Michael-5 said:
People in Canadian Cities would be better off if we could carry guns? Why, have to been to Canada? We keep our doors unlocked because we feel safe, why would be pack a gun?
Just wow..... |
3% legally carry guns... that has nothing to do with criminals. I think you keep underestimating how many illegal guns are in circulation and how they get in circulation.
and as for Canada.... any actual proof on that? Because it certaintly happens a lot in Britain.
Gary Kleck, a criminologist at Florida State University, wrote in his 1991 book, Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America, that only 13 percent of burglaries in America occur when the occupant is home. In Britain, so-called hot burglaries account for about 45 percent of all break-ins. Kleck and others attribute America’s low rate of occupied-home burglaries to fear among criminals that homeowners might be armed. (A survey of almost 2,000 convicted U.S. felons, conducted by the criminologists Peter Rossi and James D. Wright in the late ’80s, concluded that burglars are more afraid of armed homeowners than they are of arrest by the police.)
A large problem with this arguement seems to be that you don't have the requistite understanding of statistics to even understand what the facts say... So let me break it down for y ou.
When you look at the changes in gun legislation from country to country, like the UK above, you see absoluteley zero change in homicide. Which means... no difference.
To use Canada as an example....
Long Gun Registry implemented.... no effect on crime murder rates. Well large increase in youth deaths but that's probably incidental. This means that, basically the gun law had no effect. There could be other factors involved, however this seems highly unlikely since this is a trend you see over and over and over again. UK, Canada, Austraila etc.
Your whole arguement boils down to "Hey everybody these countries with gun control that had lower homicide rates then the US still have lower homicide rates then the US after gun control. So it must work, despite the fact that murder rates have essentially stayed exactly the same."
My arguement is, there is no statistical proof that there gun legislation stops homicides at all (As can be seen by the above, the UK data, and pretty much all data everywhere.) Where if anything there is a SLIGHT increase in deaths after gun bans. As illustrated in the above Youth Homicde rate. (Which is higher then adult homicide rate? Seriously?) Additionally the presence of guns prevents numerous crimes just by being a possibility. (See the above quote.)
Or if you want a longer look.
Compaired to the Canada the US has actually have done a better job then Canada at reducing homicides since the 1960's. (manslaughter only accounting for between 0.1 and .03 of the numbers. If all that was different was gun control measures it would mean that gun control has a negative effect. (Which of course it isn't, but again the all statistics are pointing in the opposite direction.)
I mean, what about that can't you understand? Your claims fall flat because homicde rates in Canada were lower BEFORE the gun ban? it's no different then me going to Canada passing a law saying you can't chew bubblegum on tuesdays and claiming THAT lowers homicides, because the US is lower then Canada. (Despite Canada sorta jutst being around where it's been homicide wise since 1960 seeing no real change and the US homicde rate being lower.)
And that's not even counting the fact that the US homicide rate counts far more then just Murder and Manslaughter, meaning Canada's homicde rate is actually a lot closer to the US homicde rate then you realize or are probably comfortable with.
In short... again you have zero statistisc or facts to back up your point. The fact that you think you do only stems from a lack of knowledge on statistics and statistical comparisons.
