Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[NineSpine]

What is true? What is your explanation for the decrease in the crime rate in the US and also in other countries? Name the other countries, along with a comparison to the rates in the US, with prison populations, etc.

One of the strongest correlations with crime that we know of is the presence of lead. Another strong correlation is abortion access.

Canada and the US have mapped each other almost perfectly in crime rate as far as rise and fall. Our prison population began skyrocketing in the early 80s, but our crime decrease starts in the early 90s. That's a lot of lag. There wasn't even a slowdown in increase through the 80s. In fact, there was a rapid increase. So, your entire correlation is based on the idea that one number went up while another went down ten years later, with no closeness whatsoever in how those numbers map.

Canada has had a declining prison population since the 90s, and has seen a similar decline in crime.

[petej0]

The list only shows it to 1917? And we surely know how much the population has increased since then. So we need to look at the % rate, not numbers so much. A lot more cops out there now than in 1917. Plus I was referring more to civilians being killed by the police. A study in 2011 shows 610 killed. The latest data shows 320 in 2013. As the crime rate goes down, the number of criminals killed by police will decline also.

Now that I reread your post, no, the data is from 1791 to 2013

Another strong correlation is abortion access.

Reminds me, I read a staggering stat the other day. In 2013, more black babies were aborted then were born in NYC.

[Stormdash]

Now that I reread your post, no, the data is from 1791 to 2013


Reminds me, I read a staggering stat the other day. In 2013, more black babies were aborted then were born in NYC.

Margaret Sanger would be thrilled, no doubt. Not sure what it has to do with gun control, though (although abortion is a handy substitute when trying to get hardcore gun control types to grok restrictions on the power of government).

[NineSpine]

Margaret Sanger would be thrilled, no doubt. Not sure what it has to do with gun control, though (although abortion is a handy substitute when trying to get hardcore gun control types to grok restrictions on the power of government).

Let the Margaret Sanger thing go already. It was old years ago. In the 80s we had a Republican president that ignored a crack and HIV epidemic that ravaged the black community, and you people still want to talk about Margaret fucking Sanger.

[Ghostpanther]

One of the strongest correlations with crime that we know of is the presence of lead. Another strong correlation is abortion access.

Canada and the US have mapped each other almost perfectly in crime rate as far as rise and fall. Our prison population began skyrocketing in the early 80s, but our crime decrease starts in the early 90s. That's a lot of lag. There wasn't even a slowdown in increase through the 80s. In fact, there was a rapid increase. So, your entire correlation is based on the idea that one number went up while another went down ten years later, with no closeness whatsoever in how those numbers map.

Canada has had a declining prison population since the 90s, and has seen a similar decline in crime.

Very interesting. It is a good theory because it is backed up with some good data. However you are wrong that the crime rate started going down from peaking in the 80's. As this chart shows, there was a nice drop around 1980 - 1985. But then starting to climb again and peaked in 1992. It has been steady dropping since then.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...States.svg.png

So I am not saying you are wrong about the lead. In fact I agree there appears to be a strong correlation between lead exposure and crime. But I think there are other contributing factors involved also. I can still take the incarceration charts and the drop in crime in the US and there appears to be a correlation there too. Anyway, thanks for the interesting info.

[Mayhem]

Very interesting. It is a good theory because it is backed up with some good data. However you are wrong that the crime rate started going down from peaking in the 80's. As this chart shows, there was a nice drop around 1980 - 1985. But then starting to climb again and peaked in 1992. It has been steady dropping since then.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...States.svg.png

... it peaked in 1980, the 1991 number is lower than the one from 1980, so it didn´t peak in 1991, your chart shows that

[Ghostpanther]

... it peaked in 1980, the 1991 number is lower than the one from 1980, so it didn´t peak in 1991, your chart shows that

Correct. Thanks for pointing that out. The peak in 1980 however is not much higher than the 1991 peak.

[Mayhem]

Correct. Thanks for pointing that out. The peak in 1980 however is not much higher than the 1991 peak.

can anyone confirm these numbers? they seem way off

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_i...#Violent_crime

[TZucchini]

can anyone confirm these numbers? they seem way off

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_i...#Violent_crime

I didn't look at them, but you cannot compare the "violent crime" rates of countries accurately. Especially the often touted USA vs. The UK.

Reason being? Each country defines these two terms in vastly different ways.

The FBI defines "violent crime" as: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.

The UK defines "violent crime" very broadly, as: Violence against the person. This encompasses basically everything, from a non-injurious pushing and shoving match, to procuring an illegal abortion. In fact, 45% of The UK's "violent crimes" do not involve injury.

[Mayhem]

I didn't look at them, but you cannot compare the "violent crime" rates of countries accurately. Especially the often touted USA vs. The UK.

Reason being? Each country defines these two terms in vastly different ways.

The FBI defines "violent crime" as: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.

The UK defines "violent crime" very broadly, as: Violence against the person. This encompasses basically everything, from a non-injurious pushing and shoving match, to procuring an illegal abortion. In fact, 45% of The UK's "violent crimes" do not involve injury.

that´s actually taken into account with austria, when you read the link, austria takes more into account than the US and still has a significant lower violent crime rate, hence why i asked for confirmation, because that´s quite a difference

[hakujinbakasama]

I didn't look at them, but you cannot compare the "violent crime" rates of countries accurately. Especially the often touted USA vs. The UK.

Reason being? Each country defines these two terms in vastly different ways.

The FBI defines "violent crime" as: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.

The UK defines "violent crime" very broadly, as: Violence against the person. This encompasses basically everything, from a non-injurious pushing and shoving match, to procuring an illegal abortion. In fact, 45% of The UK's "violent crimes" do not involve injury.

That would be only 1 reason. There are actually several. The "problem" is that people tend to fucking refuse reality unless it supports their conclusion.

[PhaelixWW]

In fact, 45% of The UK's "violent crimes" do not involve injury.

You know, 20% of the US violent crimes don't involve injury, either.

[Ghostpanther]

that´s actually taken into account with austria, when you read the link, austria takes more into account than the US and still has a significant lower violent crime rate, hence why i asked for confirmation, because that´s quite a difference

If I understand your point that Austria has a significant lower crime rate than the US, it should. I would be surprised if it didn't. The US has states bigger and with more population than Austria does and a lot more cultural issues.

[Eats Compost]

If I understand your point that Austria has a significant lower crime rate than the US, it should. I would be surprised if it didn't. The US has states bigger and with more population than Austria does and a lot more cultural issues.

I think it's pretty safe to assume that those numbers are per capita. It's hard to commit 0.42 murders.

[Nadiru]

Smaller total numbers are easier to variate up or down even through per capita metrics. Case in point, comparing Austria (population 8,100,000) even with Germany (population 80,000,000) is sort of disingenuous. I have no doubt that the US is more dangerous; there's considerably more to fight over in North America than Europe. Plus, a continual flow of immigrants from far-off lands means that the US is in a permanent state of social and political transition, which is never totally peaceful.

[TZucchini]

You know, 20% of the US violent crimes don't involve injury, either.

That's a pretty significant difference. 20% vs 45%.

[Mayhem]

If I understand your point that Austria has a significant lower crime rate than the US, it should. I would be surprised if it didn't. The US has states bigger and with more population than Austria does and a lot more cultural issues.

yeah, we have 3 times the density of the US and 1/5 of the population is living in one city

[Incredibale]

Get treated for insomnia, have your guns stolen by government. Welcome to New York

This is why 2A advocates have to always keep their guard up. Gun control often comes through back door methods like this.

[Ghostpanther]

yeah, we have 3 times the density of the US and 1/5 of the population is living in one city

Yep and a lot of other positives going for you and I am not speaking of strong gun control.

[Mahourai]

Get treated for insomnia, have your guns stolen by government. Welcome to New York

This is why 2A advocates have to always keep their guard up. Gun control often comes through back door methods like this.

While the Daily Caller is a rubbish source, this is illustrative of why "mental health" requirements to exercise constitutional rights are awful.