Truth About The Anti Gun "Argument" bogush j mann - 35th post - 15 Oct 2005 12:09

On tenterhooks - 15 Oct 2005 10:17

Agnes posted:

>> I was expecting a response to my posting about the evidence I produced showing gun homicides to be so much higher in countries where these horrid nasty weapons are allowed. Perhaps I should assume that matter is now closed.

.

Actually, no, you can't.

But then you should have known that if you had ever read any of my replies to your same points posted previoulsy.

Your very own thread on my forum where I have posted dozens of links for you to follow up.

Or even the table you were extracting "information" from!

.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/h2/h2.cgi?x=y&board=england.nottingham&state=view&sort=U

 

re: Truth About The Anti Gun "Argument" bogush j mann - 36th post - 15 Oct 2005 12:23
Agnes posted:

re: bogush's beliefs Agnes McKenzie - 88th post - 13 Oct 2005 11:51

Do you mean these rates:

Death rates per 100,000 by guns:

England and Wales; 0.11

Switzerland 1.32

USA 3.72

So the countries with more liberal approaches to these horrid nasty weapons have rates of up to 33 times those in the UK. Imagine that - that would mean a shooting in Nottingham of the Dannielle Beccan scale every fortnight.

Is that what you propose Bogush?

-----------------------------------------------------

Then she posted:

re: bogush's beliefs Agnes McKenzie - 90th post - 13 Oct 2005 21:12

Gun death rates per 100,000 of population:

Country, gun murders, gun suicides

England and Wales, 0.11, 0.33

Switzerland, 0.58, 5.61

USA, 3.72, 7.35

Game Set and Match?

-------------------------------------------------------

And finally she posted:

re: bogush's beliefs Agnes McKenzie - 90th post - 13 Oct 2005 21:18

I apologise for mis-informing in my earlier post this afternoon. On further checking I find that the gun murder rate in Switzerland is only 5 times that in England and Wales. However, I think my point is still proven that more horrid nasty guns means more deaths.

---------------------------------------------------------

Well, I've had a hunt around, and these homicide figures seem to tie up with hers:

Count r y.........Total.....Gun.....Non-Gun

Switzerland.....1.32......0.58......0.74

N. Ireland........6.09......5.24......0.85

Scotland.........2.24......0.19......2.05

Eng/Wales......1.41......0.11......1.30

U.S.of A..........5.70......3.72......1.98

Can ada..........2.16......0.76......1.40

J a p a n..........0.62......0.02......0.60

As she has already admitted, her original claimed gun murder rate for Switzerland was actually the total murder rate!

But she still "claims" that Switzerland has five times the gun murder rate in England and Wales.

Quite "true".

.

But she extrapolates to the "fact" that:

>> However, I think my point is still proven that more horrid nasty guns means more deaths.

.

But as a look at the fuller extracts from the table she seems to have got her figures from clearly shows:

The total murder rate in gun toting Switzerland is only 1.32

In gun hating, gun banning England and Wales it is 1.41

Errrmmmmmmmmmmm: That's HIGHER!

In Scotland it is 2.24

HIGHER STILL !!

And in Northern Ireland (with much more draconian gun controls) it is 6.09 !

FIVE TIMES HIGHER THAN SWITZERLAND !!!

.

So, using your figures, Agnes:

More horrid nasty guns means MUCH LESS deaths!

.

re: Truth About The Anti Gun "Argument" bogush j mann - 37th post - 15 Oct 2005 12:27
As I keep telling her, there's a bit more to comparative international criminology than a few soundbites.

But she seems to have trouble hearing me.

.

Let's look at a few other figures in that table.

They're actually from the 90's.

When the US and Canada had similar gun control laws, and Canada and Switzerland had similar gun ownership rates, though Canada had a gun ownership rate about three quarters of the USA.

But the figures are very different.

You have to make allowances for cultural factors.

Take Japan for example:

Look at its very low figures.

And it has even more draconian gun laws than the UK.

But The figures for Japanese immigrants in the USA compare to those in Japan, not the general USA figures!

.

The non-gun murder rate in the USA is more than the total in England and Wales.

The USA is a very violent society with a recent violent cultural past.

So you can't compare the USA and the UK directly.

.

But in the USA the gun murder capitals actually have had draconian gun laws for a century.

Whilst the areas where legal gun ownership is easy and widespread the general crime rates, as well as the gun crime rates, are very low.

.

In the UK England and Wales (more urban, more drug culture, usually given as the reasons for more gun crime by George and Agnes) the figures are in the same ball park, but lower than, more rural Scotland.

However, both are way below those for Northern Ireland where controls on the kind of firearms used in crime have been very strict for far longer than on the mainland.

.

In the UK we used to have easy access (as easy as getting a TV license, but far, far cheaper) to firearms and hardly any gun crime and low crime generally.

As gun controls increased, so has crime, including gun crime.

.

I think that's Game Set and Match, Agnes.

To ME !!

.

Oh, nearly forgot:

Country / Total Suicide / Firearms Suicide !

Switzerland 21.28 5.61

N Ireland 8.41 1.34

Scotland 12.16 0.31

England and Wales 7.68 0.33

USA 12.06 7.35

Canada 13.19 3.72

Japan 16.72 0.04

.

So, Switzerland might have a high gun suicide rate.

But it's only a QUARTER of its total!

.

Canada has only half the gun suicide rate of the USA

But MORE suicides overall.

.

Japan has a tiny gun suicide rate.

But a total more than TWICE that of England and Wales.

.

The USA has a gun suicide rate nearly as high as the TOTAL for England and Wales.

But its total suicide rate is LOWER than Scotland's!

.

If only the world was as simple as the Georges and the Agnes of the world see it.

But IT ISNT !!

.

The Georges and the Agnes of the world sit there and campaign for a ban on guns.

Because Guns Kill.

.

And they campaign for a ban on speed.

Because Speed Kills.

.

And most other people nod their heads sagely and say of course it does.

And of course we should.

.

And the politicians, recognising a vote winner when they see it, agree.

.

And deaths GO UP !!

.

Some of us try to look beyond the superficial.

Some of us try to study these things properly.

Some day we might be listened to.

.

But if we aren't: it won't really matter.

As, because of the policies championed by the Georges and Agnes of the world:

We'll all be dead!

.

C'mon now Mr B, 'tis well documented that enthusiasm for big guns is associated with a desire to compensate for ... well ... a slightly less sizable weapon.

You really should be more circumspect in revealing so much about yourself.

ND

People really should learn to read a few posts before posting.

 

As I have recently posted on the BBC board.

(From whence I take it you have just slithered over)

And archived on the thread that was adjacent to this when you posted.

And as I have pointed out previously on both fora:

 

Sigmund Freud believed that a fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.

And we all know what some psychologists think cars are meant to represent.

I wonder what a fear of cars is a sign of?

 

You were saying?

 

As for myself:

I don't own a gun of any size.

I don't shoot.

 

I merely have an interest in the truth.

And in the public not dying needlessly because of lies from politicians.

And certain groupings of activists.

That have their own agenda.

Which clearly is totally unrelated to health, safety, public wellbeing, or the good of society.

 

You were saying?

 

George Painter posted:

>> Phew there seems an awful lot of postings since I last visited. Mainly from one person though.

And a few more from you to add to all the others?

Trying to push my full version of the "data" Aggie had posted even further back, perchance?

.

>> To answer a few points:

>> No I don't know Agnes but she seems like quite some lady.

Is my memory failing me?

Or are you failing to keep note of what you've said in the past?

.

>> Last time I posted I suggested Bogush went away and looked up the gun deaths in Switzerland. He seemed to suggest Switzerland is not overun with gangsters etc. The non-firearm murder rate would certainly suggest he's right. However the lax gun controls seem to lead to an overall murder rate close to ours. The gun murder rate is horrendous. The USA of course is the one quoted most often and has absurdely high gun and non-gun murders and I think in every reasonable persons mind it's clear the lax gun laws play some considerable part in this sad state of affairs.

Talking of "states", remind me, was it you, or not your friend Aggie who mentioned Canada?

Something about firearms homicides going down since the new firearms laws of 1995?

But weren't they going down before 1995?

And didn't the Act not come into force until 1997?

And aren't they going down in the States (despite restrictions being eased!)?

Oh, and handguns have been strictly controlled there for 70 years.

But their use is increasing in Canada!

And here's another interesting fact:

The northern US states have several times the gun ownership rate of the southern Canadian provinces which are demographically very similar.

But, guess what:

The Canadian provinces have a higher gun homicide rate!

>>To make a fair comparison we need to go to a country where stringent gun controls have recently been introduced. Canada brought in strict laws in 1995. There was an almost immediate halving of gun homicides (both suicides and murders). However the homicide level has increased by about 3% over the 10-year period. either side of 1995. There was a marked increase last year but this was 9 years after the step change in legislation and so this is clearly due to other factors.

Oh:

It was you.

Sorry.

But you've been caught out again!

 

 >> There was a marked increase last year but this was 9 years after the step change in legislation and so this is clearly due to other factors.

No, there wasn't a marked step change.

The act came into force in 1997.

And gave a few years for people to comply.

So it looks like the halving happened before the act began to come into effect.

And the step up after it finished.

.

>> Searching on the web it's clear bogush is not alone. There exists a small vocal minority who seem to claim more guns would lead to fewer murders. I think this is a minority view.

Strange.

Considering all the evidence you and Aggie keep finding to support their view!