You still haven't explained in any coherent fashion why, compared to 1967, the homicide rate in England and Wales has risen steadily until it is now DOUBLE, while our rate, over the same time period, is about 15% or so lower than 1967.
Oh, and did I mention the two bans in the UK? The assault weapon ban and the handgun ban? Two things that people such as yourself heavily advocate?
Let me summarize, although viewers should read the
original exchange as it includes a graph and some pictures, as well as the full reference links:
billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Fri May-25-07 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Die on your knees or get on your knees to the gun lobby and it's minions
Edited on Fri May-25-07 09:01 PM by billbuckhead
Why not do what free democratic advanced nations like those in the EU, Canada, Australia, New Zealand have done to great success and have stricter gun laws and enforce them? The Brits had a twenty year low in gun homicide last year, only 46 nationwide!
krispos42 (1000+ posts) Fri May-25-07 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. And near-record total homicides
but I guess that doesn't matter.
How about we do Mexican gun control? They ban anything over .17 caliber.
billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Fri May-25-07 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Any links or just lies as usual? Here check out nationmaster for real comparison
The Mexicans come over the border and buy guns in gun friendly red states, the Mexican and Candian governments complain about it all the time.
With 3 time the murder rate of the UK, the USA is the one doing the right thing............in opposite world where the gun lobby and minions live. The only exceue they ever can come up with is that people of the same culture, language and genetics magically become evil in the USA. These gun worshippers will say anything to keep up their addiction to guns.
<
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-... >
krispos42 (1000+ posts) Sat May-26-07 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #9
20. Of course I have links for you
Even a nifty graph.
This is the UK's Home Office 2004/2005 Crime Report
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/hosb0206.pdf Open it and look at pages 48 and 54. For comparison, here is a chart of the US homicide rate. Note the massive bump as PTSD-afflicted Vietnam veterans returned home to an uncaring nation, as civil unrest surged, as crack and cocaine markets flourished, as Reagan systematically closed down mental hopitals and turned health care into a for-profit enterprise.
Note that the British graph on page 48 is for total number offenses; it's not per capita. Per capita numbers are on page 54. It is important to note that the UK uses offences per million people, and the US graph is in offences per hundred thousand. So you have to either multiply the US numbers by 10 or divide the UK numbers by 10 to get a valid comparison.
Note that in 1989 the UK implemented it's ban on the sale and posession of assault weapons, and in 1998 it's ban on the sale and posession of handguns. So both the numbers of guns in the UK, and the 'death-spraying' assault weapons with huge magazines, pistol grips, and bayonet lugs also decreased.
Some DUers will note that the bans on assault weapons and handguns in the UK was not intended to fight crime or homicide, but to prevent a specific form of homicide, the mass shooting like at Dublane or Hungerford. Some DUers also advocate extremely strict gun-storage laws with the stated intent of preventing thefts so as to reduce a major source of illegal guns for criminals.
It follows, then, that even if the UK assault weapon and handgun ban was not specifically intended to lower crime and homicide rates, it should have been a nice side effect. As should the 4 million police-monitored public-area surveillence cameras that have cropped up in the past couple of decades.
To see the ratio of US to UK gun ownership rates, see this post of mine. It includes links to my sources.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph... billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Sat May-26-07 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #20
34. Let's cut to the chase. HOW MANY MURDERS WERE IN BRITAIN?
Edited on Sat May-26-07 11:28 PM by billbuckhead
Tell us that. Admit it. Admit the truth, that it's far harder to kill people without guns.
krispos42 (1000+ posts) Sun May-27-07 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #34
35. 820 in England and Wales
The population of England is about 50 million, and of Wales is 3 million. Total, 53 million people, or one-sixth of the US population. Homicide rate is 1.55 per one hundred thousand people per year. This is one-third of the current US homicide rate of 4.5 per 100k/year.
40 years ago, the US homicide rate was about 6.0 per 100k/year, looking at the chart. So ours is down about 30% or so compared to 1967.
40 years ago, the homicide rate in England and Wales was 0.73 per 100k/year, looking at page 54. So theirs is up 100% or so compared to 1967.
I have never said otherwise. I, in fact, noted the exact same thing I just re-stated above on December 18th of last year. We're getting better, they're getting worse. In 1967, our homicide rate was 8 times theirs. Now it is only 3 times theirs.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph... As to admitting it is far harder to kill people without guns, well, that's a topic deserving of some consideration. There is no doubt that it is easier in the mechanical aspect of it. Pulling a trigger is much easier than, say, beating somebody to death with a baseball bat or strangling them with your bare hands. Not that the latter is particularly hard, either, especially when, as typically happens, a man is killing a woman.
The fact that it is easier does not make it more likely to happen, though. I drive a car. On any given day I can kill somebody on the sidewalk much easier with my two-ton domestic sedan than I could jumping out of it with a club and engaging them in hand-to-hand combat. Yet, day in and day out I do neither.
Simply because it's easy does not make me eager to kill a person. The prohibition against killing that nearly all of us have ingained in us is not easily dismissed.
In my opinion guns can make rage killings easier. So-called 'crimes of passion', usually, but that can include mass shootings as well.
However, it is also my belief that it is offset by allowing normal, non-violent, non-criminal, non-predatory citizens defend themselves better against attack. It probably more than offsets the passion-crime numbers, actually. But, as evidenced by your passion, that is not what gets reported. Blood-drenched stories about husbands killing cheating wives make headlines for days, but a 2% drop in national homicides gets a 5-second commentary during the MSM news hour. Never mind that that 2% drop means 300 lives saved, it's the father that kills his family of 4 then himself that makes top-of-the-hour news for 4 days. Maybe even getting it's own nifty computer-generated graphics on CNN or MSNBC.
How's that?
billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Sun May-27-07 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #35
37. The USA must be doing something right to have over 12,000 every year!!!!
Edited on Sun May-27-07 11:39 AM by billbuckhead
You could total up all the nations of Europe and it would be far less. There can only be 2 explantions, either Americans are uniquely evil or our unique gun laws are responsible for this ongoing national tragedy.
WE NOW HAVE A HIGHER MURDER RATE THAN INDIA!
<
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur-crime-murders >
<
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-... >
krispos42 (1000+ posts) Sun May-27-07 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. You still haven't addressed the fundamental issues I raised
Until you do, we are not having a dialogue, we're having two unresponsive, overlapping monologues.
What is the UK doing that is so terrible that their homicide rate is going up while ours is going down?
billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Sun May-27-07 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. Why does the USA have multiples higher murder rate than similar nations?
The only real difference is easy access to guns or Americans are worse people.
As far as the Uk homicide rate rising, they're just copying American violence glamorized by the gun culture and Hollywood.
krispos42 (1000+ posts) Sun May-27-07 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #40
43. The only real difference?
Well, have fun in your bubble. Say hi to Bush for me.
Tell me, what will you do when you and people like you get their way... and nothing changes? Who will you blame then?
billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Sun May-27-07 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. Crooked voting machines and a corrupt supreme court put Bush in, not gun nuts
Your side lost the fair election and could only win through corruption.
Keep laughing about Bush being power, it reveals your true colors and lack of humanity.
Um.... non sequitur?
Edited on Sun May-27-07 08:07 PM by krispos42
I was talking about some sort of near-total gun ban, not crooked voting machines or anything else like that.
You think I WANT Bush in power? You think I want this in MY country? I have a two-year-old, dammit.
Or some nutjob that worships THIS Jesus controlling MY country?
You think I want THIS as national executive policy???
Puh-leez. You think I have Old Glory in my sig because I'm some sort of flag-waving Bush-savant?
No.
I'm not letting the beautiful flag of MY country be the sole province of fascists.
Besides, I took the picture myself and think I did quite a good job of it.
END OF EXHANGE