3 ms·

"The common element in all these deaths is a gun. But the causes are very different, and that means the solutions must be, too." Nonsense... Proof: Any other c

• jkoll 9y ago
  Gun violence decreases, but violence as a whole does not.
  • Gys 9y ago
    Source ?
  • pwinnski 9y ago
    When gun violence decreases, fatalities decrease. A violent attack without a gun is less like to result in fatalities. A suicide attempt without a gun is less likely to result in a fatality, and so on.
    • JCzynski 9y ago
      Source? Murder rates didn't drop below trend.
• microcolonel 9y ago
  https://static.businessinsider.com/image/561817dbbd86ef195c8b5a7f/image.jpg https://static.businessinsider.com/image/561817dbbd86ef195c8... http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/facts/2006/figure_13.png http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/facts/2006/...
  • GuiA 9y ago
    The second chart you posted has no labels, title, or context, and as such is pretty useless.
  • wbc 9y ago
    is it bad to look at the first image and think: "needs AB testing"?
  • dmix 9y ago
    Gun deaths went down in the US at a similar pace as the Australian graph, without any significant gun control... http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2013/05/SDT-2013-05-gun-crime-1-2.png http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/201...
    • lawtguy 9y ago
      Your chart is gun deaths per 100,000 but the other chart posted was total gun deaths in Australia, so that's not a fair comparison. Here's the gun deaths per 100,000 for Australia: http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/10/rate_of_all_gun_deaths_per_100_000_people http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/10/rate_of_al.... You can see from the chart that both the US and Australia show a significant drop in the 1990s. The US levels off by 2000, but Australia keeps dropping through about 2005. It's entirely possible that the further drop could be due to Australia's 1996 gun law.
      • microcolonel 9y ago
        > It's entirely possible that the further drop could be due to Australia's 1996 gun law. Since the trendline is basically the same until it tapers off around 2003, it's hard to say; but since the trend is identical (and identically noisy) before and after 1996, it is unlikely it had any effect. You would expect an increase in the trend if it did. Especially when you compare this to the identical trend in the U.S.[0] and Canada[1] at the time, it's hard to make a case that any effect was experienced. Homicide in western countries just sorta trended downward since the mid '80s until the early 0ughts. See: http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/10/rate_of_gun_homicide http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/10/rate_of_gu... Or more importantly, see: http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/10/rate_of_homicide_any_method http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/10/rate_of_ho... [0]: http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/194/rate_of_homicide_any_method http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/194/rate_of_h... [1]: http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/31/rate_of_homicide_any_method http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/31/rate_of_ho...
• JCzynski 9y ago
  False. In the UK and Australia it didn't even make mass killings go down.