and nobody was killed, unlike the shootout that would have happened if everyone had a gun It's a mindset you guys can't get through that thick skull that if everyone has a gun, and there are a percentage of them that are disturbed and a percentage that are criminal and the rest are just frightened then killings WILL result depends on your definition of civilised
Saw that, I was referring to the homicide rate. yet ranks only 12th in the firearms death rate per 100 000 with around 3 homicides per 100 000 people . Source Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country | News | theguardian.com M
As an aside, I always LOL when the AMA takes political stand on firearms, the road toll, etc You'd think that people in glass houses wouldn't throw stones. Preventable Medical Errors ? The Sixth Biggest Killer in America and in Australia Thousands dying from preventable hospital errors, says professor M
Hold on - two posts ago you were certain that the U.S. had "by far the most gun violence in the world," which was foundational to your point. That's not a minor mistake. Now, without missing a beat, you drop that argument and pick up another one. Being so wrong about something so fundamental should be an occasion for pause and reconsideration, not a nasty comeback.
I did wonder if that was the distinction you were making but I don't agree it is relevant to the argument. The proliferation of guns results in more gun related deaths. That is a fact. Whether they are homicides, accidental shootings, suicides or whatever doesn't really alter the discussion about what happens when there are too many guns too easily available to too many people.
Don't think so... and Australia is more urbanised than the US and has just as great traffic density. How do you define correct? Also it is closer to 60:40 than 90%... and due to lots of RHD countries having low population densities about 45% of road are designated as drive on the left (the "right" side ). One more nerd fact for you - the Romans, pretty much the first people to have traffic rules, drove on the left
I have considered my posts and I stand by them. I didn't think I'd need to point out that war zones were irrelevant to the discussion. But since you're so sure I'm wrong, go ahead and name another comparable country which has anything like the amount of gun violence as the US, and to bring this back to the original topic, anything like the number of mass shootings.
A reader would have to be more generous than that to find truth in your claim that the U.S. had "by far the most gun violence in the world." It doesn't, even discounting the "war zones." Continuing to add qualifiers after the fact makes it apparent that this isn't a serious conversation.
Is it time for gun control in Chicago. Another mass shooting(12 victims..no suspect..yet),this time at a basketball court on the south side of Chicago. It's unknown,at this stage if there are any fatalities. Jeez the numbers are stacking up.....................
I only added one qualifier, and it was one that everybody except you seems to feel wasn't necessary. Please name the comparable countries which have more gun violence than yours. Well, obviously MORE GUNS are needed! *rest of the world shakes collective head*
You've done it,GREAT,I'll have to catch up next Saturday night 'cos I'm going Barra fishing for 6 days from Monday morn.
I think the homicide rate relevant as there are victim(s) (as in the topic of the thread title). Accidents - not really, that in most cases involves just the owner of the firearm, and you can't legislate against stupidity (or accidents). Suicides no, people will just use another method. The data shows that in the US, despite the proliferation of firearms, you are around 4 times as likely to be killed in a car accident than murdered with a firearm, and the likelyhood of drowning (2.1 per 100 000) is not far behind the firearm homicide rate. Doesn't make for sensational news though. M
You've added three so far. And you don't speak for everyone in this thread. Nor do you don't speak for everyone in the world. As I said before, this isn't a serious conversation. I actually live here, care about what happens here, and know a thing or two about this subject, so I'm not going to waste more time with people who aren't actually interested in having a discussion in good faith.
Naturally you've ignored my question and tried to distract by focussing on the minutiae of one statement, whilst attacking the man instead of the issue. Anyhow, this is the Australian section. So if you don't like it, Ooroo! There are plenty of nut-jobs in P & R who'll pat you on the back and agree with everything you say.
Fair enough. We'll have to agree to disagree then. I don't think it's necessary to break down the numbers. I think it's pretty simple - easy access to guns results in more gun related deaths, and most certainly more shooting massacres, which is what these constant threads are really about.