I do not have a huge bias concerning gun control. To me, it's a bit like taking birth control pills, or being a vegetarian... it's up to you. However, I found these stats to be really surprising and I hadn't seen them before. I hope it wont start an ugly debate, but at the very least, the facts are really thought provoking.
WORLD MURDER STATISTICS
Murders per 100,000 citizens per year.
Honduras 91.6 (WOW!!)
El Salvador 69.2
Cote d'lvoire 56.9
US Virgin Islands 39.2
Saint Kitts and Nevis 38.2
Trinidad and Tobago 35.2
South Africa 31.8
Central African Republic 29.3
Puerto Rico 26.2
Saint Lucia 25.2
Dominican Republic 25.0
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 22.9
Democratic Republic of the Congo 21.7
Equatorial Guinea 20.7
Burkina Faso 18.0
North Korea 15.2
Sierra Leone 14.9
French Guiana 13.3
Papua New Guinea 13.0
Cape Verde 11.6
Costa Rica 10.0
Turks and Caicos Islands 8.7
British Virgin Islands 8.6
Cayman Islands 8.4
Antigua and Barbuda 6.8
The United States 4.2 !!!!!!!!!!!!
ALL (109) of the countries above the US of A have 100% gun bans.
It might be of interest to note that SWITZERLAND is not shown on this list because it has:
NO MURDER OCCURRENCE!
However, SWITZERLAND'S law requires that EVERY ADULT MALE:
1. Be issued a gun.
2. Be trained in its use.
3. Maintain Marksman qualifications .... regularly.
You really think you can compare the US fairly to essentially lawless states and war zones, which is what most of these are? What the law is only matters of there is a effective police and justice system and in the vast majority of these countries, there effectively isn't.
That is why people compare the US to other first world nations with no within-border wars. Apples to apples.
But if you compare the US, homicide rate and gun ownership rate, to other first world countries without a war going on, you will find that there is absolutely no correlation between the number of guns in the country and the homicide rate.
I'm not talking about Bolivia or Guatemala here, but countries of Europe (France, Germany, Switzerland, UK, etc.), and other first world countries around the world such as Japan, Australia, New Zealand and the like.
The weapon of choice for the murderer in the UK is the knife.
We are extremely lucky here in the UK the police compile the figures for government to gloat over.
The crime rate has fallen at its fastest for 2 decades, from 2006 to 2009 there was a drop of 17%, however a commons select committee inquiry has found that the police have been doctoring the figures. (now why would they do that?)
The fall is put down to better police work, the proliferation of CCTV and better DNA evidence.
And in Canada it appears to be bludgeoning, whether by tools, hands or feet. In the middle East it is bombs.
Take the guns and something else will be found. Killers will not be stopped by so simple a solution as taking their preferred tool.
I think the problem is that if somebody stands ten feet in front of me with either a knife or a piece of wood they are not an immediate threat. I stand a reasonable chance of either disarming them or putting legs under it and getting away.
Faced with a gun I might not even be able to see my attacker!
IF they stand 10 feet away and make plain overtures they will attack.
Few attackers, gun or not, will follow the rules like that. The ice pick in the movie theater comes to mind...
Nevertheless, the perception is different.
Movie theatre or grassy knoll?
Yes, the perception is different. The gun haters often bring this one up - that they can run away from a killer without a gun.
Unfortunately the facts say differently; countries that don't allow guns do NOT show fewer homicides. Perhaps people there all have broken legs and can't run very fast. The perception doesn't match the reality, in other words.
Well, it's true - how do you run away from somebody you can't even see?
Er, what facts? The UNODC report 5 killings per 100,000 for the USA as opposed to 1.2 per 100,000 for the UK. That certainly looks like fewer homicides to me. That's not gun related, that's everything.
So you're saying the whole "polite" thing is a ruse?
And how the heck do you bludgeon someone with a foot? Is the foot connected at the time of the bludgeoning?
But what about the Switzerland emphasis of her comparison? Is it fair to compare the U.S. to Switzerland?
Taking the high numbers found elsewhere, Switzerland could have a rate as high as 3.68 per 100k, and a 29% population gun ownership
vs. The U.S. at 10.3 per 100k, and a 43% gun ownership.
To account for the ownership rate disparity, 29 vs 43, comparable murder rates might be claimed as 3.68, (Switz.) t0 6.9, (U.S.). The U.S. is still higher of course, but it does point out that perhaps the U.S. is the evil gun-owning nation most want to portray it as.
I get the gist of your point, as made by the list you included, but...
Although the point about misleading gun ownership assumptions appears valid, the information may be a little slanted, or just flawed.
Several other lists, including Wikipedia, show Switzerland to have various "murder rates" from .52 per 100k, to 3.68 per 100k. They also show the U.S. at around 10.2 per 100k.
This does not invalidate the comparison, but it does seem to show a bias from the list maker.
Were you asleep when you typed Switzerland had "NO ,MURDER OCCURRENCE?"
Just a quick search debunked this.
In Switzerland, annual deaths resulting from firearms total
The rest also needs a little clarification. It is not "EVERY ADULT MALE," it is almost every, (there are some exemptions), adult male between the ages of 20 and 34, and this is a military service issue - which is not implied by your comment.
Also the "be trained, and maintain marksmanship qualifications" requirements end at age 30, (for enlisted), and 34, (for officers).
But even after pointing out the flawed data presentation, I agree that your original paragraph, and the apparent point of your post, (that gun ownership is not always a bad thing), seem to contradict a lot of the anti-gun and pro-gun control lobbies, (and supporters) primary arguments.
Who would have thought good ol' peaceful Switzerland would have had such pervasive gun ownership in their society without all those mass shootings that anti-gun folks say only happen because people are allowed to have guns.
Thanks for pointing this out.
A little correction. Nothing in the OP references gun homicides, or murder by gun. You are the only one to bring this up, and it is irrelevant to the point being made.
According to the UN, compiled by "Small Arms Survey.org", the homicide rate in 2007 (not "gun" homicide) for Switzerland is 0.7/100,000; the US is 5.7. Gun ownership is 45.7 guns/100 people in Switzerland, 88.8 in the US. (not quite the same statistic as you used, where I believe you refer to households with guns) Statistics on both sides of these ratios can be found in various other 1st world countries.
hmm... first a mention of no gun control bias, then a mention of 100% gun bans, then the reference to "NO MURDER OCCURRENCES" (hard to believe there no murders of any kind), so yes I did make an assumption and I did jump to the conclusion that the point of the OP was gun deaths and gun control issues.
If so that would not make my response irrelevant. I think the odds are in my favor. Perhaps Beth37 will chime in with a little clarification.
And you are right, a range of statistic variances can be found for either side of the discussion.
I will put on a little mood music while we wait for Beth37...
Oh, the comment about Switzerland is definitely NOT irrelevant - it should be obvious that not a single country has a homicide rate of zero. At least not one with more than a few thousand people.
But to bring gun homicides into a discussion of gun ownership vs murder rate - yes, that is little more than a red herring.
Sorry, I was at work... had I known my presence was required, I should have hopped in my car and come home. Please remember to use the batlight when matters become urgent.
lol... no, nor was I drunk. As I said, I have a few beliefs concerning gun ownership, but I don't feel a need to argue them. This was an email I received from my incredibly right-wing, father in law. I just felt it was interesting so I thought I'd share it.
Once more, hmm... "...from my incredibly right-wing father-in-law." Does that mean you think the point of the post was about gun ownership and gun control? (maybe I am not so irrelevant after all)
Do you think he was asleep, (or drunk), when he wrote/copied "NO MURDER OCCURRENCES?
Maybe we could use Pres Obama's policy on handling terrorists as a way of handling the gun owning issue in America. Let me see, first don't use the word terrorist, it is a euphemism. Don't assume that everyone trying to kill Americans overseas or in this country are linked to an international american hater network. So...just treat them all like the criminals and murderers that they are and set the FBI on them, bring them to justice and prosecute them within the American court system... that way, we don't have to get all riled up about something that is just being overly politicized and just makes the people who don't like us, more angry because everyone knows that Americans are warmongers and only interested in making a buck. So, we should do the same with people (U.S. Citizens) who own or want to own guns in the United States to hunt and protect themselves. That would mean we pursue the ones ( persons who own guns) that misuse their rights, bring them to justice and prosecute them within the American court system, but don't over politicize the issue and don't turn gun owners into villains who want to shoot people they don't like and kill everything beautiful and alive in nature....call them, ....... fire arms enthusiasts and leave it at that.
Hmmm.... it must have been that venison.... burp.
by IslandBites 7 years ago
George Zimmerman was arrested after a domestic altercation. Allegedly, he threatened his wife and father-in-law with a gun. His wife filed divorce papers a few days ago.Is this going to prove (not legally of course) that he was indeed guilty of Trayvon's murder?Is this other example to why gun...
by promisem 3 years ago
If you want a factual and research-based explanation of how to reduce gun violence, please read the informative article below.https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics … c24213c694
by zzron 10 years ago
As a legal citizen of America, how do you feel about guns?
by Susie Lehto 5 years ago
FBI: Homicide rates were considerably higher in the United States during the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, but over the past 25 years, have fallen nearly continuously:Graphs, information and links provided from indepth research:* http://www.infowars.com/fbi-us-homicide … -year-low/Why am...
by Sychophantastic 5 years ago
So, here's my rant. Since there appears to be no line on gun control, I advocate for complete freedom of gun ownership. After all, I should be able to exercise my constitutional right to protect myself wherever and whenever I want.This needs to start now! And I want it to start in two places:1....
by Tim Lajoie 5 years ago
I am curious about what the public thinks about militarized police. As a police chaplain I hear mainly one side of the discussion. I would like to hear some general perceptions of police officers and police tactics. Most of the police officers I know are decent people. There...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|