Poll: Research on the Police has shown....

[ACman]

Everyone looking at statistics needs to keep in mind some things. Crime rates in pretty much all areas increase the more diverse the population is, the US includes accidents in it's Gun violence statistics while most other countries don't, knife attacks have a higher lethality rate then guns here in the US, most underdeveloped countries have strict gun bans in place yet maintain much higher homicide rates, and you need to compare violence/homicide overall to see if gun laws have caused more crime/deaths rather then just changed what is used for it.

If you want to compare violence and homicide rates based on gun prevalence, the US is culturally so different from a lot of Europe that it's a poor place to look. We just have way too many different kinds of people, and often times they don't get along. Switzerland is probably the best comparison point. They have stricter gun control laws then the US, but also has one of the proportionately largest armed civilian population in the world. They also have a lower then average murder rate then the rest of Europe, and a decent sized chunk of that comes from non-citizens.

Switzerland is a poor comparison because it's entirely ethnically European tension with the highest wealth per adult of any country in the world with moderate income inequality.

I think the thing to compare here is something called Inequality-adjusted Human Development index. It's a good way of finding comparable countries.

The region that is most comparable to the US as a block in IadHDI and murder rate and numbers of guns is the Balkans.

Lots of AK47s in the Bulkans

 

[soulfire130]

So, tell me if the citizens are armed now, what makes anyone think that the criminal won't buy more and bigger guns?

Oh, and saw if that happens: what makes anyone think the citizens won't buy more and even bigger guns?

Besides, guns, in general, are not that cheap. Even with less regulation on guns, not everyone gonna be able to buy one. so there will still be people without guns.

 

[ultimateownage]

It's simple really. The more people who are armed, the less crime there is due to criminals knowing that their victims have guns.

And the higher the chance people who just don't give a shit will be able to do some serious damage.
If you check most statistics, I promise you that your theory is complete shite.

Banning guns in America is impossible, but no country should be aiming to unban them. A good system of combating crime is much more useful than just handing the entire country those tools.

 

[Syzygy23]

I've seen this argument before from pro-gun people. Their claim that the police are "not legally obligated to protect us" is based on something we all know, which is that we can't sue the police or the government when they fail us.

It's a misleading argument, since the police officers are sworn to uphold the law, so it is the duty of the police to protect us. It's just not a legally obligated duty, meaning we can't sue them if they fail to protect us.

Anyway, gun control is good and misleading right-wing propaganda is bad. There are no cited sources because only right-wing pro-gun organizations talk about this "not legally obligated to protect us", but that would give away the game.

No, gun control is DUMB.

If you stop regular Joe Average from buying guns, how cam he protect himself or others from bad people who will just smuggle guns? Stop denying human nature, we all have the capacity to be violent selfish pricks, as well as mentally disturbed.

 

[ACman]

The problem isn't with the people who legally own them. The vast majority of gun crimes in the USA are committed with an ILLEGALLY obtained firearm. Which by the way automatically adds on to your sentence.

But why do you have so many illegally owned firearms?

The the laws controlling firearms in the United States seem to be largely ineffective.

 

[moonlantern]

All that pride you place in a two-hundred years out of date document[.]

The only thing out of date about it is all the ambiguous, open-to-interpretation stuff that must have been perfectly clear back then. Just look at this: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." That's so messed up the Supreme Court had to tell everyone what it means.

The most important thing isn't for everyone to have a gun but for everyone who does or will have a gun to be properly trained in its use and maintenance and how to prevent accidents/theft.

As for gun control, less is more, but there should be some basic regulations. Such as minimum age, criminal background (just so they can't have a gun legally) and restrictions of concealed weapons (but not unconcealed ones).

Also, knives/swords should be completely legal everywhere, because people who are going to use them for crimes will do so regardless and banning them just annoys those of us who enjoy collecting knives/swords.

 

[Kopikatsu]

I've seen this argument before from pro-gun people. Their claim that the police are "not legally obligated to protect us" is based on something we all know, which is that we can't sue the police or the government when they fail us.

It's a misleading argument, since the police officers are sworn to uphold the law, so it is the duty of the police to protect us. It's just not a legally obligated duty, meaning we can't sue them if they fail to protect us.

Anyway, gun control is good and misleading right-wing propaganda is bad. There are no cited sources because only right-wing pro-gun organizations talk about this "not legally obligated to protect us", but that would give away the game.

No, gun control is DUMB.

If you stop regular Joe Average from buying guns, how cam he protect himself or others from bad people who will just smuggle guns? Stop denying human nature, we all have the capacity to be violent selfish pricks, as well as mentally disturbed.

Sigh. Look here.

Spoiler

Notice how all of the countries down at the bottom have strict gun control laws, and the countries up top do not.

Also, 'Joe Average' with a gun he may or may not know how to use properly verses a criminal, armed with a gun, with killing intent? Joe Average is a goner either way.

 

[infinity_turtles]

Everyone looking at statistics needs to keep in mind some things. Crime rates in pretty much all areas increase the more diverse the population is, the US includes accidents in it's Gun violence statistics while most other countries don't, knife attacks have a higher lethality rate then guns here in the US, most underdeveloped countries have strict gun bans in place yet maintain much higher homicide rates, and you need to compare violence/homicide overall to see if gun laws have caused more crime/deaths rather then just changed what is used for it.

If you want to compare violence and homicide rates based on gun prevalence, the US is culturally so different from a lot of Europe that it's a poor place to look. We just have way too many different kinds of people, and often times they don't get along. Switzerland is probably the best comparison point. They have stricter gun control laws then the US, but also has one of the proportionately largest armed civilian population in the world. They also have a lower then average murder rate then the rest of Europe, and a decent sized chunk of that comes from non-citizens.

Switzerland is a poor comparison because it's entirely ethnically European tension with the highest wealth per adult of any country in the world with moderate income inequality.

I think the thing to compare here is something called Inequality-adjusted Human Development index. It's a good way of finding comparable countries.

The region that is most comparable to the US as a block in IadHDI and murder rate and numbers of guns is the Balkans.

Lots of AK47s in the Bulkans

I wasn't looking at something to compare the United States with, so much a looking for a country with higher legal gun ownership, but otherwise comparable conditions with other first world countries with stricter gun laws so that their violent crime rates can be compared. Switzerland probably isn't the best example for the reasons you said though.

Still, the IadHDI doesn't quite fit what I'm saying, though probably the closest thing that can be found. Inequality isn't the only trigger for violence. Cultural differences result in a lot, and the diversity in the US means that there are many more groups that regularly deal with culture clash. Since the United States is a good deal more culturally diverse then other countries, it's harder to use it as a comparison point in this instance. It inherently has a much different value for one of the key variables in violent crime rates.

 

[Virtual-Goose]

I live in the UK we're state intervention in our lives has in my opinion become to rampant and self justified here for people to notice or care when their liberties are taken. I do not smoke because i have concluded it is bad for my health I get this information from independent medical groups and make an informed decision however I hate that the government has banned smoking in public places such as pubs as it can only be classed as meddling. Now gun laws in the country are tight to the point of a de facto ban, a sentiment which I detest. I feel that we have sacrificed liberty for security, freedom for control it sickens me.

 

[infinity_turtles]

Sigh. Look here.

Spoiler

Notice how all of the countries down at the bottom have strict gun control laws, and the countries up top do not.

Also, 'Joe Average' with a gun he may or may not know how to use properly verses a criminal, armed with a gun, with killing intent? Joe Average is a goner either way.

Notice how that's only a chart on gun deaths, not deaths in general? You may realize this skews things rather largely, as it's pretty obvious that more guns means crimes that would otherwise be done without them are more likely to swap tools, right?

 

[Crazycat690]

It's simple really. The more people who are armed, the less crime there is due to criminals knowing that their victims have guns.

That's why there is absolutely no crime in the US while in Finland where guns are nowhere to be seen these days we have crime happening at every corner...

OH WAIT!

Yeah that's so much bullshit, the easier it is to get guns the more criminals are gonna have guns, and it's not like old ladys are gonna have AK-47's in their purses.

 

[need4snacks]

Lets look at some facts.

"Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year."

"A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year."

Perhaps these statistics should be taken with a grain of salt. There could be misinformation, miscalculation, even bias. But until such things can be proven, I would suggest anyone against a citizen's right to hold a gun not simply just throw these things out. Take them into consideration.

It seems a lot of pro-gun restriction arguments stem from the idea that the more armed citizens there are, the more crime will be committed. Unless a clear correlation can be made between high crime rates and less gun restriction, I firmly disagree. I've seen some people here simply ask us Americans to look at our crime rates and look at the crime rates of some Western European nations, which have strong gun-restrictions and lower crime rates.
I only ask that we look at Switzerland, which has one the highest gun ownership rates in the world, and yet is one of the safest places to be. Yes, they are all trained proficiently to use them, but the United States has gun restrictions as well. I can't just go out and purchase a fire-arm like some may think.
From this we can conclude that more guns does not equal more crime. Because of what I provided above, we can conclude that at least some of the time, citizens use firearms to thwart criminal activity.

For these reasons it is clear that a citizen's ability to own a firearm is both safe an beneficial.

 

[Kinguendo]

It's simple really. The more people who are armed, the less crime there is due to criminals knowing that their victims have guns.

Not actually supported by the facts though is it? America is one of the most armed nations on the planet and one of the most violent.

OT: If the police arent protecting the people then whats the point in having them? Make them do their job... and also, clearly change the parameters of their job so that they are actually protecting citizens and doing the right thing.

 

[direkiller]

I just got done doing a little research for a speech class, and in the process I discovered something I had only ever heard in rumors or passing but never took the time to personally look into. As it turns out, via local courts and the United States Supreme Court, the Police in the United States are not legally nor do they have a "Consitutional Duty" to protect the people.

Originly states did not have to heed the bill of rights then Mapp v. Ohio happened

The rest of the contusion deals with the powers of the 3 branches so id be surprised if police are mention in there as its states the federal government can only prosecution two crimes(treason and conterfiting).
It also dictates how a grand jury and impeachment process works if that matters as well

So yes the police don't have a "Constitutional Duty" because the Constitution dose not deal with what there duties are

 

[Kopikatsu]

Sigh. Look here.

Spoiler

Notice how all of the countries down at the bottom have strict gun control laws, and the countries up top do not.

Also, 'Joe Average' with a gun he may or may not know how to use properly verses a criminal, armed with a gun, with killing intent? Joe Average is a goner either way.

Notice how that's only a chart on gun deaths, not deaths in general? You may realize this skews things rather largely, as it's pretty obvious that more guns means crimes that would otherwise be done without them are more likely to swap tools, right?

Murder rate per 100,000 year 2010

United States: 5.1
Western and Central Europe: 1.2

You were saying?

 

[direkiller]

The problem isn't with the people who legally own them. The vast majority of gun crimes in the USA are committed with an ILLEGALLY obtained firearm. Which by the way automatically adds on to your sentence.

But why do you have so many illegally owned firearms?

relativity open borders,some of the largest ports in the world,and drug wars(its a Mexican problem as well as ours)
quite a few that have nothing to do with gun control laws

 

[Trippy Turtle]

It's simple really. The more people who are armed, the less crime there is due to criminals knowing that their victims have guns.

Compare the amount of crimes in the US to the amount of crimes in Australia (relative to population). The more people who are armed, the more idiots that are going to shoot people.
Giving weapons to achieve peace is like fucking for virginity.

 

[ManOwaRrior]

I'm actually pretty glad that where I live, you can't just have guns.
It means, that when I go out, a can usually assume that the people around me are not armed, just as myself and I probably wouldn't feel safer it was the other way round.
Strangely enough, we don't seem to need guns to prevent the police from running wild either.
Oh and someone needs to explain to me how you can use a gun to defend yourself against someone who shoots at you first. Which is what you can do with a gun: you can kill someone from a save distance. It's a weapon made for killing and attacking, not to defend with. If you wanted to protect yourself, you would wear kevlar vests and carry riot shields around.

But if you think that the fact that I might be carrying a gun in my pocket prevents someone else from pointing a gun at me, maybe I should always hold a dead man switch in my left hand and have some wires dangling from my pockets, now that would be a nice deterrent.

 

[Some_weirdGuy]

Armed citizens. There is a documented study done comparing all the counties in the US, and the more people(percentage) who carry handguns legally, the lower the violent crime rate. Strong correlation.

United States of America / USA - 90 school shootings and 231 deaths, 13 of the 90 shootings did not result in any deaths. The first recorded shooting was in 1966.

Europe - 16 school shootings and 91 deaths, 3 of the 16 shootings did not result in any deaths. The first recorded shooting was in 1913.

Canada - 9 school shootings and 26 deaths, 1 of the 9 shootings did not result in any deaths. The first recorded shooting was in 1902.

South America, Asia, and Australia - 8 school shootings and 29 deaths, all shootings resulted in at least 1 death. The first recorded shooting was in 1997.

USA school shootings/deaths, more than the combined total of the rest of the world^...

It also apparently has the highest gun crime rate of any developed nation. (but that's all to be expected I guess)

Either a whole lot of you are a bunch of murderous monsters, or its the abundance of guns that is the problem. I'm an optimist, so I like to think its the guns

But even so, I'm pretty sure its too late for USA, gun bans wouldn't work now.