5 ms·

> What about Greenland? It's not a country and it has a very low population (less than 60k). Small regions make bad statistical samples.

betwixthewires 5y ago
OK, how about Argentina?
- smnrchrds 5y ago
  What about Canada, Australia, and New Zealand?
  - betwixthewires 5y ago
    Because I can't help but get the sense that using those countries, culturally very distinct from the US, is cherry picking st best. If the "legal firearms lead to more violence and crime, and if we restrict comparison to new world highly developed countries this still holds" argument is to stand, then the comparison has to apply to every country with firearm restrictions, not just a couple. If it doesn't apply across the board then that is an indicator that culture plays an outsized role and legal status of firearms does not. So I answered your question, now your turn, what about Argentina?
    - smnrchrds 5y ago
      Because Canada is the closest country on earth to the US culturally and Australia and New Zealand are not far behind. Also, poverty tends to increase crime and CA/AU/NZ are closer to US economically as well, while Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, and South Africa are far behind. If you want to pick one country to compare it to the US, it only makes sense to pick Canada. Argentina is very far down the list. The main difference between Canada and US (and to a great extent Australia and New Zealand) are not cultural or economical. The main differences are in access to firearms. I fully expect Canada's murder rate to rise to US levels if US gun laws were adopted here.
      - blix 5y ago
        There are a few very significant cultural/economic differences between the USA and Canada/Austrial/NZ. The biggest one is that only the USA has a legacy of slavery. The USA has much higher population density as well. The USA is also somewhat more economically unequal than the other 3. The USA is more diverse than any of the other 3, especially Canada and Australia. These factors might play a role in gun violence.
        ikr678 5y ago
        The US is the least diverse of those countries. Australia has 30%(2019) of foreign born resident's to NZ's 27.4%(2018),Canada's 20%(2016) and the US's 13.7%(2018)
        blix 5y ago
        "Foreign born" is really not the best judge of diversity in this context imo. I would instead look at the fraction of population that has European ancestry. I have not seen many statistics linking foreign-born residents to higher crime, but locally-born oppressed minority populations (e.g. Black, Aboriginal, Native, Maori) are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system due to ongoing legacies of systemic violence.
        mpweiher 5y ago
        Generally, when you correct for poverty, those differences disappear.
        laverya 5y ago
        I thought the whole point of the ongoing systemic racism debates in the US was that even after correcting for poverty, African Americans still had worse outcomes on essentially every metric from college graduation to murder rate?
        5y ago

betwixthewires 5y ago

OK, how about Argentina?

smnrchrds 5y ago
What about Canada, Australia, and New Zealand?
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  Because I can't help but get the sense that using those countries, culturally very distinct from the US, is cherry picking st best. If the "legal firearms lead to more violence and crime, and if we restrict comparison to new world highly developed countries this still holds" argument is to stand, then the comparison has to apply to every country with firearm restrictions, not just a couple. If it doesn't apply across the board then that is an indicator that culture plays an outsized role and legal status of firearms does not. So I answered your question, now your turn, what about Argentina?
  - smnrchrds 5y ago
    Because Canada is the closest country on earth to the US culturally and Australia and New Zealand are not far behind. Also, poverty tends to increase crime and CA/AU/NZ are closer to US economically as well, while Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, and South Africa are far behind. If you want to pick one country to compare it to the US, it only makes sense to pick Canada. Argentina is very far down the list. The main difference between Canada and US (and to a great extent Australia and New Zealand) are not cultural or economical. The main differences are in access to firearms. I fully expect Canada's murder rate to rise to US levels if US gun laws were adopted here.
    - blix 5y ago
      There are a few very significant cultural/economic differences between the USA and Canada/Austrial/NZ. The biggest one is that only the USA has a legacy of slavery. The USA has much higher population density as well. The USA is also somewhat more economically unequal than the other 3. The USA is more diverse than any of the other 3, especially Canada and Australia. These factors might play a role in gun violence.
      - ikr678 5y ago
        The US is the least diverse of those countries. Australia has 30%(2019) of foreign born resident's to NZ's 27.4%(2018),Canada's 20%(2016) and the US's 13.7%(2018)
        blix 5y ago
        "Foreign born" is really not the best judge of diversity in this context imo. I would instead look at the fraction of population that has European ancestry. I have not seen many statistics linking foreign-born residents to higher crime, but locally-born oppressed minority populations (e.g. Black, Aboriginal, Native, Maori) are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system due to ongoing legacies of systemic violence.
        mpweiher 5y ago
        Generally, when you correct for poverty, those differences disappear.
        laverya 5y ago
        I thought the whole point of the ongoing systemic racism debates in the US was that even after correcting for poverty, African Americans still had worse outcomes on essentially every metric from college graduation to murder rate?
        5y ago