Kasz216 said:
A) Not for a lot of things no. For example, target practice, protection outside of the home. B) The above is comparing countries. The difference is, the above is the data put scientifically, while you are cherry picking countries to try and make a point.
Here is an informative harvard review. http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf |
A) If Handguns are illegal, why do you need a handgun for rifle target practice? Protection outside of the home? It's called pepper pray, or a non lethal taser gun. Also aren't homicide rates 3x higher during burglery for residents with guns then those without? At least that's what it is in Canada.
B) What populations is this chart based on? What does each dot represent? a population of a thousand, a million, an entire country? Where do literally, the countries with the lowest homicide rate reside? How many guns per Capita does each spot represent? I'm not nit picking, I'm being specific, Nevada has one the highest homicide rate in all the US states along with Michigan, New York, and I forget the rest. They also have the highest gun ownership per capita.
As for your link, I used google, and the first article for harvard states "We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty)"
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html
Actually....so far every article on google I see seems to support the claim that lower gun ownership rates relate to lower homicide rates.
http://www.nber.org/digest/feb01/w7967.html
What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results