Responding to the horrific killings of 20 innocent children and 6 innocent adults, many political types began howling for increased gun control. While acknowledging the bewildering horror of slaughtering children, lets also acknowledge that emotional reasoning provides a poor foundation for laws and governmental policy. How much of the problem are guns?
Several times Australia has been held up as an example of radical gun control cutting murder by guns. Too bad it didn’t cut down on murders.
This chart, published by the Australian government, shows the number of homicides from 1993 through 2007. Note that while the number has declined, that decline didn’t begin until long after Australia cracked down on gun ownership, and has not been very impressive. In fact, the homicide rate in the U.S. has declined more steeply, as we will see momentarily:
England banned many weapons in 1996 and saw a similar result, i.e. no reduction in murder related to gun ownership.
So adoption of harsh gun laws that likely would be unconstitutional in the U.S. did little or nothing to improve homicide rates in either Australia or the U.K. The next question is, how were homicide rates trending over the same time period in the U.S.? This chart comes from the Department of Justice. It shows the U.S. homicide rate per 100,000 population from 1950 to 2010. Note that from the mid-1990s to the present, the homicide rate in the U.S. has declined at a significantly better rate than either Australia or the United Kingdom:
Maybe the Brits and Aussies should study our gun laws to get some pointers on how to bring down the crime rate. Nothing scares criminals like armed “victims” who–oops!–aren’t victims after all.The Times concludes:
As Mayor Michael Bloomberg stressed on Monday while ratcheting up his national antigun campaign, “We are the only industrialized country that has this problem. In the whole world, the only one.”
Michael Bloomberg raises an interesting question: how does an idiot become a billionaire? But that is a topic for another day. I am not sure what problem he thinks is unique to the U.S.; surely not the problem of murder. But there is one factor that distinguishes the U.S. from most, if not all, of the other wealthy countries, and that accounts more than anything else for our higher murder rate: we have a far larger minority population.
Minority population? Surely it’s racist to consider this, but lets take a quick look.
Using Bureau of Justice Statistics, we see in 2005 the murder rate for whites was 3.5 per 100,000; for blacks 26.5. “In 2008, the off ending rate for blacks (24.7 offenders per 100,000) was 7 times higher than the rate for whites (3.4 offenders per 100,000)”
3.4 per 100,000 sits slightly below Europe as a whole. It’s worth noting, “Countries like Russia and South Africa have murder rates that dwarf ours, with a tiny fraction of the gun ownership.” Surely those are developed countries, especially Russia. How many countries have put a man in space? Who was the first man in space? Could have been Russian and Yuri Gagarin? The NYT tells lies rather than practice objective journalism.
But, now, the knee jerk lazy intellects have decided guns are the problem. Remember this?
Some want to pretend there is some evil conspiracy by the NRA that perverted the 2nd amendment. But, even liberal Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan and liberal Senator Patrick Leahy recognize the 2nd amendment. Although, I must admit that our gracious host, H.M. Stuart said it as well as anyone.
Just as no one would ever seriously entertain the phrase “no woman needs two breasts” or “no man needs two testicles” or “no person needs two kidneys” and no one would ever interpret a law as generously granting humans that privilege over and against a prior state in which that was not already a self-evident, pre-existing right, the Second Amendment does not in fact grant “the people” any “right” to “keep and bear arms”, rationally understood as the common personal battle munitions of the day.
Entirely to the contrary, it prohibits government or anyone else from infringing upon that pre-existing condition.
Indeed, I hope I never need my guns, for protection or survival. But, if I do need it, I’ll really need it. Keep in mind that it took the police 20 minutes to arrive at Sandy Hook School after the first call. 20 minutes. Which brings up the adage: When seconds count, the police are only (20) minutes away. A woman I knew in Knoxville awoke one night to an intruder in her house. She called the police and a mutual friend who lived over 5 miles from her. Guess who got there first despite having to drive through city streets for over 5 miles.
If it’s truly about saving live, then how come this isn’t a huge issue – a U.S. suicide rate of 12 persons per 100,000 including a suicide rate of 19.2 per 100,000 for men? Oops, I’m sorry, men don’t matter. Don’t go blaming the suicides on guns. Many of the countries with tougher gun laws and much lower gun ownership rates have as high or higher suicide rates.
No, at best it’s a knee jerk, empty minded reaction. It’s also about elitists, megalomaniac billionaires, politicians and other members of the ruling class, many of whom have armed bodyguards, wanting to wield and extend their power over us. Most likely, there’s a touch of racism as we must take guns away from those violent blacks although many times they need self protection the most. (It seriously diminishes a woman’s ability to defend herself. Do you have the time, or the ability to become a world class female street fighter, which is what it would take for a woman to be able to defend herself from a typical thug if she is unarmed? God made man; Samuel Colt made them equal.
P.S. In the latest news, Obama decided to use the tragedy to push for higher taxes. No shame.
1) Just to put some of your stats in perspective, the murder rate in the UK is 1.2 per 100,000. For Australia, 1.0 per 100,000, for the US 4 per 100,000. For Western Europe 1, for Northern Europe 1.5, Southern Europe 1.4 (where has the Mafia gone?) and Eastern Europe 6.5. I would not consider those Eastern European countries, including Russia, first world countries. Remember that Russia is part of the BRIC group. What should also be noted is that murder rates are much higher in Africa and the Americas. Honduras, 4% black, is the murder capital with a rate of 96. Poverty seems to be implicated rather than guns. At any rate, we certainly should not be lecturing the UK and Australia about homicide rates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
2) Why did the homicide rate in the US rise so drastically in the 60s, more than doubling? Did the percentage of blacks in the country double during that time? Why has the rate dropped? Did our percentage of blacks decrease?
3) “If it’s truly about saving live, then how come this isn’t a huge issue – a U.S. suicide rate of 12 persons per 100,000 including a suicide rate of 19.2 per 100,000 for men? ”
It is a big deal. We have data from Israel that may be helpful in this regard. They had very high suicide rates among their military members. They started requiring that their military leave their guns on base when they went away for the weekend. Suicide rates dropped.
4) You keep guns, I keep guns in our homes because they work. They are good for killing. You could have an ax or a sword, but, like me, you chose guns. So, the question is not if guns will lead to more killings. Of course they will, but rather if their benefit is worth their risk. I think I can make a good case that they are. What I dont know, and what you need to make your case on, is if the cost of making some small change to access to some kinds of guns, ammo or equipment is worth the benefit. If, and this is just an if as I dont really know, we would eliminate the deaths of 100 hundred people a year (20 of them kids) by limiting access to some gun related gear, would it be worth the cost?
5) The rights question is silly. Nothing is a right until we say so. We then proclaim it was a right all along. There was essentially no such thing as liberty or property rights under a monarchy. We develop democracy and they are eternal rights. 200 years from now our “rights” will be different.
Steve
As usual, you define everything and select only what supports your desired conclusion. Ever here of confirmation bias? You use the same international homicide link I used, but you only want to consider the countries that support your position. Truly fallacious reasoning.
I haven’t speculated too much on the murder rates from 1960s till now. I’m guessing drugs had something to do with it. If you look at the BJS stats, you’ll see that the murder rate by blacks dropped from 46.6 in 1976 to 26.5 in 2005. You make another truly stupid argument regarding changes in the black population.
I actually have a modern tomahawk and KBar knofe also, but realize that they’re outdated and last resorts for self-defense.
The rights question is silly. Nothing is a right until we say so. So, in your book, this statement is silly = “that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” and all rights are just arbitrary privileges granted by some power. What an interesting, but pathetic creature you are. Nothing to believe in, nothing to fight for except whatever whimsy that happens to catch your fancy. A man without a soul.
If you want to compare the US to the UK or Australia, you should look at their baseline level of homicides. They have much lower rates. All of Europe does except for Eastern Europe. I think you should compare apples to apples.
I think Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness should be rights. Do you deny that they were not treated as such through most of recorded history? BTW, I was not persuaded by those who want to make health care a right.
My latest knife purchase. I splurge occasionally.
http://www.amazon.com/Columbia-River-Knife-Tool-2910/dp/B001QFJ7QQ/ref=pd_cp_hi_0
The thing I’m looking at the seems to escape you tunnel vision is the impact of guns on the murder rate. For example, as you say “For Australia, 1.0 per 100,000,” If you look at the little chart on the right hand side of this page. You will see in 1996, the year they banned the guns, the murder rate for Australia was 2.0, in 2002 it was 1.9 and them began falling to 1.3 in 2007. We can see by looking at the BJS figures linked to above that in the U.S. the figures fell from whites – 4.5; blacks – 35.9 in 1996 to 3.5 and 26.5 in 2005 respectively. Significant drops both places. Since the U.S. didn’t outlaw any guns during this period of time, there’s no evidence that gun laws made a difference in the murder rate.
So their drop paralleled what much of the anglo-world saw in that same time period. So I am agreeing with you that their gun law probably was not the cause in their drop. You are still left with a higher baseline rate in the US. Couple that with the lower rates seen in essentially all other first world countries, even Israel, it suggests that the US is a more violent country than other first world countries, and if you want to be violent, guns are much more efficient than knives or fists.
Steve
Gheez. That’s one heck of a knife. My favorite knife source is Smokey Mountain Knife Works. Since it’s close to Knoxville, I visit in person. Their prices and selection are great. The two guys started out selling knives at flea markets 40 years ago. Now one is the CEO of a 55,000 sq. ft. showroom store plus all the other business. My Ks-Bar from them ($66.99) cost $28 less than at Bass Pro Shoppe ($94.99) – just looked them up on their websites. You beat the hell out of their price ($237.99) on the knife you bought by going through Amazon.
If more people have gun maniac and other killers wouldn’t kill so many people!