Relative violent crime

[Blind groper]

http://www.justice.govt.nz/publications ... lent-crime

I found the reference above comparing violent crime rates between the USA and New Zealand. It turns out that the per capita rate of violent crime in the USA is FOUR TIMES as high as in NZ.

So much for guns reducing crime!

I also carried out a little arithmetic on DGU's (defensive uses of a gun). The FBI says there are 70,000 DGU's each year in the USA, and Seth says that if those defensive uses did not happen, there would be terrible consequences.

Well, taking Seth's argument to the absurd conclusion, it means that where there are no guns there must be a very large number of terrible consequences. By simple ratio, that means an extra 1,000 terrible consequences in NZ due to a lack of guns. Yet our violent crime rates are a quarter of that in the USA. Something in Seth's illogic is not right....

Any of you guys from other countries got similar statistics?

[jaydot]

the population of the united states is over 300 million. the population of new zealand is...?

i like comparing apples and oranges.

[Blind groper]

Jaydot

It appears you missed the vital words 'per capita'.

The USA has four times the violent crime rate of NZ, on a per capita basis. That is apples compared to apples.

To put it another way, the USA has one violent crime for every 200 people every year. NZ has one violent crime for every 800 people every year. One quarter the violent crime rate.

Seth claims that more guns lowers crime rates. The USA has five times more guns than NZ, and that is also per capita. Yet it has four times the violent crime rate per capita. According to Wiki, the closest estimate is over 100 guns per 100 people in the USA and only 22 in NZ. That is a pretty damn good indication that Seth is indulging in crap logic.

Let me make one more comment. It is very difficult to compare violent crime rates between nations, for the simple reason that statistical methods vary from place to place. For example, in Britain simple assault that causes no injury is listed under police statistics as violent crime, as is any sexual crime. In the USA, simple assault is not listed as a violent crime, and only forcible rape among sexual crimes is so listed. This makes it look as if violent crimes rates in the USA are lower, but that is bullshit.

I do not know what the violent crime rates for other nations , if you use the same definitions. I am aware that Australia has slightly lower per capita rates than NZ, and I suspect that similar rates apply across most of the developed western nations.

The reference I posted is from the NZ Justice Dept., and is carefully adjusted so that the same definitions are used. There will still be error, but it is of the order of plus or minus 30%.

The USA is a very violent place. Certainly more violent than NZ, and probably more violent than Britain, once the same definitions for violent crime are used.

[Rum]

Plus Kiwis are nice people.

[Blind groper]

Thank you, Rum.

Sadly it does not apply across the board. We have our lower socio-economic groups also, where crime rates are high.

[Hermit]

the population of the united states is over 300 million. the population of new zealand is...?

i like comparing apples and oranges.

LOL. You need to take a remedial course in reading comprehension.

[JimC]

I like eating apples and oranges.

[laklak]

I like cider and Screwdrivers.

[Jason]

Fruit salad and a cosmopolitan.