"Homicide rates tend to be related to firearm ownership levels. Everything else being equal, a reduction in the percentage of households owning firearms should occasion a drop in the homicide rate".
Evidence to the Cullen Inquiry 1996: Thomas Gabor, Professor of Criminology - University of Ottawa
"The level of gun ownership world-wide is directly related to murder and suicide rates and specifically to the level of death by gunfire."
International Correlation between gun ownership and rates of homicide and suicide.' Professor Martin Killias, May 1993.
http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm
2007-04-17 15:11:01 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Gun deaths per 100,000 population (for the year indicated):
Homicide Suicide Unintentional
USA 4.08 (1999) 6.08 (1999) 0.42 (1999)
Canada 0.54 (1999) 2.65 (1997) 0.15 (1997)
Switzerland 0.50 (1999) 5.78 (1998) -
Scotland 0.12 (1999) 0.27 (1999) -
England/Wales 0.12 (1999/00) 0.22 (1999) 0.01 (1999)
Japan 0.04* (1998) 0.04 (1995) <0.01 (1997)
* Homicide & attempted homicide by handgun
Data collected by Philip Alpers, Harvard Injury Control Research Center, and HELP Network
2007-04-17 15:11:27 · update #1
More people die in auto accidents...does that mean cars should have more restrictions?
More people die of aids..does that mean we should round up the aids people to keep the un infected from getting infected?
The study is irrellevent.
2007-04-17 15:21:18 · answer #1 · answered by wwpetcemetery 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I look to detect flaws in very almost each little thing you're asking. Please reevaluate your query. merely as easily as irresponsible gun discharges reason harm, thoughtless claims verbalized make the speaker seem silly. Examples: with out the 2d modification the 1st modification will end to exist. next: the country isn't the country with the utmost fee of deaths led to via weapons. permit's see: I keep in mind numerous wars on the African Continent the place civilians have been indiscriminately killing almost all people in "Civil Wars". maximum of those weren't government owned weapons getting used via those civilians. Then there are all those conflicts in such a lot of countries interior the middle East.... not all weapons killing harmless civilians there are government owned weapons. way too many ae ineffective there and those deaths did not take place because of the fact the country is having occasional nut circumstances strolling into theaters the place it extremely is marketed that No weapons are Allowed. Do you advise we legislate ethical habit and in charge citizenship? If that have been conceivable, then each in charge citizen might have a gun and no demise might result so i've got faith you may sparkling up the project with out revoking Liberty and removing Constitutional Rights.
2016-12-20 17:42:18 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Banning guns from Americans hasn't helped anybody. The bad guys are going to get their hands on guns one way or the other. They don't care about laws. So what kind of situation does that put the law abiding citizens in? They don't have the adequate means of protecting themselves from the guys with guns.
In Texas one guy tried to rob a convenience store with a firearm. Immediately, 4 people pulled their guns on him. How far do you think he got? Without the means of protecting ourselves, the bad guys don't have anything to fear, except for the police, of course, IF they get there in time.
Hmm....I guess we could say that more jet liners = more 9/11's. So, now all we have to do is ban box-cutters and jet liners and all our problems will be solved! (*cough cough*)
2007-04-17 15:24:25 · answer #3 · answered by Yep-itsMe 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your example of Switzerland doesn't hold water. There is 1 firearm for every 3 people there. And, we're not talking about "hunting" rifles for the most part. Many have military M-57 assault rifles.
So "Why in a gun oriented culture such as Switzerland is there so little crime?" should be your question!
-----------------------------------
Just added link to 2nd article on Swiss guns. Really worth reading.
2007-04-17 15:23:34 · answer #4 · answered by Mark in Time 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
People without remorse kill people. Guns are intended for uses other than murder. Do your numbers include the guns used by police forces or that are Military issue? What of the hunters that use guns for feeding their families? Irresponsible people cannot set the standard for all gun owning individuals.
2007-04-17 15:26:45 · answer #5 · answered by mildred d 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No matter what "stats" you put, it all comes down to "one" thing, people kill, with either guns, knives, bats, cars, whatever, people kill. You can lay a gun down on a table and it can stay there until it rusts, but unless oneone picks it up, then there is the danger, not lthe gun "itself". Also keep in mind that a gun also saves lives, from a bear attack, or even from a two legged predator...????
2007-04-17 15:16:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
look at Sweden. Almost every male has a gun in that country yet crime is far less in that country then in America! Killers are more afraid to kill if they know a person has a chance to defend themselves!
2007-04-17 15:21:40 · answer #7 · answered by Gypsy 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Your statistics only show gun deaths. It ignores all other types of violence.
My statistics,
household- 5 people
Murders- 0
Suicides- 0
Guns-More than you would feel comfortable with
2007-04-17 15:23:55 · answer #8 · answered by singnwinds 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I do not see a stat for crazy people on that list
2007-04-17 15:19:59 · answer #9 · answered by just_my_2_cents 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i am a sportsman if no guns i cant hunt what bout all the good people ?
2007-04-17 15:19:48 · answer #10 · answered by tex_115 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋