Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Weapons of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: USA #1 in arms ownership! Makes you feel Proud!
RockyMTNClimber    8/28/2007 6:02:37 PM
The right of self defense is universal. UN should mandate all nations allow their citizens access to gun ownership! Check Six Rocky ht**tp://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2007-08-28T174254Z_01_L28348938_RTRUKOC_0_US-WORLD-FIREARMS.xml&pageNumber=0&imageid=&cap=&sz=13&WTModLoc=NewsArt-C1-ArticlePage2 By Laura MacInnis GENEVA (Reuters) - The United States has 90 guns for every 100 citizens, making it the most heavily armed society in the world, a report released on Tuesday said. U.S. citizens own 270 million of the world's 875 million known firearms, according to the Small Arms Survey 2007 by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute of International Studies. About 4.5 million of the 8 million new guns manufactured worldwide each year are purchased in the United States, it said. "There is roughly one firearm for every seven people worldwide. Without the United States, though, this drops to about one firearm per 10 people," it said. India had the world's second-largest civilian gun arsenal, with an estimated 46 million firearms outside law enforcement and the military, though this represented just four guns per 100 people there. China, ranked third with 40 million privately held guns, had 3 firearms per 100 people. Germany, France, Pakistan, Mexico, Brazil and Russia were next in the ranking of country's overall civilian gun arsenals. On a per-capita basis, Yemen had the second most heavily armed citizenry behind the United States, with 61 guns per 100 people, followed by Finland with 56, Switzerland with 46, Iraq with 39 and Serbia with 38. Continued... France, Canada, Sweden, Austria and Germany were next, each with about 30 guns per 100 people, while many poorer countries often associated with violence ranked much lower. Nigeria, for instance, had just one gun per 100 people. "Firearms are very unevenly distributed around the world. The image we have of certain regions such as Africa or Latin America being awash with weapons -- these images are certainly misleading," Small Arms Survey director Keith Krause said. "Weapons ownership may be correlated with rising levels of wealth, and that means we need to think about future demand in parts of the world where economic growth is giving people larger disposable income," he told a Geneva news conference. The report, which relied on government data, surveys and media reports to estimate the size of world arsenals, estimated there were 650 million civilian firearms worldwide, and 225 million held by law enforcement and military forces. Five years ago, the Small Arms Survey had estimated there were a total of just 640 million firearms globally. "Civilian holdings of weapons worldwide are much larger than we previously believed," Krause said, attributing the increase largely to better research and more data on weapon distribution networks. Only about 12 percent of civilian weapons are thought to be registered with authorities.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16   NEXT
paul1970       9/6/2007 3:22:47 AM

I have to go with the chaps from the US on this.
Tighter firearms laws do not necessarily mean a decrease on the criminal use of guns.

Certainly in the UK, since the banning of handguns, the number of crimes involving handguns has increased for a given unit of time. So clearly it hasn't worked as intended. One might argue that the number of handgun crimes might have gone up more had the ban not been enacted, but that would be difficult to prove.

As for why I would wish to own a firearm (for the record I do not, currently) is that I like target shooting. The focus and discipline of it appeal to me.
would you kindly post your references for this?

according to the radio (BBC radio 5 government release) this morning you are wrong. gun crime in the UK is down. there is certainly more reporting of it currently due to the recent spate of "gang" related shootings.
 
Paul

 
Quote    Reply

paul1970       9/6/2007 3:29:25 AM

ermmmmm......

tightening gun laws reduces crimes carried out with...... guns.....

Statistically gun control's only tangible effect on crime is it is followed by increases. That holds for the recent changes in UK, Australia, and Canada. Liberalizing laws in the US has reduced crimes.

 

the cause and effect with guns is that more people die when a gun is used in a crime than not....

See above. You don't know your facts.

 

how many firearm related deaths are there in the USA every year compared to other countries?

See above, rates going down with liberal gun ownership and carry laws.

 

Check Six

 

Rocky



1 please provide proof. as in my previous post... UK is down. where do you get your "facts" from.
 
2 so you are saying that more people are killed when guns are not used than when they are????? please post that proof as that is a corker.
 
3 rates are going down... good... do you think this is actually because more people have guns or do you think that there could be other reasons for the decrease?
 
paul

 
Quote    Reply

paul1970    my general view from the UK   9/6/2007 3:48:24 AM

I have to go with the chaps from the US on this.
Tighter firearms laws do not necessarily mean a decrease on the criminal use of guns.

Certainly in the UK, since the banning of handguns, the number of crimes involving handguns has increased for a given unit of time. So clearly it hasn't worked as intended. One might argue that the number of handgun crimes might have gone up more had the ban not been enacted, but that would be difficult to prove.

As for why I would wish to own a firearm (for the record I do not, currently) is that I like target shooting. The focus and discipline of it appeal to me.

it certainly helps get rid of the "guy goes nuts and shoots a load of people" type crime that happens every few years... (Dunblaine, Hungerford). without guns these people who flip don't have the guns to do it in the first place... but we do have a rise in "crazed attack with samurai sword..." I am happy with laws that reduce guns in the hands of people who should't have them.
as for criminals.... they are criminals... if they want a gun to commit a crime then they will get one... but I am happy that they find it harder to get hold of one now....
 
 
 
the recent troubles in the UK has been mainly gang related and not "professional criminals".
 
 
the use of guns by "professional criminals" is pretty static. but will increase if they percieve that they need one to do the job... hence...  if corner shop owners were armed than all corner shop robbers would need guns....
 
 
now this may not be valid for the US because you have already gone too far (I have not thought of a good idea for the US that wwould work) but please bare in mind that different countries have different needs. and increasing gun ownership might be "obvious" to some in the US who see this as the only viable option. but in other countries we have time to stop this "obvious need" from needing to occur.
 
Paul
 
Quote    Reply

mustavaris       9/6/2007 4:33:45 AM
Gotta add that the accidental gun-related deaths can be reduced with proper training and change in weapon handling culture. We (Finns) have the third most weapons per capita while our gun accidents kill 12 times less people than in USA (relatively, and it was some time ago when I checked the figures).. Part of this is explained by the fact that the Americans have a lot more hand guns while majority of our weapons are shotguns and rifles, but that´s only part... and in our case the situation is made worse by the fact that a lot of our hunters (400-800K of Finns hunt, depending on the source) are monkey drunken in the woods.. and yet they ain´t killing so many others nor themselves. Accidental killings with firearms can be reduced by many means, banning guns ain´t a solution for that unless you think that it is good to reduce road accidents by reducing the number of people with driving license.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber    Paul Reply   9/6/2007 1:17:11 PM



Rocky, your UK example is a little bit off.


It's been nearly forty years since it was legal to hold a firearm for the purpose of self-defence in the UK.


I think my analysis is accurate. Attached is one of many studies showing that the banning of handguns in UK all together did nothing. In fact your crime rates have gone up. Including violent crimes.

Check Six

 

Rocky


ht***tp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1440764.stm
Monday, 16 July, 2001, 04:50 GMT 05:50 UK

Handgun crime 'up' despite ban


Handgunhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1440000/images/_1440764_hand.300.jpg" width=300 border=0>

Handguns were banned following the Dunblane massacre



A new study suggests the use of handguns in crime rose by 40% in the two years after the weapons were banned.

The research, commissioned by the Countryside Alliance's Campaign for Shooting, has concluded that existing laws are targeting legitimate users of firearms rather than criminals.

The ban on ownership of handguns was introduced in 1997 as a result of the Dunblane massacre, when Thomas Hamilton opened fire at a primary school leaving 16 children and their teacher dead.

The Centre for Defence Studies at Kings College in London, which carried out the research, said the number of crimes in which a handgun was reported increased from 2,648 in 1997/98 to 3,685 in 1999/2000.

It also said there was no link between high levels of gun crime and areas where there were still high levels of lawful gun possession.

Of the 20 police areas with the lowest number of legally held firearms, 10 had an above average level of gun crime.

And of the 20 police areas with the highest levels of legally held guns only two had armed crime levels above the average.

Smuggling

The campaign's director, David Bredin, said: "It is crystal clear from the research that the existing gun laws do not lead to crime reduction and a safer place.

"Policy makers have targeted the legitimate sporting and farming communities with ever-tighter laws but the research clearly demonstrates that it is illegal guns which are the real threat to public safety."

He said the rise was largely down to successful smuggling of illegal guns into the country.

Weapons have even been disguised as key rings no larger than a matchbox to get them in, he said.

Other sources of guns include battlefield trophies brought back by soldiers, the illegal conversion of replica firearms including blank firing pistols and the reactivation of weapons which had been deactivated.

Ammunition

Examples of illegally manufactured guns include screwdrivers being adapted to fire off one round, he said.

The Metropolitan Police said its official figures showed a 20% drop in armed robberies of commercial premises between April and July this year, compared with the same period last year.

A Scotland Yard spokesman said that, since April 2001, the Flying Squad has arrested 39 people in connection with 34 armed incidents and seized 52 weapons.

Operation Trident, which investigates "black on black" shootings in the UK, has made more than 300 arrests, recovered 100 firearms and 1,500 rounds of ammunition since it was established a year ago.

The Home Office said measures were being taken to tackle handgun crime, including an intensified effort against illegally smuggled weapons.

 




It helps if you read the thread before making comments paul. It makes you look allot smarter.
Check Six
 
Rocky
 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber    Some additional UK news....   9/6/2007 2:02:54 PM
 
Frankly it looks like the UK is doing what we did in the US 30 years ago. Took away victim rights and blamed everything but the bad guys. Allot of that "poverty causes crime" trash back then. We throw them in jail and leave them there now in the US.
 
That is what prevents crimes.
 
Check Six
 
Rocky
 
 
 
ht***tp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/23/nshot323.xml

Britain's rising levels of gun crime


By Sophie Borland and Aislinn Simpson
Last Updated: 3:12am BST 24/08/2007

 

  • Boy,11, shot returning from football
  • Report: Crime in England and Wales 2006/2007

    The number of young people prosecuted for firearms offences has soared by 20 per cent in the past five years, it was revealed earlier this month.

    In 2001, 1,193 youngsters under age 21 went to magistrates courts on gun related charges. By 2005, that had risen to 1,444. The statistics come after a recent wave of gun crime in Britain’s inner cities, with many victims not even out of their teens.

    Shadow home affairs minister James Brokenshire said: “The rise in gun crime demonstrated by these figures is alarming.”

    In April Bernard Hogan-Howe, the chief constable of Merseyside Police, insisted new laws to make reporting information on shootings and possession of guns a 'duty’’ were essential because people were too scared to come forward.

    Mr Hogan-Howe, in the running to be the next Metropolitan Police commissioner, said the wall of silence protecting the increasing number of young people drawn into gun crime had to be broken.

    In an interview with The Guardian, he said Britain should adopt laws similar to those in Australia "where people have a duty to report information about gun crime to the police".

    But he called on the Government to push them further and apply them to firearm victims too frightened of reprisals to press charges.

    "The challenge is people who survive do not want to complain and the best witness is quite often the victim who can provide a description and motive," he said.

    "By refusing to help it can put the investigation on to the back foot."

    His comments come as police chiefs voice growing frustration at the difficulty in tackling gun crime among youths.

    Mr Hogan-Howe told the newspaper his force was already evicting families that harboured children who possessed guns, and moving them to other areas.

    His officers are also instructed to stop and search suspects regularly. The chief constable, who attended a gun crime summit at Downing Street in February, said such initiatives were leading the way in stamping out the problem.

  •  
    Quote    Reply

    RockyMTNClimber     Dangerous UK....?   9/6/2007 2:28:20 PM
     
    UK seems to have difficulty counting its crime victims................
     
     
    ht****tp://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2328368.ece
    THE government was accused yesterday of covering up the full extent of the gun crime epidemic sweeping Britain, after official figures showed that gun-related killings and injuries had risen more than fourfold since 1998.

    The Home Office figures - which exclude crimes involving air weapons - show the number of deaths and injuries caused by gun attacks in England and Wales soared from 864 in 1998-99 to 3,821 in 2005-06. That means that more than 10 people are injured or killed in a gun attack every day.

    This weekend the Tories said the figures challenged claims by Jacqui Smith, the home secretary, that gun crime was falling. David Davis, the shadow home secretary, tells her in a letter today that the “staggering findings” show her claims that gun crime has fallen are “inaccurate and misleading”.

    The political row erupted as Merseyside police continued to question a 15-year-old boy about the murder last week of Rhys Jones in Croxteth, Liver-pool. The 11-year-old was returning from football training when he was shot by a hooded teenager on a bicycle.

    Experts are examining a BMX bike abandoned in another area of the city. Six other teenagers, including two girls, from the Croxteth and Norris Green areas were in custody last night. Two others have been released on bail.

    Senior officers believe Rhys died because he walked into the line of fire between the gunman and his intended target, who is thought to have been one of three teenagers 30-70 yards away.

    Bernard Hogan-Howe, the chief constable of Merseyside, said yesterday: “We still need help in solving this crime. We need witnesses who are prepared to stand up in court.”

    Hogan-Howe said he had invested “a huge amount of policing” into the gang-related problems in the Croxteth area and had had a great deal of success.

    A minute’s applause was held yesterday at Goodison Park stadium where Everton, the team Rhys loved, were playing Black-burn Rovers. The 11-year-old’s murder has led to a public outcry against Britain’s gang and gun culture and a furious political debate about the government’s efforts to tackle the problem.

    Smith last night proposed the setting up of neutral “drop-off zones” where illegal weapons could be handed in. “This means we can actually take that gun out of circulation and stop it from doing harm,” she said.

    The Home Office has repeatedly denied gun crime is rising. Last week it pointed to the latest annual crime statistics, which appeared to show that overall gun crime was 13% down on the previous year.

    But in his letter to Smith, released today, Davis said these claims were contradicted by figures “buried” in a Home Office statistical bulletin, published ear-lier this year. “[Here] we find the most revealing indication of the true gun-re-lated violence sweeping Britain. Gun-related killings and injuries (excluding air weapons) have increased over fourfold since 1998,” he wrote.

    The Home Office said: "We remain fully committed to tackling gang culture and gun and knife crime through responsive policing, tough powers and funding prevention projects."

    Rhys’s killing fell on the anniversary of the fatal shooting of Liam Smith, a senior figure in a local gang known as the Strand Gang. Several members of the rival Croxteth Crew were found guilty of his murder.

    Locals had said they believed members of the Strand Gang were planning a reprisal shooting to mark the anniversary.

    “We always deploy additional resources around these anniversaries,” said Chief Superintendent Chris Armitt. “But we are over half a mile here from Croxteth, and Norris Green is further away again. The additional resources [were] focused only where gangs predominantly operate.”

    Extract from letter by David Davis, shadow home secretary, to Jacqui Smith, home secretary, August 24, 2007

    Dear Jacqui, We are all concerned at the rising tide of violent crime that has manifested itself this week in a spate of shocking killings, including the tragic death of young Rhys Jones. You told GMTV this morning that “statistics aren’t a help but gun crime is down”. That is an extraordinary claim.

    According to Home Office figures, gun crime (excluding air weapons) has almost doubled since Labour took office. The annual crime figures, released by the Home Office in July, suggest a 13% decrease on the previous year

     
    Quote    Reply

    flamingknives       9/6/2007 2:30:35 PM
    paul1970:

    You ask for sources, here is one from the Home Office:

    h*tp://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/hosb0206.pdf

    Most interesting is the graph at the bottom of page 77 showing the number of crimes involving firearms. If we go from 1997/8, we see that that the use of firearms in burglary and violence against the person have been increasing at a marginal rate, use in criminal damage has been increasing more rapidly but has recently fallen off and use in robberies has fallen markedly.

    By 2002, we see the following trends:
    Use of firearms for violence against a person and criminal damage rockets - by 2002, number of incidents has nearly doubled. Use of firearms in robberies has rebounded to more than they have been in the four years prior to the gun ban.
    Burglaries have seen the same slow, steady increase.

    If we skip on to 2005, violence against a person and criminal damage have leveled off, with criminal damage falling slightly, but both are still almost twice their levels in 1997 and more than twice the 1992 levels.
    Robberies are dropping significant and burglaries have fallen by as much as they have changed in any other two years.

    Criminal damage can be largely ignored as it involves air weapons on more than a 10:1 ratio.
    Violence against a person, however, cannot be discounted in such a matter and there you have it.
     
    Quote    Reply

    RockyMTNClimber    An abstract on research by Joyce Malcom   9/6/2007 2:53:28 PM

    This is a book that reviews all of England's history as it relates to gun control. It probably would suprise you Euros to discover UK had a right to own and bear arms at one time. In fact I think maybe our 2nd Amendment might have come in part from the 1698 Bill of Rights.

    The abstract is long and very well documented with internet accessible sources. I recommend anyone with interest in this subject take a look at it and follow its resources.

    Check Six

    Rocky

    ht***tp://www.davekopel.com/2A/Foreign/The-Gold-Standard-of-Gun-Control.htm
    ........In 1998, after a known pedophile used a handgun to murder kindergarten children in Dunblane, Scotland, the Parliament banned non-government possession of handguns. As a result the Gun Control Network (a prohibition advocacy group) enthused that “present British controls over firearms are regarded as ‘the gold standard’ in many countries.”  According to GCN spokesperson Mrs. Gill Marshall-Andrews, “the fact that we have a gold standard is something to be proud of….”
    [14] 

    A July 2001 study from King’s College London’s Centre for Defence Studies found that handgun-related crime increased by nearly 40% in the two years following implementation of the handgun ban.[15] The study also found that there had been “no direct link” between lawful possession of guns by licensed citizens and misuse of guns by criminals.[16] According to the King’s College report, although the 1998 handgun ban resulted  in over 160,000 licensed handguns being withdrawn from personal possession, “the UK appears not to have succeeded in creating the gun free society for which many have wished. Gun related violence continues to rise and the streets of Britain…seem no more safe.”[17]

                A few weeks before the King’s College study was released, Home Office figures showed that violent crime in Great Britain was rising at the second fastest rate in the world, well above the U.S. rate, and on par with crime-ridden South Africa.[18] In February 2001, it was reported that 26 percent of persons living in England and Wales had been victims of crime in 1999.[19]  Home Secretary Jack Straw admitted, “levels of victimisation are higher than in most comparable countries for most categories of crime.”  On May 4, 2001, the Telegraph disclosed that the risk of a citizen being assaulted was “higher in Britain than almost anywhere else in the industrialized world, including America.”[20] The latest U.N. data show that Scotland (which has always kept separate criminal justice statistics from England and Wales) has the highest violent crime rate of any developed nation, and that England and Wales are not much better.[21]

    With passage of the Firearms Act of 1997, “it was confidently assumed that the new legislation effectively banning handguns would have the direct effect of reducing certain types of violent crime by reducing access to weapons.”[22]  The news media promised that the “world’s toughest laws will help to keep weapons off the streets.”[23] 

    Yet fast

     
    Quote    Reply

    Jeff_F_F       9/6/2007 3:20:44 PM



    I have to go with the chaps from the US on this.
    Tighter firearms laws do not necessarily mean a decrease on the criminal use of guns.



    Certainly in the UK, since the banning of handguns, the number of crimes involving handguns has increased for a given unit of time. So clearly it hasn't worked as intended. One might argue that the number of handgun crimes might have gone up more had the ban not been enacted, but that would be difficult to prove.



    As for why I would wish to own a firearm (for the record I do not, currently) is that I like target shooting. The focus and discipline of it appeal to me.


    it certainly helps get rid of the "guy goes nuts and shoots a load of people" type crime that happens every few years... (Dunblaine, Hungerford). without guns these people who flip don't have the guns to do it in the first place... but we do have a rise in "crazed attack with samurai sword..." I am happy with laws that reduce guns in the hands of people who should't have them.

    as for criminals.... they are criminals... if they want a gun to commit a crime then they will get one... but I am happy that they find it harder to get hold of one now....

     the recent troubles in the UK has been mainly gang related and not "professional criminals".

    the use of guns by "professional criminals" is pretty static. but will increase if they percieve that they need one to do the job... hence...  if corner shop owners were armed than all corner shop robbers would need guns....

     now this may not be valid for the US because you have already gone too far (I have not thought of a good idea for the US that wwould work) but please bare in mind that different countries have different needs. and increasing gun ownership might be "obvious" to some in the US who see this as the only viable option. but in other countries we have time to stop this "obvious need" from needing to occur.

     Paul
    explain what you mean by "already gone too far"? toward what? toward having armed citizens?what are you trying to say?
     
    Also, explain what you mean by "only viable option"? for dealing with what? because of what situation?
     
    Innuendo is useless. Take a stand.
     
    Quote    Reply
    PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16   NEXT



     Latest
     News
     
     Most
     Read
     
     Most
     Commented
     Hot
     Topics