Such as?? If you are stating more guns per capita than the US, there isn't such a country. ?
Exactly.. and yet there are many countries that have much more violence than the US,. And if you look at other countries.. like Canada, like New Zealand, Like Australia.. that have much higher gun ownership rates.. they have LOWER murder rates, lower violent crime rates than other countries like the UK that have LOWER gun ownership.
The upshot is.. the facts show that more guns does not equal more crime.
Additionally the problem is guns and thus guns should be more so correlated with gun crime not necessarily overall crime
And As I already pointed out.. doing such lead to invalid conclusion.
Again.. if you studied bicycle use and its effect on a community.. and you used "bike accidents" as your measured statistic. Guess what you would find? Duh.. communities that used bicycles.. have a higher "bike accidents" .. than communities that don't use bicycles.
And thus you would conclude that bike use is a detriment to society and they should be banned.
However, if you used a valid statistic.. like overall accident rate, etc.. you would likely find out that bicycles are a positive for a community.
See.. that's the difference between being biased.. which is what using "gun violence" is..
And using logic and science to study something.
How have they been needlessly disarmed??? is it needless to disarm someone of something that is being used to kill??
Absolutely when disarming that person either one makes no difference in crime rates.. or disarming that person makes things even worse. Which is what studies show happens with most proposed gun controls.. I,e Assault weapons bans, registration etc.
This is not a strategic or tactical game, where criminals have any advantage rather they are actually primarily disadvantaged in a number of ways pertaining to health, education etc.
Which is in some part because we spend time, effort and money on such things as millions of dollars for gun stamping.. that was never used to even solve one crime.
Or forcing counties to spend money registering firearms, etc.. when that money COULD be going toward mental health. Perhaps the state could be providing mental health to some young student.. and having him stay in school rather than be kicked out for behavioral problem, and helping before he becomes a threat.
But of course no.. as you say.. your view is narrow minded and focused on a "gun problem" that does not exist.
However what about this notion of for every gun used in self-defense, six more are used to commit a crime
Sure.. so?
Whats your point? you want to take away my self defense, and my father.. a retired school teacher.. his ability to defend himself effectively with a firearm... and then leave the criminals that have the firearms.. or a baseball bat.. or a knife.. etc.. in a better position to harm us?
Do you not agree that there is a firearm problem in the USA presently?
its not a belief... I don't have a "belief".. As a scientist and a medical provider, I base my decisions on the best available evidence. And the best available evidence is that we DO NOT.. have a "firearm problem" in the US.
eace