4 ms·

That's not consistent with the reality of the rest of the world. Australia banned guns in 1996 and has had one mass shooting since, compared to 66 in the US in

That's not consistent with the reality of the rest of the world. Australia banned guns in 1996 and has had one mass shooting since, compared to 66 in the US in April of this year.

bko 4y ago
I never found this argument convincing. There are many differences between Australia and the US. It's like saying "American does X and is wealthy and relatively not corrupt, Mexico should just do X". This is the whole "bring democracy to the Middle East" argument repackaged.
- cuteboy19 4y ago
  This whole thread is a just list of people eliminating confounding variables > Social media >> All countries have that > Violent video games >> All other countries have that > Media reporting on violence >> All other countries have that > Mental illness >> Other countries have it worse > Lack of Religion >> Some other countries have that At some point we are left with just one variable that is different from these other countries
  - justanorherhack 4y ago
    Lots of other countries have firearms and don’t have school shootings. Switzerland and Israel come to mind.
    - netfortius 4y ago
    - mrguyorama 4y ago
      Both those countries require everyone to experience military service, where such a gun is used as a tool to kill. There's much less of a "gun culture" in those countries because guns aren't cool, everyone has used one, everyone is familiar, everyone understands what they are for, namely protection of the country as a whole. If the alternative to making guns much harder to access is to conscript everyone in the country for a few years to try and beat the gun culture out of them, good freakin luck
    - nothingisbad 4y ago
      Per wikipedia[0], the US has an estimated 120 guns per 100 citizens. Switzerland, the number is 27.6, Israel the number is 6.7. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_g...
  - bko 4y ago
    US is 59th in murder rate. A lot of these countries have all those things + restrictive gun laws. You can't have a theory and just arbitrarily section off over 50% of countries and test your theory on that subset https://www.factsinstitute.com/ranking/countries-by-murder-rate/ https://www.factsinstitute.com/ranking/countries-by-murder-r...
    - cuteboy19 4y ago
      The other 58 are either extremely poor or in an actual war/insurgency. I don't deny that poverty and war cause violence but the US does not have those variables
throwaway894345 4y ago
I have no doubt that Australia has fewer mass shootings than the US by pretty much any reasonable metric, but we should be careful in our comparisons. First of all, definitions vary widely on what constitutes a “mass shooting”, so we should always give our definition and make sure we’re applying the same definition to both operands (notably, by most common definitions, Australia has had several mass shootings and quite a few more mass murders since 1996). We should also adjust for known dependent variables, like population, population density, crime rates, number of guns in circulation (i.e., we would intuitively expect fewer mass shootings from a small, sparse, low-abiding country with few guns in circulation irrespective of gun laws)—Australia has only 8% of the US population and only 10% of the density—not sure about crime rates. I also suspect there were fewer guns in circulation prior to 1996, so even if officials could get the same share removed from the US market, it would likely leave more guns in circulation than in America (even adjusting for population, etc)—I also doubt Americans would be as willing to give up their guns as Australians were in ‘96, so the odds that America could get the same share of guns off the market as Australia did seems unlikely. That said, I’ve read that Australia’s gun count has crept back up to pre-96 levels (not sure if that is per capita or not), which is interesting—potentially it suggests there’s something else going on: either it matters what type of guns are banned (e.g., semi-automatic handguns), or perhaps there’s an altogether different reason or hidden factor behind the decline in Australian mass shootings. In any case, mass shootings is probably the wrong metric, but rather we probably want to look at number of mass murder deaths overall (presumably some people switch to stabbings or arson, but both of these are probably result in fewer fatalities). It’s also not clear to me why we fixate on mass murders/shootings rather than homicides overall—is it really worse when 10 people are killed all at once rather than 10000 people killed individually?
- renaudg 4y ago
  Use any other country you like as a comparison. The UK for example changed gun laws after a mass school shooting 26 years ago. Not a single one since.
  - quantumwannabe 4y ago
    Not true. There was one literally less than a year ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plymouth_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plymouth_shooting Another one in 2018: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Moss_Side_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Moss_Side_shooting And another in 2010: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbria_shootings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbria_shootings And in 2009: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massereene_Barracks_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massereene_Barracks_shooting Britain has also had numerous mass stabbings, bombings, and vehicle ramming attacks.
jrs235 4y ago
66! Where are these? Also, what is the definition of a mass shooting?
- nothingisbad 4y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2022#Statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_...

That's not consistent with the reality of the rest of the world. Australia banned guns in 1996 and has had one mass shooting since, compared to 66 in the US in April of this year.

bko 4y ago

I never found this argument convincing. There are many differences between Australia and the US. It's like saying "American does X and is wealthy and relatively not corrupt, Mexico should just do X". This is the whole "bring democracy to the Middle East" argument repackaged.

cuteboy19 4y ago
This whole thread is a just list of people eliminating confounding variables > Social media >> All countries have that > Violent video games >> All other countries have that > Media reporting on violence >> All other countries have that > Mental illness >> Other countries have it worse > Lack of Religion >> Some other countries have that At some point we are left with just one variable that is different from these other countries
- justanorherhack 4y ago
  Lots of other countries have firearms and don’t have school shootings. Switzerland and Israel come to mind.
  - netfortius 4y ago
  - mrguyorama 4y ago
    Both those countries require everyone to experience military service, where such a gun is used as a tool to kill. There's much less of a "gun culture" in those countries because guns aren't cool, everyone has used one, everyone is familiar, everyone understands what they are for, namely protection of the country as a whole. If the alternative to making guns much harder to access is to conscript everyone in the country for a few years to try and beat the gun culture out of them, good freakin luck
  - nothingisbad 4y ago
    Per wikipedia[0], the US has an estimated 120 guns per 100 citizens. Switzerland, the number is 27.6, Israel the number is 6.7. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_g...
- bko 4y ago
  US is 59th in murder rate. A lot of these countries have all those things + restrictive gun laws. You can't have a theory and just arbitrarily section off over 50% of countries and test your theory on that subset https://www.factsinstitute.com/ranking/countries-by-murder-rate/ https://www.factsinstitute.com/ranking/countries-by-murder-r...
  - cuteboy19 4y ago
    The other 58 are either extremely poor or in an actual war/insurgency. I don't deny that poverty and war cause violence but the US does not have those variables

throwaway894345 4y ago

I have no doubt that Australia has fewer mass shootings than the US by pretty much any reasonable metric, but we should be careful in our comparisons. First of all, definitions vary widely on what constitutes a “mass shooting”, so we should always give our definition and make sure we’re applying the same definition to both operands (notably, by most common definitions, Australia has had several mass shootings and quite a few more mass murders since 1996). We should also adjust for known dependent variables, like population, population density, crime rates, number of guns in circulation (i.e., we would intuitively expect fewer mass shootings from a small, sparse, low-abiding country with few guns in circulation irrespective of gun laws)—Australia has only 8% of the US population and only 10% of the density—not sure about crime rates. I also suspect there were fewer guns in circulation prior to 1996, so even if officials could get the same share removed from the US market, it would likely leave more guns in circulation than in America (even adjusting for population, etc)—I also doubt Americans would be as willing to give up their guns as Australians were in ‘96, so the odds that America could get the same share of guns off the market as Australia did seems unlikely. That said, I’ve read that Australia’s gun count has crept back up to pre-96 levels (not sure if that is per capita or not), which is interesting—potentially it suggests there’s something else going on: either it matters what type of guns are banned (e.g., semi-automatic handguns), or perhaps there’s an altogether different reason or hidden factor behind the decline in Australian mass shootings. In any case, mass shootings is probably the wrong metric, but rather we probably want to look at number of mass murder deaths overall (presumably some people switch to stabbings or arson, but both of these are probably result in fewer fatalities). It’s also not clear to me why we fixate on mass murders/shootings rather than homicides overall—is it really worse when 10 people are killed all at once rather than 10000 people killed individually?

renaudg 4y ago
Use any other country you like as a comparison. The UK for example changed gun laws after a mass school shooting 26 years ago. Not a single one since.
- quantumwannabe 4y ago
  Not true. There was one literally less than a year ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plymouth_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plymouth_shooting Another one in 2018: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Moss_Side_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Moss_Side_shooting And another in 2010: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbria_shootings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbria_shootings And in 2009: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massereene_Barracks_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massereene_Barracks_shooting Britain has also had numerous mass stabbings, bombings, and vehicle ramming attacks.

jrs235 4y ago

66! Where are these? Also, what is the definition of a mass shooting?

nothingisbad 4y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2022#Statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_...