https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States Gun violence in the United States results in tens of thousands of deaths and injuries annually.[1] In 2013, there were 73,505 nonfatal firearm injuries (23.2 injuries per 100,000 U.S. citizens),[2][3] and 33,636 deaths due to "injury by firearms" (10.6 deaths per 100,000 U.S. citizens).[4] These deaths consisted of 11,208 homicides,[5] 21,175 suicides,[4] 505 deaths due to accidental or negligent discharge of a firearm, and 281 deaths due to firearms use with "undetermined intent".[4] Of the 2,596,993 total deaths in the US in 2013, 1.3% were related to firearms.[1][6] The ownership and control of guns are among the most widely debated issues in the country. In 2010, 67% of all homicides in the U.S. were committed using a firearm.[7] In 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US, with 6,371 of those attributed to handguns.[8] In 2012, 64% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. were suicides.[9] In 2010, there were 19,392 firearm-related suicides, and 11,078 firearm-related homicides in the U.S.[10] In 2010, 358 murders were reported involving a rifle while 6,009 were reported involving a handgun; another 1,939 were reported with an unspecified type of firearm.[11] Firearms were used to kill 13,286 people in the U.S. in 2015, excluding suicide.[12] Approximately 1.4 million people have been killed using firearms in the U.S. between 1968 and 2011.[12] In 2010, gun violence cost U.S. taxpayers approximately $516 million in direct hospital costs.[13] Gun violence is most common in poor urban areas and frequently associated with gang violence, often involving male juveniles or young adult males.[14][15] Although mass shootings have been covered extensively in the media, mass shootings account for a small fraction of gun-related deaths[16] and the frequency of these events steadily declined between 1994 and 2007, rising between 2007 and 2013.[17][18] Legislation at the federal, state, and local levels has attempted to address gun violence through a variety of methods, including restricting firearms purchases by youths and other "at-risk" populations, setting waiting periods for firearm purchases, establishing gun buyback programs, law enforcement and policing strategies, stiff sentencing of gun law violators, education programs for parents and children, and community-outreach programs. Despite widespread concern about the impacts of gun violence on public health, Congress has prohibited the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) from conducting research that advocates in favor of gun control.[19]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States#Homicide According to a 2013 report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), between 2005 and 2012[update], the average homicide rate in the U.S. was 4.9 per 100,000 inhabitants compared to the average rate globally, which was 6.2. However, the U.S. had much higher murder rates compared to other countries identified in the report as "developed", which all had average homicide rates of 0.8 per 100,000.[46] In 2004, there were 5.5 homicides for every 100,000 persons, roughly three times as high as Canada (1.9) and six times as high as Germany and Italy (0.9).[53][48] A closer look at The National Archive of Criminal Justice Data indicates that per capita homicide rates over the last 30 plus years on average, of major cities, New Orleans' average annual per capita homicide rate of 52 murders per 100,000 people overall (1980–2012) is the highest of U.S. cities with average annual homicide totals that were among the top 10 highest during the same period. In the United States, the number of homicides where the victim and offender relationship was undetermined has been increasing since 1999 but has not reached the levels experienced in the early 1990s. In 14% of all murders, the victim and the offender were strangers. Spouses and family members made up about 15% of all victims, about one-third of the victims were acquaintances of the assailant, and the victim and offender relationship was undetermined in over one-third of homicides. Gun involvement in homicides were gang-related homicides which increased after 1980, homicides that occurred during the commission of a felony which increased from 55% in 1985 to 77% in 2005, homicides resulting from arguments which declined to the lowest levels recorded recently, and homicides resulting from other circumstances which remained relatively constant. Because gang killing has become a normal part of inner cities, many including police hold preconceptions about the causes of death in inner cities. When a death is labeled gang-related it lowers the chances that it will be investigated and increases the chances that the perpetrator will remain at large. In addition, victims of gang killings often determine the priority a case will be given by police. Jenkins (198 argues that many serial murder cases remain unknown to police and that cases involving Black offenders and victims are especially likely to escape official attention.[54] According to the FBI, "When the race of the offender was known, 53.0 percent were black, 44.7 percent were white, and 2.3 percent were of other races. The race was unknown for 4,132 offenders. (Based on Expanded Homicide Data Table 3). Of the offenders for whom gender was known, 88.2 percent were male."[55] According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, from 1980 to 2008, 84 percent of white homicide victims were killed by white offenders and 93 percent of black homicide victims were killed by black offenders.[56] The United States has the highest rate of civilian gun ownership per capita.[57][58][59] According to the CDC, between 1999 and 2014 there have been 185,718 homicides from use of a firearm and 291,571 suicides using a firearm.[60] Despite a significant increase in the sales of firearms since 1994, the US has seen a drop in the annual rate of homicides using a firearm from 7.0 per 100,000 population in 1993 to 3.6 per 100,000.[61] In the ten years between 2000 and 2009, the ATF reported 37,372,713 clearances for purchase, however, in the four years between 2010 and 2013, the ATF reported 31,421,528 clearances.[62]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate Homicide rate per 100,000 most recent year: UK 0.9 per 100,000 -- count of 602 USA 3.9 per 100,000 -- count of 12,253
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/gun-homicides-ownership/table/ Gun homicide rate per 100,000 most recent year: UK 0.07 per 100,000 -- count 41 -- percent of homicides 6.6% USA 3.2 per 100,000 -- count 9,960 -- percent of homicides 67.5%
Calculations from the above data: 1 - the USA has 4 times as much homicide as does the UK (3.9 / 0.9 = 4.3). 2 - the USA has 46 times as many gun homicides as does the UK (3.2 / 0.07 = 46).
Conclusions from the above data and calculations: 1 - There is no correlation between guns and gun homicide comparing the USA and UK. While the USA has a higher homicide rate than the UK, the relationship between gun- versus non-gun homicide in the two nations is not proportional. This merely indicates that guns are the preferred method of homicide in the USA. In the UK other methods of homicide besides guns are popular. And this is precisely what I expected. Ergo you cannot draw an inference from gun ownership or gun availability to homicide. If there were such a correlation then you would expect to see the UK having 1/46th the amount of homicide as the USA. However the UK actually has 1/4th the amount of homicide as the USA. Clearly homicides in the UK are being committed by means other than guns. Q.E.D.
Better yet paste up some data that contradicts my source. Crime stats soared in the UK after the gun ban in spite an active cover up of crime by the UK authorities.
Johnny Depp in "Pirates Of The Caribbean" said "Q.E.D." a lot so that is where I picked that habit up. I also took Latin in middle school but that's not where I learned Q.E.D.
How did I "shift the burden of proof"? The soaring crime in the UK after the gun ban is a matter of public record. Do you deny that fact?
Because you cannot ethically or forensically or according to NCAA debate rules tell someone else to go and do something. You either have to do it yourself or else your data and conclusions have to hang together on their own. Ergo your assertion is a shifting of the burden. You lose the debate point for doing this IF the fallacy is pointed out to you. That's how debate works in the NCAA. Q.E.D.
That's TWO debate points that you just lost, @Ddyad . I get that you are not good at this and that you don't have any formal training in debating. Not to worry however, we will whip you into shape. You just need to pay attention and learn from your mistakes.
Criminals already ignore laws by definition. Any more laws will only leave the law abiding at a greater disadvantage. The elderly and female will pay the greatest price. Disarming the public will only embolden packs of feral thugs. Just look at my Southern border and the cartels. Mexicans are caught between a corrupt government and the cartels. I don't know how many times I have read news stories about dozens of people being slaughtered for money or political views in Mexico. Besides, do you expect us to send you more guns if another world war breaks out?
I see - is that why you did not answer my question. It was very straightforward and right on point. Note the Title of the thread.
Stick with me and pay attention and learn from your mistakes and then I will be able to square you away until you too are sh!tting Tiffany cuff links.
This is not the NCAA. And you have yet to come up with a substantive response to the fact that crime soared in the UK after the gun ban. Again, note the title of this thread and try to stay on point. That works better than obvious evasion.
I completely agree with you @Texan . And yes, I bet they do expect us to bail them out again the next time, just like last time back in 1939 - 1945 when they bit off more than they could chew by declaring war on Adolf because he invaded Poland in agreement with Stalin. Ultimately the British got their azz kicked both times, during WW1 and WW2, and the USA had to come running and bail them out both times. They are lucky we like them. They are lucky we are Anglophiles.
Hahaha ... this is not the NCAA !!! Nor is it the Moon, Mars, Venus, or Jupiter either !!! RED HERRING !!! You are now zero for three. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
Yet another empty unresponsive post. Most people come here to share knowledge and ideas and learn. You should try that approach. It will probably be easier than swallowing "Tiffany cuff links".
@Ddyad you don't seem to be paying attention. And you don't seem to be learning from your mistakes either. Maybe you are just a slow learner. I guess I am just going to need to be very patient with you. You need to click on the link for the fallacies, read the list, and stop using fallacies in your "arguments". Your arguments have fallacies in them and therefore that makes them invalid arguments. Q.E.D.
The O/P did not give any citations or links for his data. Therefore it is hard to take him/her seriously. That's why I gathered the data on my own and started completely over.
