instance, but the New Yorker is 54 times more likely to be killed in the process.

They concluded that the discrepancy, like so many other anomalies of American violence, came down to guns.

More gun ownership corresponds with more gun murders across virtually every axis: among developed countries, among American states, among American towns and cities and when controlling for crime rates. And gun control legislation tends to reduce gun murders, according to a recent analysis of 130 studies from 10 countries.

This suggests that the guns themselves cause the violence.

Skeptics of gun control sometimes point to a 2016 study. From 2000 and 2014, it found, the United States death rate by mass shooting was 1.5 per one million people. The rate was 1.7 in Switzerland and 3.4 in Finland, suggesting American mass shootings were not actually so common.

But the same study found that the United States had 133 mass shootings. Finland had only two, which killed 18 people, and Switzerland had one, which killed 14. In short, isolated incidents. So while mass shootings can happen anywhere, they are only a matter of routine in the United States.

As with any crime, the underlying risk is impossible to fully erase. Any individual can snap or become entranced by a violent ideology. What is different is the likelihood that this will lead to mass murder.

In China, about a dozen seemingly random attacks on schoolchildren killed 25 people between 2010 and 2012. Most used knives; none used a gun.

By contrast, in this same window, the United States experienced five of its deadliest mass shootings, which killed 78 people. Scaled by population, the American attacks were 12 times as deadly.

Beyond the Statistics

In 2013, American gun-related deaths included 21,175 suicides, 11,208 homicides and 505 deaths caused by an accidental discharge. That same year in Japan, a country with one-third America’s population, guns were involved in only 13 deaths.

This means an American is about 300 times more likely to die by gun homicide or accident than a Japanese person. America’s gun ownership rate is 150 times as high as Japan’s. That gap between 150 and 300 shows that gun ownership statistics alone do not explain what makes America different.

The United States also has some of the weakest controls over who may buy a gun and what sorts of guns may be owned.

Switzerland has the second-highest gun ownership rate of any developed country, about half that of the United States. Its gun homicide rate in 2004 was 7.7 per million people — unusually high, in keeping with the relationship between gun ownership and murders, but still a fraction of the rate in the United States.

Swiss gun laws are more stringent, setting a higher bar for securing and keeping a license, for selling guns and for the types of guns that can be owned. Such laws reflect more than just tighter restrictions. They imply a different way of thinking about guns, as something that citizens must affirmatively earn the right to own.

The Difference Is Culture

The United States is one of only three countries, along with Mexico and Guatemala, that begin with the opposite assumption: that people have an inherent right to own guns.

The main reason American regulation of gun ownership is so weak may be the fact that the trade-offs are simply given a different weight in the United States than they are anywhere else.

After Britain had a mass shooting in 1987, the country instituted strict gun control laws. So did Australia after a 1996 shooting. But the United States has repeatedly faced the same calculus and determined that relatively unregulated gun ownership is worth the cost to society.

That choice, more than any statistic or regulation, is what most sets the United States apart.

“In retrospect Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate,” Dan Hodges, a British journalist, wrote in a post on Twitter two years ago, referring to the 2012 attack that killed 20 young students at an elementary school in Connecticut. “Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over.”
That article says its not this, its not that and its not that either therefore it has to be guns.
The problem is cultural. Mass shootings are mainly the domain of America. Gun ownership is not.


Byron Bay Fan
Member
Member
Posts: 3821
Joined: Sat 17 Oct, 2015 2:14 pm
Has liked: 45 times
Been liked: 49 times

Unread post by Byron Bay Fan » Sat 11 Nov, 2017 10:30 pm

Munk wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 9:03 pm
innsaneink wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 2:35 pm
This ones interesting, if it means what I think it means:

H.J.R. 40: On February 28, Trump signed a bill that repeals an Obama-era rule that prohibited the mentally disabled from being able to purchase firearms. Obama signed the executive action, which mandated that the Social Security Administration submit names of mentally ill individuals to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System following the San Bernardino terrorist attack in 2015.
The government repealing that EO from Obama was all about restoring due process in a case by case basis rather than a blanket description of an estimated 75 000 residents. I dont agree with it but that bill was passed 57-43 in the senate so there must have been more to it.
Trump is more guilty of those 26 deaths than Rudd or Gillard is of those insulation installers dying during stimulus package.
Malcolm Knox: What has happened this week is a pity for the Tigers, a pity for Jason Taylor and a pity for Robbie Farah, who had achieved more than the Big Four put together but was somehow turned into collateral damage. (SMH 25-26 March, 2017)

Munk
Member
Member
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri 06 Oct, 2017 4:20 pm
Has liked: 6 times
Been liked: 9 times

Unread post by Munk » Sat 11 Nov, 2017 10:45 pm

Byron Bay Fan wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 10:30 pm
Munk wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 9:03 pm
innsaneink wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 2:35 pm
This ones interesting, if it means what I think it means:

H.J.R. 40: On February 28, Trump signed a bill that repeals an Obama-era rule that prohibited the mentally disabled from being able to purchase firearms. Obama signed the executive action, which mandated that the Social Security Administration submit names of mentally ill individuals to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System following the San Bernardino terrorist attack in 2015.
The government repealing that EO from Obama was all about restoring due process in a case by case basis rather than a blanket description of an estimated 75 000 residents. I dont agree with it but that bill was passed 57-43 in the senate so there must have been more to it.
Trump is more guilty of those 26 deaths than Rudd or Gillard is of those insulation installers dying during stimulus package.
Dumb.

colmcd
Member
Member
Posts: 499
Joined: Wed 04 Jan, 2017 11:38 pm
Has liked: 28 times
Been liked: 51 times

Unread post by colmcd » Sat 11 Nov, 2017 11:46 pm

Munk wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 10:45 pm
Byron Bay Fan wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 10:30 pm
Munk wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 9:03 pm
innsaneink wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 2:35 pm
This ones interesting, if it means what I think it means:

H.J.R. 40: On February 28, Trump signed a bill that repeals an Obama-era rule that prohibited the mentally disabled from being able to purchase firearms. Obama signed the executive action, which mandated that the Social Security Administration submit names of mentally ill individuals to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System following the San Bernardino terrorist attack in 2015.
The government repealing that EO from Obama was all about restoring due process in a case by case basis rather than a blanket description of an estimated 75 000 residents. I dont agree with it but that bill was passed 57-43 in the senate so there must have been more to it.
Trump is more guilty of those 26 deaths than Rudd or Gillard is of those insulation installers dying during stimulus package.
Dumb.
Agreed, trump is very Dumb.

But it's more then dumb from trump. Any responsible gun owner, gun range or gun instructor will not give a mentally ill person a Gun! It's that simple, the logical premise of gun defense is "I have a gun, you have a gun. You won't shoot me because i might shoot back and kill you". You give a mentally ill person a gun, suddenly you have a person who may shoot at you because you're an elephant, Pinocchio or stealing your thoughts!

You don't give guns to a person who is psychotic. END! The Obama legislation made sense, END. Responsible gun owners in Australia will want nothing to do with this crazyness. It's just too trumpdumb

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 36080
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm
Has liked: 21 times
Been liked: 37 times

Unread post by happy tiger » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 12:04 am

colmcd wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 11:46 pm
Munk wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 10:45 pm
Byron Bay Fan wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 10:30 pm
Munk wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 9:03 pm

The government repealing that EO from Obama was all about restoring due process in a case by case basis rather than a blanket description of an estimated 75 000 residents. I dont agree with it but that bill was passed 57-43 in the senate so there must have been more to it.
Trump is more guilty of those 26 deaths than Rudd or Gillard is of those insulation installers dying during stimulus package.
Dumb.
Agreed, trump is very Dumb.

But it's more then dumb from trump. Any responsible gun owner, gun range or gun instructor will not give a mentally ill person a Gun! It's that simple, the logical premise of gun defense is "I have a gun, you have a gun. You won't shoot me because i might shoot back and kill you". You give a mentally ill person a gun, suddenly you have a person who may shoot at you because you're an elephant, Pinocchio or stealing your thoughts!

You don't give guns to a person who is psychotic. END! The Obama legislation made sense, END. Responsible gun owners in Australia will want nothing to do with this crazyness. It's just too trumpdumb
I don't want to be a fly in the ointment , but you could meet a mentally ill person and not even know they were mentally ill

Around 1 in 5 people battle at some stage in their lives depression which is a mental illness


MG1962
Member
Member
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu 06 Apr, 2017 12:44 pm
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 14 times

Unread post by MG1962 » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 12:27 am

happy tiger wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 12:04 am
I don't want to be a fly in the ointment , but you could meet a mentally ill person and not even know they were mentally ill

Around 1 in 5 people battle at some stage in their lives depression which is a mental illness
Well that bill and other efforts were not aimed at the gun retailer making the determination on someones state of mind. That roll would be performed at the background check stage based on availability of medical records and other sources.

Adam Lanza, the kid that shot up Sandy Hook suffered from Aspergers, depression, brain damage from being anorexic and potential schizophrenia, was barely a functioning human being let alone being able to own a Bushmaster semi automatic.

Then NRAs only response was to call on Congress to fund schools to employ full time armed guards.

Earl
Member
Member
Posts: 1608
Joined: Sat 18 Feb, 2017 9:21 am
Has liked: 120 times
Been liked: 85 times

Unread post by Earl » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 9:24 am

MG1962 wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 12:27 am
happy tiger wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 12:04 am
I don't want to be a fly in the ointment , but you could meet a mentally ill person and not even know they were mentally ill

Around 1 in 5 people battle at some stage in their lives depression which is a mental illness
Well that bill and other efforts were not aimed at the gun retailer making the determination on someones state of mind. That roll would be performed at the background check stage based on availability of medical records and other sources.

Adam Lanza, the kid that shot up Sandy Hook suffered from Aspergers, depression, brain damage from being anorexic and potential schizophrenia, was barely a functioning human being let alone being able to own a Bushmaster semi automatic.

Then NRAs only response was to call on Congress to fund schools to employ full time armed guards.
It's obvious to anyone with a brain that the gun ownership laws in America need to be changed. It's causing a whole bunch of innocent deaths.

Fix it or the deaths will keep coming.

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 36080
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm
Has liked: 21 times
Been liked: 37 times

Unread post by happy tiger » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 10:22 am

Earl wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 9:24 am
MG1962 wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 12:27 am
happy tiger wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 12:04 am
I don't want to be a fly in the ointment , but you could meet a mentally ill person and not even know they were mentally ill

Around 1 in 5 people battle at some stage in their lives depression which is a mental illness
Well that bill and other efforts were not aimed at the gun retailer making the determination on someones state of mind. That roll would be performed at the background check stage based on availability of medical records and other sources.

Adam Lanza, the kid that shot up Sandy Hook suffered from Aspergers, depression, brain damage from being anorexic and potential schizophrenia, was barely a functioning human being let alone being able to own a Bushmaster semi automatic.

Then NRAs only response was to call on Congress to fund schools to employ full time armed guards.
It's obvious to anyone with a brain that the gun ownership laws in America need to be changed. It's causing a whole bunch of innocent deaths.

Fix it or the deaths will keep coming.
And yet the Americans won't change there guns

Reconfirms my opinions of most Americans

Stupidest ,arrogant nation on the planet

Think that the sun shines from their own derriere's

User avatar
GNR4LIFE
Member
Member
Posts: 18702
Joined: Mon 28 Feb, 2011 5:57 pm
Has liked: 62 times
Been liked: 186 times

Unread post by GNR4LIFE » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 10:31 am

Munk wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 9:14 pm
voice of reason wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 1:29 pm
This is a reasonable item - originated here - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/worl ... ional.html

What Explains U.S. Mass Shootings? International Comparisons Suggest an Answer

When the world looks at the United States, it sees a land of exceptions: a time-tested if noisy democracy, a crusader in foreign policy, an exporter of beloved music and film.

But there is one quirk that consistently puzzles America’s fans and critics alike. Why, they ask, does it experience so many mass shootings?

Perhaps, some speculate, it is because American society is unusually violent. Or its racial divisions have frayed the bonds of society. Or its citizens lack proper mental care under a health care system that draws frequent derision abroad.

These explanations share one thing in common: Though seemingly sensible, all have been debunked by research on shootings elsewhere in the world. Instead, an ever-growing body of research consistently reaches the same conclusion.

The only variable that can explain the high rate of mass shootings in America is its astronomical number of guns.

A Look at the Numbers

The top-line numbers suggest a correlation that, on further investigation, grows only clearer.

Americans make up about 4.4 percent of the global population but own 42 percent of the world’s guns. From 1966 to 2012, 31 percent of the gunmen in mass shootings worldwide were American, according to a 2015 study by Adam Lankford, a professor at the University of Alabama.

Adjusted for population, only Yemen has a higher rate of mass shootings among countries with more than 10 million people — a distinction Mr. Lankford urged to avoid outliers. Yemen has the world’s second-highest rate of gun ownership after the United States.

Guns per 100 people
The New York Times |Source: Adam Lankford, The University of Alabama (shooters); Small Arms Survey (guns).
Worldwide, Mr. Lankford found, a country’s rate of gun ownership correlated with the odds it would experience a mass shooting. This relationship held even when he excluded the United States, indicating that it could not be explained by some other factor particular to his home country. And it held when he controlled for homicide rates, suggesting that mass shootings were better explained by a society’s access to guns than by its baseline level of violence.

Factors That Don’t Correlate

If mental health made the difference, then data would show that Americans have more mental health problems than do people in other countries with fewer mass shootings. But the mental health care spending rate in the United States, the number of mental health professionals per capita and the rate of severe mental disorders are all in line with those of other wealthy countries.

A 2015 study estimated that only 4 percent of American gun deaths could be attributed to mental health issues. And Mr. Lankford, in an email, said countries with high suicide rates tended to have low rates of mass shootings — the opposite of what you would expect if mental health problems correlated with mass shootings.

Whether a population plays more or fewer video games also appears to have no impact. Americans are no more likely to play video games than people in any other developed country.

Racial diversity or other factors associated with social cohesion also show little correlation with gun deaths. Among European countries, there is little association between immigration or other diversity metrics and the rates of gun murders or mass shootings.

A Violent Country

America’s gun homicide rate was 33 per million people in 2009, far exceeding the average among developed countries. In Canada and Britain, it was 5 per million and 0.7 per million, respectively, which also corresponds with differences in gun ownership.

Americans sometimes see this as an expression of deeper problems with crime, a notion ingrained, in part, by a series of films portraying urban gang violence in the early 1990s. But the United States is not actually more prone to crime than other developed countries, according to a landmark 1999 study by Franklin E. Zimring and Gordon Hawkins of the University of California, Berkeley.

Rather, they found, in data that has since been repeatedly confirmed, that American crime is simply more lethal. A New Yorker is just as likely to be robbed as a Londoner, for instance, but the New Yorker is 54 times more likely to be killed in the process.

They concluded that the discrepancy, like so many other anomalies of American violence, came down to guns.

More gun ownership corresponds with more gun murders across virtually every axis: among developed countries, among American states, among American towns and cities and when controlling for crime rates. And gun control legislation tends to reduce gun murders, according to a recent analysis of 130 studies from 10 countries.

This suggests that the guns themselves cause the violence.

Skeptics of gun control sometimes point to a 2016 study. From 2000 and 2014, it found, the United States death rate by mass shooting was 1.5 per one million people. The rate was 1.7 in Switzerland and 3.4 in Finland, suggesting American mass shootings were not actually so common.

But the same study found that the United States had 133 mass shootings. Finland had only two, which killed 18 people, and Switzerland had one, which killed 14. In short, isolated incidents. So while mass shootings can happen anywhere, they are only a matter of routine in the United States.

As with any crime, the underlying risk is impossible to fully erase. Any individual can snap or become entranced by a violent ideology. What is different is the likelihood that this will lead to mass murder.

In China, about a dozen seemingly random attacks on schoolchildren killed 25 people between 2010 and 2012. Most used knives; none used a gun.

By contrast, in this same window, the United States experienced five of its deadliest mass shootings, which killed 78 people. Scaled by population, the American attacks were 12 times as deadly.

Beyond the Statistics

In 2013, American gun-related deaths included 21,175 suicides, 11,208 homicides and 505 deaths caused by an accidental discharge. That same year in Japan, a country with one-third America’s population, guns were involved in only 13 deaths.

This means an American is about 300 times more likely to die by gun homicide or accident than a Japanese person. America’s gun ownership rate is 150 times as high as Japan’s. That gap between 150 and 300 shows that gun ownership statistics alone do not explain what makes America different.

The United States also has some of the weakest controls over who may buy a gun and what sorts of guns may be owned.

Switzerland has the second-highest gun ownership rate of any developed country, about half that of the United States. Its gun homicide rate in 2004 was 7.7 per million people — unusually high, in keeping with the relationship between gun ownership and murders, but still a fraction of the rate in the United States.

Swiss gun laws are more stringent, setting a higher bar for securing and keeping a license, for selling guns and for the types of guns that can be owned. Such laws reflect more than just tighter restrictions. They imply a different way of thinking about guns, as something that citizens must affirmatively earn the right to own.

The Difference Is Culture

The United States is one of only three countries, along with Mexico and Guatemala, that begin with the opposite assumption: that people have an inherent right to own guns.

The main reason American regulation of gun ownership is so weak may be the fact that the trade-offs are simply given a different weight in the United States than they are anywhere else.

After Britain had a mass shooting in 1987, the country instituted strict gun control laws. So did Australia after a 1996 shooting. But the United States has repeatedly faced the same calculus and determined that relatively unregulated gun ownership is worth the cost to society.

That choice, more than any statistic or regulation, is what most sets the United States apart.

“In retrospect Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate,” Dan Hodges, a British journalist, wrote in a post on Twitter two years ago, referring to the 2012 attack that killed 20 young students at an elementary school in Connecticut. “Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over.”
That article says its not this, its not that and its not that either therefore it has to be guns.
The problem is cultural. Mass shootings are mainly the domain of America. Gun ownership is not.
I think there is some merit in that there is a cultural problem at play. So isn't it a bit stupid to have such lax gun laws in a nation that has said cultural problems? Why not enforce some gun control to till we at least "work out what the hell going on". If that line is good enough to justify keeping the evil Muslims out, then why not take the same stance on guns?

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 36080
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm
Has liked: 21 times
Been liked: 37 times

Unread post by happy tiger » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 10:46 am

GNR4LIFE wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 10:31 am
Munk wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 9:14 pm
voice of reason wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 1:29 pm
This is a reasonable item - originated here - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/worl ... ional.html

What Explains U.S. Mass Shootings? International Comparisons Suggest an Answer

When the world looks at the United States, it sees a land of exceptions: a time-tested if noisy democracy, a crusader in foreign policy, an exporter of beloved music and film.

But there is one quirk that consistently puzzles America’s fans and critics alike. Why, they ask, does it experience so many mass shootings?

Perhaps, some speculate, it is because American society is unusually violent. Or its racial divisions have frayed the bonds of society. Or its citizens lack proper mental care under a health care system that draws frequent derision abroad.

These explanations share one thing in common: Though seemingly sensible, all have been debunked by research on shootings elsewhere in the world. Instead, an ever-growing body of research consistently reaches the same conclusion.

The only variable that can explain the high rate of mass shootings in America is its astronomical number of guns.

A Look at the Numbers

The top-line numbers suggest a correlation that, on further investigation, grows only clearer.

Americans make up about 4.4 percent of the global population but own 42 percent of the world’s guns. From 1966 to 2012, 31 percent of the gunmen in mass shootings worldwide were American, according to a 2015 study by Adam Lankford, a professor at the University of Alabama.

Adjusted for population, only Yemen has a higher rate of mass shootings among countries with more than 10 million people — a distinction Mr. Lankford urged to avoid outliers. Yemen has the world’s second-highest rate of gun ownership after the United States.

Guns per 100 people
The New York Times |Source: Adam Lankford, The University of Alabama (shooters); Small Arms Survey (guns).
Worldwide, Mr. Lankford found, a country’s rate of gun ownership correlated with the odds it would experience a mass shooting. This relationship held even when he excluded the United States, indicating that it could not be explained by some other factor particular to his home country. And it held when he controlled for homicide rates, suggesting that mass shootings were better explained by a society’s access to guns than by its baseline level of violence.

Factors That Don’t Correlate

If mental health made the difference, then data would show that Americans have more mental health problems than do people in other countries with fewer mass shootings. But the mental health care spending rate in the United States, the number of mental health professionals per capita and the rate of severe mental disorders are all in line with those of other wealthy countries.

A 2015 study estimated that only 4 percent of American gun deaths could be attributed to mental health issues. And Mr. Lankford, in an email, said countries with high suicide rates tended to have low rates of mass shootings — the opposite of what you would expect if mental health problems correlated with mass shootings.

Whether a population plays more or fewer video games also appears to have no impact. Americans are no more likely to play video games than people in any other developed country.

Racial diversity or other factors associated with social cohesion also show little correlation with gun deaths. Among European countries, there is little association between immigration or other diversity metrics and the rates of gun murders or mass shootings.

A Violent Country

America’s gun homicide rate was 33 per million people in 2009, far exceeding the average among developed countries. In Canada and Britain, it was 5 per million and 0.7 per million, respectively, which also corresponds with differences in gun ownership.

Americans sometimes see this as an expression of deeper problems with crime, a notion ingrained, in part, by a series of films portraying urban gang violence in the early 1990s. But the United States is not actually more prone to crime than other developed countries, according to a landmark 1999 study by Franklin E. Zimring and Gordon Hawkins of the University of California, Berkeley.

Rather, they found, in data that has since been repeatedly confirmed, that American crime is simply more lethal. A New Yorker is just as likely to be robbed as a Londoner, for instance, but the New Yorker is 54 times more likely to be killed in the process.

They concluded that the discrepancy, like so many other anomalies of American violence, came down to guns.

More gun ownership corresponds with more gun murders across virtually every axis: among developed countries, among American states, among American towns and cities and when controlling for crime rates. And gun control legislation tends to reduce gun murders, according to a recent analysis of 130 studies from 10 countries.

This suggests that the guns themselves cause the violence.

Skeptics of gun control sometimes point to a 2016 study. From 2000 and 2014, it found, the United States death rate by mass shooting was 1.5 per one million people. The rate was 1.7 in Switzerland and 3.4 in Finland, suggesting American mass shootings were not actually so common.

But the same study found that the United States had 133 mass shootings. Finland had only two, which killed 18 people, and Switzerland had one, which killed 14. In short, isolated incidents. So while mass shootings can happen anywhere, they are only a matter of routine in the United States.

As with any crime, the underlying risk is impossible to fully erase. Any individual can snap or become entranced by a violent ideology. What is different is the likelihood that this will lead to mass murder.

In China, about a dozen seemingly random attacks on schoolchildren killed 25 people between 2010 and 2012. Most used knives; none used a gun.

By contrast, in this same window, the United States experienced five of its deadliest mass shootings, which killed 78 people. Scaled by population, the American attacks were 12 times as deadly.

Beyond the Statistics

In 2013, American gun-related deaths included 21,175 suicides, 11,208 homicides and 505 deaths caused by an accidental discharge. That same year in Japan, a country with one-third America’s population, guns were involved in only 13 deaths.

This means an American is about 300 times more likely to die by gun homicide or accident than a Japanese person. America’s gun ownership rate is 150 times as high as Japan’s. That gap between 150 and 300 shows that gun ownership statistics alone do not explain what makes America different.

The United States also has some of the weakest controls over who may buy a gun and what sorts of guns may be owned.

Switzerland has the second-highest gun ownership rate of any developed country, about half that of the United States. Its gun homicide rate in 2004 was 7.7 per million people — unusually high, in keeping with the relationship between gun ownership and murders, but still a fraction of the rate in the United States.

Swiss gun laws are more stringent, setting a higher bar for securing and keeping a license, for selling guns and for the types of guns that can be owned. Such laws reflect more than just tighter restrictions. They imply a different way of thinking about guns, as something that citizens must affirmatively earn the right to own.

The Difference Is Culture

The United States is one of only three countries, along with Mexico and Guatemala, that begin with the opposite assumption: that people have an inherent right to own guns.

The main reason American regulation of gun ownership is so weak may be the fact that the trade-offs are simply given a different weight in the United States than they are anywhere else.

After Britain had a mass shooting in 1987, the country instituted strict gun control laws. So did Australia after a 1996 shooting. But the United States has repeatedly faced the same calculus and determined that relatively unregulated gun ownership is worth the cost to society.

That choice, more than any statistic or regulation, is what most sets the United States apart.

“In retrospect Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate,” Dan Hodges, a British journalist, wrote in a post on Twitter two years ago, referring to the 2012 attack that killed 20 young students at an elementary school in Connecticut. “Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over.”
That article says its not this, its not that and its not that either therefore it has to be guns.
The problem is cultural. Mass shootings are mainly the domain of America. Gun ownership is not.
I think there is some merit in that there is a cultural problem at play. So isn't it a bit stupid to have such lax gun laws in a nation that has said cultural problems? Why not enforce some gun control to till we at least "work out what the hell going on". If that line is good enough to justify keeping the evil Muslims out, then why not take the same stance on guns?
Don't waste logic on Americans , their core beliefs are based on information that is 250 years and can be twisted and turned every which way

They are happy with that , leave them wallow in their own idiocy

Earl
Member
Member
Posts: 1608
Joined: Sat 18 Feb, 2017 9:21 am
Has liked: 120 times
Been liked: 85 times

Unread post by Earl » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 11:21 am

happy tiger wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 10:22 am
Earl wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 9:24 am
MG1962 wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 12:27 am
happy tiger wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 12:04 am
I don't want to be a fly in the ointment , but you could meet a mentally ill person and not even know they were mentally ill

Around 1 in 5 people battle at some stage in their lives depression which is a mental illness
Well that bill and other efforts were not aimed at the gun retailer making the determination on someones state of mind. That roll would be performed at the background check stage based on availability of medical records and other sources.

Adam Lanza, the kid that shot up Sandy Hook suffered from Aspergers, depression, brain damage from being anorexic and potential schizophrenia, was barely a functioning human being let alone being able to own a Bushmaster semi automatic.

Then NRAs only response was to call on Congress to fund schools to employ full time armed guards.
It's obvious to anyone with a brain that the gun ownership laws in America need to be changed. It's causing a whole bunch of innocent deaths.

Fix it or the deaths will keep coming.
And yet the Americans won't change there guns

Reconfirms my opinions of most Americans

Stupidest ,arrogant nation on the planet

Think that the sun shines from their own derriere's
People are delusional. Personally I don't get it and I don't think I ever will. It's a simple fact that they will not hand over their guns to save kids and adults lives. Their guns are more important to them. Seriously some of them go on about praying to God at the same time. I don't want to knock all religious people but can you imagine trying to act like you have morals when you don't care about kids and people being murdered for no reason.

User avatar
GNR4LIFE
Member
Member
Posts: 18702
Joined: Mon 28 Feb, 2011 5:57 pm
Has liked: 62 times
Been liked: 186 times

Unread post by GNR4LIFE » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 11:23 am

Earl wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 11:21 am
happy tiger wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 10:22 am
Earl wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 9:24 am
MG1962 wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 12:27 am


Well that bill and other efforts were not aimed at the gun retailer making the determination on someones state of mind. That roll would be performed at the background check stage based on availability of medical records and other sources.

Adam Lanza, the kid that shot up Sandy Hook suffered from Aspergers, depression, brain damage from being anorexic and potential schizophrenia, was barely a functioning human being let alone being able to own a Bushmaster semi automatic.

Then NRAs only response was to call on Congress to fund schools to employ full time armed guards.
It's obvious to anyone with a brain that the gun ownership laws in America need to be changed. It's causing a whole bunch of innocent deaths.

Fix it or the deaths will keep coming.
And yet the Americans won't change there guns

Reconfirms my opinions of most Americans

Stupidest ,arrogant nation on the planet

Think that the sun shines from their own derriere's
People are delusional. Personally I don't get it and I don't think I ever will. It's a simple fact that they will not hand over their guns to save kids and adults lives. Their guns are more important to them. Seriously some of them go on about praying to God at the same time. I don't want to knock all religious people but can you imagine trying to act like you have morals when you don't care about kids and people being murdered for no reason.
It's funny that a large chunk outspoken gun activists are practicing Christians. I don't recall ever hearing about Jesus owning guns. I thought he was about turning the other cheek.

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 36080
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm
Has liked: 21 times
Been liked: 37 times

Unread post by happy tiger » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 11:28 am

GNR4LIFE wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 11:23 am
Earl wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 11:21 am
happy tiger wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 10:22 am
Earl wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 9:24 am


It's obvious to anyone with a brain that the gun ownership laws in America need to be changed. It's causing a whole bunch of innocent deaths.

Fix it or the deaths will keep coming.
And yet the Americans won't change there guns

Reconfirms my opinions of most Americans

Stupidest ,arrogant nation on the planet

Think that the sun shines from their own derriere's
People are delusional. Personally I don't get it and I don't think I ever will. It's a simple fact that they will not hand over their guns to save kids and adults lives. Their guns are more important to them. Seriously some of them go on about praying to God at the same time. I don't want to knock all religious people but can you imagine trying to act like you have morals when you don't care about kids and people being murdered for no reason.
It's funny that a large chunk outspoken gun activists are practicing Christians. I don't recall ever hearing about Jesus owning guns. I thought he was about turning the other cheek.
JC was more about flexing his guns Gunners ;)

MG1962
Member
Member
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu 06 Apr, 2017 12:44 pm
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 14 times

Unread post by MG1962 » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 2:09 pm

happy tiger wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 10:22 am
And yet the Americans won't change there guns

Reconfirms my opinions of most Americans

Stupidest ,arrogant nation on the planet

Think that the sun shines from their own derriere's
Please dont categorize a people based on the behavior of their law makers :(

Munk
Member
Member
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri 06 Oct, 2017 4:20 pm
Has liked: 6 times
Been liked: 9 times

Unread post by Munk » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 2:33 pm

happy tiger wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 12:04 am
colmcd wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 11:46 pm
Munk wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 10:45 pm
Byron Bay Fan wrote:
Sat 11 Nov, 2017 10:30 pm


Trump is more guilty of those 26 deaths than Rudd or Gillard is of those insulation installers dying during stimulus package.
Dumb.
Agreed, trump is very Dumb.

But it's more then dumb from trump. Any responsible gun owner, gun range or gun instructor will not give a mentally ill person a Gun! It's that simple, the logical premise of gun defense is "I have a gun, you have a gun. You won't shoot me because i might shoot back and kill you". You give a mentally ill person a gun, suddenly you have a person who may shoot at you because you're an elephant, Pinocchio or stealing your thoughts!

You don't give guns to a person who is psychotic. END! The Obama legislation made sense, END. Responsible gun owners in Australia will want nothing to do with this crazyness. It's just too trumpdumb
I don't want to be a fly in the ointment , but you could meet a mentally ill person and not even know they were mentally ill

Around 1 in 5 people battle at some stage in their lives depression which is a mental illness
Exactly, you dont have to be a drooling lunatic psychopath to experience mental illness. I dont agree with the repeal but will not go as far as these lefties above me in slamming it.

Munk
Member
Member
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri 06 Oct, 2017 4:20 pm
Has liked: 6 times
Been liked: 9 times

Unread post by Munk » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 2:35 pm

MG1962 wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 2:09 pm
happy tiger wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 10:22 am
And yet the Americans won't change there guns

Reconfirms my opinions of most Americans

Stupidest ,arrogant nation on the planet

Think that the sun shines from their own derriere's
Please dont categorize a people based on the behavior of their law makers :(
Agree MG I knew we would find common ground eventually.
Happy Tiger, these sort of biggotted comments help no one. On the whole, Americans are deeply caring, generous and loving people. You should not judge them based on the outspoken ones you see on television. We hate when people do that about Australia.

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 36080
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm
Has liked: 21 times
Been liked: 37 times

Unread post by happy tiger » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 4:21 pm

Munk wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 2:35 pm
MG1962 wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 2:09 pm
happy tiger wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 10:22 am
And yet the Americans won't change there guns

Reconfirms my opinions of most Americans

Stupidest ,arrogant nation on the planet

Think that the sun shines from their own derriere's
Please dont categorize a people based on the behavior of their law makers :(
Agree MG I knew we would find common ground eventually.
Happy Tiger, these sort of biggotted comments help no one. On the whole, Americans are deeply caring, generous and loving people. You should not judge them based on the outspoken ones you see on television. We hate when people do that about Australia.
Based on all the Americans I have met , same as the French

I don't have the time of day for either sorry

Bit like Bourbon and white wine , I'm sure there is a nice one out there , but I'm yet to find one I like

Guess now I'm be bigoted against bourbon and white wine

And I don't give a rats what people think about Australians , people need to worry less what people think about them and be themselves

Munk
Member
Member
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri 06 Oct, 2017 4:20 pm
Has liked: 6 times
Been liked: 9 times

Unread post by Munk » Sun 12 Nov, 2017 7:06 pm

happy tiger wrote:
Sun 12 Nov, 2017 4:21 pm


And I don't give a rats what people think about Australians , people need to worry less what people think about them and be themselves
Right. So a tad biggotted with probable racism mixed with arrogance and selfishness? I think you have most bases covered.

Locked

Return to “General Discussion”