Update below jump with related items from NewsBusters.
This morning, NewsBusters contributing editor Dan Gainor brought this Washington Post article to my attention:
"Britain's Gun Laws Seen as Curbing Attacks"
But the problem is that while anti-gun activists recited those talking points in Post foreign service correspondent Mary Jordan's April 24 story, the empirical evidence shows otherwise.
The number of crimes in which a handgun was used in England and Wales has risen from 299 in 1995 to 1,024 last year. Offenses committed with all types of firearms, including air guns, have also increased.
That's an increase of 725 gun crimes in 11 years, a 242 percent increase. Britain already had strict gun control before the 1996 Dunblane, Scotland, school shooting, and in 1997 both Conservative and Labour governments pushed through fresh gun control legislation banning small caliber handguns.
Jordan did note that gun fatalities are down at just 50 deaths in the U.K. last year from 55 in 1995, yet Jordan carefully inserted a caveat earlier in the same paragraph.
"According to government statistics, the number of people killed by guns has essentially stayed the same, with dips and spikes, as before the 1997 gun control laws went into effect," she wrote.
"Dips and spikes?" Perhaps like the spike in total homicides in England and Wales in the years following the 1997 gun laws? Homicides peaked at over 1,000 in the 2002-3 survey period. The number has since fallen to just above 1997-8 levels.
What about the oft-repeated meme that gun-free Britain is much less violent than the United States? Jordan doesn't raise that meme per se, but neither does she compare apples to apples. Has Britain historically been less violent, more violent, or similarly violent per capita to the United States? Jordan doesn't say.
The better comparison, in fact, is if Britain has become more or less violent since the 1997 gun laws.
The notion that it's become less violent doesn't wash according to data from the British government.
What about "possession of weapons." Surely arrests for illegal weapons is on a downward trend, right?
Related Items:
ABC News Trumpets UK's Handgun Ban
MSNBC.com Cites Unlabeled Anti-Gun Activist
ABC Poll Finds Twice as Many Blame Culture Over Guns, But 'World News' Spikes It—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Great blog Ken and the other
April 24, 2007 - 12:22 ET by Dee BunkGreat blog Ken and the other thing that bugs me when they make comparisons is that Britain doesn't have the same gang problems. They don't have the history of slavery that makes it taboo to improve conditions in gang areas for fear of being labeled racist. They also have cameras on every street corner so they can catch illegal possession a lot easier than we could. We would have to have evidence of a crime in neighborhoods where no one will cooperate with the police so we wouldn't be able to get the guns that account for most of our gun deaths.
Ken's post today has been tho
April 25, 2007 - 08:36 ET by JMSUKen's post today has been thoroughly debunked below:
http://newsbusters.org/node/12267#comment-326894
It actually proves the NRA position
April 24, 2007 - 12:24 ET by c5thenBanning guns means that only criminals will have them and in fact makes having a gun much more enticing to the criminals because it guarentees them a huge advantage over their chosen victim.
Automobiles kill far more people in Britain and the US than guns. Why do we hear no talking about banning cars?
Too many people make a living
April 24, 2007 - 12:37 ET by FastEdToo many people make a living making cars - Still waiting for some demolib to point to just ONE "gun control" law that has stopped anyone from shooting another person. Never mind that criminals will get the guns they need, law or no law.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
C5- I think we had a ban on b
April 24, 2007 - 12:39 ET by Dee BunkC5- I think we had a ban on bombs before Oklahoma bombing didn’t we? Was it illegal to fly planes into buildings before? Shoot – I think something has been overlooked – better get that law on the books to prevent another terrorist attack. In fact – lets just make all terrorists attacks illegal by any method. That should do it. Ban terrorists! I guess I need to say that I'm being sarcastic, because if someone doesn't know me they could think I was serious. These dems are so goofy.
Britains Gun Crime
April 24, 2007 - 12:59 ET by bsmarjSeems to me the Brits, last week were saying how our gun control isn't strict enough. I would much rather be in country where I could at least have a chance to defend myself than not.
When the Muslims actually start to forcibly take over their country, they are all going to wish they had their guns and ours!
In a democracy the more you t
April 24, 2007 - 13:07 ET by Gat New YorkIn a democracy the more you try to control/ban goods or services the more those who want them will circumvent those laws and find ways to get them.
It also should be noted that
April 24, 2007 - 13:18 ET by MivvisIt also should be noted that the UK is the size of what? Texas. Big difference here in acreage.
Close but, Texas is still big
April 24, 2007 - 13:42 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveNot even close, Texas is way bigger: U.K. 150,117 sq miles (or 241,590 sq km), Texas 261,797 sq miles (or 421,321 sq km). The U.K. is even smaller than California (158,302 sq miles).
"When life gives you lemons, make lemonade, and then toss it in the face of the person who gave you the lemons until they give you the oranges you asked for in the first place!" --Bill McNeal, NewsRadio episode 3.17
Great Britain is about the si
April 24, 2007 - 13:54 ET by ahusserGreat Britain is about the size of Kansas. I think all of Europe without Great Britain is about the size of Texas
"A mind is a terrible thing." - A comic I forgot the name of.
Don't think...look it up. Kan
April 24, 2007 - 14:05 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveDon't think...look it up. Kansas: 82,277 sq miles, Europe: 3,930,000 sq miles.
"When life gives you lemons, make lemonade, and then toss it in the face of the person who gave you the lemons until they give you the oranges you asked for in the first place!" --Bill McNeal, NewsRadio episode 3.17
I stand corrected on the size
April 24, 2007 - 14:21 ET by ahusserI stand corrected on the size of Europe. But GB is the size of Kansas.
"A mind is a terrible thing." - A comic I forgot the name of.
You're both correct!
April 24, 2007 - 14:27 ET by w0tmI think you read his post too quickly. He wrote Kansas is about the same size as England. That's correct. I live in Kansas and 82,277 square miles sounds pretty close (I'll step it off and get back to you). The island of Britain is 80,800 square miles. Great Britain is a bit more of course but still close. Now his comment that Texas is about the same size as Europe (4 million square miles) just means he lives in Texas. "Everything is bigger in Texas". I think that's their state tourism motto or something. So Texans have a right to exaggerate the size of their state, the fish in their lakes and most everything else. So you're both right on one point but off on another. A tie. Gotta go. I need to start walking and counting steps. I'll report back in a few months when I reach the Colorado border.
5th generation Kansan -- Texas before that and Europe before that so all bases are covered!
Sorry, I stand corrected. I m
April 24, 2007 - 15:01 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveSorry, I stand corrected. I mistakenly calculated km to miles rather than sq km to sq miles (1 km = 0.621371192 miles...1 sq km = 0.386102159). The U.K. is still bigger at 94,526 sq miles. I know, I'm splitting hairs but 12,249 sq miles can be a significant difference....Maryland as a matter of fact is 12,407 sq miles.
Anyway...sorry to derail the thread. I just like to help everyone remember to back up their claims. Please forgive me.
"When life gives you lemons, make lemonade, and then toss it in the face of the person who gave you the lemons until they give you the oranges you asked for in the first place!" --Bill McNeal, NewsRadio episode 3.17
Sorry for the incorrect analo
April 25, 2007 - 08:17 ET by MivvisSorry for the incorrect analogy, I'll be more specific in the future. I was looking to point out the apples to oranges angle to the article.
Obviously, the violence of
April 24, 2007 - 13:28 ET by blogonatorObviously, the violence of last week should have everyone rethinking gun-free zones. If the VT campus and NASA had not had policies against carrying guns, we wouldn't be mourning the loss of lives and we'd care less about the Brittish an their failings...
I posted this yesterday:"
April 24, 2007 - 13:50 ET by ahusserI posted this yesterday:
" RTE News-Sunday, 28 November 1999 21:00
Police in Surrey in southern England are questioning a 26-year-old local man who ran amok with a samurai sword during Mass at a local Catholic church. The naked man, armed with the sword and a knife, struck out at worshippers at St Andrew's Church in Thornton Heath. Eleven people were injured; tonight four of them are in a critical condition in hospital. The man's family say that he is suffering from severe depression."
And This too:
There was a deadly school shooting in Germany about 5 years ago. But the strange fact was that there have been many school shootings in Germany and according to the internet news story I was reading:
"Germany has some of the most strict firearms laws in the world. But a school shooting this week raises the question of whether the Internet presents a loophole for illegally acquiring weapons."
Apparently the amount of gun control doesn't matter as we all know.
"A mind is a terrible thing." - A comic I forgot the name of.
1776 - outcome number two
April 24, 2007 - 14:50 ET by w0tmWith all due respect to our good friends, the Brits, if the King had banned firearms in the Colonies (not practical since shooting game provided some of the food supply), "1776" would have had a much different outcome. We wouldn't have followed up the initial petition to the King politely asking for certain rights and relief from onerous taxation. That was the one where the King politely replied, "stuff it" (reply shortened for brevity). No tea would have sullied Boston harbor and we would have just said "thanks for considering our request, we'll now go back to being unwilling subjects but, of course, God Save The King! (in case you thought we were serious about anything we wrote or said)".
Seriously, pity poor Europe, especially our best friends, the Brits. And, yes, even the French as "Holier than Thou" as they've always been. You've disarmed yourself and weakened your military that, combined, you couldn't beat the former Yugoslavia. You are defenseless. Europe has become the "fatted calf" marking time waiting for Eurabia to arrive. Your media keeps asking why we "Yanks" are so hung up on our Second Amendment. You'll have the question answered within your own borders with the worst possible outcome within a generation.
I have a blog I visit with po
April 24, 2007 - 15:18 ET by contraryI have a blog I visit with post predominantly written by Brits. They haven't a clue in regards to our Constitution and why the second amendment was written. They look at guns as some archaic, unnecessary, and unattractive piece of furniture that needs removal. One of the patrons said he needed to call the Police to have them remove a rifle given as a gift. Talk about a different mindset!
Annual Brit gun homicides are
April 24, 2007 - 17:20 ET by OttoAnnual Brit gun homicides are in the high twenties. US gun homicides are about 32 a day!! They may not know much about the US constitution but they seem to know how to stop gun homicides. BTW if you roll in accidents and suicides US daily gun deaths go up to around 88! These stupid brits, we know so much better.
Otto - have you even read any
April 24, 2007 - 17:28 ET by Dee BunkOtto - have you even read any of the thread? Your points are meaningless. Using your logic - I live in a town of 150,000 people and guns are allowed here. We have an average of less than 1 gun death a year so GB should learn from us.
U.K. population: 60,609,153
April 24, 2007 - 17:44 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveU.K. population: 60,609,153
U.S. population: 301,572,000
Where are you getting you statistics? And what about statistical analysis?
First of all there is a pretty big population disparity between the U.K. and the U.S.
You also need to count in the fact that probably all 20-30 gun deaths in the U.K. are homicides committed by criminals. A high number of the U.S. gun deaths are justifiable homicides by homeowners/individuals killing criminals that have invaded their home or threatened their lives. So the numbers look bad if you equate all homicides as crime.
You also need to remember that the U.K. doesn't have the gang problems on the scale the U.S. does in places like California, and many areas of the East Coast.
You can't just spout off statistics without context or a good methodology for analysis.
"When life gives you lemons, make lemonade, and then toss it in the face of the person who gave you the lemons until they give you the oranges you asked for in the first place!" --Bill McNeal, NewsRadio episode 3.17
Completely obtuse, irrelevant
April 24, 2007 - 17:59 ET by NL207Completely obtuse, irrelevant and factually incorrect, Otto. Your blather ignores both the actual facts and a radical cultural difference between the two societies with respect to homicide which is revealed clearly by examining the overall homicide rates including all methods.
First, firearms deaths in the UK are NOT in the high twenties per year. They are more like 100 per year. source. 81 and 97 for the two years reported here. And notice this article also reports a soaring violent crime rate in the UK representing crimes other than murder.
Next, overall er capita murder rates in the UK are roughly 1/3 of the US as seen here. There is just plain more murder in the US per capita by all means than in the UK. The UK rates are around 1.4 per 100,000 versus the current US rate at little less than 5 per 100,000.
Even more interesting is HOW the US rate is divided. If one considers the differences in demographics of the two populations, US nd UK, and factors that out, the homicide rates are damn near equal. The British population is both considerably older and has less than half per capita minority males of the US, and it is young males, particularly minority males who do most of the murdering and most of the dying from murder in America. Read the referenced charts. I didn't make this up and its not racism, it is a statement of MEASURED FACT.
You don't even know what the actual facts are. No wonder you are a font of misguided impressions and misinformed opinions. How can you have any useful opinions or thought processes if don't even know what the facts are?
More on the Swiss
April 24, 2007 - 21:52 ET by UnsaneSo how come Switzerland doesn't have an even higher rate of gun violence, when applying your logic?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Or Kenneshaw, Georgia? "Safest Town in America"
April 24, 2007 - 18:33 ET by w0tmOr how about Kenneshaw, Georgia? 25 years ago, they passed a city ordinance requiring all heads of households to own a gun. You may remember, the media went bonkers. They've not followed up on what happened (there were dire predictions of murder and mayhem) for a reason. In those 25 years, while the city has grown from 5,242 to 28,129, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting. Not a potential victim, attacker or defender. The law protected the criminals too! The overall crime rate plummeted and is still way below what is was before 1982.
Or Washington D.C., "the murder capital of America". Gun laws there are almost as strict as they are in England. Or remove all cities run by liberal Democrats from the database pool and the U.S. crime rate (not just murder by firearms) falls to something close to Sweden. You can get statistics to show most anything - on both sides. Except the side of common sense is the only one that counts. That's gun ownership by law-abiding, mentally stable citizens. As well as enforcement of the 21,000+ gun laws already on the books - almost all aimed at criminals.
Zero guns advocates always lump all gun deaths into a single category. As if the death of a criminal killed commiting a felony is the same to society as the death of a defenseless victim. Playground teacher rules: "You're both at fault and will be punished equally". "Fighting is always wrong" "It takes two to make a fight". "Stop and he/she will too". That was fourth grade. Get over it!
IF, ten years from now, Al-Qaeda is landing boatloads of firearms on English coastlines to arm their U.K. Caliphate worshippers already in place and growing in numbers every day, the English will wish they had a Second Amendment. But it will be too late.
so, who knew????
April 24, 2007 - 18:39 ET by misterbill
Gun crime trebles as weapons and drugs flood British citiesBy David Bamber, Home Affairs Correspondent
Last Updated: 12:36am GMT 24/02/2002
GUN crime has almost trebled in London during the past year and is soaring in other British cities, according to Home Office figures obtained by The Telegraph.
w0tm...When my son was in the
April 24, 2007 - 18:46 ET by Clear thinkerw0tm...
When my son was in the 9th grade he was approached by a Sophomore wanting to fight him. We had been working on our son for quite sometime because he had a temper and would start a fight over anything. This time he did as we had asked him to do and refused to fight. The older guy started pushing him and then was immedaitely stopped by a teacher. Both my son and the sophomore were then taken to the Principals office where they both got suspended from school. I did some checking with a lot of the kids present at this incident (I coached a lot of the kids my sons age for 5 years prior to them going to High School) and all the kids agreed that my son refused to fight the sophomore. After a heated discussion with the Principal, and then the school board (the principal called the police on me because he thought I was going to trash him). Getting nowhere with these idiots I took my son home for 3 his 3 day suspension. He and I spent the next 3 days fishing. While fishing on the 3rd day I had the following conversation with my son..."if anyone ever does that to you again, beat the tar out of them"!
I figured if he's going to get thrown out of school anyway, he might as well defend himself.
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
Grade school bullies can grow up to be fine citizens if --
April 26, 2007 - 22:02 ET by w0tmClear Thinker -- thanks
I had a somewhat similar experience with my son at about the same age except he was the biggest kid in school and no one picked on him. I had always taught him to respect others but always protect himself and help others who weren't able to do so. The school bully worked his way up to my son and finally decided he'd own the school by hitting my son. He did and my son decked him. One punch - no more. Of course the school principal (a thoroughly pc gal) witnessed and heard the whole thing. Instead of punishing the bully, she had us, the parents, in her office with the two boys within an hour. The bully's parents weren't there as his mom was a single mom and wasn't even sure which of her many boyfriends was his dad.
The pc principal gave the usual "fighting is always wrong, you're both at fault and you're both being punished equally". My wife, also a school teacher but not nearly as pc except when it came to violence (the world's problems would end if we just disbanded our military according to her) agreed with the principal. I listened quietly then verbally laid into the principal like there was no tomorrow. I told her if she punished my son in the slightest, I'd have her before the school board before sundown. She backed down and the bully served detenton for a week.
But that's not the end of the story. I was the coach for the school's baseball team. A week later the bully came by practice and asked me if he could watch. I invited him to play and said I happened to have an extra uniform if he wanted to try it on. I didn't - I paid for it. He did and he practiced non-stop until he became a very good player. He also became good friends with all of the boys he had bullied including my son. He became a straight A student. He's now a PhD microbiologist doing something so egghead I have no clue what it is. He has a nice wife and two wonderful children. About five years ago he stopped by the house. I hadn't seen him since high school. He wanted to thank me for "turning his life around". What had I done??? He told me watching me stand up for my son and for what was right -- not politically correct made him think REAL HARD. I would also love to run into that politically correct principal today to ask her how many more kid's lives has she ruined since I last saw her 20 years ago.
Sometimes life does work out the way it's supposed to. You just have to keep these damn idiots out of the way!
*********************************************
View http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c to FINALLY understand why liberals think they way they do. An amazing speech.
w0tm
April 26, 2007 - 22:06 ET by misterbillA truly inspiring story. I, fortunately did not have to live through such an experience. The reward exceeded the effort, a good citizen and family man is out there today because one man stood up for fair play. Congratulations!
Ken-Intentionally deceptive t
April 25, 2007 - 08:34 ET by JMSUKen-
Intentionally deceptive today? "'Dips and spikes?' Perhaps like the spike in total homicides in England and Wales in the years following the 1997 gun laws? Homicides peaked at over 1,000 in the 2002-3 survey period."
Of course, since your article is about gun violence, you should stick to homicides that actually involve guns (169 in 2002, 163 in 2003).
Compounding the problem, your link even gives an explanation for the peak in 2002/3: "Increases in homicides in recent years, and in particular 2002/03, have been influenced by the victims of Harold Shipman, whose deaths will have occurred some years prior to the period in which they were recorded." 215 of the homicides in 2002/3 are from Shipman - that's when they were reported, even though most/all of them are believed to have taken place between 1975 and 1998 - and did not involve guns.