If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Stabbing suspect's family was "like the Brady Bunch". Marcia, Marcia, Marcia   (cnn.com) divider line 53
    More: Unlikely, Pennsylvania, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, dysfunctional family, stab wound, stabbing  
•       •       •

2842 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Apr 2014 at 4:43 PM (15 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-11 10:39:06 AM

dittybopper: So really, what did you gain?


Well, I'm sure lots of people got all warm and fuzzy for doing what felt right!
 
2014-04-11 11:07:22 AM

dittybopper: Dansker: dittybopper: And I will note that the homicide rate in the UK hasn't actually gone down since they enacted ever-stricter controls on firearms:

[violentdeathproject.com image 730x389]

It's stayed at roughly 1 per 100,000 for the last 100 years,

Wrong, the homicide rate has gone down. Your data is fifteen years old, from only three years after the gun ban. Here's something a little more recent:
[img.photobucket.com image 817x650]
[img.photobucket.com image 778x632]
The number of homicides recorded by the police in 2011/12 (550) fell by 14 percent compared with 2010/11. The number of homicides has increased from around 300 per year in the early 1960s to over 800 per year in the early years of this century. More recently the number of homicides has fallen and these provisional data show that homicide is at its lowest level since 1983 (when 550 were also recorded)
Link

You're using numbers, not rates.


The homicide rate in England was 1.45 per 100,000 in 1995, the gun ban was established in 1996, the homicide rate in 2011/12 was ((550/63,000,000)*100,000)=0.87 per 100.000.
So, contrary to what you said, the homicide rate has actually gone down since they enacted strict controls on firearms.
At this point it would be smart to admit you were wrong, and thank me for providing you with facts.


Plus, there is another reason why that graph is complete and utter bullshiat:
Comparing England (or UK) murder rates with the US: More complex than you thought


I didn't say anything about comparing the UK and US, and it's not relevant to the point.
 
2014-04-11 11:14:39 AM

dittybopper: Also, how do you account for the 7 year difference in the "Peaks" between "All Violent Crimes" (around 1996) and the peak in Homicides (around 2003)?  Something *MUST* be wonky with the data, because one would naturally expect that the peaks in violent crime would coincide with the peak in homicide:  The more violent crime, the more likely people will be killed due to violent crime.


From the link I kindly provided:
Notes:

The homicide figure for 2002/03 includes 172 homicides attributed to Harold Shipman in previous years but coming to light in the official inquiry in 2002.
The homicide figure in 2005/06 of 764 includes 52 homicide victims of the 7 July London bombings, which also accounted for approximately one-quarter of the total of 920 attempted murders.
 
Displayed 3 of 53 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report