Toonpack

And 838 p.a. die from poisoning and 1,176 from suffocation or accidental strangulation, in fact 8,684 children (up to age 19 as it's classified over there) die accidentally each year, guns account for 0.2 per 100K of population. It would appear that the stupid folks who would leave guns lying around are hugely outnumbered by those who leave meds, chemicals or plastic bags lying around. Over here around 700 kids die accidentally each year over 10 times less than the USA with or without the gun factor. The problems in the USA is way bigger than just guns (which is the only point I'm trying to make).

It's explained in the second sentence in my last post. Somewhat a moot point, given murder rates in the USA are dropping anyway, even with all the guns lying around. How's that work ?? Weird isn't it, USA = Loads of guns and murder rate dropping, UK banned guns and murder rate grew.

Yes they would, but the murder rate per capita would only remain constant if that population growth was uniform across all demographics. If the demographic that has the inclination to murder more, within the society, grows at a quicker rate than the demographic with the lesser murderous intent then that whole society's murder rate per capita will increase. All that said, murder rates in the US are falling, despite all the guns. Canny read (from 2011): http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304066504576345553135009870 Although I'm not sure about his US v UK robbery etc comparison. Maybe it's not the lead in bullets either: There may also be a medical reason for the decline in crime. For decades, doctors have known that children with lots of lead in their blood are much more likely to be aggressive, violent and delinquent. In 1974, the Environmental Protection Agency required oil companies to stop putting lead in gasoline. At the same time, lead in paint was banned for any new home (though old buildings still have lead paint, which children can absorb). Tests have shown that the amount of lead in Americans' blood fell by four-fifths between 1975 and 1991. A 2007 study by the economist Jessica Wolpaw Reyes contended that the reduction in gasoline lead produced more than half of the decline in violent crime during the 1990s in the U.S. and might bring about greater declines in the future. Another economist, Rick Nevin, has made the same argument for other nations.

Yeah all Americans are idiots, that really stacks up. What are these simplest of points I don't understand ??? Maybe, just maybe, the things you think are absolute just aren't as clear cut as you think. Answer me this, IF guns are the root of all evil, and the primary cause of murder in particular, why didn't the murder rate in dear old blighty fall immediately guns were banned. How could it conceivably have continued to rise, eh? I'd love to know.

Banning (not just controlling) guns had no effect on the murder rate over here. Even after the legislation was passed in the UK murder rates continued to go up, along a growth rate similar to before the legislation, reaching a peak around 2003/4-ish it's now down to about the same as the early 80's (when there were guns). Getting rid of guns is not the magic bullet to reduce murder as most seem to be portraying, there are way deeper issues than just the guns. Take away the guns and the murder rates are still way higher than they are over here. If this country is anything to go by, legislating for guns has no effect on murder rates otherwise why did the murder rate continue to rise, for around 10 years, after the ban over here. Guns undoubtedly turn some situations, which maybe wouldn't be fatal, into murder, but Americans kill other Americans way more than any other western country even discounting the guns. Look at the Swiss, about half the fuckers have a gun and assault rifle or carbine for that matter, their murder rate is bugger all comparatively. Chicago - has some of toughest gun laws and controls in the US and no gun shops, you can't carry them in the street hidden or not etc. yet had 500 homicides in 2012(Detroit has 47.5/100,000 FFS). Houston has roughly the same population as Chicago (around 600K different) and over 1500 places you can buy a gun, with Texas' anyone can have one rules, and you can carry a gun just about anywhere, but Houston only (only!) had 217 murders. Median income between those two places is about the same as well btw. It's way more complicated than just guns. There's huge diversity in the statistics within the US, never mind anywhere else.

I don't own a gun you knob. Given we (in the UK) don't have any guns our murder/violent crime rate is fucking appalling.

Australia has re-armed, as many guns there now as there was before. http://www.smh.com.au/national/australia-reloads-as-gun-amnesties-fail-to-cut-arms-20130113-2cnnq.html After the controls robbery etc. went up, has fallen again now. Also it's not being made worse or getting worse, violent crime in the US is as low now as it was mid 70's and continues to drop.

So what you're saying is that if the UK population grew to 300 Million we'd still have the same murder rate as with 60 Million. Aye OK

I am well aware of that. US 300 Million people of whom 4 out of every 100,000 murder (assuming single victim single perpetrator) UK 60 Million people of whom 1.5 out of every 100,000 murder(assuming single victim single perpetrator) If you increased the UK population to equivalent size do you really think that the murder rate per capita would stay at 1.5, or do you think that with the growth of population that the number of people, within that population, who are capable of committing murder would also increase in some proportion, ergo the number per capita would perhaps also grow. Fuckwit. I wonder what it would look like if you could extract the UK demographic and apply it to 60 Million of the equivalent US demographic in terms of murder rates.

But how the fuck could you implement it, seriously. It's not about some aspirational dream it's about reality. How could you draft the appropriate law, there are people who absolutely need guns, like my mate out in the sticks, upper Wisconsin/Michigan/Alaska etc. is not like the Cheviots, you don't have Health and Safety signs at work telling you that before descending to look down and check under the stairs outside the plant for fucking polar bears, out in the sticks over here, but you do in Alaska. (my favourite HSE sign ever, that one BTW). If you're coming from a position like it is here and imposing control from no guns to controlled ownership, that's a hell of a lot easier than de-gunning a whole continent. I just really don't see how it could work. As I said easier the genies out of the bottle and added to that there's the small problem of the constitution.

I have made nothing up. P.S. I don't own a gun.

If it's not deemed murder, it's not murder then is it, simple really. You're as likely to die in an accident at work in the US as you are to get murdered (by whatever means). If you took all the guns out of America, how many of the murders that are committed do you think that would stop ?? 100%, 50% 25% Personally I think the US would STILL have an inordinately skewed murder rate, that's the real root cause problem.

Utter bollocks, I have no issue with reasonable legislation but it's way too fucking late. Where do I state I do not care about the lives of children ?? What makes someone kill by whatever means ??

4 times in total, yes, if you discount the non-firearm related murders it's about 3 times the murder rate of the UK attributable to guns as the murder weapon. Takes a "special" kind of person to kill I reckon. In simple terms, given the US has 5+ times the population I would expect that the numbers of people with the propensity, or lack of moral judgement, to be able to kill would be 5 times as much as here ergo a murder rate would (all things being equal) be 5 times what it is here, but it's not it's less than that. The fact that there are so many people prepared to kill is the problem, not their method of murder. The gun argument is just noise around that. In some utopian society, if you took all the guns out of the US would every one of those murders that happened with a gun, not happen by another means, some of them probably yes, but even if it was half of them you'd still have a murder rate approaching something like 3 times what it is here.

Simply saying that by having guns definitively means massive murder rates is equally as silly. Look at Switzerland, loads of guns, bugger all murder rate. My friends and aquaintences, who are gun owners, use theirs to do pest control on their multi tens of acre farms (could be hundreds of acrestbh, have never been but have seen pics) and to go "shopping" for meat in season. One of my mates lives 100+ miles from the nearest mainstream store waaaay up north and way out in the sticks, hunt and eat meat it's been that way his whole life. Should he lose his right to have guns ??? Some of my Texan colleagues carry, erm because their Texan and that's what they do, no-one I know there has ever used theirs "in anger".

Four times as high I believe, of which 33% don't involve guns. It's what makes someone a murderer that is the problem not the murder weapon. Knife, gun or baseball bat the victim is just as dead. I will read that, haven't yet btw.

Oh there's a problem, but it's peculiar to the US, in that almost anyone irrespective of background/record can buy a gun at Wallmart. Restricting it now would be worthless, there's so many guns out there, the only folks who would perhaps give up their guns are the folks who aren't the problem. If they were starting from say, where we are, that'd be a different matter. That said given the scale of the ownership, the effect of guns is somewhat restrained tbh. It's more dangerous to get regularly pissed or get pregnant, or god forbid, do gymnastics

In the US it covers - Murder, Rape, Robbery and Aggravated Assault UK figure excludes murder and sexual offences. http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/feb/13/violent-sexual-crime-statistics-england-wales-2013 Geezus it's even worse than I thought

It's way too late, the genie is out of the bottle.

Name calling, oh well that's novel. Refute the stats

Just to stir the pot We'd better ban booze, killed 2/3rds as many people in the UK (per UK Gov) as guns kill folks in the USA, given the US population is 5 times what ours is, that would mean booze is way more dangerous than guns. BTW Fish, your previous stats table is wrong, all violent death in the US is 4.7/100,000 of population (as per the FBI) so guns can't kill 10.2/100000 (and 33% of US violent deaths do not involve firearms) (Switzerland's violent death rate is 0.7/100,000 your table says guns kill 3.84/100,000) And from http://irbplayerwelfare.com/pdfs/CI_Risk_Assessment_EN.pdf (I was looking for sports safety stuff) Motorbikes in the UK killed 190/100,000 of those who used them in 2005 If you work in Belgium, Ireland, Canada, Austria, France, Greece, Italy, Spain or Portugal you are more likely to get killed at work than you are to be shot by a gun in the USA. In fact twice or three times as likely in Spain and Portugal (8.9/100,000) !!!! In fact if you consider owning a gun as "participation" there's tons more stuff more dangerous, Gymnastics being really, really nasty (twice as dangerous than gun ownership) as is being a UK pedestrian, about the same as US gun deaths. Bizarrely you are also 13 times more likely to suffer death or a catastrophic injury playing Rugby in Fiji than in the UK, UK cocks are more dangerous than US guns, four times as many women die in pregnancy 12/100,000 than folks get gunned down in the USA. (well they did in 2005) Oh and the UK had 700,000-ish more violent crimes than the whole of the US last year 1.9mill v 1.2 mill, There's more of it but it doesn't involve guns much so that's OK. There are more non firearm murders in the US than there are total murders in the UK, if you're going to murder your going to find a way.

No, not at all, I stumbled across it reading another article and thought I'd post it here as I knew it'd get some of you wetting the bed. Seems to have done it's job

Tragic, fucking poor bowler an all, he must be in bits.

Hmmm

Do you advocate randomly laying poison around the environment ?? P.S. Poison and dogs don't mix.