RIP Charlie Kirk

It's not actually.


Of course they have and do, there's legislation, regulations and restrictions in place. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Seems as if they may need to do a bit more. I mean being able to buy a firearm privately without any background checks is crazy, and that's just one example. I know some states have closed that loophole, but unless they all do, it's somewhat limited in its usefulness.

So let's look at developed/wealthy countries with populations of similar origin. The homicide numbers exclude suicides and lawful killings, obviously.

USA
Gun ownership: 120.5 per 100 people
Gun homicides: 4.42 per 100000

Canada
Gun ownership: 35 per 100 people
Gun homicides: 0.72 per 100000

Australia
Gun ownership: 14 5 per 100 people
Gun homicides: 0.095 per 100000

UK
Gun ownership: 5 per 100 people
Gun homicides: 0.045 per 100000

Amongst its peers, there is no doubt that the US has gun problem. For sure there are other contributory factors, but they have the weakest gun control of their peers, and I doubt the above numbers are a mere coincidence.
 
Seems as if they may need to do a bit more. I mean being able to buy a firearm privately without any background checks is crazy, and that's just one example. I know some states have closed that loophole, but unless they all do, it's somewhat limited in its usefulness.

So let's look at developed/wealthy countries with populations of similar origin. The homicide numbers exclude suicides and lawful killings, obviously.

USA
Gun ownership: 120.5 per 100 people
Gun homicides: 4.42 per 100000

Canada
Gun ownership: 35 per 100 people
Gun homicides: 0.72 per 100000

Australia
Gun ownership: 14 5 per 100 people
Gun homicides: 0.095 per 100000

UK
Gun ownership: 5 per 100 people
Gun homicides: 0.045 per 100000

Amongst its peers, there is no doubt that the US has gun problem. For sure there are other contributory factors, but they have the weakest gun control of their peers, and I doubt the above numbers are a mere coincidence.

Attaching gun homicide rates to gun ownership as proof of causality is not how the scientific method works unfortunately. It sounds fantastic but actually means little.
 
Seems as if they may need to do a bit more. I mean being able to buy a firearm privately without any background checks is crazy, and that's just one example. I know some states have closed that loophole,
Which states have plugged the military industrial complex's mass killing loophole?

but unless they all do, it's somewhat limited in its usefulness.

So let's look at developed/wealthy countries with populations of similar origin. The homicide numbers exclude suicides and lawful killings, obviously.

USA
Gun ownership: 120.5 per 100 people
Gun homicides: 4.42 per 100000

Canada
Gun ownership: 35 per 100 people
Gun homicides: 0.72 per 100000

Australia
Gun ownership: 14 5 per 100 people
Gun homicides: 0.095 per 100000

UK
Gun ownership: 5 per 100 people
Gun homicides: 0.045 per 100000

Amongst its peers, there is no doubt that the US has gun problem. For sure there are other contributory factors, but they have the weakest gun control of their peers, and I doubt the above numbers are a mere coincidence.
Why exclude deaths by the Anglo-American establishment's military industrial complex, vigras?

All the regime-change wars in the ME have been illegal going back at least to 2001. Including the current one.
 
Attaching gun homicide rates to gun ownership as proof of causality is not how the scientific method works.

It's not the full cause, no. For instance, healthcare cost (including mental health) in the US is well over double annually per capita than it is in the UK.

But some people think that relatively inaccessible mental healthcare, along with very accessible gun ownership, is somehow a good idea. 🤔
 
Imagine shifting the conversation from who murdered him, who celebrates his murder, to a gun debate.
 
Imagine shifting the conversation from who murdered him, who celebrates his murder, to a gun debate.

They are definitely related, based on Charlie's narrative.

People have very strong feelings around the gun issue, so it's bound to happen. It does feel a bit Groundhog Day-ish though.
 
It's not the full cause, no. For instance, healthcare cost (including mental health) in the US is well over double annually per capita than it is in the UK.

But some people think that relatively inaccessible mental healthcare, along with very accessible gun ownership, is somehow a good idea. 🤔

Once again, causality between mental illness and gun murders would need to be established.

Also, not sure how a country that spends more on Healthcare is evidence of inaccessibility.
 
Which states have plugged the military industrial complex's mass killing loophole?


Why exclude deaths by the Anglo-American establishment's military industrial complex, vigras?

All the regime-change wars in the ME have been illegal going back at least to 2001. Including the current one.

I don't disagree with you actually. US foreign policy has always just been self enrichment disguised as democracy vouchsafement. It's a different discussion though.
 
Once again, causality between mental illness and gun murders would need to be established.

Also, not sure how a country that spends more on Healthcare is evidence of inaccessibility.

US healthcare is private and not easily accessible to many.

But I don't see how you can't fathom that there may well be a correlation between poor mental health, gun ownership and potential problems....
 
I don't disagree with you actually. US foreign policy has always just been self enrichment disguised as democracy vouchsafement. It's a different discussion though.
Why the double standard?

Why should gun violence be legal for mass murderers, but not for self-defense against those same thugs?
 
Why the double standard?

Why should gun violence be legal for mass murderers, but not for self-defense against those same thugs?

Because the whole "self defence against a tyrannical government" thing is a load of BS. It would never happen. It's fairytale nonsense.

In the meantime all those weapons that are supposedly a safeguard against tyranny, are used against the populace instead.

Great success.
 
Amongst its peers, there is no doubt that the US has gun problem. For sure there are other contributory factors, but they have the weakest gun control of their peers, and I doubt the above numbers are a mere coincidence.

If you have a look at per capita gun ownership by country there are other countries with high gun ownership rates. If high gun ownership rates were the issue, then one would expect those other countries to have gun crime & mass shooting proportional to their gun ownership rates, yes? That is however not the case.

Secondly the US has more gun control today than ever before in history, it was much easier to buy a gun back in say the 80s than it is today, yet the shootings just increase with time.

The US has always had a schitload of guns compared to other countries, but they did not always have these mass shootings and crap.


There's something else wrong with the Americans.
 
Because the whole "self defence against a tyrannical government" thing is a load of BS. It would never happen. It's fairytale nonsense.

In the meantime all those weapons that are supposedly a safeguard against tyranny, are used against the populace instead.

Great success.
It already DID happen you paw-paw...

Why did the Americans secede from GB?
 
If you have a look at per capita gun ownership by country there are other countries with high gun ownership rates. If high gun ownership rates were the issue, then one would expect those other countries to have gun crime & mass shooting proportional to their gun ownership rates, yes? That is however not the case.

Secondly the US has more gun control today than ever before in history, it was much easier to buy a gun back in say the 80s than it is today, yet the shootings just increase with time.

The US has always had a schitload of guns compared to other countries, but they did not always have these mass shootings and crap.


There's something else wrong with the Americans.

Yeah, I largely agree actually, which is why I brought in the mental health angle. I do believe that the Yanks are too relaxed about the gun situation though - perhaps there should be harsher penalties for losing weapons or allowing unauthorised people to access them. That would need to be at federal level to have any real effect.

People often mention Switzerland for its high gun ownership rates, but they are still a fraction of the USA rates and in additional to that carrying of weapons is very strictly controlled.

I don't know what the answer is, but it seems as if Americans largely just accept it as the status quo.
 
If you have a look at per capita gun ownership by country there are other countries with high gun ownership rates. If high gun ownership rates were the issue, then one would expect those other countries to have gun crime & mass shooting proportional to their gun ownership rates, yes? That is however not the case.

Secondly the US has more gun control today than ever before in history, it was much easier to buy a gun back in say the 80s than it is today, yet the shootings just increase with time.

The US has always had a schitload of guns compared to other countries, but they did not always have these mass shootings and crap.


There's something else wrong with the Americans.
It's the prescription drugs, stoopid....

'[May cause increased anxiety, aggression and/or suicidal ideation]'

It's right there on the label of some of the best-selling prescription drugs.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X