Booth kills baited bear

[Per]

Canada had a knee jerk reaction to Ecole Polytechnique. The long gun registry.

That turned out well.

Well, I guess it must have. Canada has 0.51 homocides with gun per 100.000 inhabitants, compared to the 2.97 in the USA. Thus the number of homicides by gun per capita is almost six times higher south of the border.

Sweden is pretty similar to Canada, with a 0.41 rate.

Gun ownership is 88.8 guns/100 people in the USA, 30.8 in Canada and 31.6 in Sweden.

As a comparisson, gun ownership is 6.2 guns/100 peope in England & Wales, and they have 0.07 homicides by gun per 100.000 people.....

That must truly be a horrible place to live, eh?

And in all fairness, total homicide rates per 100.000 people, regardless of murder weapon:

USA 4.2
Canada 1.6
UK 1.2
Sweden 1.0

So, doing the maths, non-gun homicide rates would be roughly 1.2 for the US, 1.1 for the UK and Canada and 0.6 for Sweden.
Kind of looks like gun homicides are just added on top of other homicides that look to be roughly the same in all four countries (slightly lower in Sweden, but that could be an effect of a smaller population, few big cities, etc).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... world-list
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... icide_rate

[Topper]

By the way IMO the Economist is the only journal worth reading, I started reading it when I was about 21. The problem is it makes most other media look inadequate

You're preaching to the choir here. It's an excellent magazine.

A annual 52 round humour magazine I've subscribed to for over 20 years.

[ukcanuck]

By the way IMO the Economist is the only journal worth reading, I started reading it when I was about 21. The problem is it makes most other media look inadequate

You're preaching to the choir here. It's an excellent magazine.

A annual 52 round humour magazine I've subscribed to for over 20 years.

Tried quoting it once in a first year poli sci paper once... Didn't go over well, Wikipedia didn't exist then lol

[okcanuck]

No surprises for me watching that so-called press conference by the NRA yesterday. First of all at least have some balls and let the press ask questions about their ridiculous solution to the problem. Secondly he didn't even mention assault rifles. I have a solution for the NRA, just shut the fuck up and dont push your paranoid ideas onto the american public. Nobody will ever convince me that those type of weapons are needed for protection.

[ukcanuck]

No surprises for me watching that so-called press conference by the NRA yesterday. First of all at least have some balls and let the press ask questions about their ridiculous solution to the problem. Secondly he didn't even mention assault rifles. I have a solution for the NRA, just shut the fuck up and dont push your paranoid ideas onto the american public. Nobody will ever convince me that those type of weapons are needed for protection.

Guess its a good thing you aren't in charge then, I have never needed a gun and don't really see the need for one personally but there is NO WAY I would ever willingly give up the right to own one...that's if I had that right obviously.

The bottom line OK, "the right to bear arms shall not be infringed" has almost nothing to do with what happened at Sandy Hook.

You want to prevent such things from happening stop voting for politicians that refuse to spend money in health care.

Start caring about the Health of you fellow man more and less about non sequiturs...

[Topper]

No surprises for me watching that so-called press conference by the NRA yesterday. First of all at least have some balls and let the press ask questions about their ridiculous solution to the problem. Secondly he didn't even mention assault rifles. I have a solution for the NRA, just shut the fuck up and dont push your paranoid ideas onto the american public. Nobody will ever convince me that those type of weapons are needed for protection.

Spot the assault riffle.





Because they are both the same gun.

But one is black and is therefore evil.

[Fred]

No surprises for me watching that so-called press conference by the NRA yesterday. First of all at least have some balls and let the press ask questions about their ridiculous solution to the problem. Secondly he didn't even mention assault rifles. I have a solution for the NRA, just shut the fuck up and dont push your paranoid ideas onto the american public. Nobody will ever convince me that those type of weapons are needed for protection.

Spot the assault riffle.





Because they are both the same gun.

But one is black and is therefore evil.

[Fred]

The answer is obvious they're both evil and intended to kill, in fact designed to kill people. Why not try paper airplanes for a hobby. how about a couple of flame throwers, you know you can just barbecue people rather than kill them or how about an anti tank gun you could take out your entire neighbours house, or an atom bomb and solve the housing problem in Vcr. why not if you're going to do it, heck do it right

[okcanuck]

No surprises for me watching that so-called press conference by the NRA yesterday. First of all at least have some balls and let the press ask questions about their ridiculous solution to the problem. Secondly he didn't even mention assault rifles. I have a solution for the NRA, just shut the fuck up and dont push your paranoid ideas onto the american public. Nobody will ever convince me that those type of weapons are needed for protection.

Guess its a good thing you aren't in charge then, I have never needed a gun and don't really see the need for one personally but there is NO WAY I would ever willingly give up the right to own one...that's if I had that right obviously.

The bottom line OK, "the right to bear arms shall not be infringed" has almost nothing to do with what happened at Sandy Hook.

You want to prevent such things from happening stop voting for politicians that refuse to spend money in health care.

Start caring about the Health of you fellow man more and less about non sequiturs...

Listen UK where in my post did I say I wanted to get rid of the right to bear arms? Not a fucking chance. I am against the right to bear weapons that are clearly not needed to protect yourself. Do you think we should be able to own missle launchers or machine guns and on and on. Something has to be done and it might as well be now. As a matter of fact maybe there should be a vote by the american people on whether they think they should have the right to own such weapons. Clearly the NRA's solution is ridiculous.

[Topper]

Do you think we should be able to own missle launchers or machine guns and on and on. Something has to be done and it might as well be now. As a matter of fact maybe there should be a vote by the american people on whether they think they should have the right to own such weapons. Clearly the NRA's solution is ridiculous.

We can't, and for the most part neither can all but a very few wealthy Americans.

[Strangelove]

Canada had a knee jerk reaction to Ecole Polytechnique. The long gun registry.

That turned out well.

Well, I guess it must have. Canada has 0.51 homocides with gun per 100.000 inhabitants, compared to the 2.97 in the USA. Thus the number of homicides by gun per capita is almost six times higher south of the border.

Sweden is pretty similar to Canada, with a 0.41 rate.

Gun ownership is 88.8 guns/100 people in the USA, 30.8 in Canada and 31.6 in Sweden.

As a comparisson, gun ownership is 6.2 guns/100 peope in England & Wales, and they have 0.07 homicides by gun per 100.000 people.....

That must truly be a horrible place to live, eh?

And in all fairness, total homicide rates per 100.000 people, regardless of murder weapon:

USA 4.2
Canada 1.6
UK 1.2
Sweden 1.0

So, doing the maths, non-gun homicide rates would be roughly 1.2 for the US, 1.1 for the UK and Canada and 0.6 for Sweden.
Kind of looks like gun homicides are just added on top of other homicides that look to be roughly the same in all four countries (slightly lower in Sweden, but that could be an effect of a smaller population, few big cities, etc).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... world-list
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... icide_rate

"Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

I dunno Per this list of death rate per country:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_so ... death_rate

... tells me the death rate of Americans is LESS than that of Swedes!

So what does it all mean??

Are Swedes falling down open manhole shafts?

Are Swedes killing off other Swedes with hard-to-detect poisons (murders deemed "natural causes")?

Are incompetent Swedish cops finding bodies beaten to death with rocks and ruling these deaths "suicide"?

Are a high percentage of Swedes being struck dead by God?

I dunno, fuckin stats eh Per?

Personally I'd rather be shot to death than beaten to death with a rock but that's for another thread....



Just to add a little perspective.

http://www2.macleans.ca/tag/homicide/

Murders per 100,000 population:

1. Honduras 82.1

2. El Salvador 66

3. Ivory Coast 56.9

4. Jamaica 52.1

5. Venezuela 49

6. Belize 41.7

7. Guatemala 41.4

8. St. Kitts and Nevis 38.2

9. Zambia 38

10. Uganda 36.3
.
.
.

103. United States of America 5

150. Canada 1.8

No wonder Topper has seen so much violence in his day!

[okcanuck]

Do you think we should be able to own missle launchers or machine guns and on and on. Something has to be done and it might as well be now. As a matter of fact maybe there should be a vote by the american people on whether they think they should have the right to own such weapons. Clearly the NRA's solution is ridiculous.

We can't, and for the most part neither can all but a very few wealthy Americans.

By such weapons I mean the kind used in this last massacre which you can buy at wallmart.

[Fifty Fifty]

Canada had a knee jerk reaction to Ecole Polytechnique. The long gun registry.

That turned out well.

Well, I guess it must have. Canada has 0.51 homocides with gun per 100.000 inhabitants, compared to the 2.97 in the USA. Thus the number of homicides by gun per capita is almost six times higher south of the border.

Sweden is pretty similar to Canada, with a 0.41 rate.

Gun ownership is 88.8 guns/100 people in the USA, 30.8 in Canada and 31.6 in Sweden.

As a comparisson, gun ownership is 6.2 guns/100 peope in England & Wales, and they have 0.07 homicides by gun per 100.000 people.....



That must truly be a horrible place to live, eh?

And in all fairness, total homicide rates per 100.000 people, regardless of murder weapon:

USA 4.2
Canada 1.6
UK 1.2
Sweden 1.0

So, doing the maths, non-gun homicide rates would be roughly 1.2 for the US, 1.1 for the UK and Canada and 0.6 for Sweden.
Kind of looks like gun homicides are just added on top of other homicides that look to be roughly the same in all four countries (slightly lower in Sweden, but that could be an effect of a smaller population, few big cities, etc).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... world-list
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... icide_rate

"Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

I dunno Per this list of death rate per country:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_so ... death_rate

... tells me the death rate of Americans is LESS than that of Swedes!

So what does it all mean??

Are Swedes falling down open manhole shafts?

Are Swedes killing off other Swedes with hard-to-detect poisons (murders deemed "natural causes")?

Are incompetent Swedish cops finding bodies beaten to death with rocks and ruling these deaths "suicide"?

Are a high percentage of Swedes being struck dead by God?

I dunno, fuckin stats eh Per?

Personally I'd rather be shot to death than beaten to death with a rock but that's for another thread....



Just to add a little perspective.

http://www2.macleans.ca/tag/homicide/

Murders per 100,000 population:

1. Honduras 82.1

2. El Salvador 66

3. Ivory Coast 56.9

4. Jamaica 52.1

5. Venezuela 49

6. Belize 41.7

7. Guatemala 41.4

8. St. Kitts and Nevis 38.2

9. Zambia 38

10. Uganda 36.3
.
.
.

103. United States of America 5

150. Canada 1.8

No wonder Topper has seen so much violence in his day!

Maybe the reason for the different death rates is - more people dying of old age.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... median_age

[Fifty Fifty]

Do you think we should be able to own missle launchers or machine guns and on and on. Something has to be done and it might as well be now. As a matter of fact maybe there should be a vote by the american people on whether they think they should have the right to own such weapons. Clearly the NRA's solution is ridiculous.

We can't, and for the most part neither can all but a very few wealthy Americans.

That begs the question: if most Americans can't get/afford the weapons that would actually be effective in repelling an invasion or the application of force by their own formidable military, what is the point of refusing to submit to regulating access to the kinds of weapons that are only really effective for killing each other?

[Fifty Fifty]

No surprises for me watching that so-called press conference by the NRA yesterday. First of all at least have some balls and let the press ask questions about their ridiculous solution to the problem. Secondly he didn't even mention assault rifles. I have a solution for the NRA, just shut the fuck up and dont push your paranoid ideas onto the american public. Nobody will ever convince me that those type of weapons are needed for protection.

Spot the assault riffle.





Because they are both the same gun.

But one is black and is therefore evil.

If your objective was to whack the maximum number of people at short range in the minimum amount of time, which one would you choose? I'd take the one with the pistol grip and the clip. It may be the the other can take a clip too, but that may be where some lines ought to be drawn.