University of Colorado allows students to carry guns

[Saigon]

Ok, I have time to take this too!

-Why do you think that there are more murders via firearm in the US compared to other countries?

Guns are the key correlating factor, because the enable a potential criminal to endanger so many potential victims.

I agree with the UN you report you cite that it is difficult to isolate the other factors because they all inter-relate - urban poverty, underlying crime, drug abuse, urbanisation are obviously all major factors.

My feeling with Canada is that the amount of guns owned rurally is higher than it is in Italy or France - and we know that guns owned by farmers etc are less an issue in gun accidents than those held in urban areas. With Canada having such enormous areas or rural land, I suspect many people own guns for hunting, protection from bears/wolves etc, livestock purposes - these guns are unlikely to be used in mass-shootings or robberies.

I believe this has also been studied with Australia and NZ - NZ has slightly more guns, but Australia has far more urban guns, and more homocides as a result. NZ's rural/farming and hunting traditions are perhaps stronger than Australia's, which is not a big hunting nation.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

James -

Nice to seesome real data and statistics presented here - thanks for a useful post.

I'm just rushing off to work, but will answer this in more detail this evening.

Just one thing I notice right off the bat -

Correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation

I do not believe guns CAUSE crime - hence I am not saying correlation does equal causation.

I believe guns ENABLE crime.

All countries have crime and criminals, but I believe that the statistics are so much worse in violent crime in the US because the presence of such massive amounts of weapons mean that criminals are more likely to kill people in a crime in the US than they are in other countries, where they may only be armed with a knife or fists.

I'll come back to the othe stats later - they look interesting.

the US absolutely has a higher homicide rate with homicides, and a higher rate of gun owners than the rest of the developed world. But it does NOT mean that these two things correlate with one another.

Rsearch conducted by Harvard has concluded that there is a very clear correlation - and not only between the US and other countries, but across a range of 26 countries (from memory) the study concluded that a very strong correlation existed between gun posession statistics and homocides.

While there were other factors involved (i.e. gun ownership in rural areas causes less fatalities than in urban areas), the report concluded that the correlation was basically undeniable. I'd go further and say when you look at the homocide statistics it is obvious.

As I stated before the most major flaw I can find is that you're comparing different cultures/countries together. And there's no real way to compare the cultures with one another and determine how they alter the numbers of homicides were committed in each country (as far as I know-if there is one I would like to see it). If you were to walk through the actual city areas of Buffalo and Toronto-you would notice that although they're just a stones throw from one another-that the cultures are VASTLY different (I'm using them as an example because I have lived in both). I wouldn't think twice about walking in town through Toronto alone at night-in Buffalo? Absolutely not.

I'm not naive enough to think that gun ownership has no correlation to the ability to murder somebody-of course it does. I just think that the real issue is the culture behind each country, and what ultimately drives somebody to murder someone. Guns are the method (as you correctly stated), but not the motivation. Of course it's easier for somebody to murder somebody with a gun than a knife (on the flip side it's also easier to defend against one in all fairness). But that doesn't mean that the murderer wouldn't do so anyways if they hypothetically weren't able to get one.

Also, I realize I probably came off somewhat as a jerk in my previous post, so I do sincerely apologize for that.

 

[Dr Grump]

Saigon

At the end of the day the US is a much more violent place. Let them have their peashooters....let them wallow...

 

[JamesInFlorida]

Ok, I have time to take this too!

-Why do you think that there are more murders via firearm in the US compared to other countries?

Guns are the key correlating factor, because the enable a potential criminal to endanger so many potential victims.

I agree with the UN you report you cite that it is difficult to isolate the other factors because they all inter-relate - urban poverty, underlying crime, drug abuse, urbanisation are obviously all major factors.

My feeling with Canada is that the amount of guns owned rurally is higher than it is in Italy or France - and we know that guns owned by farmers etc are less an issue in gun accidents than those held in urban areas. With Canada having such enormous areas or rural land, I suspect many people own guns for hunting, protection from bears/wolves etc, livestock purposes - these guns are unlikely to be used in mass-shootings or robberies.

I believe this has also been studied with Australia and NZ - NZ has slightly more guns, but Australia has far more urban guns, and more homocides as a result. NZ's rural/farming and hunting traditions are perhaps stronger than Australia's, which is not a big hunting nation.

I would agree if Canada's population was truly in rural areas more. But they're not (according to the Canadian census).

Canada's rural population since 1851

"The proportion of people living in rural areas in Canada (18.9%) is among the lowest of the G8 countries,1 with only the United Kingdom having a notably smaller proportion (Figure 2)."

edit: Toronto alone has about 1/6 of the Canadian population. Montreal and Vancouver are also large and have a large chunk of the population.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No I don't and in Both Cases they had a History of Mental Illness that should have stopped them from Buying one.

Do you think that if the Students of Both those Universities had been allowed to Carry that perhaps the Shooters would not have been able to kill so many People before someone put them down?

I totally agree with you on the first point - always nice to find some common ground!!

I do not think guns have any place in any school or learning institution.

Teenagers and young adults are a high risk group for gun ownership - prone to emotional swings, depression, not to mention drug and alcohol abuse. There is too high a risk of both firearm accidents and homocides committed in fits of teenage rage to make that risk acceptable.

Also consider the stats (posted earlier in this thread).

The US has had more than 60 school shootings. Italy has had one, and England one. Many EU countries have never had a school shooting.

Neither allow guns in schools.

Why not follow their lead?

Fuck you I have had enough of your fucking stupid idiotic bullshit.
1. KIDS ARE NOT ALLOW TO BUY FIREARMS THEY MUST BE 21 TO BUY A HAND GUN AND 18 TO BUY RIFLE AND SHOTGUN
So columbine is out.

People were killed in gun free zones, are you going to bring your ass over here and station yourself at every gun free zone to tell those criminals they are not allowed to bring their guns inside? IF NOT SHUT THE FUCK UP.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Saigon

At the end of the day the US is a much more violent place. Let them have their peashooters....let them wallow...

We will not wallow and will move on.

 

[NoNukes]

Charles -

Do you think the shooters at Columbine and Virginia Tech should have been allowed to buy and own guns?

No I don't and in Both Cases they had a History of Mental Illness that should have stopped them from Buying one.

Do you think that if the Students of Both those Universities had been allowed to Carry that perhaps the Shooters would not have been able to kill so many People before someone put them down?

More people would probably been killed.

 

[P@triot]

Rottweiler -

Do you really not think providing individual examples of where guns "may" have saved a life is using a bow and arrow against the modern artillery of statistics?

Do you really not think that any poster with 5 minutes on their hands could present 20, 50 examples from the past few months where guns have cost lives?

For every 1 "mass shooting" you can provide, I could literallly provide 1,000 actual cases where a firearm was properly used for self-defense to save the life of an innocent, law abiding citizen. Period.

 

[P@triot]

Saigon

At the end of the day the US is a much more violent place. Let them have their peashooters....let them wallow...

Exactly! For once, you actually earned a rep for saying something intelligent. If you want to surrender your firearms and become either a statistic to violent crime or an oppressed subject under the thumb of an Adolf Hitler-Nazi-like regime in your country, that's your business. But America will not. And that is our business. It's about damn time you idiot foreigners figured that out and minded your own damn business.

 

[Dr Grump]

Saigon

At the end of the day the US is a much more violent place. Let them have their peashooters....let them wallow...

Exactly! For once, you actually earned a rep for saying something intelligent. If you want to surrender your firearms and become either a statistic to violent crime or an oppressed subject under the thumb of an Adolf Hitler-Nazi-like regime in your country, that's your business. But America will not. And that is our business. It's about damn time you idiot foreigners figured that out and minded your own damn business.

Sock....

 

[jillian]

Saigon

At the end of the day the US is a much more violent place. Let them have their peashooters....let them wallow...

not everywhere. but one would think people would be smart enough not to want to live in the wild west.

macho idiots think they're going to be the new sherriff in town.

 

[P@triot]

I believe guns ENABLE crime.

All countries have crime and criminals

And this is where your argument has an epic break down - if you understand that a criminal is a criminal because they don't follow the law, then with an ounce of common sense, you would recognize that banning guns won't stop a criminal from having guns (just like banning drugs hasn't stopped criminals from producing, selling, and using drugs). Which means, the idiot philosophy of outlawing guns ends with all law abiding citizens unarmed and vicious criminals heavily armed.

And we see the outcome of that scenario in the "mass shootings" where guns were banned already - and a criminal took the guns to kill a bunch of victims the idiot anti-gun crowd created.

Guns are banned in some areas already (such as Aurora, Colorado theatre) and it is PROVEN that it DOES NOT WORK. End of story. There is nothing the irrational anti-gun crowd can say that changes the facts.

 

[P@triot]

Saigon

At the end of the day the US is a much more violent place. Let them have their peashooters....let them wallow...

not everywhere. but one would think people would be smart enough not to want to live in the wild west.

macho idiots think they're going to be the new sherriff in town.

So the 92-year old man who was minding his own business in his own home when people invaded with intent to do him harm was being "macho"? Really Jillian?

Jillian, like a typical liberal (especially a liberal woman) is all irrational emotion and zero logical thought. Every political stance she has is solely based on irrational emotions without an ounce of intellect behind it.

Guns are banned in many places in America thanks to idiots like Jillian, and all we see are innocent citizens slaughtered. Conversely, where guns are permitted, all we see are innocent citizens stopping awful crimes (such as this 92-year old man being alive today because he did not listen to irrational, emotional train wrecks like Jillian).

Jillian, sweetheart, seek a mental health professional. What ever has scarred you, whatever has caused such irrational, emotional reactions with zero thought or logic is a problem.

 

[jillian]

Saigon

At the end of the day the US is a much more violent place. Let them have their peashooters....let them wallow...

not everywhere. but one would think people would be smart enough not to want to live in the wild west.

macho idiots think they're going to be the new sherriff in town.

So the 92-year old man who was minding his own business in his own home when people invaded with intent to do him harm was being "macho"? Really Jillian?

Jillian, like a typical liberal (especially a liberal woman) is all irrational emotion and zero logical thought. Every political stance she has is solely based on irrational emotions without an ounce of intellect behind it.

Guns are banned in many places in America thanks to idiots like Jillian, and all we see are innocent citizens slaughtered. Conversely, where guns are permitted, all we see are innocent citizens stopping awful crimes (such as this 92-year old man being alive today because he did not listen to irrational, emotional train wrecks like Jillian).

Jillian, sweetheart, seek a mental health professional. What ever has scarred you, whatever has caused such irrational, emotional reactions with zero thought or logic is a problem.

actually, you braindead twit, my husband and son shoot and my husband and father and brother own guns.

but they're not wackos like you rightwingnut loons who think you should be able to run around with a gun and shoot up anyplace you feel like.

noi matter how big and stupid you make your fonts.

and given that you're the one throwing the tantrum, i'd say that you're the emotional train wreck. i'm doing just fine.

glad to help you melt down though, it's always amusing seeing loons like you sputter and drool.

 

[P@triot]

Saigon

At the end of the day the US is a much more violent place. Let them have their peashooters....let them wallow...

not everywhere. but one would think people would be smart enough not to want to live in the wild west.

macho idiots think they're going to be the new sherriff in town.

It's equal parts comical and equal parts tragic when you see people like Jillian - with literally ZERO idea what they are talking about - running around with "opinions" anyway.

I know nothing about engineering NASA space shuttles - therefore, I don't jump on message boards and give advice about engineering NASA space shuttles.

Jillian knows nothing about firearms or security. She's never owned a firearm. Never fired a firearm. Was never trained in firearms. Has never worked in security. Was never trained in security. And doesn't understand security. Yet, that doesn't stop her from making irrational, emotional statements on firearms.

I have to wonder how people like this are not humiliated to comment on subjects they know nothing about?

 

[P@triot]

actually, you braindead twit, my husband and son shoot and my husband and father and brother own guns.

but they're not wackos like you rightwingnut loons who think you should be able to run around with a gun and shoot up anyplace you feel like.

noi matter how big and stupid you make your fonts.

and given that you're the one throwing the tantrum, i'd say that you're the emotional train wreck. i'm doing just fine.

glad to help you melt down though, it's always amusing seeing loons like you sputter and drool.

LMAO!!!

Jillian makes irrational, emotional statements about banning guns while her family owns guns. Once again, we see why the Dumbocrats are the party of hypocrisy. Leadership starts with actions first, not words you moron. If you're going to speak out about the dangers of guns and banning guns, then lead by example and gives yours up FIRST.

Second, you emotional train wreck, why are you changing the subject? You have this female-inferiority complex going on, where anyone with an ounce of common sense who wants to exercise their constitutional rights is immaturely called "macho" by you - but when I point out an innocent 92-year old man was NOT being "macho", but merely protecting his own life in his own home, you conveniently skip over that fact and make personal attacks like the emotional train wreck that you are.

Uh-oh, this obsession with attacking law abiding citizens and your irrational, emotional misuse of the word "macho" would make it seem that someone has is suffering from a serious case of penis envy. Like I said dear, seek a mental health professional. You are falling apart in front of everyone right here on USMB.

 

[P@triot]

My point is that if you make it impossible for risk categories of the population to buy and own guns, you wil radically reduce the numbers of mass-shootings.

Saigon, now you're just going off the deep end to insanity. It is literally impossible to "make it impossible" for a person to get guns.

The fact that you would use the phrase "make it impossible" for bad people to get guns is so ludicrous, it defies logic. Here are a list of things that are BANNED, but yet is readily available to all Americans still through the black market:

• Cocaine
• Heroin
• Marijuana
• Meth
• Crack
• LSD
• PCP
• Prostitution
• Murder
• Steroids
• Sex Slaves
• Stolen Goods
• Weapons

 

[bodecea]

Saigon

At the end of the day the US is a much more violent place. Let them have their peashooters....let them wallow...

not everywhere. but one would think people would be smart enough not to want to live in the wild west.

macho idiots think they're going to be the new sherriff in town.

It's equal parts comical and equal parts tragic when you see people like Jillian - with literally ZERO idea what they are talking about - running around with "opinions" anyway.

I know nothing about engineering NASA space shuttles - therefore, I don't jump on message boards and give advice about engineering NASA space shuttles.

Jillian knows nothing about firearms or security. She's never owned a firearm. Never fired a firearm. Was never trained in firearms. Has never worked in security. Was never trained in security. And doesn't understand security. Yet, that doesn't stop her from making irrational, emotional statements on firearms.

I have to wonder how people like this are not humiliated to comment on subjects they know nothing about?

Oh dear...you haven't read her post then.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Saigon

At the end of the day the US is a much more violent place. Let them have their peashooters....let them wallow...

not everywhere. but one would think people would be smart enough not to want to live in the wild west.

macho idiots think they're going to be the new sherriff in town.

People like you are the problem, you think those who are armed do it to be macho?
Ask the family of those who died in gun free zones how they feel about them.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

My point is that if you make it impossible for risk categories of the population to buy and own guns, you wil radically reduce the numbers of mass-shootings.

Saigon, now you're just going off the deep end to insanity. It is literally impossible to "make it impossible" for a person to get guns.

The fact that you would use the phrase "make it impossible" for bad people to get guns is so ludicrous, it defies logic. Here are a list of things that are BANNED, but yet is readily available to all Americans still through the black market:

• Cocaine
• Heroin
• Marijuana
• Meth
• Crack
• LSD
• PCP
• Prostitution
• Murder
• Steroids
• Sex Slaves
• Stolen Goods
• Weapons

Even in prison people are murdered, by other inmates.