Places with higher gun ownership rates also have higher firearms-related deaths, a study finds. In the study, published in the American Journal of Medicine, researchers analyzed gun ownership rates, crime rates and deaths from firearms across 27 developed countries around the world. More: news.yahoo.com.

5 opinions, 20 replies
Add your opinion:
Preview:
(mouse over or touch to update)
Add your opinion
100
4 votes
Jul 31, 2015

More guns will probably not decrease the crime rate as far as street crime is concerned. Unless a "law biding" citizen is walking around with a gun in his hand, he is still subject to a mugging. However, more guns will probably increase gun deaths for the simple fact there will be more guns in households. A greater chance of accidents, or domestic rage.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
100
main reply
1 vote,
Feb 7, 2016

More guns = more gun-related deaths, but are there less deaths over all? In other words, in countries where gun ownership is severely restricted, are there actually less murders per capita, or do more people just stab, strangle, bludgeon, or poison each other to make up the difference? It's hard to imagine that any other weapons would have as poor a record for accidental killings.

For those of you who say that cars kill more people or almost as many people as guns, but no one wants to limit them, you may be right. Maybe we should invest in more buses and trains to decrease the number of accidental deaths, and decrease our pollution and energy use.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
100
main reply
1 vote,
Jul 31, 2015

Fact every state that has passed a right to carry concealed has a minimum of a 10% drop in there violent crime rate immediately after the passing of that bill. Sorry you are wrong the right to carry does in fact reduce violent crime.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
100
1 vote,
Jul 31, 2015

The problem is that they don't take into account firearm accidents. The more guns, the more accidents. Down here in Texas, they have very liberal open carry and concealed laws, but yet there is a shooting every week in Dallas.

subscribe
load further replies (7)
Load more (1) in reply to wtinc's post (Fact every state that has passed a right to carry concealed has a minimum of a 10% drop in there violent crime rate immediately after the passing of that bill. Sorry you are wrong the right to carry d...)
::unhide-discussion::
0
main reply
0 votes,
Oct 6, 2015
subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
0
0 votes,
1 day ago

So, you'd feel better if he just beat her to death or ran over her with a car? How he killed her doesn't really matter, what matters is he killed her.

subscribe
load further replies (2)
::unhide-discussion::
0
main reply
0 votes,
1 day ago

Next study, more cars equals more car deaths. So given that cars kill as many people as guns, and hasn't the left said time and time again, "It's worth it if it saves ONE life." then by that logic shouldn't we ban cars?

subscribe
100
2 votes
Jul 31, 2015

Under current conditions, increasing guns will increase deaths - by whatever degree.

In order to preserve existing individual liberties, we must institution protective principles in-measure to the laws, regulations, or other systems we instrument.

In other words, we must change current conditions to maintain the individual liberties we have today. Changed conditions can allow the same, or increased, gun ownership without more deaths — or even less deaths.

This "protective principle" I have written about here, and call a "Commutative Principle". I propose this principle as a fair way to regulate rights / liberties, as a guarantor that means are contemplated for the safe absence of regulation.

subscribe
100
opinion
1 vote
Jul 31, 2015

No laws were necessary with the first few cars on the road... But as the numbers increased, laws became necessary. Same with guns... Study the Founding Fathers intentions.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
100
main reply
1 vote,
Apr 17, 2016

Sorry Dave K, but you're wrong, the first laws for cars was passed in the 1800's (1894 if you want the date and there were just a little over 4,000 cars in the US in 1900). If you read what the founding fathers intends, you'd want as few laws as possible, with the smallest government possible, and no standing military, and with most of the power in the hands of the states.

But you can change this question to just about anything and it would be true, more bread = more deaths, more computers = more deaths, more cell phones = more deaths, more beds = more deaths, all of which are true. So the question is basically invalid.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
100
main reply
1 vote,
Jul 31, 2015

One possibility implied in your reply is that few [gun] laws would be needed were our large society to operate as many clusters of smaller societies, each with their own smaller population-dynamics.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
0
main reply
0 votes,
Jul 31, 2015

And tell me with all those new laws for autos has auto deaths gone up or down. Up the only thing that has managed to bring them down is the fact people can no longer afford to drive so fewer miles has reduced MVA.

subscribe
100
1 vote
Jul 31, 2015

Fact every state that has passed a right to carry by its citizens has in fact see a 10% or greater violent crime rate reduction. More guns has actually equaled fewer deaths and more citizens being able to protect themselves something you can not do for them. Just look at the numbers.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
0
main reply
0 votes,
Jul 31, 2015

Do you have a citation for that claim? Just wondering.....most people include a link when mentioning statistics.

subscribe
0
0 votes
Sep 28, 2015

In my view, there is some good evidence that more guns increases gun-related violence. There's also a possibility that guns deter some violence. Everyone on all sides likes to pretend that they can measure both of these effects against each other, but that is almost always suspect.

The most careful analyses routinely find that, when you control for all of the variables that matter, gun control might help reduce gun violence but it would not be a panacea. The U.S.' high levels of gun violence and death are not actually only or even primarily due to our relatively lax gun laws or poor gun law enforcement. There are a ton of sociological factors, from ethnic heterogeneity and residential segregation to geographic patterns to a militaristic culture to income inequality. Those should be resolved primarily.

subscribe
Add your opinion
Challenge someone to answer this topic:
Invite an OpiWiki user:
OR
Invite your friend via email:
OR
Share it: