If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
The difference (and it's a huge one) between the example you give and a gun is one of design and usage.
When a gun is used correctly, in the manner it was designed and to obtain the effect it was designed to do, then injury and/or death will follow. In fact gun producers are proud of the fact that their weaponry is better at this than others. That isn't the same for a car. Not even close.
The only real reason you have given so far for having a gun is so that you can threaten (or actually achieve) injury on an intruder or a.n. other criminal.
So what does that say?
It says that it secures me, my family and my property. It also deters criminals from breaking in in the first place, so I don't have to shoot them (or be shot.)
Consider this. Guns are designedto cause injury as you say, yes? Yet it still causes less deaths than automobiles.
It's apparently bullshit, but you can't refute it. Paesan', if you're gonna bother debating at all, do it will a little dignity and don't whine when someone has an opinion that differs than yours (and supports it with facts that you can't refute.)
Hahahaha.
Indeed it does. 43,000 automobile related deaths and 32,000 gun related deaths.
Using your own earlier argument, CDC figures also show that only 1,500 of those firearm deaths were "accidental", suggesting that over 30,000 were intentional. How many of the automobile deaths were deliberate?
Interestingly, death by automobile in the UK is 3.5 per 100,000 population, in the US it's 12.3. Not only are you more likely to kill each other with guns, but also with cars. I'm starting to wonder if you lot are mature enough to be trusted with anything slightly dangerous
Thats an interesting comment, why would you have an issue with prayer and the national anthem in schools?
I dont think seperate religious schools are healthy at all which is why i think all schools should be state run with a mix of all cultures and religions attending.
It may be controversial but i think starting the day with the lords prayer and the national anthem is a great idea.
Or suicide. Which I mentioned earlier.
Again, if you want to compare the U.K. to the U.S., compare it to the individual states, which are each about the size of European countries.
Still not an accident though, is it?
NB Suicide in the US = 11.1 per 100,000 and in the UK 9.2. Interestingly the rate in men is identical (17.7).
Suicide by gun in the US is 54% of that total, whereas in the UK we are more likely to hang ourselves (guns being less accessible)
Why? Rate per 100,000 is internationally recognised comparison.
If the Chief is in possession of an intercontinental ballistic handgun then you could well be visiting your friends in A and E.
:x
Right. So, lets look at the individual states per 100,000.
Because the United States is a large country and anything we do is going to be larger per 100,000 compared to the UK.
Anyways, my stance on gun control is that they shouldn't be banned they should just be more strict on the gun owners. Just banning things won't do a thing for keeping it out of the streets, or keeping criminals from possessing them. It's just going to make them more creative in hiding their guns. A good example would be prohibition.
Actually, it's more because the individual states have different gun laws. There isn't just one law that the whole country follows, it's up to the state what is and isn't allowed. So, if we're arguing about the impact of gun laws on gun violence, it would be nice to look at it by state, because then we can actually see how different laws affect those rates. If the US had one set of rules regarding guns that every state followed, then comparing the whole country would be perfectly fine. But it doesn't work that way.
Sorry, I don't follow that logic, can you explain?
Isn't that an argument against anyone having guns ?
Or, ultimately,against the idea of a nuclear deterrent ?
Even then, the cultures of individual states can vary very dramatically. Consider Arkansas and California, for example. It also happens that some states are more urbanized than others. It makes it impossible to conduct any form of analysis on the reasons for difference between countries by looking at the U.S. as a whole because New York is a completely different landscape with different everything than Ohio. As such, it makes it impossible to structuralize it without analyzing it by individual state.
The population of the UK is 61,838,154
The population of the USA is 307,006,550
That's 5 times the amount right there so you can already assume that most statistics are going to be 5 times higher for us. Now I'm just guessing but with the 100,000 thing they are most likely taking the statistics of the whole group and condensing them down to that amount so you're still going to have a higher amount it's just going to look like it's compared to the same number of people.
You take total number of events / 100,000
number of events in us is 5x that of the uk / number of times 100,000 can fit into 307million is around 5x that of the UK
Ie even if there was 5x more of a certain crime in the US, it would still be the same rate of x:100,000 population.
^He's right. xD The issue is more that different states have different rules and attitudes towards guns, and so comparing the country as a whole can be misleading.
If we looked at raw numbers then you would be correct in your thinking. i.e. we should expect to see at least 5x the number of events in the US as in the UK.
However, by using a common denominator we take that variation out of the equation.
The others are correct when they argue about urbanisation vs rural being a greater issue. Very hard to find any state in the US with similar proportions to the UK in that regard though.
There is also the issue of culture - and I suspect that is the major issue when it comes to guns.
Not true. More cars on the road in New York means one accident in there can turn into a fuckload of others. And as a resident of New York, I can attest for this being a frequent occurrence. Idaho, however, wouldn't have that same problem.
This is why I said earlier that statistics are bullshit.
Click the link I posted before.
Which is a good point, except you argue against that same point when it comes to guns - i.e. more guns = more likelihood of them being used
Thats the same over here too, or anywhere in the urban world.
Hm?
Point is, though, that not everywhere in the U.S. is the same. New York is ridiculously urbanized, but Arkansas is very rural and Louisiana is mixed. If any argument about the United States versus another country is to stand, then the same conclusion would be applicable if compared to individual states. And it seems you guys are covering your ears, screaming "lalalalalala" whenever I ask you to compare anything to individual states.
Im not saying you are, just you seem to find it hard to ever accept it.
I think the argument was that when one car crashes, and there are tons of other cars around, it's more likely to quickly turn into a multi-vehicle pile-up than if the area is rural and you're almost alone on the road. So, one car accident can CAUSE other accidents in heavily-trafficked areas. One gunshot will not CAUSE other guns in the area to start firing.
You argue that more cars in NY means more likely to have an accident. When you do, other cars are more likely to be involved.
My argument is that more guns available means that gun death is more likely and when one person is prepared to use it (in defence or attack) then so is the other person.
Looking into some of the national statistics more, burglary rates in the US are actually higher than in the UK, but US burglars are more likely to wait until you are out. That makes sense, less likely to be shot.