U.S. homicide rates compared to different countries

Dude you could not have done a better job making my argument if I typed your post myself. Thanks! LOL

 

Rather than having a ping pong argument over the demographics, I would say you should look at the political, legal, and economic corruption are the driving causes of violence in the those places in the Americas. Looking at race or political parties not only merely obscures the issues, they are canards. Canards that the ruling elites want you to believe. If you want to be sucked by using those lies about race and political parties as the causes of the increasing poverty and especially violence, no one can stop you, but you will remain their useful idiots.

 

Find me a large city state or country on earth with lax gun laws and low gun deaths and I will buy into your mythology. You can't.

 

After I finish doing the stuff I need to do, instead of hiding on this forum, I will do the research and reply.

What I can show right now are the many, many cities and countries with strong laws, even effectively their banning, but are politically corrupt with high levels of income inequality and poverty paired with very high levels of violence. Los Angeles, Oakland, Baltimore, Chicago, D.C., Mexico, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Brazil, South Africa and so on.

Guns will increase the lethality of the violence, but the level of poverty, income inequality, corruption, and repression will increase the level of violence and usually supercharge its lethality.

There are countries with somewhat easy gun laws in Western Europe, but since none of them have anything like America’s poverty and corruption they don’t have anything like the violence.

For that matter look at Prohibition or the crack wars of the 1980s.

So I will say again, the increase availability of guns can, and probably will, increase the deaths, it is the violence associated with societal dysfunction that is the actual cause of violence and death.

 

Post your countries in western Europe. As long as you will be ok with having their laws here. If they are in the EU they all have more strict gun control than the US. That is a fact.

This is not my first rodeo

 

I'm still not doing what I need to do, but I ask what does that mean in the context of this discussion?

Most places with extreme violence, let alone gun violence, have gun laws as least as strong as California's, or Western Europe, but have a much, much higher level of poverty, income inequality, and general corruption; most places with little violence, let alone any gun violence, have gun laws as strong as California's, or Western Europe, but have a much, much lower lever of poverty, income inequality, and general corruption.

The point I keep making is that any reduction in gun violence, or violence in general, is almost incidental to the legality or illegality of guns; the economic and social health of a society is much more of a determinant. If banning, or even just restricting, something was the same as solving a problem the War on Some Drugs would be a roaring success right?

The focus on guns is very effective tool to get people to ignore the pathologies created by political corruption that itself created the economic corruption, which themselves have destroyed the government, enabled the creation of the police state, increased racism and classism, war, pollution, climate change, and other wonderful things. Advocate for ever stricter gun control, demand gun abolition, for that can be considered a worthy goal, but do not fool one's self into believing that that actually solves anything.

 

All developed countries have ares of low income. They just don't have the gun deaths we have. In fact the states with the most per capita gun deaths have lax gun laws....and they are the same ones year in and year out. The top ten lowest gun death states all have strict gun control.

 

Thats not even close to being accurate.

From the FBI Uniform Crime Reports, crime is not directly correlated to states, its highly correlated to city size. For example, see FBI UCR Table 11. The larger the city, the higher the crime rate (per 100,000 people). Cities drive the crime rate. Small towns and rural areas are as safe or safer than most of the rest of the western world.

And while its difficult to determine because gun ownership rates in the USA are almost impossible to quantify, high firearm ownership does not drive crime rates. The highest crime rates are in the very large cities, and in certain areas of those cities (typically poor minority areas of the city). Gun ownership rates int hose areas is unknown bit presumably high. But gun ownership rate are high all over the USA, particularly in rural and small town areas which have low crime rates.

 

Agree that the problem with violence is not guns but other socio-economic issues. That should be obvious simply by looking at the places which have high crime rate - the poor minority areas of the largest cities. The root cause is corruption, poor job opportunities, poor education systems, poor transportation, essentially people are locked in these areas and have no hope of improvement.

Given that aspect, why would you state "Advocate for ever stricter gun control, demand gun abolition, for that can be considered a worthy goal" when it will not solve anything?

 

But gun deaths are higher in states with large rural areas

 

But it does solve the problem in states that have it

 

FBI UCR Table 11. Proves you are wrong. Crime rates are very very highly correlated (correlation index 0.6-0. to city size. Rural areas have very low crime rates. Violent crime rates, homicide rates, gun related crime rates, are highest in the largest cities, and as a secondary result in states with the largest cities. You always are wrong.

 

Gun deaths include all gun deaths. NYC is the largest city in the US and also among the safest cities for crime and gun deaths. They have effective gun control

 

NYC has had idiotic gun laws for decades and also was very unsafe for decades.

 

But it is very safe now. Now that those laws are being effectively enforced. Gun control works

 

I wonder what the left would say to a city in a conservative state - say, Utah or Idaho - creating a permit requirement for abortions, with the cost of said permit in the neighborhood of $500.

 

You are welcome to address that on the abortion forum

 

Interesting that the homicide rate per 100k for NYC was almost 31 per 100k population in 1990, and without changing any laws it's plummeted to current rates. Why didn't gun control work back then?

 

the fact is, the silly NY City Gun gun control laws really have no relevance to their crime rates

 

All do most poor countries. Regardless of the kinds of gun laws, it is the social, political, and economic conditions that are the greatest determinant of violence and death.

 

But not the only determinent. Gun control works

 

It wasn't enforced. Now it is.

 

Except for the fact that they work

 

Because while the rate or amount of violence is not strongly influenced by the presence of guns, the violence’s lethality is greatly increased. Knife stabs are possible more lethal than a bullet wound, but it is usually much easier to pull that trigger.

 

Yes we should do what we can to reduce lethality