This guy seems to be a far right nutcase, a nationalist with past involvement with far right journals which amongst other things wrote in favour of apartheid and wanted to deport all non whites from Europe. There are accounts he shouted Britain first, which seems to be the name of a far right nationalist group in England, yet others are denying it. It seems he targeted her for being a supporter of taking in refugees, remaining in the EU etc. I am sure more will come out soon.
But if you ban guns in a country, everybody is safe…right?
Imagine for a second if a sitting U.S. Congressman was gunned down after a speech. The shitstorm would literally never end.
To be fair I think the British had like 12 gun deaths per year 3 years running. That said there is ultimately no stopping a bad person from doing a bad thing.
They haven’t had as many guns deaths no, but then they have also had many, many, many more stabbings and fatal “glassings”. I hear they are trying to ban knives.
Using statistics from the FBI crime lab and England/Wales…Adjusted for the difference in reporting categories as England and America use different definitions for violent crime…
"For England and Wales, we added together three crime categories: “violence against the person, with injury,” “most serious sexual crime,” and “robbery.” This produced a rate of 775 violent crimes per 100,000 people.
For the United States, we used the FBI’s four standard categories for violent crime that Bier cited. We came up with a rate of 383 violent crimes per 100,000 people.
This calculation suggests that there is a higher rate of crime in England and Wales."
I’m sorry man, but crazy always finds a way.
I just googled it because that sounds way wrong from my experience in Europe and the US, where do stats like these come from:
I wonder, did you read this before you went Ph.D GOOGLEFU on me.
Because I posted a quote from a study that attempted to compare apples to apples. The U.S. and England use different terms for the same crimes. That can confuse a absolute airtight source like Wikipedia.
But even if you add rape, GBH, assault, attempted murder in the UK into one section and compare with US violent crime, it is still a magnitude lower. So I don’t see where you are getting these numbers from, you didn’t even post the study you referenced.
The UK has more crime, but it has way lower violent crime, and way less murders per capita. You seem to be arguing based on an ideology, so I am not going to convince you.
This article contains the study
…it sets out to disprove a meme that stated England has a violent crime rate that is 5x that of the U.S. After scouring and disproving the meme, he happily states the following…
“Due to fundamental differences in how crime is recorded and categorized, it’s impossible to compute exactly what the British violent crime rate would be if it were calculated the way the FBI does it, but if we must compare the two, my best estimate‡ would be something like 776 violent crimes per 100,000 people. While this is still substantially higher than the rate in the United States, it’s nowhere near the 2,034 cited by Swann and the Mail.”
Now in his glee to disprove the asinine meme, he finds that England has very similar or HIGHER violent crime rates to the U.S.
Ideological enough for you?
Using the UK newspapers stats of 1.3 million shotguns and 525,000 ish other firearms owned for 2015 and taking the 2015 population at ~65 million gices us a rough firearms ownership rate of 0.02807 or about 2.8%. The US has 357 million guns according to the Congressional Research Service (in 2013), and a 2015 population of ~323 million.
Now I can’t spend time digging to dind the exact numbers because I am at work, but a quick google puts the 2013 UK gun homicides at between 40-44 depending on what I saw. so say 40.
40 gun homicides for 1,825,000 guns, or about 0.000022.
US had 11,200 for 357 million guns, or 0.000031
Now, the UK only counts as homicide an incident where the case lead to a conviction. This biases their numbers low, and in that case it is worth it to note that only about 62 ish % of gun homicides in the US lead to convictions. I dont have those numbers off hand so I am rounding. That means that the US rate, if counted like Britain counts it, would drop by almost 40% to about 0.000019, or less than Britain on a per gun basis using Britain’s method of reporting homicide.
All in all, I think we are doing ok. I am aware stats are counted on a per capita basis most often. However, seeing as our 2014 homicide rate was the lowest its been since 1963 I don’t feel threatened.
If you are interested, in 2014 there were 8,124 gun homicides. Our gun homicide rate was about 2.5 per 100,000. I am fine with that.
Unfortunately I do not agree. But the primary difficulty is a difference in how crime statistics are reported between the two countries. This makes comparisons very difficult in general.
Regardless, I feel pretty safe in both countries and don’t really see a need to freak out either way. We are both very well off
BTW, yes I am aware that the stats I didwere not well matched. Unfortunately I am on my phone and also at work, so I did not take the time to really try to set this up properly. Searching on my phone is much alower and more laborious. I am only giving a general picture and I would not accept these stats as thorough or vetted.
The general picture I am trying to illustrate is this: Despite having almost 200x the guns in the UK, we are doing mostly ok and should not need to freak out.