14 ms·

It's true that the US has more gun violence than other first world countries, but we also has more violence and crime in general. Within the US, there is no st

It's true that the US has more gun violence than other first world countries, but we also has more violence and crime in general. Within the US, there is no statistically significant correlation (r = -0.02) on the state level between firearm ownership and firearm homicide. (There is a statistically significant correlation between firearm ownership and firearm deaths, but this is due to suicides.) Make of this what you will, but it's not substantiated by the facts the claim that restricting gun ownership would have a strong impact on homicides. You can look at this list and sort by gun murder rate and see what kind of states come out on top: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta... Here is a strongly political Medium article about the matter: https://medium.com/handwaving-freakoutery/everybodys-lying-about-the-link-between-gun-ownership-and-homicide-1108ed400be5 https://medium.com/handwaving-freakoutery/everybodys-lying-a...

stephenr 7y ago
So what you’re saying is, the real problem is that Americans are just a violent bloodthirsty lot. Maybe the rest of the world should stop telling Americans to control gun ownership (ie ”ban guns”, despite nobody ever suggesting a total ban) and instead we should be promoting control of Americans (ie. “ban Americans”, although nobody would suggest a total ban. I’m sure zoos would want some).
- heartbeats 7y ago
  That's incredibly racist.
  - stephenr 7y ago
    I know they/you may think otherwise, but "American" isn't a race, mate.
- yellowapple 7y ago
  > the real problem is that Americans are just a violent bloodthirsty lot. More like "Americans are more subject (relative to, say, Europeans) to the economic and mental health hardships that typically beget violent crime". That is, I'm far less motivated to rob a store at gunpoint if I can actually feed myself and my family through legitimate means. I'm far less motivated to kill someone in anger if I have access to mental health resources that can help me address that anger less destructively. I'm far less motivated to join a gang if my life - and that of my family - doesn't depend on me doing so (or more precisely, if that gang is no longer able to convince me of that). Guns are tools. Taking away the tool does not take away the desire to commit crime. I'd expect Hacker News, of all places, to understand the importance of root cause analysis.
  - stephenr 7y ago
    A car is a tool. A truck is a tool. A 747 is a tool. All have the capacity to very quickly cause a death and injury to a unit of people colloquially known as "a fucking lot" when operated incorrectly. Guess how society generally tries to overcome the problem of death and injury caused by "incorrectly" operating those tools? Education, combined with testing (i.e. government-enforced licensing for operation of the tool). A gun is a tool. A goodly number of the models favoured by Americans have the capacity to very quickly cause a death and injury to a unit of people colloquially known as "a fucking lot" when operated correctly. Guess how society (outside of America) tries to overcome the problem of death and injury caused by "correctly" operating those tools? Education, combined with testing, and in many case, restrictions on which kind of "tools" are deemed an acceptable "tool" for one of the tasks it can achieve, outside of death and injury to other humans. No one needs an AR-15/etc for hunting deer or bears or whatever other lesser animal needs to die, or sport shooting, or anything really, other than laying down covering fire against the "Charlies in the trees". It'd be like if you decided to buy a 400ton mining truck, and drive it on the road. At 9m+ wide, with a turning circle of 42m, it's safe to assume the level of damage to the roads and infrastructure wherever you go, could be measured with a unit colloquially known as "a fucking lot". Gun control laws does not equal a ban on guns. Most US states require no licensing to own and no permit to purchase a firearm, and a number require no special license to carry it on your person in public, either concealed or otherwise. Those that do impose an age limit, generally set it at 18 - so you can buy a tool to murder your neighbours but you can't buy a bud light.
    - heartbeats 7y ago
      This is an interesting philosophical argument, but it doesn't actually stack up to the facts. While it may feel righteous to regulate them more, it is all but guaranteed to have next to no effect on gun violence. The AR-15 undoubtedly has a military background, although it isn't the exact same weapon as the M16. Does this mean firearms with a less militaristic style, like the Ruger Mini-14[0], should be allowed? This weapon wasn't banned during the assault weapons ban, for example. Yet from a purely mechanical point of view, bullets come out of the operational end when you pull the trigger. It is no less unpleasant to get shot by a sport or hunting rifle, even if the designer did not intend for it to ever be used against humans. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruger_Mini-14 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruger_Mini-14
pdonis 7y ago
> It's true that the US has more gun violence than other first world countries, but we also has more violence and crime in general. These statements are misleading as they stand because the variation in the US is so high. Basically, for all types of violent crimes, the US is divided into two very different regions: (1) particular large urban and dense suburban areas, which have rates of violent crime higher than any other developed country; and (2) the rest of the country, which has rates of violent crime lower than almost any other developed country. Even looking at the stats by state doesn't fully capture this dichotomy.
- rfrey 7y ago
  > the rest of the country, which has rates of violent crime lower than almost any other developed country. Lower than the overall rate of the other comparable countries? Or lower than the non urban portion of the other developed countries?
  - pdonis 7y ago
    > Lower than the overall rate of the other comparable countries? Or lower than the non urban portion of the other developed countries? For comparable countries (e.g., Switzerland), they're basically the same; comparable countries don't have the same large disparity in crime rates.
- heartbeats 7y ago
  Even within the states, there is no link. It is not possible to find any connection between gun ownership and gun violence on a county level either. The urban/rural divide is a good starting point. If you look at the stats, an even clearer pattern emerges: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta... What sets Washington D.C., Louisiana, Mississippi, and Maryland apart from Maine, Vermont, Hawaii, and New Hampshire?
  - yellowapple 7y ago
    Well all of the first group (except DC) are in the South while all of the second group (except Hawaii) are in the North.

stephenr 7y ago

So what you’re saying is, the real problem is that Americans are just a violent bloodthirsty lot. Maybe the rest of the world should stop telling Americans to control gun ownership (ie ”ban guns”, despite nobody ever suggesting a total ban) and instead we should be promoting control of Americans (ie. “ban Americans”, although nobody would suggest a total ban. I’m sure zoos would want some).

heartbeats 7y ago
That's incredibly racist.
- stephenr 7y ago
  I know they/you may think otherwise, but "American" isn't a race, mate.
yellowapple 7y ago
> the real problem is that Americans are just a violent bloodthirsty lot. More like "Americans are more subject (relative to, say, Europeans) to the economic and mental health hardships that typically beget violent crime". That is, I'm far less motivated to rob a store at gunpoint if I can actually feed myself and my family through legitimate means. I'm far less motivated to kill someone in anger if I have access to mental health resources that can help me address that anger less destructively. I'm far less motivated to join a gang if my life - and that of my family - doesn't depend on me doing so (or more precisely, if that gang is no longer able to convince me of that). Guns are tools. Taking away the tool does not take away the desire to commit crime. I'd expect Hacker News, of all places, to understand the importance of root cause analysis.
- stephenr 7y ago
  A car is a tool. A truck is a tool. A 747 is a tool. All have the capacity to very quickly cause a death and injury to a unit of people colloquially known as "a fucking lot" when operated incorrectly. Guess how society generally tries to overcome the problem of death and injury caused by "incorrectly" operating those tools? Education, combined with testing (i.e. government-enforced licensing for operation of the tool). A gun is a tool. A goodly number of the models favoured by Americans have the capacity to very quickly cause a death and injury to a unit of people colloquially known as "a fucking lot" when operated correctly. Guess how society (outside of America) tries to overcome the problem of death and injury caused by "correctly" operating those tools? Education, combined with testing, and in many case, restrictions on which kind of "tools" are deemed an acceptable "tool" for one of the tasks it can achieve, outside of death and injury to other humans. No one needs an AR-15/etc for hunting deer or bears or whatever other lesser animal needs to die, or sport shooting, or anything really, other than laying down covering fire against the "Charlies in the trees". It'd be like if you decided to buy a 400ton mining truck, and drive it on the road. At 9m+ wide, with a turning circle of 42m, it's safe to assume the level of damage to the roads and infrastructure wherever you go, could be measured with a unit colloquially known as "a fucking lot". Gun control laws does not equal a ban on guns. Most US states require no licensing to own and no permit to purchase a firearm, and a number require no special license to carry it on your person in public, either concealed or otherwise. Those that do impose an age limit, generally set it at 18 - so you can buy a tool to murder your neighbours but you can't buy a bud light.
  - heartbeats 7y ago
    This is an interesting philosophical argument, but it doesn't actually stack up to the facts. While it may feel righteous to regulate them more, it is all but guaranteed to have next to no effect on gun violence. The AR-15 undoubtedly has a military background, although it isn't the exact same weapon as the M16. Does this mean firearms with a less militaristic style, like the Ruger Mini-14[0], should be allowed? This weapon wasn't banned during the assault weapons ban, for example. Yet from a purely mechanical point of view, bullets come out of the operational end when you pull the trigger. It is no less unpleasant to get shot by a sport or hunting rifle, even if the designer did not intend for it to ever be used against humans. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruger_Mini-14 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruger_Mini-14

pdonis 7y ago

> It's true that the US has more gun violence than other first world countries, but we also has more violence and crime in general. These statements are misleading as they stand because the variation in the US is so high. Basically, for all types of violent crimes, the US is divided into two very different regions: (1) particular large urban and dense suburban areas, which have rates of violent crime higher than any other developed country; and (2) the rest of the country, which has rates of violent crime lower than almost any other developed country. Even looking at the stats by state doesn't fully capture this dichotomy.

rfrey 7y ago
> the rest of the country, which has rates of violent crime lower than almost any other developed country. Lower than the overall rate of the other comparable countries? Or lower than the non urban portion of the other developed countries?
- pdonis 7y ago
  > Lower than the overall rate of the other comparable countries? Or lower than the non urban portion of the other developed countries? For comparable countries (e.g., Switzerland), they're basically the same; comparable countries don't have the same large disparity in crime rates.
heartbeats 7y ago
Even within the states, there is no link. It is not possible to find any connection between gun ownership and gun violence on a county level either. The urban/rural divide is a good starting point. If you look at the stats, an even clearer pattern emerges: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta... What sets Washington D.C., Louisiana, Mississippi, and Maryland apart from Maine, Vermont, Hawaii, and New Hampshire?
- yellowapple 7y ago
  Well all of the first group (except DC) are in the South while all of the second group (except Hawaii) are in the North.