From: Michael Lowry (mike@datamann.com)
Date: Fri Jan 19 2001 - 22:34:52 MST
Damien Broderick wrote:
>
> >Some statistics a year after Australia's gun confiscation:
>
> >State of Victoria, homicides with firearms up 300%!
>
> < teeth grinding sounds >
>
> With firearm homicides as low as they are in Oz, noise makes such claims
> virtually meaningless.
>
> For the facts, take a look at:
>
> http://www.aic.gov.au/stats/homicide/
>
> In 1997, the Australian Institure of Criminology stats show that for the
> entire country of some 19 million people, there were 360 homicides. One a
> day. 76 used firearms (100 the previous year, but I doubt this drop means
> anything at such low rates).
>
> Victoria's rate *for the whole goddam year* went from 7 to 19.
>
> (Note well: not 70 to 190. Not 700 to 1900.)
>
> Oh my god! Up by a factor of 2.7! 270%!! How shocking! Nineteen shot dead
> in a year, in a State of some 4.5+ million people.
>
> Get a grip on reality.
How about you, Damien? Read the stats:
According to FBI crime stats for the US for 1999, out of 230.476 million
people, there were 12,266 murders and non-negligent manslaughters (with
no cause of death breakdown), which is approximately three times higher
rate overall. Now lets look at regions, since there are some regions
whose laws are much like Australias and others that are not.
The Northeast, which includes New England and mid Atlantic states, with
a population of 47.108 million, had 1,800 murders and n-n manslaughters,
which is a rate approximately twice that of australia. New England
specifically, which is divided between gun control and non gun control
states, had only 295 murders and nn manslaughters out of a population of
12.198 million, which is approximately equal to that of Australia on a
rate basis.
We can look at the south atlantic states and see for a similar 47
million person population, a huge wave of 2,997 murders and nn
manslaughters, which is about nine times that of Australia.
Out of 112 thousand robberies where guns were used, 99 thousand occurred
in cities, and 57,000 of these in just 57 cities with populations of
250,000 and over. Out of 115 thousand aggravated assaults with a gun, 92
thousand occured in cities, with 49 thousand in the 57 cities with
populations over 250,000. These 57 cities house only 41 million people
(about one sixth of our population) but account for half of gun related
robberies and assaults. Of the murders and nn manslaughters, 2,651
occured in those largest cities, or over 21% of the whole for less than
16% of the population. These largest cities also feature the most
restrictive gun laws in the nation.
Out of the 5,661 cities with populations under 10,000, which totals up
to just over 19 million people (i.e. the population of Australia), the
murders and non-negligent manslaughters totaled 374, which is only
slightly higher than Australias total, despite such communities hosting
high gun owning populations. Among all suburban and rural counties
(population 85 million) there were 1,802 murders and nn manslaughters,
which comes out to about 400 per 19 million in some of the most freely
gun wheeling areas of the country. Oh, and by the way: these crime rates
are dropping every year. Australias rates are rising every year...
Nationwide, murder rates peaked in 1980 and 1991, years of significant
economic distress. They were lowest in 1963, 1985, and 1999, periods of
significant economic prosperity.
Oh, heres my cite:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/Cius_99/99crime/99cius5.pdf
which, if you look at figures 5.1 and 5.2, you'll see the racial,
gender, and age breakdown in crime activity. I'll bet Australias racial
cross section is markedly different. Looking at figure 5.4a, we see the
lifetime murder breakdown by race and sex per 100,000 population.
Of course, the Australian Bureau of Statistics is being as cooperative
as it normally is with crime statistics, and does not provide the sort
of in depth data that the FBI offers. However the best data I could find
is a crime report from the Australian Attorney General's office (
http://www.ncp.gov.au/ncp/publications/pdf/Crime.pdf ) that featured
lots of nice color graphs that took up lots of space and said little of
specific interest, although it did admit that indigenous people are
about 15 times more likely to be imprisoned.
In the age and sex breakdowns, Australia does not feature the huge bump
in homicides found in the 15-35 age group here in the US that is
entirely due to the black population (i.e. the age and race segment most
involved in the illegal drug trade) according to FBI statistics. If they
are removed from the demographics, the US homicide rate tracks very
closely with the Australian homicide rate. Now, this is rather
interesting: it is black people in the US who are most restrained by law
enforcement against legally owning firearms and most excluded from the
economy due to stereotypes, criminal records, discrimination as well as
general bad attitudes, and they contribute the most to crime rates.
Whites are most free to own and carry firearms and have homicide rates
little different from those found in Australia, which is a far more
racially monocultural nation than the US is, with its far smaller
indigenous population being in a very similar state of incarceration in
the justice system.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:05:05 MST