The USA is 31st for gun deaths per 100,000 population. Most of those with higher rates don't have guns freely on sale.But the only country anyone goes on about is the USA.
How many of those countries are developed, Western societies and how many are classed as 3rd world countries?
Depends on your definition. The rate is about 12 times more in Venezuela, a country Corbyn said was an example we should aiming to be like. Jamaica's rate is 7 or 8 times.
Those aren't two countries I'd think of as fully developed. Jamaica's crime rate is notorious, Venezuela has had a revolution recently and is incredibly tumultuous.
Can't say I've ever heard or read him say that at all. Maybe you could provide a link, by PM if necessary for forum rules. Anyway, how could you realistically compare Britain to Venezuela under any socio-economic or political terms? It'd be fundamentally stupid to do so. The point is that the US is the (largely self appointed) leader of the 'free world' - the beacon etc. Which countries are you comparing its gun related crime to?
This is an interesting post from Reddit. There are a links on most points to the research docs/reports, but too lazy to link them. There are is a lot of interesting debate here about gun control. Here's a TL;DR from https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html Americans make up about 4.4 percent of the global population but own 42 percent of the world’s guns. From 1966 to 2012, 31 percent of the gunmen in mass shootings worldwide were American 1 Adjusted for population, only Yemen has a higher rate of mass shootings among countries with more than 10 million people. Yemen has the world’s second-highest rate of gun ownership after the United States. If mental health made the difference, then data would show that Americans have more mental health problems than do people in other countries with fewer mass shootings. A 2015 study estimated that only 4 percent of American gun deaths could be attributed to mental health issues 2 EDIT : This was misleading - The published paper reads Perhaps most importantly, the 1-year population attributable risk of violence associated with serious mental illness alone was found to be only 4% in the ECA surveys. Attributable risk takes into account both the magnitude of risk and the number of people in the risk category within the population. America’s gun homicide rate was 33 per million people in 2009, far exceeding the average among developed countries. Americans sometimes see this as an expression of deeper problems with crime. But the United States is not actually more prone to crime than other developed countries. Rather, they found, in data that has since been repeatedly confirmed, that American crime is simply more lethal. 3 A New Yorker is just as likely to be robbed as a Londoner, for instance, but the New Yorker is 54 times more likely to be killed in the process.They concluded that the discrepancy, like so many other anomalies of American violence, came down to guns. In China, about a dozen seemingly random attacks on schoolchildren killed 25 people between 2010 and 2012. Most used knives; none used a gun. By contrast, in this same window, the United States experienced five of its deadliest mass shootings, which killed 78 people. Scaled by population, the American attacks were 12 times as deadly. The United States also has some of the weakest controls over who may buy a gun and what sorts of guns may be owned. Switzerland has the second-highest gun ownership rate of any developed country, about half that of the United States. Its gun homicide rate in 2004 was 7.7 per million people — unusually high, in keeping with the relationship between gun ownership and murders, but still a fraction of the rate in the United States. Swiss gun laws are more stringent, setting a higher bar for securing and keeping a license, for selling guns and for the types of guns that can be owned. Such laws reflect more than just tighter restrictions. They imply a different way of thinking about guns, as something that citizens must affirmatively earn the right to own. After Britain had a mass shooting in 1987, the country instituted strict gun control laws. So did Australia after a 1996 shooting. But the United States has repeatedly faced the same calculus and determined that relatively unregulated gun ownership is worth the cost to society. That choice, more than any statistic or regulation, is what most sets the United States apart. EDIT : Formatting EDIT 2 : A lot of questions about gun violence and mental illness. Here is (once again) a link to the text version of the paper (from 2015, by the US National Library of Medicine and the National Institute of Health) - (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4211925/ and thanks for the gold! EDIT 3 : Please read the linked article! Takes about 6-8 mins tops. The title is "What explains U.S. Mass shootings?". I'm a firm believer that reading well researched articles/papers/journalistic pieces which provide the sources as well, lead to well informed, civil discussions based on facts and data. Since I'm a lurker_n00b Redditor who hasn't fully understood the etiquettes of posting, I placed this comment in this particular post since the discussions revolved around gun control in the USA - perhaps it deserved it's own post elsewhere. Also, in my haste I might have left out important contextual information around the points that I summarised! Please accept my apologies. I urge everyone stepping in here to read the linked article. Thanks. EDIT 4 : (Probably final edit, thanks for all the comments!) I decided to delete the final quotation - which was from a tweet - that I had included at the bottom of my comment from the original article. I think it's unnecessarily dramatic and takes from the point of the original article and you can find it there anyway.
Couple of my mates have them. One, let’s call him Dave ‘cos that’s his name, has a rifle & sights that he says can put down a deer from over a mile away. He worries me sometimes.
**** Glad to hear that the ones you know are ok, and I hope they get the support they’ll undoubtedly need That must really bring it close to home Dreadful
So basically you think actually enforcing existing laws and recording would help? It would certainly be worth trying for say 12 months to see if it did, although is that likely? From afar you get the impression the NRA would happily encourage sales to anyone and everyone Do you think some of the most deadly weapons should be banned though? I struggle too see how some of the weapons available would be suitable for sport, hunting, or home security
Guns are legal and available in many country, but only seem make problem in USA. Do we simply not hear about all the other mass murder rampages anywhere else or does America have some other problem?
