4 ms·

Not 24 hours ago the #1 post on HN was that gun crime has been downright plummeting for the past 20 years, despite the fact that more and more guns are being ma

by Zikes 14y ago

Not 24 hours ago the #1 post on HN was that gun crime has been downright plummeting for the past 20 years, despite the fact that more and more guns are being manufactured and sold. I know it's a tired old saying, but the honest truth is that guns do not kill people, people kill people. Once you realize that, you realize that 3D printable guns are not a danger justifying "extreme prison terms".

rollo_tommasi 14y ago
That gun crime has been falling does not mean that proliferation of guns is a neutral proposition, it only means that other trends have been stronger. More handguns = more dead people, period. The only people rooting for a society awash in easily obtainable handguns are criminals and delusional libertarians with adolescent Minute Man fantasies.
- Zikes 14y ago
  More handguns = more handguns, period. Like I said before, violent crime has been falling steadily for the past 20 years despite the rise in availability of handguns. This is in direct conflict with your assertion that more handguns = more dead people. It is a more delusional viewpoint in my opinion to think that simply reducing the availability of weapons would eliminate the criminal impulses to use them.
  - rollo_tommasi 14y ago
    Zikes, let's do a simple observational experiment. Compare the rates of violent death in countries with few guns to those in countries with lots of guns. Get back to me with your next keen insight on how the number of guns in a society is a just a meaningless number that doesn't really affect anything at all.
    - koenigdavidmj 14y ago
      Look at knife crime rates in the UK.
      - mikeyouse 14y ago
        The murder rate in the UK is 1.2 / 100k, it's literally 4x higher in the US. You've probably read that the UK is significantly more violent than the US, but the difference comes entirely from different categorizations of crime. For instance, UK violent crime stats as typically reported include such things as harassment, 'causing public fear, alarm, or distress', or 'possession of an article with a blade or point'. Depending on how judicious you are with the categories, the UK is either safer than the US or slightly more violent, but it's very close. Combine that with 1/4 the murder rate, and I think it's clear which is performing better.
    - cobrausn 14y ago
      Compare the rates of violent deaths in those countries when they did have guns available to ours, and you will find out that America is just more violent period, which nobody should find surprising. EDIT: But in better news, we are getting less violent, which is good.
    - GVIrish 14y ago
      As of 2007 Switzerland has the 3rd highest gun ownership rate in the world, but is number 51 on the gun homicide rate list, with a gun homicide rate of .52 per 100k. Meanwhile, Mexico's gun ownership rate is one third that of Switzerland, yet their gun homicide rate is 20 times as high (10 per 100k). Mexico's gun homicide rate is actually twice that of the United States. Note that Mexico's gun laws are considerably more strict than those in the US. Another example is Russia. Their overal murder rate is twice that of the United States even though they have strict gun laws and a gun ownership rate that is 10% that of the US (8.9 per 100k vs 88.9 per 100). One could look at a country like the UK where there are strict gun laws and far less gun crime in the US. However, gun crime was never as high in the UK as it was in the US, even when the UK had gun laws as loose as those in the US. Long story short, crime is driven largely by socioeconomic factors, the criminal justice system, and culture. The availability of guns plays a part, but not a large part. Otherwise Wyoming would have the highest murder rate in the US, as it has the highest gun ownership rate.
      - hga 14y ago
        "Note that Mexico's gun laws are considerably more strict than those in the US." Mexico has one legal gun store in a country of 115 million people: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/28/AR2010122803644.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12...
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
cmdkeen 14y ago
Gun crime has plummeted in the USA nowhere near as much as in Australia where guns are banned. Gun crime hasn't plummeted in Mexico, with the USA being a prime source of weapons. Crime in general has plummeted across the West, the increase in firearms in the USA is not a causative factor. Keynes made the point that it is better to be austere in a time of plenty. The time to introduce gun control is when crime is falling, not try and introduce it when crime is rising and people feel like they might want to have weapons for self defence.
- homosaur 14y ago
  So that way people can't defend themselves when the situation reverses? I don't quite get this idea that the current regime of neoliberal democracies and peace will always be so. What evidence do you have to suggest that history will suddenly stop?
  - hga 14y ago
    Indeed; it's appalling how few have learned from the fate of a quarter billion disarmed people killed by their own governments in the 20th century.
- dr_doom 14y ago
  The US does not supply the majority of guns to Mexico. We supply 17-38% depending on your source. If you really wanted to end the crime in Mexico reevaluating prohibition would be a good start. [1]http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110209-mexicos-gun-supply-and-90-percent-myth http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110209-mexicos-gun-supply-a... [2] http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/counting-mexicos-guns/ http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/counting-mexicos-guns/ [3]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/02/myth-percent-small-fraction-guns-mexico-come/ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/02/myth-percent-smal...
  - mikeyouse 14y ago
    To be fair, he never said the US supplied a majority of weapons in Mexico. Only that we were a 'prime source' of weapons, which if the range is 20 - 40%, would be completely accurate.
mpyne 14y ago
And as the printable gun debacle mixed with the ongoing unsuccessful "War on Drugs" shows, we live in a time where it's essentially impossible to fully lock down the production of these types of things in a free society anyways. Use the example of abstinence education: It's better to accept that guns will be made and use education and light regulation to minimize the damage than to try to squash them out completely.
conanbatt 14y ago
If someone put a gun factory in their backyard and starting distributing guns, he has to be found liable. Why should that be different for a plastic gun? My concern is that a printed gun is disposable and untraceable. Without ballistics, its certainly a tempting option. Also going through metal detectors is a huge deal over security measures. It looks like a game changer to me.

by Zikes 14y ago

rollo_tommasi 14y ago

That gun crime has been falling does not mean that proliferation of guns is a neutral proposition, it only means that other trends have been stronger. More handguns = more dead people, period. The only people rooting for a society awash in easily obtainable handguns are criminals and delusional libertarians with adolescent Minute Man fantasies.

Zikes 14y ago
More handguns = more handguns, period. Like I said before, violent crime has been falling steadily for the past 20 years despite the rise in availability of handguns. This is in direct conflict with your assertion that more handguns = more dead people. It is a more delusional viewpoint in my opinion to think that simply reducing the availability of weapons would eliminate the criminal impulses to use them.
- rollo_tommasi 14y ago
  Zikes, let's do a simple observational experiment. Compare the rates of violent death in countries with few guns to those in countries with lots of guns. Get back to me with your next keen insight on how the number of guns in a society is a just a meaningless number that doesn't really affect anything at all.
  - koenigdavidmj 14y ago
    Look at knife crime rates in the UK.
    - mikeyouse 14y ago
      The murder rate in the UK is 1.2 / 100k, it's literally 4x higher in the US. You've probably read that the UK is significantly more violent than the US, but the difference comes entirely from different categorizations of crime. For instance, UK violent crime stats as typically reported include such things as harassment, 'causing public fear, alarm, or distress', or 'possession of an article with a blade or point'. Depending on how judicious you are with the categories, the UK is either safer than the US or slightly more violent, but it's very close. Combine that with 1/4 the murder rate, and I think it's clear which is performing better.
  - cobrausn 14y ago
    Compare the rates of violent deaths in those countries when they did have guns available to ours, and you will find out that America is just more violent period, which nobody should find surprising. EDIT: But in better news, we are getting less violent, which is good.
  - GVIrish 14y ago
    As of 2007 Switzerland has the 3rd highest gun ownership rate in the world, but is number 51 on the gun homicide rate list, with a gun homicide rate of .52 per 100k. Meanwhile, Mexico's gun ownership rate is one third that of Switzerland, yet their gun homicide rate is 20 times as high (10 per 100k). Mexico's gun homicide rate is actually twice that of the United States. Note that Mexico's gun laws are considerably more strict than those in the US. Another example is Russia. Their overal murder rate is twice that of the United States even though they have strict gun laws and a gun ownership rate that is 10% that of the US (8.9 per 100k vs 88.9 per 100). One could look at a country like the UK where there are strict gun laws and far less gun crime in the US. However, gun crime was never as high in the UK as it was in the US, even when the UK had gun laws as loose as those in the US. Long story short, crime is driven largely by socioeconomic factors, the criminal justice system, and culture. The availability of guns plays a part, but not a large part. Otherwise Wyoming would have the highest murder rate in the US, as it has the highest gun ownership rate.
    - hga 14y ago
      "Note that Mexico's gun laws are considerably more strict than those in the US." Mexico has one legal gun store in a country of 115 million people: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/28/AR2010122803644.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12...
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

cmdkeen 14y ago

Gun crime has plummeted in the USA nowhere near as much as in Australia where guns are banned. Gun crime hasn't plummeted in Mexico, with the USA being a prime source of weapons. Crime in general has plummeted across the West, the increase in firearms in the USA is not a causative factor. Keynes made the point that it is better to be austere in a time of plenty. The time to introduce gun control is when crime is falling, not try and introduce it when crime is rising and people feel like they might want to have weapons for self defence.

homosaur 14y ago
So that way people can't defend themselves when the situation reverses? I don't quite get this idea that the current regime of neoliberal democracies and peace will always be so. What evidence do you have to suggest that history will suddenly stop?
- hga 14y ago
  Indeed; it's appalling how few have learned from the fate of a quarter billion disarmed people killed by their own governments in the 20th century.
dr_doom 14y ago
The US does not supply the majority of guns to Mexico. We supply 17-38% depending on your source. If you really wanted to end the crime in Mexico reevaluating prohibition would be a good start. [1]http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110209-mexicos-gun-supply-and-90-percent-myth http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110209-mexicos-gun-supply-a... [2] http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/counting-mexicos-guns/ http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/counting-mexicos-guns/ [3]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/02/myth-percent-small-fraction-guns-mexico-come/ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/02/myth-percent-smal...
- mikeyouse 14y ago
  To be fair, he never said the US supplied a majority of weapons in Mexico. Only that we were a 'prime source' of weapons, which if the range is 20 - 40%, would be completely accurate.

mpyne 14y ago

And as the printable gun debacle mixed with the ongoing unsuccessful "War on Drugs" shows, we live in a time where it's essentially impossible to fully lock down the production of these types of things in a free society anyways. Use the example of abstinence education: It's better to accept that guns will be made and use education and light regulation to minimize the damage than to try to squash them out completely.

conanbatt 14y ago

If someone put a gun factory in their backyard and starting distributing guns, he has to be found liable. Why should that be different for a plastic gun? My concern is that a printed gun is disposable and untraceable. Without ballistics, its certainly a tempting option. Also going through metal detectors is a huge deal over security measures. It looks like a game changer to me.