Only in America

[Forty Two]

The gun murder rate in the US is 3.2 per 100,000, and in Wyoming it's 0.9 per 100,000. Wyoming has the highest gun ownership rates, and less than 1 gun murder per 100,000. That's about the same as Norway and Australia. Sounds like Wyomingans are fairly peaceful with their guns.

You're mixing categories. The gun murder rate per 100,000 is 0.16 in Australia and 0.1 in Norway. Total murder rates per 100,000 for Wyoming, Australia and Norway are 1.9, 1.0 and 0.6 respectively.

I'm not mixing categories, you are. I was referring to gun murder rates only. The murder rate in general includes other categories of murder weapons.

But the figures aren't much different. In Wyoming, the state with the highest per capital gun ownership in the US, there is a .9 per 100,000 gun homicide rate. That's pretty low, especially given the number of guns per capita. Sounds like Wyomings are pretty responsible with their guns.

[Hermit]

The gun murder rate in the US is 3.2 per 100,000, and in Wyoming it's 0.9 per 100,000. Wyoming has the highest gun ownership rates, and less than 1 gun murder per 100,000. That's about the same as Norway and Australia. Sounds like Wyomingans are fairly peaceful with their guns.

You're mixing categories. The gun murder rate per 100,000 is 0.16 in Australia and 0.1 in Norway. Total murder rates per 100,000 for Wyoming, Australia and Norway are 1.9, 1.0 and 0.6 respectively.

I'm not mixing categories, you are. I was referring to gun murder rates only. The murder rate in general includes other categories of murder weapons.

Yes, you were. You compared Wyoming's gun murder rate with Norway's and Australia's total murder rate.

Locality         Gun murder     Total murder

Wyoming        0.90                 1.9 
Australia         0.16                 1.0
Norway           0.10                 0.6

Wyoming's gun murder rate is almost 6 times that of Australia and 9 times that of Norway. What definition of "about the same" are you using?

By the way, I brought up total murder rates because that is a fairer comparison because when you make firearms unavailable, people will resort to other methods to achieve the same ends, be it murder or suicide. That's has been demonstrated in Australia with the federal gun control laws in 1996. If you look at the statistics three years either side of that legislation, you'll see that plainly enough. (I left out mass killings because the small rate of incidents makes it not amenable to statistical evaluation over such a small period of time.)

[JimC]

If guns in Wyoming were all about hunting (and I'm not opposed to hunting, and I imagine Wyoming has plenty of scope for that), then the weapons owned would be real hunting rifles, typically scoped, bolt action, very accurate and with a modest magazine capacity (or shotguns for duck hunting). Such weapons are widely available and widely used in Oz.

I doubt that many of the gun deaths in Wyoming came from such weapons. I would imagine most of them came from either semi-automatic military-style rifles with high capacity magazines or hand-guns, few of which are available in Oz.

[pErvinalia]

Haven't you ever hunted ducks with a hand gun, Jim?

[Forty Two]

Hand guns are the problem. The number of murders by long guns is miniscule by comparison. Hand guns are the culprits.

The vast majority of gun crimes in the US are with illegal guns, not legally obtained guns, and most gun crime is committed in cities and involve gangs or drugs.

One of the best ways to reduce gun deaths would be to legalize drugs, and then address the gang problem.

[JimC]

Hand guns are the problem. The number of murders by long guns is miniscule by comparison. Hand guns are the culprits.

The vast majority of gun crimes in the US are with illegal guns, not legally obtained guns, and most gun crime is committed in cities and involve gangs or drugs.

One of the best ways to reduce gun deaths would be to legalize drugs, and then address the gang problem.

I don't disagree with sorting out the drug issue, which would help, but it still remains true that it is just so damn easy to acquire a hand-gun, legally or illegally in the US...

[Tero]

Toddlers rule! A hit every week!

http://usuncut.com/news/toddler-shot-pe ... -straight/

[Brian Peacock]

“Guns Don’t Kill People, Toddlers Kill People.”

[Forty Two]

Hand guns are the problem. The number of murders by long guns is miniscule by comparison. Hand guns are the culprits.

The vast majority of gun crimes in the US are with illegal guns, not legally obtained guns, and most gun crime is committed in cities and involve gangs or drugs.

One of the best ways to reduce gun deaths would be to legalize drugs, and then address the gang problem.

I don't disagree with sorting out the drug issue, which would help, but it still remains true that it is just so damn easy to acquire a hand-gun, legally or illegally in the US...

The problem from a regulatory standpoint is that a handgun will be the hardest to regulate, because it is solidly within the 2d Amendment. Even the most die hard anti-gun folks have not tried to get rid of hand guns, because they know that they have to chip away at the things that are further away from the heart of the 2d amendment.

I'm not opposed to regulation of guns. I would oppose outright bans. But, I would think we could stiffen penalties for possession of illegal guns, which should be huge. And, then we could impose a registration and licensing requirement, whereby strict requirements are met, including training and education.

One thing that I observe about the pro-gun position which I don't think the anti-gunners take enough advantage of is that the pro-gunners seem to universally admit that regulation is allowed. They say that mentally unfit and felons are rightly barred from gun ownership. At least most of the ones I talk to do, and lots of comments like that are made on gun discussions. So, if you can require mental cases to give up their right to bear arms, then what about those who can't pass a basic skills test? That sort of thing.

[Tero]

"The problem from a regulatory standpoint is that a handgun will be the hardest to regulate."

Not if you set up a government unit whose only purpose is to frisk citizens on the street and collect all hand guns.

[Tero]

We even let loonies serve in the millitary where they get real attached to the gun
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/01/06/at ... rport.html

[Tero]

Voices told him! Isis!
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/01/06/ft ... ideos.html

[laklak]

"The problem from a regulatory standpoint is that a handgun will be the hardest to regulate."

Not if you set up a government unit whose only purpose is to frisk citizens on the street and collect all hand guns.

yah but there's that whole Constitution thingy, you know? Keeps getting in the way of the Progressives. Shame, huh?

[Tero]

The constitution does not define arms. As long as all citizens, even looonies, can carry some arms, the citizens are satisfied. I propose we provide them rifles weighing 20kg. Let them bear them.

[laklak]

Probably would need to get rid of that pesky 4th Amendment also. Warrants? We don't need no stinking warrants!

Personally I'm A-OK with handguns. Love 'em. Lots of lethality in a small, easy to conceal package. Cold dead hands, baby!