Here's something interesting for you guys who believe taking away guns is the answer.

This thread aged a little so let's refresh here. The people from the UK think their gun crime rate is so low because guns are illegal so the US needs to do the same (however most of us understand that won't happen so we agreed upon strickter gun regulations).

Ok, so now let's take a look at another country in the mix- Switzerland. Switzerland only had 41 murders in 2014 (1 murder per 165k people). That's a lot better than the UK (1 murder per 119k people). I wander what their policies are?

The vast majority of men between the ages of 20 and 34 are conscripted into the militia and undergo military training, including weapons training. The personal weapons of the militia can be kept at home as part of the military service. However, it is generally not permitted to keep army-issued ammunition, but compatible ammunition purchased for privately owned guns is permitted. At the end of military service period the previously used gun can be converted to a privately owned gun after a weapon acquisition permit has been granted (fully automatic weapons will be rebuilt into semi-automatic ones).

Huh, that's odd. A country where guns are so plentiful has a lower murder rate than that of a country of minimal guns. I wander what gun that is? Nothing less than the SIG 550, which is an assault rifle. Weird how that works. Maybe the US should read their own constitution and do the exact same thing.

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

One of the most informative and fair summaries of gun violence in the US I've seen. Needless to say deluded pro-firearm warriors will call it misinformation or manipulating the truth.

MagnaFlow wrote and its also bullshit that this guy could buy a gun since he was on the FBI watchlist.

No, it's not. It sets a terrible precedent to suspend constitutional rights of people who haven't been tried or convicted of anything, merely placed on a secret list.
If they're terrorists, take them to trial.

Motivational wrote

"GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, JUST LIKE SPOONS DON'T MAKE PEOPLE FAT. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE! "

That's possibly the stupidest analogy I've ever heard. Spoons do good things, they allow people to eat healthy things and good food, as well as bad food.

If spoons were only used by fat people to eat junk food and they could use that food as a weapon to shoot innocent people around them and kill them, then yes. We could ban spoons. However that's clearly not the case.

A better anaolgy would be "KFC and Mcdonalds sell horrific food to people and are killing thousands of overweight children everyday, should we ban them? Because they, like guns serve no good purpose.

And don't say that guns serve a purpose, they really don't. A gun has no other purpose than to hurt or damage things. They were created for the purpose of killing and the majority of time that's what they're used for. If you want to do target practice, use an air rifle or something. Something that can't actually kill someone.


And to the people saying that if the people in the club had of been armed they could have killed the guy. This is not COD. He sprayed into a building of people who were using alcohol and not thinking straight. Most of them didn't even know what was going on.

Shall I mention that he was carrying a fully automatic assault rifle and a pistol? What are people going to do? Run at him through the main door that he's firing into with a 9mm pistol against an assault rifle? Good luck.

Great idea guys, let's have everyone holding a firearm. I wonder what will happen when someone gets drunk and into a fight? They'll reach for their gun instead of their fist and we'll be having massacres everyday.

002 wrote Well.... The US has 318.9 million people and the UK has 64.1 million people... Less people = less problems.

UK has 65 million people and has had one school shooting ever.

America has 320 Million people.

Let's do some basic maths here. 320/65 = 5

There should be only five school shootings in America ever. As I said, there were 142 in two years alone. There's clearly something wrong.

You will not get through to Americans on this topic, they're in denial. I'm sure they do know it's wrong that you can get a weapon that can kill multiple people with ease.

Their logic:

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

Alpina wrote

Motivational wrote

"GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, JUST LIKE SPOONS DON'T MAKE PEOPLE FAT. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE! "

That's possibly the stupidest analogy I've ever heard. Spoons do good things, they allow people to eat healthy things and good food, as well as bad food.

If spoons were only used by fat people to eat junk food and they could use that food as a weapon to shoot innocent people around them and kill them, then yes. We could ban spoons. However that's clearly not the case.

A better anaolgy would be "KFC and Mcdonalds sell horrific food to people and are killing thousands of overweight children everyday, should we ban them? Because they, like guns serve no good purpose.

And don't say that guns serve a purpose, they really don't. A gun has no other purpose than to hurt or damage things. They were created for the purpose of killing and the majority of time that's what they're used for. If you want to do target practice, use an air rifle or something. Something that can't actually kill someone.


And to the people saying that if the people in the club had of been armed they could have killed the guy. This is not COD. He sprayed into a building of people who were using alcohol and not thinking straight. Most of them didn't even know what was going on.

Shall I mention that he was carrying a fully automatic assault rifle and a pistol? What are people going to do? Run at him through the main door that he's firing into with a 9mm pistol against an assault rifle? Good luck.

Great idea guys, let's have everyone holding a firearm. I wonder what will happen when someone gets drunk and into a fight? They'll reach for their gun instead of their fist and we'll be having massacres everyday.

002 wrote Well.... The US has 318.9 million people and the UK has 64.1 million people... Less people = less problems.

UK has 65 million people and has had one school shooting ever.

America has 320 Million people.

Let's do some basic maths here. 320/65 = 5

There should be only five school shootings in America ever. As I said, there were 142 in two years alone. There's clearly something wrong.

You will not get through to Americans on this topic, they're in denial. I'm sure they do know it's wrong that you can get a weapon that can kill multiple people with ease.

Their logic:

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

We're not in denial, we see the truth. Scroll up a little bit and read my post about Switzerland. The land where there are a ton of guns readily available (the oh so bad assault weapons kinds), and yet they have a lower murder rate than that of the UK. Wander how that works.

Guns aren't plentiful in Switzerland. Your information is completely outdated. Since 2008, Switzerland has complied with European Union gun control requirements and changed a lot of their rules and laws.

According to recent (2014) estimations of guns per 100 residents in Switzerland is about 25, which is, for example, is lower than Germany, France, or Austria.

In 2005 over 10% of households contained handguns, compared to 18% of U.S. households that contained handguns. In 2005 almost 29% of households in Switzerland contained firearms of some kind, compared to almost 43% in the US

Switzerland also has extremely strict gun control when it comes to foreigners. You cannot buy a weapon if you you have a citizenship from Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Turkey, Sri Lanka, Algeria or Albania.

I've also mentioned it many times in this thread, the smaller a population is, the lower the percentages are. How come Ireland has one of the best numeracy and literacy rates in the world, yet the students are taught almost identical curriculum in comparison with the UK? Why are the UK's rates so much worse? Because Ireland has a far smaller population.

In 2008, the U.S. had over 12 thousand firearm-related homicides. All of Japan experienced only 11, fewer than were killed at the Aurora shooting alone. And that was a big year.

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

Murder rate: Homicide rate per year per 100,000 inhabitants in various countries.

Why has Japan got such a low rate of crime and murders when guns and swords aren't allowed and are completely illegal, punishable with up to ten years in prison for just holding a gun?

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

Motivational wrote

Click to View Content

002 wrote Here's something interesting for you guys who believe taking away guns is the answer.

This thread aged a little so let's refresh here. The people from the UK think their gun crime rate is so low because guns are illegal so the US needs to do the same (however most of us understand that won't happen so we agreed upon strickter gun regulations).

Ok, so now let's take a look at another country in the mix- Switzerland. Switzerland only had 41 murders in 2014 (1 murder per 165k people). That's a lot better than the UK (1 murder per 119k people). I wander what their policies are?

The vast majority of men between the ages of 20 and 34 are conscripted into the militia and undergo military training, including weapons training. The personal weapons of the militia can be kept at home as part of the military service. However, it is generally not permitted to keep army-issued ammunition, but compatible ammunition purchased for privately owned guns is permitted. At the end of military service period the previously used gun can be converted to a privately owned gun after a weapon acquisition permit has been granted (fully automatic weapons will be rebuilt into semi-automatic ones).

Huh, that's odd. A country where guns are so plentiful has a lower murder rate than that of a country of minimal guns. I wander what gun that is? Nothing less than the SIG 550, which is an assault rifle. Weird how that works. Maybe the US should read their own constitution and do the exact same thing.

Guns aren't plentiful in Switzerland. Your information is completely outdated. Since 2008, Switzerland has complied with European Union gun control requirements and changed a lot of their rules and laws.

According to recent (2014) estimations of guns per 100 residents in Switzerland is about 25, which is, for example, is lower than Germany, France, or Austria.

In 2005 over 10% of households contained handguns, compared to 18% of U.S. households that contained handguns. In 2005 almost 29% of households in Switzerland contained firearms of some kind, compared to almost 43% in the US

Switzerland also has extremely strict gun control when it comes to foreigners. You cannot buy a weapon if you you have a citizenship from Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Turkey, Sri Lanka, Algeria or Albania.

I've also mentioned it many times in this thread, the smaller a population is, the lower the percentages are. How come Ireland has one of the best numeracy and literacy rates in the world, yet the students are taught almost identical curriculum in comparison with the UK? Why are the UK's rates so much worse? Because Ireland has a far smaller population.

In 2008, the U.S. had over 12 thousand firearm-related homicides. All of Japan experienced only 11, fewer than were killed at the Aurora shooting alone. And that was a big year.

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

Murder rate: Homicide rate per year per 100,000 inhabitants in various countries.

Why has Japan got such a low rate of crime and murders when guns and swords aren't allowed and are completely illegal, punishable with up to ten years in prison for just holding a gun?

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

Glad you brought that up, that magical number 25 is registered firearms.

The ownership rate reported is the average estimate taken from a survey from 2007 by Small Arms Survey.[1] This survey gives also the minimum and maximum estimates, which are based on other surveys with estimations. Note that for some countries, this margin of error is considerable. For example, Yemen, ranked near the top with an ownership rate of 54.8, has a low estimate of 28.6 and a high estimate of 81.1. While the United States is ranked for the highest gun ownership rate unambiguously, Yemen based on the margin of error may rank anywhere between 2nd and 18th, Switzerland anywhere between 4th and 17th.

As of 2012, based on second-hand figures from the millennium, there were estimated to be 3.4 million civilian guns in circulation in Switzerland, which would give the country a gun ownership rate of about 45.7 per 100 people, the third-highest in the world.

I said we should follow what switzerland is doing as opposed to the UK since what the UK is doing will never happen in the US. Switzerland trains its citizens with these firearms, and the citizens for lack of better terms is their military.

I don't know if it was you or not, but when I bring up the fact that the UK is 5x smaller than the UK it gets dismissed with the agument of "well the US still has X more mas murders which is far too many". Which side of the fence are we going to get on, sizes do affect numbers and percentages, or they don't?