31 ms·

A simple look at other countries would tend to say that, yes.

by pikzen 10y ago

benjohnson 10y ago
It really depends on the sample - if you look over the last 100 years the picture really changes. You'll find massive government killings of their own unarmed citizens.
- daenney 10y ago
  Yet would those massive government killings of their own citizens not have happened if those citizens had guns? There are plenty of methods a government can use to kill large swaths of its population without ever coming in contact with said population, even a 100 years ago.
  - JBReefer 10y ago
    The strongest military on Earth couldn't defeat a bunch of illiterate people with 40 year old guns in terrain they knew well.
    - daenney 10y ago
      So we'll just forget about (atomic) bombs that we drop from the sky, gasses and other biological agents, cutting them off from necessary resources like water (or poisoning it) and food and so on? The strongest military in the world could probably just outlast them. Might take another 100 years though.
    - 15155 10y ago
      Anti-firearms people love to imply that weapons of mass destruction and other exotic shit would be used to quell uprisings in an American Revolution-style event. "You can't stop planes and tanks with a rifle, therefore the Second Amendment is useless!" Small arms seemed to work just fine in Vietnam and Afghanistan.
      - kbenson 10y ago
        Personally, I think it would be more useful to ban (or make harder to get) handguns than automatic weapons. In almost all the legitimate uses of guns I can think of, rifles and shotguns work just fine. Easily concealed firearms are the problem. Make those more problematic to own and buy.
Zak 10y ago
Were that true, we would expect Switzerland (3rd highest number of guns per capita in the world) to have a higher murder rate than the UK (82nd in guns per capita), but it does not. This lack of correlation continues with other European countries: Serbia and Sweden have a fair number of guns, but not much murder, while Ukraine and Lithuania have few guns, but some of the highest murder rates in Europe. If you're about to point out that social, economic and political conditions are very different in Switzerland and Ukraine, you're probably on to something. Murder rates of various countries do correlate with several measures of social, economic and political stability, but not with gun ownership.
- richardwhiuk 10y ago
  Switzerland has guns, but no bullets. So you can probably give up guns or bullets and get gun safety - not that that's a very startling conclusion. Secondly the fact that A=>B doesn't mean that also C=>B so you should expect high B when either A or C is true. (Read => as implies, causes or correlates with - it doesn't really matter).
  - Zak 10y ago
    That isn't true. You're probably thinking of the change to ammunition issued by the army to members of the militia (a large fraction of the population) for civil defense. It is no longer standard practice to issue ammunition to keep at home. Buying ammunition from a gun store appears to be an option for anyone with any of several types of gun license.

A simple look at other countries would tend to say that, yes.

by pikzen 10y ago

A simple look at other countries would tend to say that, yes.

It really depends on the sample - if you look over the last 100 years the picture really changes. You'll find massive government killings of their own unarmed citizens.

daenney 10y ago
Yet would those massive government killings of their own citizens not have happened if those citizens had guns? There are plenty of methods a government can use to kill large swaths of its population without ever coming in contact with said population, even a 100 years ago.
- JBReefer 10y ago
  The strongest military on Earth couldn't defeat a bunch of illiterate people with 40 year old guns in terrain they knew well.
  - daenney 10y ago
    So we'll just forget about (atomic) bombs that we drop from the sky, gasses and other biological agents, cutting them off from necessary resources like water (or poisoning it) and food and so on? The strongest military in the world could probably just outlast them. Might take another 100 years though.
  - 15155 10y ago
    Anti-firearms people love to imply that weapons of mass destruction and other exotic shit would be used to quell uprisings in an American Revolution-style event. "You can't stop planes and tanks with a rifle, therefore the Second Amendment is useless!" Small arms seemed to work just fine in Vietnam and Afghanistan.
    - kbenson 10y ago
      Personally, I think it would be more useful to ban (or make harder to get) handguns than automatic weapons. In almost all the legitimate uses of guns I can think of, rifles and shotguns work just fine. Easily concealed firearms are the problem. Make those more problematic to own and buy.

Zak 10y ago

Were that true, we would expect Switzerland (3rd highest number of guns per capita in the world) to have a higher murder rate than the UK (82nd in guns per capita), but it does not. This lack of correlation continues with other European countries: Serbia and Sweden have a fair number of guns, but not much murder, while Ukraine and Lithuania have few guns, but some of the highest murder rates in Europe. If you're about to point out that social, economic and political conditions are very different in Switzerland and Ukraine, you're probably on to something. Murder rates of various countries do correlate with several measures of social, economic and political stability, but not with gun ownership.

richardwhiuk 10y ago
Switzerland has guns, but no bullets. So you can probably give up guns or bullets and get gun safety - not that that's a very startling conclusion. Secondly the fact that A=>B doesn't mean that also C=>B so you should expect high B when either A or C is true. (Read => as implies, causes or correlates with - it doesn't really matter).
- Zak 10y ago
  That isn't true. You're probably thinking of the change to ammunition issued by the army to members of the militia (a large fraction of the population) for civil defense. It is no longer standard practice to issue ammunition to keep at home. Buying ammunition from a gun store appears to be an option for anyone with any of several types of gun license.