Mr. Giggles
Member
Typical left wing propaganda.
"Facts"
Pffffffttttttt
"Facts"
Pffffffttttttt
Sorry but you're ignorant on this matter. I live in Denmark, I own an AR-15 and a Glock 17DK and they're sitting in a safe with ammunition 10 feet from where I'm at now.
There's no country in Europe other than the United Kingdom that prohibits people from owning semi automatic rifles and pistols, it just requires the proper licensing like a hunting license or a sporting license.
Best decision Howard ever made. And FYI Howard's government was a right wing one.
One of many reasons why Australia is superior to America.
Gun laws are still vastly different in these nations; you cannot boil gun laws down to "number of guns in country". Not only that, but you can't possibly control for the various societal factors in each country that would have an enormous effect on the actual homicide rate: police force presence, general crime rates, economic conditions, and so on.
You need to compare, within a single country, the effect of change in gun laws on that country's change in gun deaths per capita. You're isolating the factor and can draw reasonable results from that.
Study design 101.
I never said anything to the contrary.Regulation and licensing in Denmark is much harsher than in the states. Just because you got your hands on a semi-automatic rifle and a pistol through proper hunting and sporting licenses doesn't Denmark's regulation isn't much stricter than America's incredibly loose gun laws where you can get your hands on automatic assault rifles with much less work and inspection etc.
Yeah, but Australia doesn't have freedoms voted on by 2/3rds of the states, as well as a God-given right to own guns.
The only way a gun buyback program in the US is going to work is when they offer fair value for them. Most people (myself included) that have a few thousand dollars invested in firearms wont turn them in for 100 buck and a thank you.
That and defying the laws of gravity, always being upside down and never falling up onto space is some sort of witchcraft
No no no, you have it all wrong.
they also have giant, murderous rabbits
I never said anything to the contrary.
I was just saying you're ignorant if you don't think there's millions of semi automatic weapon in civilian hands.
There's almost 80 million weapons out in civilian homes in Europe.
How the hell can we research something that hasn't happened?
Also from the OP:
Edit: If anything you can see USA as an example what would happen if there weren't such laws.
The reason I make the comparison is subtle but obvious (to me anyway).If you don't see the difference in regulatios between having to store said firearms in a safe and open/concealed carry states you're being dense on purpose.
And owning firearms in Germany is pretty much a rural thing tied to shooting club culture. I grew up in the city and most people lin the bigger cities ook at those people as people living in the past.
Honestly speaking, all this study says is that the gun ban made it a little bit safer. Australia was already really safe before the gun ban took place.
Lets not get in the way of a good old liberal echo chamber.
United Kingdom-
Firearms per 100 people: 6.7
Homicides per 100.000 people: 1.0
Denmark-
Firearms per 100 people: 12.0
Homicides per 100.000 people: 1.0
Sweden-
Firearms per 100 people: 31.6
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.9
Switzerland-
Firearms per 100 people: 45.7
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.5
Germany-
Firearms per 100 people: 30.3
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.9
Czech republic-
Firearms per 100 people: 16.3
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.7
Sources: 1 and 2
There is no such thing as a control group in large-scale sociological studies. No two countries are "identical" from an experimental control phase.You can't draw any reasonable results from looking at a single country.
Hasn't study design 101 taught you the purpose of a valid control group?
The reason I make the comparison is subtle but obvious (to me anyway).
Do you think it would've made a difference if the Orlando shooter was required to store his firearm in a safe? It didn't make a difference to Anders Being Breivik.
And your little anecdotal evidence there is cute, I went to Germany last year competing and there was people from all levels of society participating there. Germany also have among the highest gun ownership in Europe, so something tells me you're talking with some very select people there.
As I said, you need a good counterfactual to find a causal effect. This is decades upon decades of philosophy of science speaking.
It's exactly why control groups are used in medical research: to see what would have happened if the treatment wasn't applied.
Was the USA a mirror image prior to the Australian gun laws passing? I doubt it. Income distribution alone would provide a convincing reason why they weren't.
Thank you for making my point. That shows exactly what I'm saying. There's no direct corelation.For example, Netherlands' gun ownership rate is about half of what the UK's is, and their homicide rate is also lower than the UK's. If you're going to compare numbers between nations, you can make the argument go in either direction, depending on which countries you choose to include
If you've been charged and found guilty with violence of any kind you can't legally own a firearm in Denmark.Might have made a difference if someone with a history of domestic abuse wasn't allowed to legally own said firearm. What are the laws on that in Denmark?
The only way a gun buyback program in the US is going to work is when they offer fair value for them. Most people (myself included) that have a few thousand dollars invested in firearms wont turn them in for 100 buck and a thank you.
Ehhhh you can't really apply the terms left wing/right wing to Australian politics. Sure Labor leans to the left, and Liberal lean to the right, but they're practically the same. Nowhere near as dichotomous as the Democrats and Republicans.
That's nice. But the Australian Constitution stipulates that the government must pay just compensation for any resumed private property.
It worked out the AUS govt spent nearly $760 per weapon. (In 1996 FFS)
Is that enough for you
I think that some police departments already do it but you get like 100$ per firearm. So you can bring in stuff that is worth less than that and might not even work and get 100$ and keep your better stuff.
The reason I make the comparison is subtle but obvious (to me anyway).
Do you think it would've made a difference if the Orlando shooter was required to store his firearm in a safe? It didn't make a difference to Anders Being Breivik.
And your little anecdotal evidence there is cute, I went to Germany last year competing and there was people from all levels of society participating there. Germany also have among the highest gun ownership in Europe, so something tells me you're talking with some very select people there.
That is a given, you're closer to nature, it's more likely you're going to be hunting which by far account for the most guns in Europe.It's very much a rural thing. Look at that heatmap. http://www.zeit.de/2014/04/waffen-deutschland
And it's tied to shooting club culture. Notice how there are fewer firarms in the GDR? Said clubs were banned there.
The last comment was based on my personal bias, but come on:
There is no such thing as a control group in large-scale sociological studies. No two countries are "identical" from an experimental control phase.
So you get as close as you can.
How do you explain the sharp drop of homicide+suicide and complete eradication of mass shootings since '96 then?
Safes are just one part of the many regulations being asked for. Exhaustive background checks and purchase delays, prevent private sales. That could have very well prevented his legal purchase of the Sig.The reason I make the comparison is subtle but obvious (to me anyway).
Do you think it would've made a difference if the Orlando shooter was required to store his firearm in a safe? It didn't make a difference to Anders Being Breivik.
Lol this is a garbage stat. Sweden has tons of firearms, but I've never met a single person with a gun that isn't clearly meant for either sports or hunting (mostly hunting). We're not talking ARs and handguns here. And you need all the right licenses and storage lockers etc. in order to acquire even these weapons that are mostly no threat to be used in mass shootings.Sweden-
Firearms per 100 people: 31.6
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.9
No denying most of the guns are classical bolt action and double barrel shotguns, but you can legally own an AR-15 in Sweden, you can legally own handguns. I know because I go there several times a year hunting and competing in sports.Lol this is a garbage stat. Sweden has tons of firearms, but I've never met a single person with a gun that isn't clearly meant for either sports or hunting (mostly hunting). We're not talking ARs and handguns here. And you need all the right licenses and storage lockers etc. in order to acquire even these weapons that are mostly no threat to be used in mass shootings.
According to this source, there were 872 serious crimes with firearms reported between 2000 and 2010, and in only 19 cases the gun(s) used were obtained by legal means. Basically gun violence in Sweden mostly happens in criminal gangs that illegally import their guns from other countries.
Exhaustive background checks, purchase delay and no private sales didn't prevent Anders Being Breivik either, and it wouldn't have prevented the Orlando shooter either. Prior to the shooting he was spotless.Safes are just one part of the many regulations being asked for. Exhaustive background checks and purchase delays, prevent private sales. That could have very well prevented his legal purchase of the Sig.
I mean I'm happy you're such a responsible toy owner, but over in the states we have a lot of fucking blood flowing
... it just requires the proper licensing....
Yea but America isn't Australia
As close as you can doesn't mean to chuck out control groups entirely and look at a single country only because there are plenty of confounding variables like improvements in living standards.
If you can't use countries because there's no valid control group then you could look for similar municipalities or other geographical areas which can provide a good counterfactual. If you can't do that but you still want to produce research, poke the obvious holes in your paper because it's a bad paper.
And sociology is a bad science.
The only reason to provide an alternative explanation is to poke a hole in the paper's research method.
I already managed that: increases in living standards can easily be thought of as a confounding variable.
That's more than enough reason to question the results. The only way to find a real causal effect is, again, through good research design.
That's not going to happen because of the elephant in the room (not so much?) called the 2nd amendment that makes it a right to Americans, and not a privilege like it is to Europeans.And here you hit a key factor and unravel your entire argument with regard to guns in the USA. Forget AU-style buy-back programs, I'd be THRILLED if we could just get sane licensing and background checks in place.
Lets not get in the way of a good old liberal echo chamber.
United Kingdom-
Firearms per 100 people: 6.7
Homicides per 100.000 people: 1.0
Denmark-
Firearms per 100 people: 12.0
Homicides per 100.000 people: 1.0
Sweden-
Firearms per 100 people: 31.6
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.9
Switzerland-
Firearms per 100 people: 45.7
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.5
Germany-
Firearms per 100 people: 30.3
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.9
Czech republic-
Firearms per 100 people: 16.3
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.7
That's just an alternative solution to the problem, an unfeasible one, at that. Banning guns is a more realistic approach. But it seems you're more concerned to discus if this research is "legit" or not.
There's no direct corelation.
Yes but when you get into those types of guns the regulations and stipulations become pretty strict. Most psychos will not be able to pass everything needed.No denying most of the guns are classical bolt action and double barrel shotguns, but you can legally own an AR-15 in Sweden, you can legally own handguns. I know because I go there several times a year hunting and competing in sports.
No denying most of the guns are classical bolt action and double barrel shotguns, but you can legally own an AR-15 in Sweden, you can legally own handguns. I know because I go there several times a year hunting and competing in sports.
Also your stat is perfectly fine, it proves that people that legally acquired the firearms are not a problem statistically speaking.
Exhaustive background checks, purchase delay and no private sales didn't prevent Anders Being Breivik either, and it wouldn't have prevented the Orlando shooter either. Prior to the shooting he was spotless.
Lets not get in the way of a good old liberal echo chamber.
United Kingdom-
Firearms per 100 people: 6.7
Homicides per 100.000 people: 1.0
Denmark-
Firearms per 100 people: 12.0
Homicides per 100.000 people: 1.0
Sweden-
Firearms per 100 people: 31.6
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.9
Switzerland-
Firearms per 100 people: 45.7
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.5
Germany-
Firearms per 100 people: 30.3
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.9
Czech republic-
Firearms per 100 people: 16.3
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.7
Sources: 1 and 2
That's not going to happen because of the elephant in the room (not so much?) called the 2nd amendment that makes it a right to Americans, and not a privilege like it is to Europeans.
There's a ton of factors, but the heavy hitters:If there is zero correlation, how do you account for a homicide rate 4 times higher than other similar first world countries?
Americans are just much worse people?
You're right, I can't, but I can prove (and you helped me there, thank you) that legal privately owned firearms doesn't mean death and carnage like it does in the US.Yes but when you get into those types of guns the regulations and stipulations become pretty strict. Most psychos will not be able to pass everything needed.
You can't use isolated examples such as Breivik to prove stricter gun control isn't helpful. The US have 99 non-Breivik's committing mass-shootings between every 'unstoppable' high-functioning psychopath.
It's obfuscation not to include the US data isn't it?
USA-
Guns per 100 people: 112.6
Homicides per 100,000 people : 3.9
Significantly more guns and significantly more murders than any of those countries. There is no honest fact/statistic based pro gun argument.
I could've included it, but it's an outlier and there's so many things the countries I listed have in common that the U.S. doesn't have.It's obfuscation not to include the US data isn't it?
USA-
Guns per 100 people: 112.6
Homicides per 100,000 people : 3.9
Significantly more guns and significantly more murders than any of those countries. There is no honest fact/statistic based pro gun argument.
how will i defend my family when Zombies come?
B-b-but criminals will just get guns no matter what! They'll just use knives instead! People will just start strangling each other to death if they can't murder with firearms! You guys just don't get it!!!
Edit: I never even considered a gun buy back program, that makes so much sense.