Support NeoGAF

[spazchicken]

Can't get rid of guns in America. It's never going to happen. The most powerful people in the US have been trying forever. The country was founded on guns, won with guns and kept with guns. It may as well say "In guns we trust" on money.

The best they can do is try to regulate them harder than they already are and ban more features than they already have but they're having a hard time even doing that.

 

[soxinthebox]

I think any country that has mass shootings on a regular basis should adopt Australia's policies. Since it has obviously worked.

Apparently you can't make that claim without having a clone of Australia that never made the same change to compare against

 

[OnionPowder]

Apparently you can't make that claim without having a clone of Australia that never made the same change to compare against

Those 18 years or so of no mass shootings are just a statistical error.

Any moment now they'll get caught up

 

[Log4Girlz]

Can't get rid of guns in America. It's never going to happen. The most powerful people in the US have been trying forever. The country was founded on guns, won with guns and kept with guns. It may as well say "In guns we trust" on money.

The best they can do is try to regulate them harder than they already are and ban more features than they already have but they're having a hard time even doing that.

This is a country founded on killing off the native peoples and enslaving others for centuries. We do not weep for tens of thousands who die each year. I'm not going to look up the stat, but I read someplace that in many upper class and rural areas the death rate from guns approaches that of advanced European countries. Who cares about the lower classes dying off?

Sad. Not going to change.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

Yeah but did they account for the inversely-proportional rise in boomerang homicides we've had since then?

 

[JediLink]

The suicide thing is actually a pretty relevant fact that often gets overlooked. I know someone very close to me who planned to commit suicide by slitting their wrists, but ultimately they couldn't bring themselves to do it and thankfully they're still with us today. I don't want to think about what might have happened if they had access to a gun instead.

 

[MisterFalcon]

Those 18 years or so of no mass shootings are just a statistical error.

That depends on what's a mass shooting. The definition used in the 'a mass shooting every day in America' considers any shooting with four or more people killed or wounded a mass shooting and there have been those in the past 18 years in Australia.

 

[Protome]

That depends on what's a mass shooting. The definition used in the 'a mass shooting every day in America' considers any shooting with four or more people killed or wounded a mass shooting and there have been those in the past 18 years in Australia.

The study defines it as 5 or more victims, killed or wounded. Reducing the US stats to fit that definition wouldn't lower the number of mass shootings by that much.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

The threads on gaf I have to always avoid are the ones that remind me that guns are still legal in this country. I can't come into them because people that defend their right to bear arms make absolutely no sense to me and are using an asinine argument.

Oh damn is this a gun thread?

 

[Vicetrailia]

So...why? Why do you own an AR-15?

It just seems like such a wanna be tough-guy thing to own. You're not in a video game. You live in a peaceful civilized society.

To me it just seems embarrassing. Even as a hobby....it's a symbol of the absolute worst of humanity.

Guns here are a fetish.

 

[War Peaceman]

Don't be reasonable. People think owning a gun makes you instantly a ticking time bomb with psychopathic potential, and ohh boy it makes it so much worse if he owns an evil black rifle too.

Thankfully most of the European countries haven't caved in to this bad logic.

Is allowing people to more easily fire a gun for sport worth the increased risk to public safety caused by laxer gun control though?

I'd say, speaking as a UK citizen, that it definitely isn't.

 

[MisterFalcon]

The study defines it as 5 or more victims, killed or wounded. Reducing the US stats to fit that definition wouldn't lower the number of mass shootings by that much.

I don't think they count wounded otherwise their 'no mass shootings since 1996' would no longer be valid:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monash_University_shooting

The Monash University shooting refers to a school shooting in which a student shot his classmates and teacher, killing two and injuring five. It took place at Monash University in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia on 21 October 2002.

Saying 5 or more deaths from shooting is a far more strict definition from the '4 people shot, either wounded or dead' that http://www.shootingtracker.com/ uses. If you would apply that ruile to shootingtracker it would be not nearly as impressive

 

[Subpar Scrub]

I don't think they count wounded otherwise their 'no mass shootings since 1996' would no longer be valid:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monash_University_shooting



Saying 5 or more deaths from shooting is a far more strict definition from the '4 people shot, either wounded or dead' that http://www.shootingtracker.com/ uses. If you would apply that ruile to shootingtracker it would be not nearly as impressive

I've said it before. Since 1996 we've had 3 true mass shootings, but nothing even close to the scale of port Arthur or most mass shootings.

Logan shootings, hectorville siege and Monash.

But 3 in 20 years is better than the 1 per year rate we had. Those are shootings in which 3 or more people are injured/killed. There's also the hunt family murders, but the nature of that shooting is a legitimate "could have been done with knives" scenario, though I'm sure guns made it easier

 

[Nightbird]

Lets not get in the way of a good old liberal echo chamber.

[...]

Germany-
Firearms per 100 people: 30.3
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.9

[...]

Sources: 1 and 2

okay, couple of things concerning Germany:

1.) Even though according to this stats every third person should own a gun, you won't ever see a gun outside of any shooting spots and on cops.

2.) We take Gun violence pretty fucking serious. Everytime there's a Mass shooting we make gun laws stricter than before.

3.) that homicide rate is inflated. there are a lot of murders caused by stabbing and violent beatdowns that would count towards that. As I said before, gun laws are pretty strict. so much that you'll had to go trough a lot just to be able to murder someone with a gun.

long story short: you're using the stats out of context

 

[Kenshin001]

That depends on what's a mass shooting. The definition used in the 'a mass shooting every day in America' considers any shooting with four or more people killed or wounded a mass shooting and there have been those in the past 18 years in Australia.

In terms of deaths I think there has been only one, the Hunt family murder/suicide which was 5 including the father.

 

[Keasar]

Sur-FUCKING-prise! You regulate the availability of guns and all of a sudden people don't have that many guns to shoot each other with!

Now to wait for the flood of Americans who is gonna come and talk about their retarded right to bear arms because a document written by slave owners from 250 years ago said they could. I swear, we Swedes have been a fucking nation for over a thousand years, we have one of highest guns per capita in the world but we never decided to stoop to a "It's my right to have a fucking assault rifle and shoot my fellow Swedes with!" At best we came to the conclusion its a privilege to own a rifle and even then its mostly a hunting rifle that you have to fucking earn through hard work proving you are not born on the low end of the human DNA pool!

I find it just so depressing how the culture in America have managed to destroy what chances they have at improving their situation, so many are so deep into this rights shit that they fail to see the evidence infront of them. Rights should be basic human needs like homes, food, social security, shit needed to survive, not a weapon to shoot others with.

 

[Fusebox]

The founding fathers weren't total idiots, they wrote "well regulated militia" instead of "guns for erryone!" for a reason, American gun nuts just pretend that subtle caveat doesn't fucking exist.

 

[MisterFalcon]

I've said it before. Since 1996 we've had 3 true mass shootings, but nothing even close to the scale of port Arthur or most mass shootings.

Logan shootings, hectorville siege and Monash.

But 3 in 20 years is better than the 1 per year rate we had. Those are shootings in which 3 or more people are injured/killed. There's also the hunt family murders, but the nature of that shooting is a legitimate "could have been done with knives" scenario, though I'm sure guns made it easier

What about these from just this year ?

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...by-police-at-shopping-centre-in-sydneys-north
Maybe it does not count as it was the police.

http://metro.co.uk/2016/03/07/one-k...ia-shooting-5737227/?iframe=true&preview=true
1 killed, 2 wounded. Mass shooting

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-...ie-gang-related-triple-shooting-perth/7361660
1 killed, 2 wounded. Mass shooting

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/t...ter-westmeadows-shooting-20160508-gopgwv.html
3 wounded. Mass shooting.

 

[Fusebox]

What about these from just this year ?

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...by-police-at-shopping-centre-in-sydneys-north
Maybe it does not count as it was the police.

http://metro.co.uk/2016/03/07/one-k...ia-shooting-5737227/?iframe=true&preview=true
1 killed, 2 wounded. Mass shooting

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/t...ter-westmeadows-shooting-20160508-gopgwv.html
3 wounded. Mass shooting.

4 or more is the standard measurement for a mass shooting, not 3.

So no, none of those are examples of a mass shooting.

 

[Lightning Count]

These numbers mean absolutely nothing without context. All of these countries have strict regulations when it comes to purchasing and/or storing firearms. Simply put, you can't legally have a loaded handgun next to your bed in these countries and can't buy one at a gun show without a background check.

Or keep a loaded and cocked handgun tucked into the back of a car seat within arms reach of toddler.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

Americans seem to have some idea in their head that Australia went from a US-style system of almost unrestricted gun access and high ownership to an almost gun-free society where only criminals have guns. The reality is that it's fairly easy to get a gun; last time I visited there were at least four shops in town selling guns and probably more that I'm not aware of. There are more legal guns in Australia right now than at any point in history, and the majority of people who participated in the buy-back went out and bought new guns with the money.

Guns had been regulated and restricted for decades before the '96 laws came in, handguns in particular have been restricted since the 1920s. Fully automatic guns were banned in every state but Tasmania since the 1930s. The 1996 laws weren't about lowering homicide rates (which have always been low in Australia), they were a reaction to something that almost never happened before. It works about as well as a tiger-repellent rock, and they haven't had another incident like Port Arthur since.

I'm a supporter of gun control, but not of the specific laws passed in Australia because the guns that were restricted (rifles) were and still are used in less murders than fists and knives. I do support national registries and licensing and restrictions on urban people owning handguns for 'self defense'.

Sur-FUCKING-prise! You regulate the availability of guns and all of a sudden people don't have that many guns to shoot each other with!

Now to wait for the flood of Americans who is gonna come and talk about their retarded right to bear arms because a document written by slave owners from 250 years ago said they could. I swear, we Swedes have been a fucking nation for over a thousand years, we have one of highest guns per capita in the world but we never decided to stoop to a "It's my right to have a fucking assault rifle and shoot my fellow Swedes with!" At best we came to the conclusion its a privilege to own a rifle and even then its mostly a hunting rifle that you have to fucking earn through hard work proving you are not born on the low end of the human DNA pool!

I find it just so depressing how the culture in America have managed to destroy what chances they have at improving their situation, so many are so deep into this rights shit that they fail to see the evidence infront of them. Rights should be basic human needs like homes, food, social security, shit needed to survive, not a weapon to shoot others with.

The Constitution is the law. As with all laws, there are ways to change it.

Are you implying that the President should be able to unilaterally overturn laws?

 

[yogloo]

An amendment is a formal or official change made to a law, contract, constitution, or other legal document.

Freedooooommmmmm!!!!!!

 

[KRod-57]

Thank you for making my point. That shows exactly what I'm saying. There's no direct corelation.

I wouldn't agree there is no direct correlation, however I also do believe it does not make as significant a difference as some people make it out to be.

 

[MisterFalcon]

4 or more is the standard measurement for a mass shooting, not 3.

So no, none of those are examples of a mass shooting.

There is no standard and is changed to suit the narrative.

Mass shootings on the rise in America !
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...-in-america-numbers-more-frequent-more-deadly
(if a mass shooting is 4 or more killed or wounded.

No mass shootings in Australia !
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...s-shootings-and-reduced-homicides-study-finds
(if a mass shooting is 5 or more killed)

 

[Fusebox]

There is no standard and is changed to suit the narrative.

Mass shootings on the rise in America !
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...-in-america-numbers-more-frequent-more-deadly
(if a mass shooting is 4 or more killed or wounded.

No mass shootings in Australia !
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...s-shootings-and-reduced-homicides-study-finds
(if a mass shooting is 5 or more killed)

Either way it's not fuckin 3 like you said is it?

 

[Keasar]

The Constitution is the law. As with all laws, there are ways to change it.

Are you implying that the President should be able to unilaterally overturn laws?

Since Americans bother to even vote for a President. Yeah!? At this point he should just open that glass case with that paper, get a really big fucking sharpie and doodle over the 2nd amendment "No more guns for ya'll!"

The American Congress is doing jackshit.
The American Senate is doing jackshit.
America has massacres so often its fucking regular to the point where the world stops giving a shit soon. This time in Orlando the world flew the colours of the rainbow flag in solidarity for the gay community. However, I'd take heed that the next time a massacre of the same numbers happen in America, nobody will raise a single red, white and blue colour across the world. Cause clearly at this point America does not give enough of a fuck, why should the world?

So yeah, have the President do something, America are the ones calling him "Leader of the Free World!" even though we the rest of the world didn't or can't vote for the bastard!

 

[Tecnniqe]

Seems pretty obvious that strict gun laws would decrease the amount of violence produced by the use of guns.

 

[antonz]

America has predominantly a handgun problem that it needs to address. People make snarky comments about rifle fetishes etc. but all they are doing is shitting up their own discussion.

Until America is willing to sit down and talk hand guns it doesn't matter what gets passed it will not reduce deaths to any significant degree

 

[TheRedSnifit]

Since Americans bother to even vote for a President. Yeah!? At this point he should just open that glass case with that paper, get a really big fucking sharpie and doodle over the 2nd amendment "No more guns for ya'll!"

The American Congress is doing jackshit.
The American Senate is doing jackshit.
America has massacres so often its fucking regular to the point where the world stops giving a shit soon. This time in Orlando the world flew the colours of the rainbow flag in solidarity for the gay community. However, I'd take heed that the next time a massacre of the same numbers happen in America, nobody will raise a single red, white and blue colour across the world. Cause clearly at this point America does not give enough of a fuck, why should the world?

So yeah, have the President do something, America are the ones calling him "Leader of the Free World!" even though we the rest of the world didn't or can't vote for the bastard!

So if the Prime Minister in Sweden randomly started overturning or creating laws without input from the Riksdag or parliament, you'd be fine with that?

The Constitution isn't a sacred document that can never ever be changed (the Amendments themselves are all changes), there exists a process to add or remove parts of it. The reason the Second Amendment is a thing is because Americans don't want to ban guns. That's how democracy works.

 

[PopeReal]

So if the Prime Minister in Sweden randomly started overturning or creating laws without input from the Riksdag or parliament, you'd be fine with that?

Lol. You seem very concerned about laws and people hypothetically altering them. You are arguing against no one.

The Constitution isn't a sacred document that can never ever be changed (the Amendments themselves are all changes). The reason the Second Amendment is a thing is because Americans don't want to ban guns. That's how democracy works.

Actually some do. And why does it have to be a ban anyway? Why all or nothing? Your arguments are going in circles.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

Lol. You seem very concerned about laws and people hypothetically altering them. You are arguing against no one.



Actually some do. And why does it have to be a ban anyway? Why all or nothing? Your arguments are going in circles.

I'm a supporter of gun control, but not of the specific laws passed in Australia because the guns that were restricted (rifles) were and still are used in less murders than fists and knives. I do support national registries and licensing and restrictions on urban people owning handguns for 'self defense'.

Like, what are you even trying to argue here.

 

[PopeReal]

Now I remember why I avoid these threads.

 

[Keasar]

So if the Prime Minister in Sweden randomly started overturning or creating laws without input from the Riksdag or parliament, you'd be fine with that?

The Constitution isn't a sacred document that can never ever be changed (the Amendments themselves are all changes), there exists a process to add or remove parts of it. The reason the Second Amendment is a thing is because Americans don't want to ban guns. That's how democracy works.

If we had several massacres every year that was clearly linked to an inherent problem in our system, then yeah! I do not know about you but we Swedes aren't as fucking jaded when our population gets murdered. We still mourn and question what happened when the racist cunt attacked a school in Trollhättan with a sword and killed three people. Three people, one kid, and we were fucking horrified!

A classroom in America gets shot and is forgotten after a few months when the next one happens! You bet your ass there would be a total outrage if our government was indifferent and did nothing to change it.

Fuck the American "democracy" cause America has one of the worst in the western world with its lobbying and self-interested dickheads in their political system.

 

[Bleepey]

That graph is so misleading. As a percentage basis, Australia dropped from 2.5 to 1, that is a reduction of, what, over 60%? US in the same period dropped from just over 12 to just under 12 or about 10%, which is almost statistical noise by comparison.

Introducing the same laws in the US (using a magic wand) could cause a drop from 12 to 4 if it followed the Australian experience.

I thought the Y axis comparisons were picked cos if the same scale was used A trend would be much harder to compare cos Australia's homocide rate is much lower.

 

[MisterFalcon]

Either way it's not fuckin 3 like you said is it?

I did not come up with 3, that was someone else who then claimed that by this standard there were still only 3 in 20 years.

But 3 in 20 years is better than the 1 per year rate we had. Those are shootings in which 3 or more people are injured/killed.

 

[Kenshin001]

There is no standard and is changed to suit the narrative.

Mass shootings on the rise in America !
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...-in-america-numbers-more-frequent-more-deadly
(if a mass shooting is 4 or more killed or wounded.

No mass shootings in Australia !
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...s-shootings-and-reduced-homicides-study-finds
(if a mass shooting is 5 or more killed)

I am pretty sure no-one considers 1 dead and two injured a mass shooting, especially in the US where it is likely a daily occurrence. If you want to argue that, that is fine but I agree there is no standard. I think 4 dead is a mass shooting, likewise 3 dead and 6 injured. When people in Australia think of mass shootings it's in terms of pre and post Port Arthur. Before there were regular incidents of a shooter killing 5 or more people. After the gun laws changed those kind of shootings stopped. There have been a few incidents, the Monash shooting and the Hunt family murder/suicide but events like Port Arthur and Hoddle Street, which is what people imagine when they think of mass shootings, don't happen.

 

[Jonm1010]

If highly successful policies in other countries influenced America, America would have had Universal Healthcare decades ago.

Sad truth is that stuff like this falls on deaf ears in this country. Most Americans still subscribe to the xenophobic, American exceptionalism notion that America does everything better so there is never any need to look outside our borders for advice or knowledge.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

If we had several massacres every year that was clearly linked to an inherent problem in our system, then yeah! I do not know about you but we Swedes aren't as fucking jaded when our population gets murdered. We still mourn and question what happened when the racist cunt attacked a school in Trollhättan with a sword and killed three people. Three people, one kid, and we were fucking horrified!

A classroom in America gets shot and is forgotten after a few months when the next one happens! You bet your ass there would be a total outrage if our government was indifferent and did nothing to change it.

Fuck the American "democracy" cause America has one of the worst in the western world with its lobbying and self-interested dickheads in their political system.

I imagine that when President Obama unilaterally shreds the Constitution and sends out the feds to confiscate weapons, gun owners will happily give up their firearms.

Governments function on the concept of legitimacy, and the idea that the government is inherently limited by a constitutional framework that can only be changed democratically is an important part of Americans' belief in the legitimacy of their government. Bypass the democratic process and unilaterally rewrite the constitution, and you'll have hundreds of thousands of rioters in the streets who believe they're being victimized by an illegitimate government. Rioters with guns.

 

[Subpar Scrub]

What about these from just this year ?

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...by-police-at-shopping-centre-in-sydneys-north
Maybe it does not count as it was the police.

http://metro.co.uk/2016/03/07/one-k...ia-shooting-5737227/?iframe=true&preview=true
1 killed, 2 wounded. Mass shooting

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-...ie-gang-related-triple-shooting-perth/7361660
1 killed, 2 wounded. Mass shooting

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/t...ter-westmeadows-shooting-20160508-gopgwv.html
3 wounded. Mass shooting.

Sorry, I thought it was 3. It's 4.

I did not come up with 3, that was someone else who then claimed that by this standard there were still only 3 in 20 years.

If you consider a mass shooting 4 or more injured, we still have Monash university, the hunt family murders and the Hectorville siege. That's why I'm claiming it was 3 or 4ish by those standards.

 

[FormallyMegadrive]

Yeah, but second amendment means we can't do anything about it. Our hands are tied.

It's an amendment. Amend it again

 

[Langdon Alger]

Good on Australia for creating sane gun laws. Still, this stat was surprising:

The average decline in total firearm deaths accelerated significantly, from a 3% decline annually before the reforms to a 5% decline afterwards, the study found.

Only a 2% change? I'd have thought there would be a much bigger decrease.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

Good on Australia for creating sane gun laws. Still, this stat was surprising:



Only a 2% change? I'd have thought there would be a much bigger decrease.

The ban was for semiautomatic rifles and semiautomatic and pump-action shotguns. Even in the US, rifles and shotguns are only a tiny fraction of crimes (more people are beaten to death by fists than are killed by rifles or shotguns), so it didn't really have a significant impact.

It's kind of a problem with current gun control laws, in that they focus on things that look scary as opposed to actual functionality. The famous assault weapons ban effected weapons that were used in something like 2% of gun crimes, and banned things like barrel shrouds and bayonet lugs.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Lets not get in the way of a good old liberal echo chamber.

Sources: 1 and 2

Strange how you didn't bring this information:
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compare/194/rate_of_gun_homicide/10,192,50,177,178,69,49

Into the "liberal echo chamber," nor did you put down the US statistics.
So that you could show this:
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compare/194/rate_of_homicide_any_method/10,192,50,177,178,69,49

And chose to ignore readily available information in one source, to provide other less useful information without context.

I mean I'm sure there's nothing going on here, and the 3.43 deaths by gun homicide per 100,000 has nothing to do with the total death rate by homicide being 4.96, while the other countries you chose to show have rates all around 1 for the total homicide rate. And neither of these have anything to do with the US being the only country amongst them that has guns so readily accessible that ownership per capita is a whole number.

This all without factoring in, as already pointed out, why you can own a gun, what you have to do to get one, what kind of guns you can own, what kind of guns people do own, and what you have to do with a gun once you own one in these other countries.

 

[Bleepey]

No, you do a RCT to control for all "possible unobservable and observable confounding variables." Which is not a realistic scenario for this topic. What kind of hypothetical control group are you even suggesting? Who makes up these individuals? People born in plastic bubbles? If you want to argue that standards of living and behavior cannot be studied by "traditional means," then you've gotten bigger issues than just a study about gun control

Couldn't you just compare statistically similar neighbours? So with regards to economics, demographics etc

In my rush to post, I completely overlooked the fact that the paper you posted was a cross-sectional study too which only looks at one time period. Panel data is needed since you care about changes over time.

Dude you can see the time trend unless I am wrong

There is no gold standard. There is no set methodological trick, like randomization, which will always guarantee a real causal effect.

Actually the gold standard for research is systematic literature reviews and meta analyses

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_evidence

 

[Dagobert Duck]

Whenever I see a thread like this, I ask myself, the people in the US who dont own a gun, what do you think of people running around with guns or woning multiple guns...

I mean...I live in germany and I dont know a single person who owns a damn gun...I would be freaked out if I saw someone walking outside with a gun like it was nothing...

It seems totally illogical to carry a gun at all times...Im 27 years old and never in my life I thought, man if I had a gun right now...but I guess thats none of my business

 

[dity]

A study was needed for this?

 

[dejay]

Good on Australia for creating sane gun laws. Still, this stat was surprising:



Only a 2% change? I'd have thought there would be a much bigger decrease.

It was only at 2.5 / 100,000 - there really wasn't that much to drop. Also consider the stats include suicide - a lot of gun related suicides are in rural areas, where gun ownership is still high. Things like suicide and domestic violence are often associated with economic downturns - you can't attribute everything on the graph to one thing.

To my mind the WHO aspect of gun control in this country has been more successful than the WHAT aspect. Of course, self defence isn't considered as a legitimate reason for owning a firearm in Australia, and you certainly can't carry loaded firearms in urban areas, so you're already in an area that isn't easily replicable in a country that has the second amendment.

 

[Atraveller]

A study was needed for this?

Did you miss the people claiming it was a bad study in this thread?

 

[dity]

Did you miss the people claiming it was a bad study in this thread?

Well, to those people: I can only imagine how many people would have been shot on Origin night last night if we had guns.

 

[Mr. Giggles]

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

You should read your own sources carefully before just picking a few numbers and throwing them out without context.

Furthermore the homicide rate for US states is close to if not more than entire countries (from your own source)

Further furthermore, the gun control laws are much stricter in those countries....

Math, how do?