Hacker News Reader

Comment by mattmanser | Hacker News Reader

It might not make you feel better, but Holland's gun death per 100,000 is in the 0.5's compared to the U.S.'s 10's and Mexico's 10's.

You're 20 times more likely to get killed by a gun in the US or Mexico.

Note that in the whole of Holland there are 50 gun homicides per year, so you were actually pretty unlucky to experience that. Your experience is exceptional and not a common occurrence, especially as I assume most Holland murders are not widely reported spouse killings, etc.

Mexico had 18,398 gun homicides in 2011, for comparison, Holland, 60, US, 11,068.

View on HN

The gun homicide rate in the US is 4.5.

The US has roughly 110 guns per 100,000 people and 4.5 gun homicides per 100,000 people.

Mexico has over 20 gun homicides per 100,000 people and about 18 guns per 100,000 people.

Canada has 2 gun murders per 100,000 people and 31 guns per 100,000 people.

Mexico: each gun is responsible for 1.11 murders

US: each gun is responsible for .04 murders

Canada: each gun is responsible for .07 murders.

Interestingly, the Bahamas has 30 gun murders per 100,000 and about 4 guns per 100,000. That's 7.5 murders per gun.

France has 2.8 gun murders per 100k and 31 guns per 100,000. Which makes each gun responsible for .09 murders -- slightly higher than both the US and Canada, despite far stricter laws.

The U.K. Has .23 gun murders and 6.6 guns -- so .35 murders per gun.

Sweden has 1.47 murders per 100k with 31.6 guns for a rate of .047 murders per gun.

Nicaragua has 4.68 murders with 7.7 guns -- each gun is part of 1.65 murders.

Jamaica: 31 murders/8 guns.

Denmark: 1.28/12 guns

Israel: 2.09/7.3 guns

Brazil: 21.2/8 guns

Australia: .93/21.7 guns

My point: gun ownership does not correlate to gun murder rates -- in fact one could make a case that increased gun ownership could actually reduce gun murder rates.

Despite having more guns per capita than most countries, the overall US murder rate ranks 108 out of 218, with Honduras topping the list (incidentally Honduras has 67 murders and 6.2 guns per 100,000)

I think you're making the argument that with more guns, countries tend to have fewer gun deaths per gun. This makes sense, casually. However, I doubt that anyone cares about the number of gun murders per gun, but rather the total number of gun murders, which is (please correct me if wrong) still correlated with more guns.

Also, I see that you've focused the discussion on gun murders, which is fine, but we should note that decreased gun ownership does lead to far fewer gun deaths, mostly by reducing suicides.

Does it matter what weapon the murder/suicide was committed with?

Yes, fewer guns mean fewer gun deaths -- but does it mean fewer deaths in general?

If fewer people own Honda Civics, then fewer people will die in Honda Civic accidents. But that dip in Honda Civic deaths would likely be absorbed into deaths by all other car models, such that the overall death rate remains the same.

Overall suicides significantly reduce as suicide is easier to do on impulse with a gun.

Depends on the culture; Japan has high suicide rates but low gun ownership.

Not if it's easier (psychologically, practically, whatever) to kill someone with a Honda Civic than other cars, of course.

Suicide is one of those clubs where we, as a society, probably have an ethical compulsion to increase the barrier to entry.

10 is the death rate, 5 the homicide.

All you've done is the old trick of twisting data until it supports what you desperately want to be true because you like owning a gun. Remember, there are far more ways that the data shows you're wrong than support you.

Like climate change deniers, the only scientists that support lesser gun laws are the ones that the NRA pay for. Your congress even defunded independent research as the "wrong" result for the lobbyists kept coming out, more gun control, much less death.

(Total number of guns / total number of gun owners) is missing in this conversation. Many single gun owners skew the total number of guns.

The statistic to highlight in this debate is the number of gun-related deaths per gun owner, not per gun.

> The US has roughly 110 guns per 100,000 people

What is this based on, or what am I missing? From what I've repeatedly read before, it's more like 110 guns per 100 people.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/19/us-gun-owner... agrees with you.

Around 265 million guns ("more than one gun for every American adult") and an estimate of 55 million gun owners in the US. Interestingly, some 7.7m gun owners make up for half of all guns.

Guns are mostly concentrated in Southern/Midwest states. Most people do not own guns in the North and coastal states. Besides people living in the sticks, I don't even know anyone who owns a gun in the New York State city I live. I'm 36 and I've never shot a gun before! http://reverbpress.com/politics/firearms-per-capita-by-state...

Guns are a solution in the right hands, that's what the founders believed, and if these stats are correct it proves that they can be used responsibly if society is stable enough. I think we're approaching a time though when guns will be a net negative, but by then, the USA will cease to exist as we know it today.

History has way more moments where guns were used for terrible things that good things.

> You're 20 times more likely to get killed by a gun in the US

This is very misleading because this audience is primarily middle class/rich white/asians employed in the tech industry.

There are 2 primary factors in homicide rates. Be poor or be a certain race. If you are not either of those things, your chances of being murdered in the US is very low.

*edit 3 factors -- men. Women don't get murdered often.

Same thing applies Mexico -- if you're not involved in the drug trade or law enforcement, your odds of getting killed are almost nil. Mexico welcomes over 20M tourists a year from all over and almost all make it back home safely.

Also, if I remember the stats correctly, you are more likely to kill yourself with a gun than to be murdered by one in the US.

How is it misleading? Are all Holland's gun killings well-heeled white techies? Why wouldn't those same factors apply in Holland? I haven't looked at stats but I'd take an educated guess that the economic/ethnic divides also apply in Holland.

You've also made the same mistake as another commentator (I admit I wasn't clear), my first figures are total gun deaths, including self-harm. A significant percentage of those deaths are white men killing themselves with guns. As I understand it, a figure that only partially translates into other forms of suicides in countries or states with better gun control (basically, less guns = less suicides, other methods need more preparation and so are caught in time or fail). A brief google seems to support that:

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazine/guns-and-suicide/

Proportionally speaking, the factors probably hold, the cold, hard, truth is that as a white techie you're still much more likely to die by a gun in America or Mexico than in Holland.

Your own state department warns about Mexico:

U.S. citizens have been the victims of violent crimes, including homicide, kidnapping, carjacking, and robbery in various Mexican states

You can search for US citizen deaths in foreign countries:

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/statistics/deaths...

I see 75 homicides of US citizens in Mexico last year. It doesn't list guns or not guns.

I tried Holland, the UK, Germany, Spain no homicides of US citizens. 2 people killed in Italy, 3 in France (Nice terrorist attack).

There are 4 factors.. emergency services and doctors. Fast responders, can save a gunshot victim from becoming a thread to officials via statistics, and allow him to have a happy vegetative state existence ever after.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com