Need some statistics.
Im trying to find some statistics with no luck.
Basically, off the top of my mind, it seems like theres less violent crimes where gun laws are more lax as compared to places with very strict laws that have extremely high violent crime rates. Not sure if I'm right though.
I'm also trying to find out how many people are murdered a year with firearms and compare it to the amount of people that are murdered with cars, knives and other weapons.
Not sure where to look, but I do know a lot of you whom have been in the firearms world their whole lives do.
Its a research project of sorts and also a means to inform myself so I can better shut down people in the classic argument over legality.
I don't have those statistics, but Google is always good for finding things. You may have to follow a link or two.
Any pro-Second Amendment website should have stuff like that. NRA website, Alan Gottleib's stuff, etc, etc, etc.
For starters I'd check the F.B.I. Uniform Crime Reports.
I don't think there is a link like this (and yes, FBI uniform reports should help. You can download the preliminary 2007 numbers here: http://www.fbi.gov/filelink.html?fil...2007table4.xls ). As an example, Massachussetts got low crime numbers compared to Florida. DC on the other hand got high numbers.
Originally Posted by Forscythe87
On the other hand, even in "pro gun" states like Florida, there are not enough people carrying to actually make a difference. I don't think you can proof either way if gun laws "matter".
The best examples to use are England and Australia. They are, I believe, number one and two in crime victimization rates, the statistic that really matters. Remember, you don't need a gun to commit a violent crime.
The statistics that are constantly thrown around are "gun crimes." People neglect to take into account all of the other violent crime when having these discussions. Look for info on the UK and Australia, there is plenty out there. I don't have the time ATM so I can't do the search for ya.. gotta run...
forgot one point: People who live in high-crime areas are more likely to carry as a result. Yet another reason that it is hard to argue this point just using statistics.
UK makes actually a very bad example. The UK has a high crime rate if compared to other European countries, but not if compared to the US.
I found some 2001 data here: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb1203.pdf
I am picking the homicide rate here because thats a number they list, and I assume its pretty comparable. For other categories, there may be different definitions what constitutes a "burglary" or a "robbery". Also: It include gun/no-gun homicides:
UK: 1.61 / 100,000 (UK: England/Wales)
US: 5.56 / 100,000
The document also has a "Victimization Rate" based on a survey that was conducted by calling random people, not by using official stats. It is indeed interesting how the victimization rate is lower in the US then in many other countries. see 2000 keyfindings industrialised
One problem I have with the study: They sent surveys to about 5000 people in each country. For the US, only about 2,000 replied. Response rates are similar in other countries. I would guess that victims are more likely to respond that people who have not been a victim. But this would apply to all countries.