No, but you don't give any reasoning why really... both are very wel developed country, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't compare.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
In 2014, Norway police officers fired two shots, killed no one, injured no one
- Thread starter chadskin
- Start date
- Status
No, but you don't give any reasoning why really... both are very wel developed country, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't compare.
It's not about it being easy, it's about positive change. It's right to compare the US to a country with different approaches in society so you can measure the benefits of change.
The easy option is to say: "everyone's got guns already", "it's our culture", "Too much poverty", "Poor education" etc...
dripdripsplash
Member
We're just fascinated with how much your cops like to shoot people.
You can't really guarantee that, but I would totally accept a 50% reduction in violent deaths as a great thing.
And yet Europe isn't bathed in blood from people bashing others peoples heads in with rocks. Your arguments fall flat at the moment you look at the far smaller count of people killed by other people in Europe compared to the USA. How often do you think does it happen that children shoot each other dead in europaen countries compared to the US? How many minority people are shot on a daily basis in Europe? Even the more chaotic and weaker developed countries in the east can't compare to the amount of violence in the US.
ReadingRambo
Member
I feel like I have to say in bold letters,
I AM NOT DEFENDING THE SHOOTING OF MINORITIES BY THE POLICE
Can we have a discussion now?
ReadingRambo
Member
Look at the typical police victim in the US. An impoverished, under-educated minority. How many of those exist in Norway? Poverty in the US leads to crime, crime committed around gun wielding and overzealous cops leads to shootings. When race comes into play the issue is exacerbated. Comparing a country with low crime, low diversity, and a largely unarmed police force with a country that is the polar opposite isn't particularly useful.
Zvonimir Boban
Banned
So eliminating 50% of all homicides is meaningless in your eyes? OK.
Firelord Chargrilled
Banned
Are you really trying to say someone who would murder with a gun wouldnt murder the same amount of people without a gun because it's not as convenient ? Also what the fuck is a borderline killer ? Because murder is black and white There is no gray area.
ReadingRambo
Member
This is almost certainly the case. Guns are a tool for ending lives and they are very good at it.
Ah, good. But I don't agree.
All above stated things are reasons why (or not) US have this problem, hence they need to adress these things to make the situation better. Since we now comapred we know things that need to be addressed (of course for this situation they might be clear as water since these problems are reasons for other problems as well).
But still saying that we shouldn't compare is wrong imo.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
I'm still waiting for you to reveal that you're just trolling everyone in this thread..
Yes. I'd say that. A weapon is far too convenient as a murder weapon, it opens oppurtunities.
Firelord Chargrilled
Banned
So comparing entire region consisting of how many different countries ? Is comparable to just 1 ?
That's best case scenario
It could get decline , stay even or get worse
That's like saying take all the bombs , guns and machetes away and there won't be anymore terrorism.
Even so, if you are armed as a police officer, it doesn't mean you have to aim for the chest. In The Netherlands we have armed police and indeed, we don't have many armed citizens. But even if someone was armed, the police still needs to aim to immobilize and/or disarm someone. If they even hit somebody in the legs or arms, they have to explain why they fired, let alone the consequences if they hit somebody in the chest or other vital areas.
Are people really suggesting we remove guns from police as a first step in improving the lives of people in US cities? Because if that happens, the increase in the amount of non-police homicides in our cities will far, far surpass the amount of people killed by police without justification.
Chittagong
Gold Member
But Norway has less people so it's not a fair comparison!
Jesus christ.
Think of this way. Let's say two people want a really expensive car. In one case, a person has a modest job that pays enough to cover bills and maybe a few nights out a year. In the other case, a person makes enough to buy the car anytime they really want to. Who is more likely to end up with the car?
If you make the instrument in which to kill someone so easy to use and effective at its job and easily concealable, people are going to kill with it far more often than if they had no such access to a weapon like that.
ReadingRambo
Member
You don't discharge a firearm unless you are prepared to take a life. End of story. That's what they are capable of. Police in the US do not shoot to injure. In very rare cases a swat sniper will take a shot meant to deescalate a situation without killing a person.
Surely you would want to look to a country like Norway to improve on the various social aspects that affect gun crime? Poverty, education, mental health etc...
I think that this post was very on point. Yes we should compare, but we should understand that comparison within the proper context. Saying that we shouldn't make comparisons because the countries are too different is a cop out.
It's about looking at the factors that have led to the insane differences in police shootings in the two countries. If you don't do that, then the comparison is essentially meaningless.
ReadingRambo
Member
You really think people don't know what causes this shit?? You think the findings in the OP are eye-opening or groundbreaking to anyone?
Ok fine. Norway isn't fillled with people killed by anything but guns either, even if all these crime novels may suggest otherwise.
Zvonimir Boban
Banned
Well duh.
It's harder to stab 20 people to death than it is to shoot the same number.
I doubt that, if you shoot then you aim for the chest. If the situation gets to the point where you are firing your gun then basically someone is going to die. Shooting someone in the arm or leg is movie make believe, that shit can still kill you and it's more likely that the bullet will miss and risk hitting an innocent bystander.
Firelord Chargrilled
Banned
By your logic
Stabbings would skyrocketing through the fucking roof then thus solving nothing.'
Cheaper
Easier to conceal
Legal for everyone to carry and buy
Just as effective if not more so then guns
Well than it's different philosophy. Here they discharge a firearm to save lives. Either to defend themselves or any bystanders. They aim to disarm or to immobilize, not to take a life, unless it's absolutely necessary. That last situation will happen almost exclusively to specialized forces for those situations (the Dutch equivalent of SWAT).
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Think that argument though. How easy do you think it is to kill large groups of people with a a knife? piano wire?, even a car is pretty damn limited. now compare that to a fucking gun, rifle etc.
Yes the number of deaths will reduce it's common sense. You just have to look at the number of mass shooting/murders in countries with a gun ban to those that don't.
CharlieDigital
Banned
Moff
Member
I think it's very useful because it shows that the US should try to offer better education and and distribute wealth better. as far as I know those are ongoing topics in the US political landscape.
It's kind of hard to fire a knife at someone at 2000 feet per second.
Yea of course they woudnt. Murdering 5 people with a gun only takes a moment of madness. Murdering 5 people with say a knife is a lot harder to pull off.
Zvonimir Boban
Banned
Are you fucking kidding me?
I guess I am confusing hopelessness with complacency.
You shouldn't get so upset about other people criticizing something that even you apparently seem to agree needs to be changed.
ReadingRambo
Member
Don't forget we'd need to racially homogenize a great deal as well!
I don't disagree with you btw.
L-O-L
When we compare Europe to US it's unfair because of multiple Countries, if we compare single Countries it's unfair because of the difference in Number of Citizens.
And a Knife is less convinient than a Gun.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
Let me ask you a different but related question: Do you think that if the US wasn't the global power that it is, if it was more vulnerable to trade embargoes and other means of political and economic pressure that are used against other countries, and if the world decided to apply such pressure on the US in order to change the US's stance on this particular matter..
Do you really think that in such circumstances your government wouldn't be able to come up with a significantly more effective gun control policy?
Are you stupid or trolling?
Knives are primarily tools, while guns have literally no other use than being weapons. They deliever an easy oppurtunity to hurt people. And my point still stands, people in Norway aren't running around with hidden knives and murdering each other.
ReadingRambo
Member
Brazilian police kill 5 times as many citizens a year as does the US (roughly 2000 a year). Where is the international pressure? Surely Brazil is less influential in the world than the US.
Moff
Member
just because you brought it up several times: I don't think diversity is a problem. if I would I would support all the european right wingers who want to keep their countries "clean", I don't. the problem is that these minorities are kept in poverty. poverty, distribution of wealth is the main problem when it comes to crime.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
You don't get to choose which problem the world cares about more in this scenario.
ReadingRambo
Member
Oh ok. Well then, judging by the evidence in the case of Brazil, no, I don't think the world gives much of a damn.
Zvonimir Boban
Banned
Jawbreaker
Member
The one variable people don't often mention in these discussions is gun printing with 3D printers. I imagine it'll only become easier and less expensive in the future.
ReadingRambo
Member
Literally every mass shooting event. The US is a divided country on the issue. Deeply. I am extremely anti-gun, but I live in the southeast and am surrounded by gun nuts. Gun culture is as American as fireworks and apple pie.
Correct, they don't give a damn about Brazil, wich is sad, but they do give a damn about the US.
And it's a Fact that the world see's the way the US handles this as bad. I mean, when even North Korea critizises you, you've gotta stop and think about what you are doing.
I read about a shooting in America seemingly every other week.
I never read about the government doing anything to help.
michaelius
Banned
They also didn't shoot in 2011
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks
Can You imagine what would happen here if police didn't shoot?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ohammed-cartoon-drawing-contest-in-Texas.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks
Can You imagine what would happen here if police didn't shoot?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ohammed-cartoon-drawing-contest-in-Texas.html
That's disingenuous. We haven't had a serious push for a better national gun policy in quite some time. We've had meek legislation get proposed and almost immediately dismissed. Some states and cities have introduced tougher gun policies, but that hardly solves the problem nationally.
- Status