Why is it that only the US is linient toward guns?

Question

Other English-speaking countries control gun usage strictly. But what's wrong with America?
Most often, I feel more insecure in urban areas. This is not the case in Australian or Canadian cities

Answer 1

Gun Laws do Not Reduce Criminal Violence According to New Study
Contact(s):
Gary Mauser, Professor
Simon Fraser University, Tel [phone]
Email: [e-mail]



Release Date: November 27, 2003

Vancouver, BC - Restrictive firearm legislation has failed to reduce gun violence in Australia, Canada, or Great Britain. The policy of confiscating guns has been an expensive failure, according to a new paper The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales, released today by The Fraser Institute.

“What makes gun control so compelling for many is the belief that violent crime is driven by the availability of guns, and more importantly, that criminal violence in general may be reduced by limiting access to firearms,” says Gary Mauser, author of the paper and professor of business at Simon Fraser University.

This new study examines crime trends in Commonwealth countries that have recently introduced firearm regulations. Mauser notes that the widely ignored key to evaluating firearm regulations is to examine trends in total violent crime, not just firearm crime.

The United States provides a valuable point of comparison for assessing crime rates as that country has witnessed a dramatic drop in criminal violence over the past decade – for example, the homicide rate in the US has fallen 42 percent since 1991. This is particularly significant when compared with the rest of the world – in 18 of the 25 countries surveyed by the British Home Office, violent crime increased during the 1990s.

The justice system in the U.S. differs in many ways from those in the Commonwealth but perhaps the most striking difference is that qualified citizens in the United States can carry concealed handguns for self-defence. During the past few decades, more than 25 states in the U.S. have passed laws allowing responsible citizens to carry concealed handguns. In 2003, there are 35 states where citizens can get such a permit.

Disarming the public has not reduced criminal violence in any country examined in this study. In all these cases, disarming the public has been ineffective, expensive, and often counter productive. In all cases, the effort meant setting up expensive bureaucracies that produce no noticeable improvement to public safety or have made the situation worse. Mauser points to these trends in the countries he examined:

England and Wales

Both Conservative and Labour governments have introduced restrictive firearms laws over the past 20 years; all handguns were banned in 1997.

Yet in the 1990s alone, the homicide rate jumped 50 percent, going from 10 per million in 1990 to 15 per million in 2000. While not yet as high as the US, in 2002 gun crime in England and Wales increased by 35 percent. This is the fourth consecutive year that gun crime has increased.

Police statistics show that violent crime in general has increased since the late 1980s and since 1996 has been more serious than in the United States.

Australia

The Australian government made sweeping changes to the firearms legislation in 1997. However, the total homicide rate, after having remained basically flat from 1995 to 2001, has now begun climbing again. While violent crime is decreasing in the United States, it is increasing in Australia. Over the past six years, the overall rate of violent crime in Australia has been on the rise – for example, armed robberies have jumped 166 percent nationwide.

The confiscation and destruction of legally owned firearms has cost Australian taxpayers at least $500 million. The cost of the police services bureaucracy, including the costly infrastructure of the gun registration system, has increased by $200 million since 1997.

“And for what?” asks Mauser. “There has been no visible impact on violent crime. It is impossible to justify such a massive amount of the taxpayers’ money for no decrease in crime. For that kind of tax money, the police could have had more patrol cars, shorter shifts, or better equipment.”

Canada

The contrast between the criminal violence rates in the United States and in Canada is dramatic. Over the past decade, the rate of violent crime in Canada has increased while in the United States the violent crime rate has plummeted. The homicide rate is dropping faster in the US than in Canada.

The Canadian experiment with firearm registration is becoming a farce says Mauser. The effort to register all firearms, which was originally claimed to cost only $2 million, has now been estimated by the Auditor General to top $1 billion. The final costs are unknown but, if the costs of enforcement are included, the total could easily reach $3 billion.

“It is an illusion that gun bans protect the public. No law, no matter how restrictive, can protect us from people who decide to commit violent crimes. Maybe we should crack down on criminals rather than hunters and target shooters?” says Mauser.
- 30 -

The Fraser Institute is an independent research and educational organization based in Canada. Its mission is to measure, study, and communicate the impact of competitive markets and government intervention on the welfare of individuals. To protect the Institute’s independence, it does not accept grants from governments or contracts for research.

Answer 2

its not only the US- africa is bad too.

but yes, they are very liberal in their attitudes. they point to 'if good guys have to give up their guns they'll be at mercy of criminals' and 'gun laws don't reduce gun crime' etc but thats just not true, in the UK guns have been banned since Dunblane and gun fatalities are much much lower as a percentage than the US. It doesn't matter even if the rate of gun crime in the US is falling and the UK is rising, the US has a long way to fall, and the UK a long way to rise, before the gun crime levels even meet in the middle.

True, most guns used in fatal shootings are illicit, but all guns start off as legal guns. It doesn't even really matter that guns will always be available on the black market, the harder guns are to come by, the more expensive illicit guns will be, and there will be a reduction in gun ownership and thereby the 'gun culture' that causes so many deaths anyway. maybe a 15yr old gangster will clench his fist rather than reach for a $7000 gun. its worth thinking about.

Answer 3

i do no longer have confidence in the dying penalty based on the occasional wrongful conviction, and likewise because of the fact i do no longer have confidence in revenge. I propose, it incredibly is actual it incredibly is a deterrent, yet i do no longer think of maximum murders are carried out with that in the time of strategies. i'm against the dying penalty for motives beside the point to weapons, is my considerable component there. On weapons. I do exactly no longer see any solid reason that individuals would desire to have weapons. i think of if executed precise, taking the weapons off the streets first, then out of the hands of voters so as that in the time of standard terms the cops have them, then ultimately (after some many years of artwork) out of the hands of cops so in ordinary terms the protection stress has them, and combating there might make a strategies-blowing help in gun deaths. i think of we would go from 12,000 gun deaths in line with twelve months (modern-day US estimate) to a minimum of something like the present estimate for Japan (12)

Answer 4

Really?
Actually the US controls guns pretty strictly in urban areas, but criminals get guns illegally.
And guns don't create the criminal mind.

Answer 5

Personal security begins with self.

IF we sacrifice freedom for security based on government security we have neither security or freedom

Teaching kids to be heros not victims is the key. Liberals so indoctrinate the victim mentality people see the government as the solution, IT IS NOT. Real people are the solution.
We need kids with backbones. not spineless jelly fish.

That said we need to teach communication skills on how to truly connect and engage people without threatening them.

I believe in a simple technique to teach my kids. You see someone at the grocery store, pharmacy, restaurant, barbershop and notice their name tag. each time you see them say hello "Bob". for each action people feel less isolated.

Try it and see if it works. I know many people by name and the names of a few of their kids because I take the time (something many fail to use correctly these days) to get to know ONE damned person.
Self, look at yourself. Who are you? Why are you here? What is your significance other then being worm food in 10-80 years?
Some of the thought's I have after something like this.

We have strong gun laws, and people with intent will find a way to perpetrate. Guns are tools as are fire, knives, pitchforks, ammonium nitrate, jet fuel, gasoline, the problem is NOT the object. The problem is the perpetrator.

I believe many people have become willing to usurp their personal liberty for security they will clamor for a police state before long.

I believe that tragedies such as this ought to give us a reason to pause and look at the causes as to why angry people do atrocious and horrific acts.

I believe the media is culpable. I believe that parents are culpable, I believe liberals are culpable, I believe by removing any semblance of conflict from schools we not given kids healthy outlets for conflict and aggression.
When I was a kid, I carried my 22 rifle and 20 gauge shotgun in the truck of my car so I could go hunting after school, I never once thought when I was getting picked on by a bully to go get the gun and kill him.. I thought differently because I respected myself and those around me. If it came to blows with the bully it would be with fists in the parking lot. a bloody nose generally stopped it.

Guns are not the problem. Ignorance of anything is dangerous and society has become ignorant of firearms. Both of my children have certified in hunter safety and firearm training. They not only know HOW to use firearms but HOW NOT to use them. This is the problem with schools today, we no longer accept firearms as a norm so they've become abnormal AND people clamor for control. This is wrong.


http://www.columbine-angels.com/violence...

Answer 6

It is probably because the Americans believe that they are the only free country in the World and they want to give the freedom of choice in everything, even if it might result in the loss of security.

Answer 7

We are lenient to guns because our founding fathers had enough WISDOM to give private citizens that right. What is wrong, is the lack of prosecution of criminals who use them
to commit deeds of unlawful and evil acts.

Answer 8

most of the crimes that happen with guns are done with guns obtained illegally.

Answer 9

Are other nations strict on suicide belts?