Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Effects of US gun crime (long)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Effects of US gun crime (long)

    Total cut and paste from another site. It’s an interesting read and includes some (ok, a lot) of those “US v Brit gun law” content but it’s interesting.
    Read it or don’t read it 🤷‍♂️, if you do, enjoy!
    Someone went to a lot of effort to compile all of this.


    What is the effect of gun crime among gangs in the USA

    I think I disagree with the premise of the original question. I feel like it should be phrased how has gun control impacted gangs in the U.S. thusfar. You see the question itself assumes that there aren’t already any or enough gun laws in place. The reality is that there are actually 1,000’s of gun laws already. Which begs the question why haven’t they worked so far?

    A gun ban in America isn’t as simple as it is in Australia or whatever other country, because we have the bill of rights, and no I am not talking about just the second amendment. I am talking about the 4th as well.

    Lets talk about what would need to happen in order for a gun ban to take place, because obviously gun laws have yet to be successful thus far.
    You need to get supermajorities in Congress, two-thirds in both the House and the Senate. And that's an enormous hurdle, especially in the Senate. But even if you get it through Congress, you still need to get your amendment ratified by three-fourths of the states. That's at least 38 states.


    What Would It Take To Repeal The 2nd Amendment?

    So assuming that happened -and good luck with that- You then need to get over the hurtle of buying back 270 - 360 million guns. On the cheap side guns are about $400 whereas others can range in the thousands of dollars if they include optics. So 270 million times 400 = one hundred eight billion dollars of tax payer money. This doesn’t include the destruction of the guns. Is that something you want to pay for?

    I also didn’t mention that small 90 million discrepancy (360 minus 270) because we are actually not sure how many guns there are in America. Also what about all of the people that don’t willingly want to trade in their guns. Are you going to get 100 million plus warrants for everyone that you think might have a gun after the gun buy back?

    Even if 100% of the law abiding Americans decided to give in their guns (that they have spent thousands of dollars on) I can guarantee you that the gangs and criminals will not. Do you think that when the police (even when they have a warrant) will be able to walk on contensted into the homes of suspected gang members and the gang members will just hand over their weapons as the cops rummage through their belongings? NO! The gangs will shot the police officers, we know this because they already are doing this even without the threat of their weapons being taken away. You essentially create a street war between the cops and the gangs.

    So lets say you over come all of these ridiculous hurtles. The bill of rights has been changed, several Americans have had their homes invaded by police even though they actually didn’t have any guns, and several Americans -both officers of the law and criminals alike- have lost their lives, now you have the issue of preventing gangs from obtaining additional firearms.

    You could always create more laws. Maybe strict gun laws would prevent people from shooting up schools. Lets take a second to think about a really serious punishment for a crime. How about capital punishment?

    People being put on death row for using a gun to kill a bunch of people is already in place, how good of a deterrent has that been? Should we torture people in public who improperly use guns before we kill them?

    Lets analyze how well making something -that is in high demand- illegal in America from other things in the past and present. Perhaps the best comparisons would be Prohibition, the war on drugs, and pirated movies . Prohibition didn’t work and nor did the $250,000 fine from FBI at the beginning of the movies.

    Drugs are currently being manufactured in Mexico and being brought illegally across the boarder. Not just a few pounds of drugs a year but 700 tons of it in just Arizona alone. In one year 18 tunnels from Mexico to Arizona were found.

    Illegal drugs flow over and under U.S. border

    England and Australia don’t have drug cartels tunneling under the ocean to get contraband into their country like America does do they?

    Okay so lets forget all that. Just ignore those issues outright. Lets say a gun ban happens and it goes great. Its everything gun control advocates ever wanted. Would America actually be better off than it was before the gun ban?

    Depending on which side of the fence you are on, defensive gun uses per year range from 64,000 to 200 million. Can the current police force handle the additional crime? I seriously doubt it. Look at the size difference between America and the U.K.

    Even Australia which is more comparable in size has a vastly different population distribution than America does.



    The emergency response times in London on a Saturday evening in 2017 looked like this.

    https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HZm-jKrXZIkJ:https://www.london.gov.uk/moderngov/...3DAppendix%252 0C2%2520RTF.rtf%26A%3D0%26R%3D0+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=cln k&gl=us

    14 minutes isn’t great nor is the horrendous criminal capture rate by the police in England and wales.

    Revealed: How likely is it that the police will manage to catch the person who burgles your house?

    Now remember the size discrepancy of the UK and America. Currently the average american police response time is 18 minutes, now add 200 million more 911 calls a year. I don’t feel like America is prepared for that volume of additional crime. Oh by the way 70% of mass shootings end within five minutes.

    https://www.google.com/search?safe=active&rlz=1C1GGRV_enUS752US753&ei=Jp1 kW8jLJcOH0gKvurHgAg&q=response+time+for+active+sho oters&oq=response+time+for+active+shooters&gs_l=ps y-ab.3..0i22i30k1l2.10997.17229.0.17300.43.38.2.0.0. 0.170.3676.20j15.35.0..2..0...1.1.64.psy-ab..6.37.3675...0j0i227i273k1j0i131k1j0i67k1j0i131 i227i67k1j0i227i67k1j0i131i67k1j33i160k1j33i22i29i 30k1.0.oXn07kClZYQ

    But wait! I hear you saying, many of those 200 million crimes that are being prevented by defensive uses of guns by citizens would have never occurred because criminals wouldn’t have guns in their hands if guns were banned. Bebatable, I reply.

    Don’t be fooled by statements like “Germany, England, Australia, and Japan have nearly eliminated gun related deaths!” That’s a really silly argument when you think about it. Have those countries prevented all crime and government tyranny too? No! In fact its actually the opposite. Japan for example has a stupendous conviction rate of 99% but only because the police torture people into confessing to crimes they didn’t commit. Not exactly the great utopia you thought it was is it? What are we trying to measure here the total amount of gun homicides in a nation or which country is better to live in. I submit it is the later.

    And then there is England, the holy grail example that has very few gun related homicides. Is it really better off than America?

    United Kingdom vs United States: Crime Facts and Stats

    Maybe on some accounts like gun related deaths but it is far from a paradise. Even right now while there are “no guns” in the UK 65% of gun related homicides in the UK come from gangs, while still being less than Americas gun related homicides, it is at least an interesting statistic on the discussion of about how gangs are impacted by gun banning.

    Gangs in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia

    Brief side tangent for a second (okay maybe a long side tangent) as I explain why America actually doesn’t have a ‘gun problem’ so much as a distribution of wealth problem and a racial tensions issue that is unique to our country.

    You see gun related death's is not the same thing as gun related murders. 65% of the gun deaths are from suicides. Don’t let people catch you on this technicality.


    70% of the suicides are from middle-aged white males most of which were working class without a college degree. This includes veterans, farmers, construction workers, etc. They feel that they are no longer able to adequately provide for themselves and with more and more labor jobs being outsourced or taken over by advances in technology they see no way to retire and have no light at the end of the tunnel. Guns so happen to be the preferred method of suicide for males. Women interestingly enough prefer poisoning. Again this highlights the true issue at hand, which is disparataty of wealth not guns.

    Its difficult to say how many of these intentional suicides would have been avoided if guns were not easily accessible, but its fair to assume most of them or at least not all of these unfortunate individuals lives would have been spared. Which then leaves us with the remaining 35%

    3% percent of the 35 is from accidental discharges, 15% are committed by police officers justifiably in the line of duty, and the remaining 17% is gangs, illegal activity and drugs.

    For those of you paying attention 65%+15% is 80% of the gun related deaths in America or in other words… not school shootings. This is enlightening to many because 5 minutes of watching a liberal leaning media station you begin to feel like there is a school shooting at every high school in America. I haven’t shared any figures yet except for percentages but I will now. The original 30,000 deaths from guns in America has now decreased to 5,100 after omitting suicides (quick figure here: that equates to 0.00157% of the American population i.e. one tenth of one percent of Americans dying from gun related homicides) or if you prefer all of this in graphical format.

    It kind of puts things in perspective doesn’t it?

    Lets take an even deeper dive into the ‘gun problem.’ We have the data to show where the gun related homicides are actually happening. 25% of gun crime is happening in just 4 cities in America. Detroit, Chicago, Washington D.C. and Baltimore or 1276 out of 5100. What is the one common denominator with these four cities? They all have strict gun control laws and also where the vast majority of the gangs are located. (P.S. another 1,169 came from the state of California, i.e. the strictest gun control laws in the nation)

    So anyway back to this false idea that Great Britain is a magical place free of crime and violence and how that relates to gun control and gangs. The go to defense from gun control advocates about why Great Britain has more violent crimes than America despite having gun bans is this. Great Britain equates a violent crime differently than America does. The Office for National Statistics (O.N.S. or the U.K.’s independent producer of statistics) might consider a yelling match for example as a violent crime, whereas a America would not, thus equating for the significantly more violent crimes in the U.K. than in America.

    However this same argument is incredibly self defeating to anyone willing to investigate. After equating for this apples-to-oranges false comparison it has been estimated that the U.K.’s actual violent crimes per 100,000 is some where between 271 and 776 vs Americas 466, or in other words. No one actually know for sure if the U.K.s violent crime rate is better or worse than Americas, however it is in the same ballpark… or is it?????

    By the Numbers: Is the UK really 5 times more violent than the US?

    Certainly the perception is that America seems more scary at night, but is it actually?

    Well that tricky O.N.S. forgot to mention that in their initial report of the statistics they excluded Northern Ireland and Scotland… Brief geography lesson, the U.K., Great Britain and the British isles are not all the same thing.

    Certainly its no surprise that much like America, the U.K. has the majority of their gun violence in a few cities as well, but they didn’t omit the more violent parts of England and Wales they omitted all of Northern Ireland and Scotland. Can you guess which two parts of the U.K. are the most violent. Thats right…. Northern Ireland and Scotland. If gun bans work so well why didn’t they have the same impact on Ireland and Scotland? And why weren’t they included in the statistics for the “United Kingdom”? Tough questions to answer.

    Republic of Ireland is deadliest place to live in Irish and British Isles - new figures - Independent.ie

    But wait there is yet another dagger to this myth that the U.K. is safer than America and that there gun ban is ‘working’. The U.K. doesn’t account for murders the same way that America does. …..Drum roll please….. The U.K. only accounts for murders if someone is charged. This means that only 1/2 to 3/4 of all murders are counted :0 This apples-to-oranges defense is absolutely debunked, but let me take it yet another step further.

    As I stated earlier Americas gun problem actually isn’t a gun problem it is a wealth distribution problem AND a racial problem unique to America. How do I know? let me show you.

    In the U.S. 1/7 of the population is black and 15% Latino vs the U.K. which only has ~3%. So lets correct for this difference in race between the two countries and see how it compares white murder rate vs white murder rate.

    U.S. vs U.K. - Crime/Murder

    Interestingly enough with this sub-group the U.S. looks better than the U.K. Now before you start branding me a member of the KKK or whatever, note that I am not trying to say white people are better than black people, I am trying to say that gangs are the problem. Not every black person is a gang member, besides that being obvious, it is also supported by statistics. Black immigrants don’t have the same murder rate as black Americans and poor rural blacks have less of a homicide rate that inner city poor Blacks. In short its a problem with the inner cities gangs.

    Gangs and Guns | International Perspective | Gun Facts

    Hopefully at this point you start to see why I say America doesn’t have a gun problem they have a gang and wealth distribution problem. America is astonishingly good at having guns and maintaining a relatively low crime and murder rate. It should be fairly obvious that the amount of guns accessible to one person actually does not impact deaths by homicides on a world level.

    Quite clearly other factors are at play here besides total number of guns in a country. I am not just comparing America to civil war torn countries. I am putting a heavy focus on comparing countries that gun control advocates prefer to compare America to. Ignoring the fact that on a world scale their is no correlation with having more gun laws and less gun violence nor more guns and more violence, lets talk more about how successful gun bans have been thus far in America, the United Kingdom and Australia.

    If gun laws worked, I feel that it would be a safe assumption that we care about more than just how many people died from guns, we actually care about how guns influence crime in the country in general and it doesn’t look good for the U.K. again we have already established that violent crime and murder are measured different from country-to-country but you will notice that all murder, violence, rape, and robbery go up when their are more gun laws.




    This is all in sharp contrast to America that as it has more guns, it has less violence and crime and homicides.


    Now there isn’t just one centuries worth of data on this topic, there are several. The invention of guns actually correlates quite well with reduction in homicides in all of Europe which includes the U.K. and Germany.

    http://economics.wm.edu/wp/cwm_wp158.pdf

    Even England themselves doesn’t think that a gun ban is what truly correlates with violence in their country. Its actually the amount of police offers on duty that helps improve the countries safety.

    Massive spike in knife and gun crime across England and Wales

    Alright so lets pretend for a second that guns ceased to exist. How would this impact gangs, criminal and the general public? Would it change the hearts of individuals simply because guns were gone. The answer is no. We see this from both Australia and the U.K.

    Little fact of the day. After the gun buy back in Australia the mass shooting rate decreased but the mass murder rate actually went up. No I am not kidding!

    The way people decided to commit mass murders just changed. Instead of using a gun, they used fire and vehicles. The ten years prior to the gun buy back it there were 136 deaths by mass shooting and 102 the ten years post.

    List of massacres in Australia - Wikipedia

    The hearts of the criminals don’t change, just the way that they commit crime.

    So what have we learned…
    • England still currently has violent crime including gun crime after a ban
    • The majority of the crime comes from specific inner city areas in both the U.K. and America, but America has more of a gang problem.
    • Americas citizens are already using guns to help prevent crime. Yet the police response time is slower in America than it is in the U.K.
    • Removing guns doesn’t change the hearts of criminals.
    • Countries without guns could potentially allow for the government to oppress people and make them confess to crimes they didn’t commit.
    • America hasn’t had a lot of success banning things because people get alcohol and drugs through the manufacturer or smuggling of the contraband illegally.
    • Although America, Germany, the U.K. Japan, Australia all share the fact that they are first world countries, they are all culturally different, and comparing apple-to-oranges by saying one has less gun violence doesn’t mean they are safer countries to live in.

    What can we conclude

    We would be taking the guns from the hands of the good people and putting them into the hands of the bad people (aka the gangs). Police would be overworked and unable to prevent the additional crime that was otherwise prevented by good people with guns and America is worse off with a gun ban.

    #2
    Next... factor in edged weapon crimes. We all know whose big on using knives on their victims. Hint... one of them is the mayor of London.
    Exercise the Bill of Rights. It's good for your Constitution.

    Comment


      #3
      Sounds pretty good only any college liberal idiot (85+% of them) would argue that the stats are skewed; in some way shape or form, calling this study BS.
      More importantly, it totally goes against their agenda.

      Comment


        #4
        Do you have the original source link?

        Comment

      Working...
      X