5 ms·

Fewer guns does not equal fewer deaths in the developed world. You are doing exactly what you claim to be against. Cherry picking data to suit your narrative.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
daemin 9y ago
Yeah it does, Australia. That's the prime example of fewer guns = fewer deaths.
- andrenth 9y ago
  Australia also had reduced number of gun-unrelated deaths. In fact the percent reduction in those cases was larger than the reduction of gun deaths. So the stricter gun laws can't be considered the sole explanation for fewer deaths.
  - ceejayoz 9y ago
    There's been a world-wide reduction in crime since the 1970s. It's very possible to isolate the impact of Australia's gun laws by comparing to other similar countries that didn't implement a major gun ban at the time.
    - andrenth 9y ago
      Has that been done? I think it would be quite hard to provide any meaningful comparison between countries, because the results would be clouded by many other factors that can influence them.
  - repsilat 9y ago
    I don't have a horse in this race, but this argument seems to do double-duty: > "Violent crime without firearms went down, maybe it was just people getting less violent." > "Violent crime without firearms went up, people are going to be violent with or without guns."
hectorlorenzo 9y ago
It's the second time you mention this without providing any source. Can you please elaborate?
alkonaut 9y ago
> Fewer guns does not equal fewer deaths in the developed world I didn't argue against cherry picking (which I'm also against) I was arguing against the parent opposing something entirely different than the post he was responding to. I divided the implication into two. The guns-to-deaths implication isn't clear cut either, but less so than the laws-to-guns one. My argument is that this is mostly cultural, which is why it's so hard to measure. The reason being that gun culture both creates a cliate of many guns, but also the other way around (many guns means people are more likely to use/buy guns). Comparable societies (such as US vs rest of western world). By "more guns" I include not just more guns sold/owned but "more guns in circulation" i.e. number of guns on streets, in cars, in bedside tables, as opposed to in gun safes. A lot of countries with lots of guns have mostly locked up rifles and very few handguns. That blurs these statistics.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

daemin 9y ago

Yeah it does, Australia. That's the prime example of fewer guns = fewer deaths.

andrenth 9y ago
Australia also had reduced number of gun-unrelated deaths. In fact the percent reduction in those cases was larger than the reduction of gun deaths. So the stricter gun laws can't be considered the sole explanation for fewer deaths.
- ceejayoz 9y ago
  There's been a world-wide reduction in crime since the 1970s. It's very possible to isolate the impact of Australia's gun laws by comparing to other similar countries that didn't implement a major gun ban at the time.
  - andrenth 9y ago
    Has that been done? I think it would be quite hard to provide any meaningful comparison between countries, because the results would be clouded by many other factors that can influence them.
- repsilat 9y ago
  I don't have a horse in this race, but this argument seems to do double-duty: > "Violent crime without firearms went down, maybe it was just people getting less violent." > "Violent crime without firearms went up, people are going to be violent with or without guns."

hectorlorenzo 9y ago

It's the second time you mention this without providing any source. Can you please elaborate?

alkonaut 9y ago

> Fewer guns does not equal fewer deaths in the developed world I didn't argue against cherry picking (which I'm also against) I was arguing against the parent opposing something entirely different than the post he was responding to. I divided the implication into two. The guns-to-deaths implication isn't clear cut either, but less so than the laws-to-guns one. My argument is that this is mostly cultural, which is why it's so hard to measure. The reason being that gun culture both creates a cliate of many guns, but also the other way around (many guns means people are more likely to use/buy guns). Comparable societies (such as US vs rest of western world). By "more guns" I include not just more guns sold/owned but "more guns in circulation" i.e. number of guns on streets, in cars, in bedside tables, as opposed to in gun safes. A lot of countries with lots of guns have mostly locked up rifles and very few handguns. That blurs these statistics.