Unlike the United States, no country in Europe has mass shootings everyday.
No US state has mass shootings every day either. It’s disingenuous to compare the USA with little European nations on this, rather than Europe as a whole.
US/European rankings:
https://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Frequency-of-Mass-Public-Shootings-in-Europe-and-US-2009-to-2015.jpg
“The average incident rate for the 28 EU countries is 0.0602 with a 95% confidence Interval of .0257 to .09477. The US rate is 0.078 is higher than the EU rate, but US and the average for EU countries are not statistically different. The average fatality rate for the 28 EU countries is 0.114 with a 95% confidence Interval of -.0244 to .253. The US rate is 0.089 is lower than the EU rate, but they are again not statistically significantly different.
There were 27% more casualties per capita from mass public shootings in EU than US from 2009-15”
“The CPRC has also collected data on the worst mass public shootings, those cases where at least 15 people were killed in the attack.
There were 16 cases where at least 15 people were killed. Out of those cases, four were in the United States, two in Germany, France, and the United Kingdom.
But the U.S. has a population four times greater than Germany’s and five times the U.K.’s, so on a per-capita basis the U.S. ranks low in comparison — actually, those two countries would have had a frequency of attacks 1.96 (Germany) and 2.46 (UK) times higher.
Small countries such as Norway, Israel and Australia may have only one major attack each, one-fourth of what the U.S. has suffered, but the US population is vastly greater. If they suffered attacks at a rate adjusted for their population, Norway, Israel and Australia would have had attacks that were respectively 16, 11, and 3 times greater than the US.”
https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-public-shootings-in-the-us-and-europe/
reply
share
krl97a (5619)
5 years ago
Trump does nothing but play golf, tweet and watch TV.
And order federal agents to Chicago to help stem the carnage there, among many other things.
“
The Trump administration announced Friday that it is dispatching an additional 20 ATF agents permanently to the nation's third-largest city to stem gun violence that's left more than 1,000 dead over the last 18 months….. Chicago Police officials say the strike force will be a specialized team of city cops, federal agents and Illinois state troopers who will work exclusively on stemming the flow of illegally possessed guns and targeting repeat gun offenders.
A key part of the strike force calls for prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney's office and Cook County State's Attorney's office to work closely with city police and federal agents on developing a prosecution strategy for targeting repeat gun offenders.
The idea of a strike force was developed by Celinez Nunez, the special agent-in-charge of ATF's Chicago office,
after Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson met with Justice Department officials earlier this year to seek assistance.”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/06/30/trump-says-hes-sending-federal-help-stem-chicago-violence/442096001/
I’m glad Johnson asked the Trump administration for help, but the problem was the criminals, who are now being arrested and getting tougher sentences, not the mere presence of firearms. Seizing them is good because it gets them out of
criminals’ hands. There are by far more guns in other, far more peaceful parts of the US.
reply
share
krl97a (5619)
5 years ago
Some more:
“Every place that has banned guns (either all guns or all handguns) has seen murder rates go up. You cannot point to one place where murder rates have fallen, whether it’s Chicago or D.C. or even island nations such as England, Jamaica, or Ireland.
For an example of homicide rates before and after a ban, take the case of the handgun ban in England and Wales in January 1997 (source here see Table 1.01 and the column marked “Offences currently recorded as homicide per million population,” UPDATED numbers available here). After the ban, clearly homicide rates bounce around over time, but there is only one year (2010) where the homicide rate is lower than it was in 1996. The immediate effect was about a 50 percent increase in homicide rates. Firearm homicide rate had almost doubled between 1996 and 2002 (see here p. 11). The homicide and firearm homicide rates only began falling when there was a large increase in the number of police officers during 2003 and 2004. Despite the huge increase in the number of police, the murder rate still remained slightly higher than the immediate pre-ban rate.”
https://crimeresearch.org/2016/04/murder-and-homicide-rates-before-and-after-gun-bans/
Charts.
British homicide rate: https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DJ-KA2WhhLo/UNZr8agpVqI/AAAAAAAAFH4/f6rrTVN7q6I/s1600/Screen+Shot+2012-12-22+at++Saturday,+December+22,+9.26+PM.png
England and Wales firearm homicide rate: https://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/UK-Firearm-Homicide-Rate.png
Number of England and Wales police: https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3F3VyqudNyc/UNkZXvslOgI/AAAAAAAAFKk/TVeWHPiBAX0/s1600/Screen+Shot+2012-12-24+at++Monday,+December+24,+10.11+PM.png
Ireland and Jamaica murder rates: https://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Ireland-Jamaica-2.jpeg
reply
share
krl97a (5619)
5 years ago
Chicago’s murder rate relative to other top 10 largest US cities: https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CSE3YbYoc_M/UNMlQ6jG9fI/AAAAAAAAE9Q/xug8Ho9outI/s1600/Screen+shot+2012-12-20+at++Thursday,+December+20,+9.47+AM.png
DC’s murder rate relative to other top 48 US cities: https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Uy7V3Zl2MZ4/UNMlfuib0EI/AAAAAAAAE9Y/KReJQnzBvkw/s1600/Screen+shot+2012-12-20+at++Thursday,+December+20,+9.49+AM.png
Venezuela homicide rate: https://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/venezuala-homicide-after-ban.png
“Private gun ownership was banned in Venezuela in June 2012, but their homicide rate went from 73 per 100,000 people in 2012 to 82 per 100,000 people in 2015. A private organization, the Venezuelan Violence Observatory (OVV), puts the rate in 2015 at over 90 per 100,000 people… As the homicide rate was already rising before the gun ban and Venezuela is such a mess of a country, this increase in homicides is less dramatic than for the UK, Ireland or Jamaica, but yet again it is still evidence that the homicide rates were at least not favorably affected by gun ban. (the trend steepened after the ban, despite independent reports of efforts by the socialist government to hide the murder rate and discourage victims’ families from reporting them)
Hugo Chavez became president of Venezuela in 1999. In that year, the homicide rate was about 25 per 100,000 people.”
https://crimeresearch.org/2016/04/venezuela-homicide-rate-rose-after-2012-ban-on-private-ownership-of-guns/
reply
share
krl97a (5619)
5 years ago
Gun violence is much lower in Europe.
Including in Switzerland, where every home is
required to have a gun. The European “gun violence” and total murder rate was much lower than the USA’s long before they passed gun control laws. And, typical of gun control advocates, you’re US centric, ignoring other cross national comparisons. From a 2007 article published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy:
“While American gun ownership is quite high, Table 1 infra shows many other developed nations (e.g., Norway, Finland, Germany, France, Switzerland, Greece, Denmark) with high gun availability yet murder rates as low as, and often much lower than, developed nations where guns are far fewer.
For example, Luxembourg, where handguns are totally banned and ownership of any kind of gun is minimal, has a murder rate 10 times higher than gun-dense Norway and Germany where handguns are legal and gun ownership in general is very high….
The same pattern appears when comparisons of violence to gun ownership are made within nations.
Indeed, "data on firearms ownership by constabulary area in England" show "a negative correlation," 10 i.e. "where firearms are most dense, violent crime rates are lowest, and where guns are least dense violent crime rates are highest" (quoting a description of what American data have also consistently shown)….
A second misconception about the relationship between firearms and violence attributes Europe’s generally low homicide rates to stringent gun control. That attribution cannot be accurate for murder in Europe was at an all-time low before the gun controls were introduced.13 For instance, the only English gun control during the 19th and early 20th Centuries was that police were to patrol without guns.....
reply
share
krl97a (5619)
5 years ago
...During this period gun control prevailed far less in England or Europe than in certain American states which nevertheless had – and continue to have – murder rates that were and are very high comparatively. 14 In this connection two recent studies are pertinent. In 2004 the U.S. National Academy of Sciences released its evaluation from a review of 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications and some empirical research of its own. It could not identify any gun control that had reduced violent crime, suicide or gun accidents. 15 The same conclusion was reached in a 2003 study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control’s review of then-extant studies 16 (The CDC is vehemently anti-gun and deemed its results to show not that the more guns = more death mantra is erroneous but only that the scores of studies it reviewed were inconclusively done.)
Stringent gun controls were not adopted in England and Western Europe until after WWI. Consistent with the outcomes of the American studies just mentioned, these strict controls did not stem the general trend of ever-growing violent crime throughout the post-WWII industrialized world including the U.S. and Russia...
Prof. Malcolm’s study of English gun law and violent crime summarizes that nation’s 19th and 20th Century experience as follows:
The peacefulness England used to enjoy was not the result of strict gun laws. When it had no firearms restrictions [19th and early 20th Century] England had little violent crime, while the present extraordinarily stringent gun controls have not stopped the increase in violence or even the increase in armed violence....Armed crime, never a problem in England, has now become one. Handguns are banned but the kingdom has millions of illegal firearms. Criminals have no trouble finding them and exhibit a new willingness to use them. In the decade after 1957 the use of guns in serious crime increased a hundredfold.17....
reply
share
krl97a (5619)
5 years ago
....In the late 1990s England moved from stringent controls to a complete ban on handguns and many types of long guns. Hundreds of thousands were confiscated from owners law abiding enough to turn them in. Without suggesting this caused violence, the bans' ineffectiveness was such that by year 2000 violent crime had so increased that England had the developed world’s highest violent crime rate, far surpassing even the U.S.18 Today English news media headline violence in terms redolent of the doleful, melodramatic ones that for so long characterized American news reports.19
The divergence between the U.S. and the British Commonwealth became especially pronounced during the 1980s and 1990s. During these two decades, while Britain and the Commonwealth were making lawful firearm ownership increasingly difficult, more than 25 states in the United States passed laws allowing responsible citizens to carry concealed handguns. There are now 40 states, including more than 60% of the population, where qualified citizens can get such a handgun permit 20. As a result, the number of Americans who are allowed to carry concealed handguns in shopping malls, on the street, and in their cars has grown to 3.5 million men and women21. Arguably, these new laws have contributed to the drop in homicide and violent crime rates. Based on 25 years of correlated statistics from all of the more than 3,000 American counties John Lott and David Mustard conclude that adoption of these statutes has so deterred criminals from confrontation crime as to cause murder and violent crime to fall faster in states that adopted this policy than in the states that did not.22”
https://drgo.us/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/SSRN-id998893.pdf
reply
share