Posted on 10/26/2002 8:12:44 AM PDT by NH Liberty
A series of high-profile shootings have highlighted the issue of gun control in the United States and Australia.
Australian Prime Minister John Howard has called for a ban on handguns following a shooting rampage at Monash University that left two dead and five wounded.
Meanwhile, the string of sniper shootings in the area surrounding Washington DC has prompted calls for tighter gun control in the United States.
There are an estimated 200 million privately held guns in the US, where the number of gun-related deaths each year runs into the tens of thousands.
But pro-firearm lobbyists say that restricted access to guns in countries like the UK and Japan leads to more crime against unarmed citizens.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
Also, although England’s murder rate is only one-sixth of America’s, England’s murder rate is increasing, while the United States murder rate is decreasing. According to the Justice Department’s National Crime Victimization Survey the crime rate declined in 2000 and is at it’s lowest since 1973. The murder rate in the United States has been decreasing since 1992 and murder rate in England has been increasing since 1981. In fact, even though England is gun free, gun crime has been steadily rising since the 1997 Dunblane pistol ban and it is now at it’s highest since 1993. It is evident that banning guns does not decrease crime because people bent on committing a crime or murder just use another method. The fact is that banning guns does not decrease crime; it just makes it harder for law abiding citizens, especially women, to defend themselves.
No
I didn't even have to read the article to answer that question.
Does anyone have the rate for england before they started banning guns way back when? I would be interested in knowing what the rate was for the US at that time as well. I suspect that they have always had a lower rate than us (different society, different people), and that our rate over the years is no different in it's change than theirs. Don't know where to look for statistics.
And I expressed surprise that they made a movie about "only" two killings, since here in Pittsburgh PA at that time we had two infamous murder cases, both hate crime cases, one where a black guy targeted and shot several whites, and another where a white guy targeted and killed five minorities. The British posters wrote that it all depended on your perspective.
The Brits are proud that their society hasn't seen the violence that ours has.
The figure I've seen (don't know source) is that in the late 1890's, there were only 4 gun-related homicides in London per year (w/ 4 million population).
I have grown tired of these self-serving dorks who use a high profile crime involving the use of guns for political gain.
I wonder if the low-grade moron who wrote this pablum has taken an honest assessment on the issue (i.e., what has gun control done to curb crime in the UK?). I would say not, because of what the results may be.
If we wanted the limp-wristed Brits opinion on this matter, we'd give it to them
I would think the murder rate disparity is due to the fact that America is home to more than 250+ million people...how many call England home?
Despite a lack of firearms in civilian hands, as many as 150 million Europeans died violently in the 20th century; the comparable number for Americans was perhaps two million.
Why should we listen to Europeans, and especially to European governments, in the matter?
I've read all the letters and the pro-gun control and anti-gun control people are talking past each other. There are two issues here: philosophy and causation. The philosophy issue trumps the causation issue, but both argue in favor of less gun control.
The philosophy of the US government is that any authority it has is derived from the people and strictly limited by the Constitution. The government does not give guns to the people; the people give guns to the government. The US founders were paranoid about tyrannies (justly so!). The second amendment is there to allow the people to overthrow any attempted tyrannical coup. This is explicitly authorized by the Declaration of Independence. I know this is alien to everyone outside the US. But this is the way it is.
The issue of causation is: does crime go down with more gun control or with less gun control? I am very dubious of country to country comparisons because of the differences in demographics and cultures. Rather, I like to compare changes with a country and within the US states. States are free to vary their gun control laws as they wish. States with less gun control have lower crime rates than those with more. The locations with the most draconian gun control are Washington DC and New York City, which also have some of the highest gun crime rates. Notice Washington DC's gun control laws didn't help prevent the latest terrorist sniper.
Outside the US, the recent gun control laws introduced in the UK and in Australia have led to higher crime rates. For those who wish to introduce gun control, you must first show that it reduces crime.
I close with a question for the readers here: Do you feel safer with private citizens owning guns or with the government? And why?
Problem is that it is hard to know if this is a matter of causation or association.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.