I agree.senordesol said:Context is importantStu35 said:Americas homicide per capita in 2004 - 5.9
Britains homicide per capita in 2004 - 1.6
Homicide is a good example I think, because unlike "violent crime" it's generally more universally defined.
US HPC in 1979: 9.8, in 2009 (When Obama took office and gun sales soared): 5.0, in 2010: 4.8
In UK in 2010 is 1.17, which is impressive but not much movement from 1.71 in 2000
The fact is: Homicides have been steadily declining in the US and have been for decades.
Alternately, Mexico's HPC (where civilian-owned firearms are heavily regulated) was 14 in 2000 (before FAF) and 15 in 2010, and Russia matches them (in 2010).
Also Switzerland (They hate this example) saw its PEAK in the first decade 2K at 1.19, and at 2010 is at 0.66
Finally Israel (Who seems to be getting into a fight with Palestine every other week and requires all able bodies to serve in the IDF) saw it's 1D peak in 2002 at 3.6
In short: That guns exist in a country matters a hell of a lot less than who has them.
My argument was that America is more violent than Britain. I didn't say it was because of guns.
I'm very much on the fence when it comes to guns. I think there are more important things to deal with. There are so many other social and economic factors which need tackling imho.
I've already shown you evidence it is. Repeatedly.jdun said:snip
Keep believing that UK is safer if that makes you feel better.