5 ms·

I wonder how German police would look if Germany had similar rates of gun ownership, homicide, and gangs as the US?

by 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago

pjmlp 2y ago
Thankfully we don't get guns in supermarkets or as gift while opening bank accounts, and everyone is fine with it.
- beaglesss 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - chris_wot 2y ago
    That's a completely different situation, and you know it.
  - wredcoll 2y ago
    > Sure, but Germany has had one of the higher genocide rates of disarmed people in the past century, to the point it exceeds the past century death by firearm inside the US. They weren't "disarmed" you absolute knob. "They" had guns and weapons and fought back against the nazis and lost. It turns out a bunch of civilians with small arms does not actually pose a meaningful threat to a state level military. What makes this comment so obnoxious, aside from getting all the facts incorrect, is it helps promote this awful notion that you can be immune to state oppression if you just buy a gun. Shockingly, it does not work that way on real life. If you want the state to not oppress people you have to actually put in work to prevent it from happening, because if a state level military is coming to kill you it doesn't really matter how many guns you have in your closet or how cool your black temu tactical gear is. Artillery from 2km away will just kill you. (Also as far as I know, when the vast majority of native americans died, they had plenty of guns.)
    - beaglesss 2y ago
      > a state level military is coming to kill you it doesn't really matter how many guns you have in your closet or how cool your black temu tactical gear is. Artillery from 2km away will just kill you. I've fought in a non-state militia that held off a nation state, in a civil war. About half the people I met died, but yet, the rest remain. So you're wrong. >They" had guns and weapons and fought back against the nazis and lost. It turns out a bunch of civilians with small arms does not actually pose a meaningful threat to a state level military. ... Those in the Warsaw ghetto did with smuggled arms, and held out for several days, meanwhile their disarmed brethren did not last nearly as long. >"They" had guns and weapons and fought back against the nazis and lost Jews were virtually disarmed in Germany before the genocide started. In conquered states,they occasionally held off longer with smuggled arms. (In some cases like Malka Zdrojewicz, fighting even seems to have possibly save her life as officers admired her courage and sent her to a non-genocide destination.)
      - bitcharmer 2y ago
        [flagged]
    - gunswork 2y ago
      You can't oppress people with artillery. You need to get close to them to check their identity, their Covid passes, or whatever. You need to get close to confiscate contraband. You need to get close to prevent them from organizing and assembling, and so on. Of course with nuclear bombs and F-16s you can blow everything to bits, but that's not how governments typically oppress people. You generally don't want to exterminate your tax base, you just want them to have the "right" opinions and beliefs.
      - beaglesss 2y ago
        The Russians blew Grozny to bits but the issue is they started fighting militia with mostly small arms, then they ended up with a bunch of dead civilians plus a bunch of dead militia plus a bunch of surviving militia who now has... their own artillery pulled from the rubble. In the end deploying the artillery in Grozny and elsewhere during the first Chechen war was a pyrrhic victory that ended in years of Chechen independence. Then there's the alternative as my compatriots saw in the YPG -- small arms bought them enough time to ally with the USA.
  - pjmlp 2y ago
    That one came up right fast, no other argument to pull out of the sleave. Specially given what happened to Native Americans. I get your point, all disputes are to be settled at gun point in front of the closest coffee shop. The western world is wild.
  - bitcharmer 2y ago
    [flagged]
shric 2y ago
Not making any statement on causality but I wanted to take a look... Firearm related deaths per 100,000[1]: Germany: 0.065 US: 4.054 (62.4x higher) Firearm ownership per 100 people[2]: Germany: 19.6 US: 120.5 (6.15x higher) If those stats are to be believed there's approximately 10x firearm deaths per gun in the US compared to Germany. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm... [2]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian...
- anonCoffee 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - SahAssar 2y ago
    Do you think that is the only statistic that might have some correlation with this? Are there perhaps other things than race that might be just as or more relevant?
    - octopoc 2y ago
      I was recently reading about violence in schools in Boys Adrift by Dr. Leonard Sax and he mentioned several correlations that are common suspects: economic "level", race, and a few others, and race was the highest correlation by about 20%. I share your curiosity and have dug into the issue quite a bit, but obviously it's difficult since it's a bit of a taboo topic.
    - Jerrrrrrry 2y ago
      It's a cultural problem, but we like to call it race because a divided people are a distracted populace.
- AdrianB1 2y ago
  I would argue that firearm ownership per 100 people is very misleading, you have more guns than owners in US. Comparing ownership per household (how many house holds have guns vs total number of households), the difference is way smaller, maybe less than 2x. For example I know a guy that has more than 400 firearms. For him it is a business, not a passion, he does not even carry one, but he is giving a wrong impression of gun ownership.
SahAssar 2y ago
Are you arguing that the US has high numbers of homicide because of high gun ownership or high gun ownership because of high numbers of homicide?
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
  I'm arguing our cops are tougher because more people are armed.

I wonder how German police would look if Germany had similar rates of gun ownership, homicide, and gangs as the US?

pjmlp 2y ago

Thankfully we don't get guns in supermarkets or as gift while opening bank accounts, and everyone is fine with it.

beaglesss 2y ago
[flagged]
- chris_wot 2y ago
  That's a completely different situation, and you know it.
- wredcoll 2y ago
  > Sure, but Germany has had one of the higher genocide rates of disarmed people in the past century, to the point it exceeds the past century death by firearm inside the US. They weren't "disarmed" you absolute knob. "They" had guns and weapons and fought back against the nazis and lost. It turns out a bunch of civilians with small arms does not actually pose a meaningful threat to a state level military. What makes this comment so obnoxious, aside from getting all the facts incorrect, is it helps promote this awful notion that you can be immune to state oppression if you just buy a gun. Shockingly, it does not work that way on real life. If you want the state to not oppress people you have to actually put in work to prevent it from happening, because if a state level military is coming to kill you it doesn't really matter how many guns you have in your closet or how cool your black temu tactical gear is. Artillery from 2km away will just kill you. (Also as far as I know, when the vast majority of native americans died, they had plenty of guns.)
  - beaglesss 2y ago
    > a state level military is coming to kill you it doesn't really matter how many guns you have in your closet or how cool your black temu tactical gear is. Artillery from 2km away will just kill you. I've fought in a non-state militia that held off a nation state, in a civil war. About half the people I met died, but yet, the rest remain. So you're wrong. >They" had guns and weapons and fought back against the nazis and lost. It turns out a bunch of civilians with small arms does not actually pose a meaningful threat to a state level military. ... Those in the Warsaw ghetto did with smuggled arms, and held out for several days, meanwhile their disarmed brethren did not last nearly as long. >"They" had guns and weapons and fought back against the nazis and lost Jews were virtually disarmed in Germany before the genocide started. In conquered states,they occasionally held off longer with smuggled arms. (In some cases like Malka Zdrojewicz, fighting even seems to have possibly save her life as officers admired her courage and sent her to a non-genocide destination.)
    - bitcharmer 2y ago
      [flagged]
  - gunswork 2y ago
    You can't oppress people with artillery. You need to get close to them to check their identity, their Covid passes, or whatever. You need to get close to confiscate contraband. You need to get close to prevent them from organizing and assembling, and so on. Of course with nuclear bombs and F-16s you can blow everything to bits, but that's not how governments typically oppress people. You generally don't want to exterminate your tax base, you just want them to have the "right" opinions and beliefs.
    - beaglesss 2y ago
      The Russians blew Grozny to bits but the issue is they started fighting militia with mostly small arms, then they ended up with a bunch of dead civilians plus a bunch of dead militia plus a bunch of surviving militia who now has... their own artillery pulled from the rubble. In the end deploying the artillery in Grozny and elsewhere during the first Chechen war was a pyrrhic victory that ended in years of Chechen independence. Then there's the alternative as my compatriots saw in the YPG -- small arms bought them enough time to ally with the USA.
- pjmlp 2y ago
  That one came up right fast, no other argument to pull out of the sleave. Specially given what happened to Native Americans. I get your point, all disputes are to be settled at gun point in front of the closest coffee shop. The western world is wild.
- bitcharmer 2y ago
  [flagged]

shric 2y ago

Not making any statement on causality but I wanted to take a look... Firearm related deaths per 100,000[1]: Germany: 0.065 US: 4.054 (62.4x higher) Firearm ownership per 100 people[2]: Germany: 19.6 US: 120.5 (6.15x higher) If those stats are to be believed there's approximately 10x firearm deaths per gun in the US compared to Germany. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm... [2]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian...

anonCoffee 2y ago
[flagged]
- SahAssar 2y ago
  Do you think that is the only statistic that might have some correlation with this? Are there perhaps other things than race that might be just as or more relevant?
  - octopoc 2y ago
    I was recently reading about violence in schools in Boys Adrift by Dr. Leonard Sax and he mentioned several correlations that are common suspects: economic "level", race, and a few others, and race was the highest correlation by about 20%. I share your curiosity and have dug into the issue quite a bit, but obviously it's difficult since it's a bit of a taboo topic.
  - Jerrrrrrry 2y ago
    It's a cultural problem, but we like to call it race because a divided people are a distracted populace.
AdrianB1 2y ago
I would argue that firearm ownership per 100 people is very misleading, you have more guns than owners in US. Comparing ownership per household (how many house holds have guns vs total number of households), the difference is way smaller, maybe less than 2x. For example I know a guy that has more than 400 firearms. For him it is a business, not a passion, he does not even carry one, but he is giving a wrong impression of gun ownership.

SahAssar 2y ago

Are you arguing that the US has high numbers of homicide because of high gun ownership or high gun ownership because of high numbers of homicide?

2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
I'm arguing our cops are tougher because more people are armed.