more guns because there is more crime, more crime because there are more guns?

[Saint Marcus]

The homicide rate in the USA is 7 to 9 times as high as that of western Europe.

At the same time, gun ownership is far higher than in western Europe.

Now my question is: Is the homicide rate so much higher because there are more guns in the USA? Or, are there more guns in the USA because people feel unsafe because of the high homicide (and crime) rates?

In other words, do guns lead to a higher crime rate, or are guns the result of a high crime rate?

If the former is the case, why aren't there stricter gun laws? If the latter is the case, why is the homicide rate in the US so much higher than in Europe?

[Mihai]

I voted for "more guns lead to more crime" but I think that civilisation/mentality plays a major part.
I saw in a tv documentary that in Swiss, the reservist have their automatic rifles at home yet the crime level is much lower that in USA (in that documentary a man was arguing with his wife, got pretty mad and local police took his weapon in custodie till he will calm down)

Anyway guns allows to fragile persons to kill, unlike a knife or a hammer.

[Flubber]

I believe the second poll option is obviously correct. Many people buy handguns as a defense in their fear of crime.

AS to the first option, I cannot see how having a gun means more crime unless you see having an armed robbery instead of a robbery as more crime-- It does lead to much more serious crimes/results-- deaths in instances where no one would die if no gun was available. I see that as a qualitative change but not necessarily a quantitative one, although I guess you could say that their is more crime if a robbery becomes an armed robbery/murder ( although you could get cute and argue that the increased number of deaths caused by guns actually REDUCES crime since people who are dead or incarcerated for a gun crime are unable to commit more crimes) .


The majority of homocides are acts of the moment where an angry person grabs what is at hand to strike out. If a handgun is right there, well , fatal results are common.

As one of my professors ( a career prosecutor) said, " generally murderers are some of the nicest people you know"-- His point was that good people can kill (often without really intending to) when the means are right there.

So readily available guns (reservists rifles are usually unloaded and/or locked away) will always lead to a higher murder rate. If the gun wasn't available, a murder could still occurr, but the more likely result is that many incidents resolve themselves with, at most, an assault ( often unreported).

[Mihai]

Without guns an adolescent who try to rob a gas station will be chased with a baseball bat, but in front of a gun...

[SlowwHand]

Texas allows concealed handguns, once a training class is completed.
Not too surprisingly, crimes against individuals has dropped.

[faded glory]

Germany, Denmark, Holland, and UK have officially surpassed USA crime levels.

Gun laws didnt seem to stop the nuts in Europe.

[faded glory]

Guns save thousands of peoples lives everyday. Wether it be an old lady who fires in the air to scare off a robber. Or a 7-11 clerk who blasts a mofo with a knife over a ladies neck.

[SlowwHand]

So much for "American Crime".

[Ecowiz Returns]

On what concerns crime, establishing direct contemporary correlations between two facts is simply a mistake.

As far as I see, the fact that someone can get his/her hands on a deadly weapon automatically increases the probability of, when in rage or feeling threatened, killing someone.

As for the question about robery and armed robery: please notice that the moment an armed rober kills the person being robed you have two crimes, and not just one (putting asside the degree of the criminal action itself).

Having a gun for protection is a sign of a feeling of lack of security.
This feeling can either be justified: you live in some place with lack of police protection (or insuficient one) or you lead a threatening life where you can have to face others with equally deadly weapons (ex: a policeman; a security agent undercover; someone in a warzone). Either justification you may have, they are results of other problems that must be faced, without introducing a new one. The new oproblem is that the lack of security may have no justification. Without justification, by carying a lethal weapon a person becomes herself a danger: if feeling threatened or enraged she can kill. And, that, statistically is still a fact: you still find a significant number of killings with no justification whatsoever, being done by people who had no real justification to carry a gun.

[SlowwHand]

Bottom line though, handgun violence has dropped significantly.
You can have all the negative opinions you want, the fact remains.

[Arrian]

Guns don't increase crime, per se, they just increase the lethality of crime. People kill people, but the gun (as with any weapon) sure as hell helps.

-Arrian

[Tom201]

Germany, Denmark, Holland, and UK have officially surpassed USA crime levels

Source?

[faded glory]

I dont know. I saw it on ABC worldnews tonight after the German went ballistic at the school. They said; violent crime in those 4 countries alone has surpassed American levels.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Texas allows concealed handguns, once a training class is completed.
Not too surprisingly, crimes against individuals has dropped.

However, Slowhand, in places where handgun ownership is banned completely, crime has dropped. In places where the police have been militarized, crime has dropped. In places where policing hasn't changed, crime has dropped.

Must be something in the water. Or maybe just a better economy has led to less people committing crime.

[Saint Marcus]

Germany, Denmark, Holland, and UK have officially surpassed USA crime levels.

According to the UN, the homicide rate in those countries is about 9 times lower than in the USA.

According to the Economist, crime rate in Holland is lower than in the USA.