3 ms·
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentiona... (per 100,000) Switz
by richcollins 14y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentiona... (per 100,000)
Switzerland 0.7
United Kingdom 1.2
So in the UK they've just switched to other weapons. The end is the issue here not the means.
- mpweiher 14y agoSo are you claiming that the substitution rate is 100%? Any evidence for that? If it's any less than that, we've saved some lives. Which I consider a Good Thing™, but you're obviously entitled to your own opinion. Or is this the old "if we can't prevent 100%, there's no point in preventing any"-canard?
- learc83 14y agoThere has to be some threshold. How many lives per year is worth restricting the freedom of every law abiding citizen? Let's say we could ban peanuts, and it would save 50 people every year. Would it be worth it? Probably not. How about 100 million. Probably so.
- richcollins 14y agoThere isn't any good evidence either way. It's too hard to control the variables. It's possible that banning guns increased homicides from guns and other means. It's possible that it prevented homicides from guns and other means. There is really no way to tell from the evidence. But it is certainly not clear that it helps.