Gun Control UK Style

We have independent peer review. We also have data sources that are typically available to anyone. All analysis can be tested and, when found wanting, generate counter paper.

You've been told this numerous times.

 

Who is we?

 

Anyone educated.

 

What is also had is the tendency for those in academics to demonstrate group-think tendencies, and never exercise individual thought on any particular matter.

Beyond that, there is neither confirmation, nor denial, on the part of yourself as to whether or not the politics of the one issuing the grant for research have any influence on the outcome of the research itself. Explain why such is never answered on the part of yourself.

 

You mean indoctrinated.
Sure now, there’s no bias in your judgmental assertion and you have conducted an empiricle study to reach that conclusion. How very superior Brit, not to mention condescendingly hypocritical of you.

 

As I've acknowledged, I expect anti-intellectualism. It encompasses both the authoritarian personality (found to be a key feature of conservatism) and the post-truth phenomonon.

An educated outlook allows for critique. Its a shame that pro gunners find that skill, so vital for individualism, so disagreeable.

 

What was the car designed to do?

 

Is that a serious question?

 

I was just thinking that myself. I wonder if the gunners think the gun was actually invented as a 'tool' rather than a weapon as they so often claim then why is it 70% of the time its the object of choice when they get a bit pissed with one another ?

 

Shows you what gun control can achieve given a chance .... but you guys don't want to hear about that sadly ..... and as a consequence your killing goes on

 

Yet the UK has a higher rate of homicide now than they did when the gun laws were even more lax than in the U.S. Culturally, the subjects of the UK have always been loathe to kill each other. Even now drive by shootings between gang members happen in both countries, but the UK thugs shoot at each other's legs.

The U.S. has parts of the country that are even more safe from crime than any place in the UK... and most of those have lax gun laws. The worst crime rates in the U.S. are almost universally in inner city areas in cities where gun control is most stringent.

It's not the guns.

 

That just pure denial given 70% of your 5 times greater homicide rate involves guns. This is a figure unique in the developed world

 

There's the disconnect between the start and end of this comment. We can all agree that homicide rates are determined by numerous factors and that gun control should not be the only criminology approach adopted. However, we also know that the hypothesis 'more guns=less crime' cannot be rejected. To ignore gun effects is therefore tacit support for higher homicide rates.

 

Depends on who has and is using those guns.
If Criminals are killed in the commission of Crimes, this is a good thing for society, hence why shall issue concealed carry, is rule of law now in most States now.

 

"RTC laws are consistently associated with increases in total homicides of from 5% to 9.5%" Donohue (2017, American Journal of Public Health)

 

If Criminals get killed in the commission of Crimes, this is not homicide, it is self defense and a good thing.

 

Did the phrase 'total homicides' confuse you?

 

No, and irrelevant to the discussion, if killings continue unabated in the Ghetto,
In the Ghetto.......

 

You think total homicides are irrelevant? Wow!

 

Wrong again.

Despite your refusal to acknowledge it, the United States is not a contiguous nation. We are 50 separate and independent states, each with very different cultures, laws, and mores. A number of states with high rates of gun ownership have exceptionally low homicide rates. Where homicide rates are highest, it is usually inner cities, and generally within areas with stringent gun control laws.

Interesting to note that if you eliminated the homicides in just five cities in the United States - four of which are gun-control "utopias" where gun ownership by the law-abiding citizenry is severely curtailed by law - the United States would be one of the safest nations in the entire world.

That's not "denial"; it's simple fact.

 

The term "homicide" is not synonymous with murder, even though they are used interchangeably by those who do not know what they are talking about. The term "homicide" merely means that the death of one individual was committed by another individual, rather than the individual killing themselves. If there is indeed an increase in total homicides in a given area due to right to carry laws, then it can be attributed to an increased number of incidents where the use of deadly force was utilized for legitimate self defense purposes.

 

https://gunculture2point0.wordpress...center-or-the-new-york-times-editorial-board/

"Knowing the VPC was founded in 1988 by Josh Sugarmann helps. Sugarmann is well-known for: (1) working as the communications director for the National Coalition to Ban Handguns (which became the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence); (2) his book, Every Handgun is Aimed at You: The Case for Banning Handguns; and (3) his 1988 memo on Assault Weapons and Accessories in America, in which he wrote: “The semiautomatic weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semiautomatic assault weapons — anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun — can only increase that chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.”

So, there is ample reason to be skeptical of “research” produced by the VPC. And, in fact, year after year when the VPC publicizes its “Concealed Carry Killers” “data,” people of the gun jump in to poke holes in the “research.” Clayton Cramer already effectively criticized this work 2.5 years ago. It was more recently taken down by Bob Owens on Bearing Arms and Miguel Gonzalez at Gun Free Zone."

 

Go and show self defences went up by 16% (reflecting handgun homicides). Good luck!

 

The phrase "total homicides" would not be presented if it was only murders that were increasing from right to carry laws. There would be no point for presenting the phrase unless the report, whatever it may be, was counting both legal and illegal homicides.

The efforts on the part of yourself are nothing more than an attempt to suggest right to carry laws are directly responsible to firearm-related murders being carried out, suggesting the notion that those who legally carry firearms do so for the purpose of shooting and murdering others in cold blood. Such is not the case, nor can such an argument be supported on the part of yourself.

 

Don't be shy now. One piece of evidence indicating 16% increase in self-defence deaths through handguns. Surely that should be simple for you?