4 ms·

Having skimmed the paper over, I'd like to quote this parapgraph, running from end of page 16 and rolling over to page 17. Once again, we are not arguing that

by bostik 13y ago

Having skimmed the paper over, I'd like to quote this parapgraph, running from end of page 16 and rolling over to page 17. Once again, we are not arguing that the data in Table 2 shows that gun control _causes_ nations to have much higher murder rates than neighboring nations that permit handgun ownership. Rather, we assert a political causation for the observed correlation that nations with stringent gun controls tend to have much higher murder rates than nations that allow guns. The political causation is that nations which have violence problems tend to adopt severe gun controls, but these do not reduce violence, which is determined by basic socio‐cultural and economic factors. Stringent gun control policies tend to appear in nations and/or regions where violence is already a problem. This study merely underlines the futility of any single tunnel-visioned policy - people who are willing to commit murder, are also willing to expend effort to find any weapon(s) to allow them to proceed in their endeavours. Here in Finland, we have quite a few weapons, but they are rarely used in violent crimes. This nation tends to favour bladed weapons in their homicides: knives, axes and other things that are easy to pick up and use in drunken anger.

cpncrunch 13y ago
At least with knives and axes you have some chance to run away.
- lupatus 13y ago
  Throwing knives, throwing axes? And, the grandparent commenter's comment duly considered, I still wouldn't easily dismiss a Finn's ability to use guns to kill people; see the White Death[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4
  - ctdonath 13y ago
    Throwing a knife/axe to useful effect is difficult enough with a stationary target under calm conditions. The number of people able to do so with malice under high stress at a moving target is vanishingly small.
- gizzlon 13y ago
  And it's hard to stab 70 people ..
  - icecreampain 13y ago
    A viking cares nothing about difficulty when there are plans to be made.
  - Zelphyr 13y ago
    The #1 weapon of mass murderers, despite what the media would have you believe, is fire.
- staunch 13y ago
  You can run away from someone holding a gun. I did. Worked great.
  - saraid216 13y ago
    It's okay. In a few years, we'll be using drones.
    - staunch 13y ago
      In a few years I'll have smart nanoarmor.
FrankenPC 13y ago
BINGO. Thank you for pointing that out. You can take away the guns, but you CAN'T FIX CRAZY and America is CHOCK full O' nuts.
ChuckMcM 13y ago
The operative phrase being ... The political causation is that nations which have violence problems tend to adopt severe gun controls, but these do not reduce violence, which is determined by basic socio‐cultural and economic factors. I saw a T-shirt that said "Guns don't kill people, Angry people kill people." and on the back it said "Chill out" and there was a marijuana leaf on it :-) Once a person has gotten themselves to the state that they only solution they see to their hurt is to make someone else dead, it really doesn't matter, they are going to try to do that.
Tloewald 13y ago
Australia has tighter gun control laws, fewer guns, and more violent crime -- but far fewer homicides. So, leaving aside the disjunction between a society in turmoil with strict but poorly enforced laws, there's the possibility than gun controls increase violent crime while reducing homicides, or the possibility that when lots of people get shot you tend to miss other stuff.
rbellio 13y ago
I really appreciate your response to this article. I've made this argument with a lot of people that just simply refuse to believe it. I've dug into a lot of the statistical data around gun fatilities in as many nations as possible including the United States. The biggest obstacle is that none of it is standardized. Violent crimes and gun violence is reported differently through municipalities and nations, association of criminal and non-criminal behavior is not effectively broken down. To be honest, it really makes me unsure as to how a lot of the media and political decisions are made. For instance, nearly two thirds of all gun related deaths in the United States are suicides and gun statistics seem to typically be reported on an overall number versus a per capita basis. Per capita, Finland has about the same number of guns as the US, approximately the same laws regarding guns and yet, their per capita homicide rate is substantially lower.
- bostik 13y ago
  This may come as a surprise, but I'm actually in favour of reasonable gun control laws. What I am opposed to is the idiocy of enacting laws as knee-jerk reactions. I'm also afraid that in about 10 years, our firearm homicide rate will go up. First, some background: I have friends who collect guns. Hell, one of them has a working replica of a light naval blackpowder cannon! My relatives are active and eager hunters, some of them own several different guns (2-3 shotguns, at least 2 different rifles). Without even looking at statistics, I'm certain that per capita there are more active hunters in Finland than in US. This means that the lessons of use and care of firearms have come from people who by their nature are cautious with their weaponry. If you've been taken out to woods to hunt starting from your pre-teens, you have most likely learned to respect firearms. Not fear - just respect. And having been around actively used and maintained firearms, they may just lose some of their glory. As to why I think we're going to see a slow rise in our gun homicide rate? There's a rather lengthy story behind that. Finland had their own private financial crisis in early 1990's. One of the victims of severe budget cuts was the youth mental healthcare. It's had even more cuts since then. We're now witnessing the second generation of Finns who haven't had the benefit of pre-1990's level of mental healthcare. There are more undiagnosed unstable people around now. We've had two school shootings in the past few years. I don't see the situation getting better, so over the next decade we'll very likely see more premeditated gun crimes by people in their early 20's. I don't have statistics or studies at hand, so please consider everything above my personal opinion.

by bostik 13y ago

cpncrunch 13y ago

At least with knives and axes you have some chance to run away.

lupatus 13y ago
Throwing knives, throwing axes? And, the grandparent commenter's comment duly considered, I still wouldn't easily dismiss a Finn's ability to use guns to kill people; see the White Death[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4
- ctdonath 13y ago
  Throwing a knife/axe to useful effect is difficult enough with a stationary target under calm conditions. The number of people able to do so with malice under high stress at a moving target is vanishingly small.
gizzlon 13y ago
And it's hard to stab 70 people ..
- icecreampain 13y ago
  A viking cares nothing about difficulty when there are plans to be made.
- Zelphyr 13y ago
  The #1 weapon of mass murderers, despite what the media would have you believe, is fire.
staunch 13y ago
You can run away from someone holding a gun. I did. Worked great.
- saraid216 13y ago
  It's okay. In a few years, we'll be using drones.
  - staunch 13y ago
    In a few years I'll have smart nanoarmor.

FrankenPC 13y ago

BINGO. Thank you for pointing that out. You can take away the guns, but you CAN'T FIX CRAZY and America is CHOCK full O' nuts.

ChuckMcM 13y ago

The operative phrase being ... The political causation is that nations which have violence problems tend to adopt severe gun controls, but these do not reduce violence, which is determined by basic socio‐cultural and economic factors. I saw a T-shirt that said "Guns don't kill people, Angry people kill people." and on the back it said "Chill out" and there was a marijuana leaf on it :-) Once a person has gotten themselves to the state that they only solution they see to their hurt is to make someone else dead, it really doesn't matter, they are going to try to do that.

Tloewald 13y ago

Australia has tighter gun control laws, fewer guns, and more violent crime -- but far fewer homicides. So, leaving aside the disjunction between a society in turmoil with strict but poorly enforced laws, there's the possibility than gun controls increase violent crime while reducing homicides, or the possibility that when lots of people get shot you tend to miss other stuff.

rbellio 13y ago

I really appreciate your response to this article. I've made this argument with a lot of people that just simply refuse to believe it. I've dug into a lot of the statistical data around gun fatilities in as many nations as possible including the United States. The biggest obstacle is that none of it is standardized. Violent crimes and gun violence is reported differently through municipalities and nations, association of criminal and non-criminal behavior is not effectively broken down. To be honest, it really makes me unsure as to how a lot of the media and political decisions are made. For instance, nearly two thirds of all gun related deaths in the United States are suicides and gun statistics seem to typically be reported on an overall number versus a per capita basis. Per capita, Finland has about the same number of guns as the US, approximately the same laws regarding guns and yet, their per capita homicide rate is substantially lower.

bostik 13y ago
This may come as a surprise, but I'm actually in favour of reasonable gun control laws. What I am opposed to is the idiocy of enacting laws as knee-jerk reactions. I'm also afraid that in about 10 years, our firearm homicide rate will go up. First, some background: I have friends who collect guns. Hell, one of them has a working replica of a light naval blackpowder cannon! My relatives are active and eager hunters, some of them own several different guns (2-3 shotguns, at least 2 different rifles). Without even looking at statistics, I'm certain that per capita there are more active hunters in Finland than in US. This means that the lessons of use and care of firearms have come from people who by their nature are cautious with their weaponry. If you've been taken out to woods to hunt starting from your pre-teens, you have most likely learned to respect firearms. Not fear - just respect. And having been around actively used and maintained firearms, they may just lose some of their glory. As to why I think we're going to see a slow rise in our gun homicide rate? There's a rather lengthy story behind that. Finland had their own private financial crisis in early 1990's. One of the victims of severe budget cuts was the youth mental healthcare. It's had even more cuts since then. We're now witnessing the second generation of Finns who haven't had the benefit of pre-1990's level of mental healthcare. There are more undiagnosed unstable people around now. We've had two school shootings in the past few years. I don't see the situation getting better, so over the next decade we'll very likely see more premeditated gun crimes by people in their early 20's. I don't have statistics or studies at hand, so please consider everything above my personal opinion.