proposed gun control (in brief)

Remember the movie Tombstone (with Kurt Russel)? Do any of you think they had the right idea concerning gun control? I will have to agree with their approach but my idea would not be as broad but in some ways more restrictive as to where you would be allowed to keep
your weapons.

In the movie ( and perhaps historically correct) The Earps band all guns within city limits. You still had every right to own your firearms, but you were not allowed to bring them into the city limits, or to surrender them.

I propose something similar. Within city limits you would be allowed to keep hand guns and shot guns (rifles would not be permitted).

The major change in my policy would be that "assault" weapons would not be permitted within 50 miles of cities or 100 miles of metropolitan areas exceeding a determined population. Again you would not be restricted from OWNING such weapons aside from your ability to store them accordingly.

Furthermore: to purchase these weapons would require
1) Federal registration
2) You are subject to at will questioning and search when you enter a city of the determined population by federal/state/local authorities.

I kept this as brief as possible...not short enough for some I'm sure

I think it would be about as effective as the war on drugs

technically, you weren't allowed to bring guns into the theater either.

effective gun control has to come at the point of acquisition. it needs to be harder to get the weapon.

If the government would step up and hire Ninjas to manage gun control this would all be settled in about five minutes. Tell congress: Ninjas or bust!

no ninjas needed:

Gun Politics in Canada

Violent crime, suicide and accidents in Canada

Gun control laws are often enacted to control injury and death with target areas broadly classified as violent crime, suicide, and accidental injury. Statistics are used to demonstrate the need for new legislation, or highlight the successes and failures of existing legislation.

The year following the introduction of firearms licensing in Canada (1977), saw a significant decline in murder involving firearms, relative to other mechanisms. From 1977 to 2003 Canada firearm homicide has declined from 1.15 to 0.5 per 100,000, while other mechanisms declined less significantly (1.85 to 1.23 per 100,000). To date, no study has explored the relationship between the choice of weapons for murder, the changing legal climate, and cultural attitudes. Currently, shooting and stabbing represent the two most common mechanisms for homicide in Canada, each accounting for approximately 30% of murders.

Overall suicide in Canada peaked in 1978 at 14.5 per 100,000, declining by 22% (11.3 per 100,000) in 2004. During this same time period, firearm suicides declined by 55% (1287 individuals to a low of 568) while the number of non-firearm suicides increased by 52% (2,046 in 1977 to 3,116 in 2003). In response to the 2001 registration requirements, some psychiatric doctors have argued that the legislation is not as effective as treatment in the prevention of suicide, given alternate mechanisms are available for suicide.

Accidental death, of any kind, is rare claiming 27.9 people per 100,000 in 2000. Of these, firearms accidents account for 0.3% (0.1 per 100,000), ranking below the 37% for transportation (10.2 per 100,000), 28% for unspecified (7.7 per 100,000), 18% for falls (5.1 per 100,000), and 11% for poisoning (3.1 per 100,000).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Canada#Violent_crime.2C_suicide_and_accidents_in_Canada

Not that this should be seen as a specific endorsement of Canadian gun laws, just that, it appears the system we have in place does have a positive impact.

Yeah, but I think the biggest thing is the mentality of Canada vs. the U.S. Generally more laid back up there, plus you guys don't have fear-mongering reporters and politicians trying to scare all of you daily into being afraid everytime you walk out your front door. I watched CNN's little Sunday gathering where all the main reporters have discussions and they were chuckling to themselves about how they don't like non-devisive stories. The American media sucks donkey balls and is without question part of the problem.

Saying "no guns here" isn't very effective. If you want to stop gun violence either you cut off the supply so its harder to get them or you up the penalties for having or using a gun. Britain has crazy harsh gun laws and consequently there is not much gun violence since it just isn't worth getting a gun. That didn't drop murder to zero though, they have incredible levels of knife crime.

Originally posted by Ascendancy
Yeah, but I think the biggest thing is the mentality of Canada vs. the U.S. Generally more laid back up there, plus you guys don't have fear-mongering reporters and politicians trying to scare all of you daily into being afraid everytime you walk out your front door. I watched CNN's little Sunday gathering where all the main reporters have discussions and they were chuckling to themselves about how they don't like non-devisive stories. The American media sucks donkey balls and is without question part of the problem.

its a within-subject comparison though. Gun regulation in Canada brought down gun violence in Canada.

The argument isn't that gun regulation will bring America to Canadian levels of gun violence, simply that it will reduce it.

In my country they offered money for guns. The stockpile was huge. (Australia)

Still drug runner suppliers, gangs, survivalists and gun enthusiasts still keep the crimes up to a degree. But nowhere near the insane numbers the US has.

We have rare occurrences of drive-bys and robberies. But nothing compared to the casualties your country has.

It is very dangerous to allow guns, 🙂

Originally posted by Oliver North
no ninjas needed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Canada#Violent_crime.2C_suicide_and_accidents_in_Canada

Not that this should be seen as a specific endorsement of Canadian gun laws, just that, it appears the system we have in place does have a positive impact.

Originally posted by Tzeentch._
I heard that gun crime is increasing in places like Toronto, though. Is there any truth to that?

There has been a number of recent high profile incidents, but last I saw, the numbers were still consistent with the last few years, and crime in general is at it lowest in 40 years.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
...they have incredible levels of knife crime.

Not really. High levels in some areas, perhaps, but nothing close to 'incredible', and don't confuse crime and murder. There is no real pattern by which knives are making up for a shortfall of guns in murders, and the US proportion of murders done without guns is higher than the UK's (obviously the amount with guns is much, much higher in the US), so knife murders are actually a bigger problem out there despite the prevalence of guns. I think this speaks against the idea that banning guns simply transfers murders to knives to any significant degree.

It is also unusual for more people to be killed with guns in a country than without them, and extremely rare in the first world. The US is one such country where this happens, and by a considerable margin (almost twice as many murdered by guns than by other means). I feel this points to a pattern.

It is, of course, impossible to make a direct link between gun control and lower murder/crime rates because we'd need to look into a parallel universe to compare two countries like for like, with and without. Nonetheless, I'm pretty confident that taking guns out the equation makes for a safer society here in the UK (more precisely in Britain, as the terrorism angle in Northern Ireland skews the stats history there), and it is still a point of pride that our policemen are, by default, not armed with guns.

On a straight statistical comparison, the US gun death rate is horrifying (those numbers truly do qualify as 'incredible'😉- but people who throw those numbers around aren't always aware that they relate to gun deaths from all causes, not just crime. Still, it doesn't have to be incredible to be a real issue and the whole world knows that the US has got to get on top of the guns issue.

Originally posted by Tzeentch._
I heard that gun crime is increasing in places like Toronto, though. Is there any truth to that?

Originally posted by Oliver North
There has been a number of recent high profile incidents, but last I saw, the numbers were still consistent with the last few years, and crime in general is at it lowest in 40 years.

Just to give some additional context, CBC talks about the issue:

YouTube video

Winnipeg is labeled, there, as the worst city (if Regina or Saskatoon were included on the list, Winnipeg might not be at the top). I live in Winnipeg, and we recently just had our 19th murder this year (knives seem to be the most common cause, 12 of the 19 murders were with knives, only 3 were shootings). The population is only 700 000, so by Canadian terms, that is a lot, but even for being the "worst in Canada", those numbers are small compared to most equally sized American cities.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Not really. High levels in some areas, perhaps, but nothing close to 'incredible', and don't confuse crime and murder. There is no real pattern by which knives are making up for a shortfall of guns in murders, and the US proportion of murders done without guns is higher than the UK's (obviously the amount with guns is much, much higher in the US), so knife murders are actually a bigger problem out there despite the prevalence of guns. I think this speaks against the idea that banning guns simply transfers murders to knives to any significant degree.

It is also unusual for more people to be killed with guns in a country than without them, and extremely rare in the first world. The US is one such country where this happens, and by a considerable margin (almost twice as many murdered by guns than by other means). I feel this points to a pattern.

It is, of course, impossible to make a direct link between gun control and lower murder/crime rates because we'd need to look into a parallel universe to compare two countries like for like, with and without. Nonetheless, I'm pretty confident that taking guns out the equation makes for a safer society here in the UK (more precisely in Britain, as the terrorism angle in Northern Ireland skews the stats history there), and it is still a point of pride that our policemen are, by default, not armed with guns.

On a straight statistical comparison, the US gun death rate is horrifying (those numbers truly do qualify as 'incredible'😉- but people who throw those numbers around aren't always aware that they relate to gun deaths from all causes, not just crime. Still, it doesn't have to be incredible to be a real issue and the whole world knows that the US has got to get on top of the guns issue.

What you said sounds legit based on research I had to do in one of my classes.

I did some fact finding to prove yours and my assumptions:

"The BCS suggests the number of violent incidents involving knives in 2005/2006 was, at 169,000. The BCS suggests the number of violent incidents involving knives in 2005/2006 was, at 169,000, around half the level of 340,000 in 1995, though it had increased on 2004 - 2005 and had been rising since the previous year The proportion of overall violent incidents involving knives was eight per cent in 1995 and seven per cent in 2005 - 2006."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1546085/The-vagaries-of-UK-knife-crime-statistics.html

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/crimeew0607.html

That's 6 year old old data and they report in the same article that violent knife crime was on an upward trend but overall knife crime was....down (I thought all knife crime was considered "violent"😉?

Population of the UK in 2006: 60,409,000.

The knife crime per 100,000 people in the UK in 2006: 377.56

For the US, there were 473.6 violent crimes per 100,000 people.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

But that's an apples to oranges comparison. We need gun crime, only, not all violent crime (gun crime can include robbery just like the UK statistic).

The best I could find was this write-up by the UK Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

The chart at the bottom splits up gun crime (it's STILL an apples to oranges comparison) into 3 categories: Murders, Robberies, Assaults:

If we add those up, we get the total.

That's 89.29 gun crimes per 100,000 people. That's much much lower than the 377.56 per 100,000 knife crimes reported in the UK.

Why is that an Apples to Oranges comparison? The 377.56 UK knife crime figure is based off of REPORTED crime from individuals and the 89.29 US gun crime figure is based off of crime logged with local law enforcement (many crimes go unreported to local law enforcement and the FBI pulls that data annually for analysis, IIRC).

This means that yours and my assumption is still probably correct and this is also why Symmetric Chaos may still be correct: we are all right.

But I will note that SC's perception may not be fairly representing the picture. Do those stats show that the knife crime rate in the UK is "incredible"? Why, yes, it does: it's 4.22 times higher than our gun crime in the US. Is that a fair comparison? Probably not.

Comments? Criticisms? You know, I could totally be wrong and that is a legit comparison. Does anyone have a chart like the one presented by the UK Guardian for the UK instead of the US? If so, that would do MUCH better to give us a legit comparison. I could not find one and the report cited by the UK Telegraph was the best I could find under short notice.

Originally posted by Oliver North
Just to give some additional context, CBC talks about the issue:

YouTube video

Winnipeg is labeled, there, as the worst city (if Regina or Saskatoon were included on the list, Winnipeg might not be at the top). I live in Winnipeg, and we recently just had our 19th murder this year (knives seem to be the most common cause, 12 of the 19 murders were with knives, only 3 were shootings). The population is only 700 000, so by Canadian terms, that is a lot, but even for being the "worst in Canada", those numbers are small compared to most equally sized American cities.

It is interesting that you note the population as well. The most crime-ridden U.S. cities have a much higher population than Winnipeg, though realistically population density in both areas is likely similar. Regardless, I think it's the mentality of the population and government as a whole that contributes to the atmosphere of crime that is pervasive in most large U.S. cities. Probably doesn't help either that when John and Jane Poverty light up a doobie to forget their troubles for a while they're going to end up in lock up here in the U.S. Kind of a tangential point, but it does speak to the situation.

I don't think there's a useful comparison unless you can compare US knife crime to UK. I also don't think general knife crime is anywhere near as high as you say there; the London rate in 2006 was 164 per 100000, and London is one of the higher areas.

Regardless, the topic at hand was murders, not crime in general. SC's comment was about deaths, which is why I mentioned not to confuse the two.

Originally posted by Ascendancy
It is interesting that you note the population as well. The most crime-ridden U.S. cities have a much higher population than Winnipeg,

Oh, for sure, I'm not trying to put Winnipeg on the same level as major US crime centers, more pointing out that similar sized cities are still worse in America, whereas Winnipeg is the literal worst in Canada. Regina and Saskatoon are also really bad, so maybe saying Winnipeg is "among" the worst is more accurate.

Originally posted by Ascendancy
though realistically population density in both areas is likely similar.

maybe not. Just as sort of a trivial point, Winnipeg is a very spread out city with low density. lol

Originally posted by Ascendancy
Regardless, I think it's the mentality of the population and government as a whole that contributes to the atmosphere of crime that is pervasive in most large U.S. cities.

oh, for sure, culture plays a major role, such as in places like Switzerland where it is mandatory to own a gun but crime is so low they don't even keep statistics on gun violence.

Still, I think control would have a positive impact on America, if nothing else, it may be a way to start that cultural change.

Originally posted by Ascendancy
Probably doesn't help either that when John and Jane Poverty light up a doobie to forget their troubles for a while they're going to end up in lock up here in the U.S. Kind of a tangential point, but it does speak to the situation.

lol, isn't legal here either

Hah, I know, but fines work out a whole lot better than jail time for minor possession.

Agreed though, until the mentality of this country changes something needs to happen with the weapon situation. Maybe some highly-enlightened alien overlords will come soon, take care of all that, and leave us a better place. Of course, I've seen Earth: Final Conflict, so maybe not. =p

Originally posted by Oliver North
Regina and Saskatoon are also really bad, so maybe saying Winnipeg is "among" the worst is more accurate.

Yeah, we've had a whole 4 murders in Saskatoon so far. It's so bad we even need to lock our doors at night.