Ursa Majoris Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 The statement that I am questioning what sources of information you referenced was in respect to people carrying firearms and having them in their homes and how that was such a rarity. The handgun ban was enacted in 1997, and all handguns were confiscated and destroyed. People not turning their handguns in risked a prison sentence. Even prior to 1997, the laws were significantly more restrictive than in the US. But, the wiki you present doesn't show how people's ownership or carrying habits were common or rare, and on top of that...it's a wiki. Nice to read and some nice information, but not a source for reliable statistics. OK, how about this? BBC article reporting the surrender of 162,000 guns when the British rendered them illegal. The article is from 1998, two years after the Dunblane Massacre that precipitated the banning, so it would be fair to say that the number of firearms in private hands was less than a quarter million. Using round figures, given that the adult population of the UK was around 35,000,000, it follows that not more than 1 in 140 people owned a weapon and many of the 162,000 weapons were surrendered in bunches, greatly reducing that number. I've tried to use numbers here that are as high as possible but I would suspect it would be fairly easy to prove that gun ownership in Britain at the time of the ban was less than 1 in 300 or more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 I never said any such thing. for all I know, spain may chop off your hand if you get caught stealing, like saudi arabia. there are far too many factors at play in something like that for me to suggest that any one thing is a "single most determinative factor". rather, I quoted an article suggesting that there was probably some connection between gun laws and the fact that 53% of burglaries in the UK occur while an occupant is at home, compared to only 13% in the US -- and, further, that that disparity may shed some light on why the UK has twice as many burglaries per capita as the US. it seems like a pretty simple, obvious, straightforward common sense point. You were speculating, which you are free to do. I called you out on it, which I am free to do. And at the end of the day we still don't know whether having a gun v. not having a gun actually makes you safer, or what impact lax v. strict gun control laws may have. So we probably should do what we feel is best for ourselves and not disparage each others' choices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Trying to compare one country to another is crazy as there are too many factors to compare, like someone mentioned, there would be a lot less theft in the US if we just cut thieves hands off. In order to have an honest look at gun control and its affects on crime you have to look at crime rates in a single country before it instituted strict gun laws and after. In all cases I've found, crime has gone up in every country that or area that has increased gun control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 You were speculating, which you are free to do. I called you out on it, which I am free to do. so, just to be clear, you're disagreeing that the 13% vs 53% thing has anything to do with the gun laws in the two countries? And at the end of the day we still don't know whether having a gun v. not having a gun actually makes you safer, or what impact lax v. strict gun control laws may have. well, I think we do know, since places that institute stricter gun laws always seem to see gun-related crime go UP. So we probably should do what we feel is best for ourselves and not disparage each others' choices. agree completely. the freedom for each of us to make those choices is all I would ever argue for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 1. so, just to be clear, you're disagreeing that the 13% vs 53% thing has anything to do with the gun laws in the two countries? 2. well, I think we do know, since places that institute stricter gun laws always seem to see gun-related crime go UP. 3. agree completely. the freedom for each of us to make those choices is all I would ever argue for. 1. I'm saying that I don't know what explains that disparity, and that you're speculating. Nothing more. 2. I don't know that for fact. And I'm not convinced you do either. 3. I don't have a problem with responsible citizens choosing to own guns. But I seriously question the fundamental assumption that owning one makes a household safer than the absence of one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 By your own logic above, it has only increased the likelihood of the burglar waiting until the house is empty. If there is a causal link between an increasingly armed society and decreasing burglary rates you've yet to provide it. Global Burglary Stats. Here we see that the United States (a very armed society) had the highest total burglaries of the nations studied. On a per capita basis, the United States had the 17th most burglaries. With European countries both above and below the US in terms of per capita burglaries I'm not sure the causal link you have assumed actually exists. For the record, I'm not taking a position one way or the other on gun laws. Just popping in to call BS when I smell it. Carry on. What is defined as a burglary, versus a home invasion? My understanding is that where criminals know their victims are unarmed, they want the victims home. That way they can get car keys, be led to valuables, have safe combinations, etc. In places where the likelihood of gun ownership is high, they prefer to burglarize, for obvious reasons. So I might be smelling a little BS too... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 What is defined as a burglary, versus a home invasion? My understanding is that where criminals know their victims are unarmed, they want the victims home. That way they can get car keys, be led to valuables, have safe combinations, etc. In places where the likelihood of gun ownership is high, they prefer to burglarize, for obvious reasons. So I might be smelling a little BS too... Just because there is nothing worth stealing in the whole state of West Virginia doesnt mean you should be so incredibly bitter all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.