Gun control a comparison US vs Russia

[♪alt13]

https://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2013/09/19/224043848/the-u-s-has-more-guns-but-russia-has-more-murders

There are fewer than 13 million firearms in circulation in Russia, compared with an estimated 300 million in the United States. That works out to about 9 guns per 100 people in Russia and closed to 100 guns per 100 people in America.

According to the FBI, the United States had 13,636 homicides in 2009 with a population that is more than twice as large. More than 80 percent of those killings were gun-related.

It's difficult to make a direct comparison of gun homicides in the two countries because Russia doesn't break down its murder statistics.

Russia has tough gun laws on the books. It's illegal for Russian citizens to own automatic and semi-automatic guns. It's possible to apply for a handgun or shotgun license, though citizens are required to provide reasons such as hunting or target shooting.

Applicants face strict background checks, including criminal history, a full psychological evaluation and a medical exam. They must pass a test on firearm laws and safety.

Each weapon is then registered by the police during a home visit. Police take bullet patterns, test bullets and cartridges so bullets can be matched if the gun is used in a crime. A license lasts five years, after which applicants must go through the whole process again.

In spite of these laws, the country does have periodic mass shootings by people thought to be mentally ill.

Last November, after a five-day drinking binge, 30-year-old lawyer posted a message online referring to humanity as "compost."

Shortly after, he walked into the Moscow pharmaceutical company where he worked and opened fire, killing six colleagues and critically injuring another. He was jailed for life last week.

 

[LogGrad98]

If someone wants to commit a senseless rampage, they will figure out a way to do it. And the people who fall into that category exist all over the place, regardless of gun laws.

 

[JimLes]

If someone wants to commit a senseless rampage, they will figure out a way to do it.

There's only really two ways to do it.* Bullets or explosives. It's not like you often read about a man who killed 15 people at a suburban office with his bare hands.

*Not including outlandish scenarios such as releasing a pack of man-eating tigers at a mall.

 

[BTP]

Rather compare how many amok runs have been prevented by allowing everyone to carry a weapon and how many homicides with weapon involvement per inhabitant have occurred. Add how many people per 100 inhabitants died through accidental gunfire.
If you interpret these numbers the way I do you'll come to the conclusion, that accessability of weapons and ammo have an influence on how many shooting victims a country has. Plus having a strong gun lobby sugarcoating the risks of weapon usage and lack of responsibility people experience by being too familiar with them.
But since you're American let me summarize it:
****ing Russians are crazy!

 

[LogGrad98]

https://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/20...sault-in-stabbing-spree-at-texas-college?lite

https://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083...abbing-at-spring-hs-near-houston-report-says/

https://www.infowars.com/gun-carrying-man-ends-stabbing-spree-at-salt-lake-grocery-store/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chenpeng_Village_Primary_School_stabbing

https://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/20...beach-car-rampage-has-history-of-arrests?lite

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...people-death-killing-spree-guilty-murder.html

I think in most views these would count as senseless rampages. It is generally much more devastating when using firearms or explosives, but hardly limited to those 2 weapon types.

 

[♪alt13]

Rather compare how many amok runs have been prevented by allowing everyone to carry a weapon and how many homicides with weapon involvement per inhabitant have occurred. Add how many people per 100 inhabitants died through accidental gunfire.
If you interpret these numbers the way I do you'll come to the conclusion, that accessability of weapons and ammo have an influence on how many shooting victims a country has.

Of course the accessability of guns and ammo has an influence on shooting victims, but you should be concerned with all victims of violent crime. I believe my neighborhood would be much more violent if none of the households had guns. Furthermore accidental deaths are just that accidents. We don't demonize any other inanimate object when an accident occurs. I really don't agree with lumping accidental deaths in with murder victims. You wouldn't lump people who died from a traumatic head injury while playing sports in with murder victims that were beaten to death.

Plus having a strong gun lobby sugarcoating the risks of weapon usage and lack of responsibility people experience by being too familiar with them.

I really feel that every gun owner I know is a responsible one. When you look at the numbers again look at them state by state. You will see that it is largely a cultural problem.

But since you're American let me summarize it:
****ing Russians are crazy!

So if I'm hearing you right, you are saying that it is a social and moral problem more than it is one that can be solved through legislation.

 

[Revolution 9]

why don't we compare the US to Japan or Germany

 

[♪alt13]

why don't we compare the US to Japan or Germany

let's do it. Then let us compare individual states to those places. Let us also include gun toting societies inside Europe such as Finland. First let's see what Harvard found.
https://usfinancepost.com/harvard-gun-control-does-not-reduce-crime-6179.html
https://www.ksl.com/?nid=757&sid=26639259

In comparison, the study looks to countries with high rates of gun ownership — Germany, France and Denmark — finding that murder rates were "as low or lower than many developed nations in which gun ownership is much rarer."

"For example," the study says, "Luxembourg, where handguns are totally banned and ownership of any kind of gun is minimal, had a murder rate nine times higher than Germany in 2002."

 

[Revolution 9]

let's do it. Then let us compare individual states to those places. Let us also include gun toting societies inside Europe such as Finland. First let's see what Harvard found.
https://usfinancepost.com/harvard-gun-control-does-not-reduce-crime-6179.html
https://www.ksl.com/?nid=757&sid=26639259

Where are the mentions of Germany and Japan?

 

[Revolution 9]

"Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania" laughable at best to even mention these

 

[LogGrad98]

let's do it. Then let us compare individual states to those places. Let us also include gun toting societies inside Europe such as Finland. First let's see what Harvard found.
https://usfinancepost.com/harvard-gun-control-does-not-reduce-crime-6179.html
https://www.ksl.com/?nid=757&sid=26639259

Wait a minute, are you saying that murders happen even if guns are outlawed? The hell you say??? That is unadulterated ******** as everyone knows that murders only occur where "gun-nuts" run the entire country and one-toothed bumpkins run around shooting them off all day screaming "gun rights...2nd ammendment...gun rights!!"

 

[Bronco70]

why don't we compare the US to Japan or Germany

I'm not overly familiar with Germany's situation, but I'm not a big fan of comparing the US to Japan in any kind of gun discussion. Civilian gun possession in Japan is rare and tightly controlled. But it always has been. Gun control is a much simpler issue when there aren't 300M firearms already in circulation.

 

[Revolution 9]

Gun control is a much simpler issue when there aren't 300M firearms already in circulation.

Agreed. Its just a point to be made about the issue of countries who have strict gun laws. Our situation is different. It
will take a unique situation to fix or make things better. I don't think that just your basic gun laws will work.
We've got to stop the extreme talk on both sides, and get real. and no I don't think it will be easy or impossible.

 

[franklin]

why don't we compare the US to Japan or Germany

Because we conquered both of them?

 

[♪alt13]

Where are the mentions of Germany and Japan?

In comparison, the study looks to countries with high rates of gun ownership — Germany, France and Denmark — finding that murder rates were "as low or lower than many developed nations in which gun ownership is much rarer."

"For example," the study says, "Luxembourg, where handguns are totally banned and ownership of any kind of gun is minimal, had a murder rate nine times higher than Germany in 2002."

Germany and Japan have low levels of violence imo because of cultural,economic and societal morality reasons. If you really want to be fair compare US states against one another and different regions of Germany with one another. You can come to your own conclusions. here is a great place to start.

 

[LogGrad98]

Once Walt is taken down the murder rates in New Mexico will go down.

 

[trigg3r]

Gun control has really worked wonders in the past in Chicago............. Criminals don't care about stiffer gun laws, they are still going to get guns and use them when it suits them.

 

[BTP]

Gun control has really worked wonders in the past in Chicago............. Criminals don't care about stiffer gun laws, they are still going to get guns and use them when it suits them.

If you can buy it everywhere out of town, what do you expect? Still I think it's a good start that may pay off long term as a role model if they manage to keep a big amount of guns out of the city with controls. I doubt you can pull it off though.

Germany and Japan have low levels of violence imo because of cultural,economic and societal morality reasons. If you really want to be fair compare US states against one another and different regions of Germany with one another. You can come to your own conclusions. here is a great place to start.

You can obviously do that and should. But Germany and Japan are 2 similarly "evolved" first world countries by modern classification. Germany for example has similar social differences within its society like the USA. You can totally find "ghetto"-like structures over here. Plus the Eastern part that struggles heavily with aftermaths of being a part of Soviet Russia.

Agreed. Its just a point to be made about the issue of countries who have strict gun laws. Our situation is different. It
will take a unique situation to fix or make things better. I don't think that just your basic gun laws will work.
We've got to stop the extreme talk on both sides, and get real. and no I don't think it will be easy or impossible.

Yep but that's extremely unlikely. Polemicizing is a weapon of everyone who doesn't want to be proven wrong or simply wants to stall talks. And there's a big industry who really likes to take the discussion to the extremes. So while I agree it's not impossible, it's going to be very tough.

I'm not overly familiar with Germany's situation, but I'm not a big fan of comparing the US to Japan in any kind of gun discussion. Civilian gun possession in Japan is rare and tightly controlled. But it always has been. Gun control is a much simpler issue when there aren't 300M firearms already in circulation.

Totally agree with this. And whatever you'd try to do against it would most likely hurt a political party beyond repair.

"Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania" laughable at best to even mention these

+1. Russia as well.

Of course the accessability of guns and ammo has an influence on shooting victims, but you should be concerned with all victims of violent crime. I believe my neighborhood would be much more violent if none of the households had guns. Furthermore accidental deaths are just that accidents. We don't demonize any other inanimate object when an accident occurs. I really don't agree with lumping accidental deaths in with murder victims. You wouldn't lump people who died from a traumatic head injury while playing sports in with murder victims that were beaten to death.

I really feel that every gun owner I know is a responsible one. When you look at the numbers again look at them state by state. You will see that it is largely a cultural problem.

So if I'm hearing you right, you are saying that it is a social and moral problem more than it is one that can be solved through legislation.

I will lump together guys who are SHOT intentional, through crossfire and get accidentally shot by kids who found a gun in the house and start playing with it.
Simply allowing people to have these items around the house is extremely dangerous and facilitates all of these incidents with an intentional one being the worst in an extra category. But every death through a gun is unnecessary IMO.
When you take classes on parenting when your wife is first time pregnant that's not only about changing diapers, but also about what items in an household can be dangerous when kids first learn to crawl, walk and even when they get older.
Taking care of your armory should be a logical first step...

For example I don't even know a single gun owner other than 2 friends who work for the police. So I have no experience with people around me and if I find them responsible.
But I wouldn't say a person with a low education background being part of a criminal organisation with anger problems is someone I would feel safe to carry a gun.
If my assumption that you have a family with financial security and a past that provided you a sufficient amount of education and luxury isn't wrong I'd guess you haven't gotten to know too many troubled personalities in your life.

I say it's a combined problem. The social and moral prevent the legislation to take care of it. The two party system doesn't help in that sense as well.
Just imagine - and that's only a thought experiment now - you'd have a law tonight which says that you have from right now on a certain amount of time to return all your registered weapons. They get refunded by tax deduction or whatever and you can turn in your ammo as well(But that's voluntary since there's no registration on the amount of ammo you buy and use).
If you fail to do it afterwards state employees would pursue the missing guns and hand out penalties on them that are hefty and it's added to your criminal record.
Think how that would affect the spread of guns long term. Of course there will be people who'll try to make a business out of this situation.
Afterwards you can install a new gunlaw how to get a gun license for sports on a gun range or hunting.
But you have no longer the right to carry them to your home but instead they're stored at the shooting range or wherever at a protected place.

I honestly such a measure would be a good start. Right now there's for example 1 murder per 100k people a year over here. In the USA it's 5 times as high. Other countries in Europe have an even lower ratio than Germany(Greece for example officially).
Luxembourg for example was a horrible example of yours. That's not a sufficient big enough country to be statistically relevant and it has an open border while in Luxembourg the wealth is way higher compared to the surrounding countries(especially Belgium) due to it's small country special economic advantages having special Bank laws and administering ****loads of money.
If you ask me of course some foreigners are walking in there and try to get a piece of wealth and that will inevitably lead to an increased murder rate.
Not that I think it's right, but that's how some people react if they feel injustice.

 

[trigg3r]

If you can buy it everywhere out of town, what do you expect? Still I think it's a good start that may pay off long term as a role model if they manage to keep a big amount of guns out of the city with controls. I doubt you can pull it off though.

Therein lies the problem. Criminals are going to find ways to get guns one way or another. All you will ultimately be doing is hindering gun ownership for the responsible. There is a reason these laws haven't worked in the past and will continue to not work. It's the war on drugs all over again.

 

[franklin]

I will lump together guys who are SHOT intentional, through crossfire and get accidentally shot by kids who found a gun in the house and start playing with it.
Simply allowing people to have these items around the house is extremely dangerous and facilitates all of these incidents with an intentional one being the worst in an extra category. But every death through a gun is unnecessary IMO.

Death by noxious substances (household cleaning items) is a gazillionX more than accidental shootings (a mere 500/yr).

Let's start an anti-cleaning products society errbody.