Japanese man goes on shooting rampage:

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: RickSp LOL. So you claim that with a knife "there are only 2, 3 or perhaps 5 persons killed before the killer is subdued". OK, so in the case being discussed in this thread, one person was killed with a gun. Your example seems to suggest that knives are the more dangerous weapon. You either are having trouble counting to three or "perhaps 5" or you obviously are not paying attention.

No, you are having trouble comprehending qualifiers -- such as "usually."

And, do you consider one death to be a "killing rampage"? Most news orgs use "killing rampage" in a way to relay the sense that multiple killings in a short violent period has occured.

LOL, indeed!

[RickSp]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin No, you are having trouble comprehending qualifiers -- such as "usually." And, do you consider one death to be a "killing rampage"? Most news orgs use "killing rampage" in a way to relay the sense that multiple killings in a short violent period has occured. LOL, indeed!

You make a really stupid statement and now you quibble over qualifiers. Typical.

The point remains, the causes of violence are too complicated to be blamed on inanimate objects.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: RickSp You make a really stupid statement and now you quibble over qualifiers. Typical.

Ha! Is that all you got?

Qualifiers exist for a very important reason. I would expect the astute and those with comprehension skills to take them seriously. It is typical that those who lack those qualities do not.

The point remains, the causes of violence are too complicated to be blamed on inanimate objects.

The point remains that the tools of violence(those designed specifically for killing) can seriously magnify the results, and conceptually it is not too complicated to apply common sense to see that inanimate objects as tools can be mere extensions of the body person performing at the will of the person.

And, the lasting point in this thread -- the one most closely related to the OP topic is -- that Japan has very low levels of gun violence and that in part is due to the tight nature of gun control they exert over their society. When it does happen, and rarely does it happen, in most cases the death toll is just one.

[The Decider]

Quote by: RickSp Japan, with low gun ownership, has one of the lowest murder rates in the world. Norway, which also has extremely low murder rates, has the highest gun ownership rate of any European country.

Japan's gun crime rate is something like 1 per 100,000 people. How does Norway compare?

[PatrickHenry]

Switzerland has a prevalent gun culture.
Are they known for violent crimes with firearms?

[The Decider]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Switzerland has a prevalent gun culture. Are they known for violent crimes with firearms?

The Swiss gun crime rate has been rising over the years.....

"...in 2005, 48 people were murdered by gunfire in Switzerland - about the same number as in England and Wales, which have a population seven times as large. According to the International Action Network on Small Arms, an anti-gun organisation based in the UK, 6.2 people died of bullet wounds in Switzerland in 2005 per 100,000 of population, second only to the US figure of 9.42, and more than double the rate of Germany and Italy."

Rise in gun crime forces Swiss to reconsider right to bear arms - Independent Online Edition > Europe

[RickSp]

Quote by: The Decider Japan's gun crime rate is something like 1 per 100,000 people. How does Norway compare?

According to data from the Seventh United Nations Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems, Japan's murder rate is roughly .5 per 100,000 while Norway is about 1 per 100,000. Switzerland, another nation with high gun ownership, has a murder rate of about .9. Britain has 1.4 murders per 100,00 while the US is 4.3.

The problem in this sort of discussion is that the numbers for murder rates vary wildly depending on how the data is reported. I prefer using a single source for murder rates as the numbers have a better chance of being comparable. Mixing data from pro-gun and anti-guns sites gives wildly contradictory data.

Whenever numbers are used on a consistent basis the outcome is the same. Violence is cultural and correlates poorly to single factors like guns, video games or the consumption of red meat. There are no simple explanations or answers for complex problems.

[RickSp]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin And, the lasting point in this thread -- the one most closely related to the OP topic is -- that Japan has very low levels of gun violence and that in part is due to the tight nature of gun control they exert over their society. When it does happen, and rarely does it happen, in most cases the death toll is just one.

Claiming that the low level of Japanese gun violence is due to gun control completely ignores the larger context. Japan overall has low levels of violence regardless of the source. The US has higher non-gun murder rates than Japan has murders from all sources. If there were no guns in the United States we would still have a higher murder rate than Japan. Guns are neither the answer, nor the problem.

At the risk of repeating myself, blaming inanimate objects for complex cultural problems is absurd.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: RickSp If there were no guns in the United States we would still have a higher murder rate than Japan.

So what? The purpose of gun control is not to match Japan`s level or to be below it, it is to impact on the U.S. society by decreasing deaths from guns, and in particularly senseless rampages. Japan`s case merely shows that the factor of having fewer guns in society means that rampages and carnage of those intent on killing do not reach the level of those who do decide to kill with guns, in such places as the U.S.

Can you point to at the minimum of just one mass gun killing (where at least 2 people are killed per incident) per year in Japan for the last 5 years? Just one per year for the last 5 years. That is all I am asking. Can you? Surf google on news searches and see if you can.

It is a very modest request, but I doubt you can meet the challenge of it.

[RickSp]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Can you point to at the minimum of just one mass gun killing (where at least 2 people are killed per incident) per year in Japan for the last 5 years? Just one per year for the last 5 years. That is all I am asking. Can you? Surf google on news searches and see if you can. It is a very modest request, but I doubt you can meet the challenge of it.

Actually it is a stupid request, and I suspect that even you know it. Once again you ignore culture and fixate on firearms. (An odd fetish that I do not share.)

Japan has low murder rates with or without guns. Of course, Japan does have over twice the suicide rate of the United States, so it is unfair to say that Japanese society is necessarily less violent than the US, even without guns.

It is foolish to attempt to explain complex social problems by blaming a single source - whether it be guns, video games, violent TV or eating meat. But I suspect that this simple, if fundamental concept, is too much of a challenge for you.

Suicide also rises in land of rising sun

Expressed in the international measurement for suicide, 27 out of every 100,000 Japanese people now take their own lives, giving Japan one of the highest rates among industrially advanced countries. Japan's current ratio of suicide to population size is about double that found in the United States or most European Union countries.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: RickSp Actually it is a stupid request, and I suspect that even you know it. Once again you ignore culture and fixate on firearms. (An odd fetish that I do not share.)

Once again you show you know little of Japan. Japan is a culture fixated on violence, from their nightly dramas, to cinemas, to manga comics, to the same video games the U.S. has. Guns are featured prominantly in many shows -- more so than knives.

Japan has low murder rates with or without guns.

How can you state that when Japan has never had a widespread gun ownership culture?

Violence in Japan was quite high during the period when samurai were controling the country and swords were plentiful. It was only when The Sword Hunt to disarm Japan came about that Japan became more peaceful within the country amongst its citizenry. Don`t let the magnified myth of manners in Japan dupe you to their past. Again, it is the fact that they have been disarmed of effective weaponry that has lead to a peaceful country amongst its citizenry.

Of course, Japan does have over twice the suicide rate of the United States, so it is unfair to say that Japanese society is necessarily less violent than the US, even without guns.

That is right! Even Japan has more rapes than the U.S., and that is of the reported ones. Still, one is much more likely to attempt an escape or fight back against a knife (at least in the opening moments of an assault) than against a gun. With Japan`s culture of shame you can easily presume the non reported rapes contribute to an actual much higher rate and with guns thrown in the mix, it would allow for even the wimpier would be rapist to be more bold.

Culture, the myth that Japan is predisposed in some way related to that which makes it special and therefore its experience with disarming its citizens is not applicable to the U.S. is just bunk. Japan just has a few hundred years head start on us, and the U.S., too, could exert gradual control over gun ownership. It is only a right to bear for as long as it is enshrined within the laws of the U.S. However, laws or ammendments can surely disenshrine that.

It is foolish to attempt to explain complex social problems by blaming a single source - whether it be guns, video games, violent TV or eating meat. But I suspect that this simple, if fundamental concept, is too much of a challenge for you.

Probably a mixture of all of those above. However, unlike you, who throws your hands up in exasperation at the complexity of it all and saying let it go out of futility, I am willing to tinker with the parts to see how senseless rampages can be affected. Japan gives us a good model to look at. Knowing that, I bet the NRA and gun toting right advocates wish Japan just never existed, because they give up the lies and falsehoods that you guys keep trying to push.

Btw, RickSp, I see you are still pushing your condescending ad hom style of responding. Do you think you could temper that? Thanks in advance.

[RickSp]

Quote by: =StrongHeartsWin It is a very modest request, but I doubt you can meet the challenge of it

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Btw, RickSp, I see you are still pushing your condescending ad hom style of responding. Do you think you could temper that? Thanks in advance.

Lets see. I respond in kind to your constant slurs and condescension and you start complaining again. Why bother? It gets really boring. If you want to complain about "condescending ad hom style of responding" why don't you buy a mirror, bucko.

Probably a mixture of all of those above. However, unlike you, who throws your hands up in exasperation at the complexity of it all and saying let it go out of futility, I am willing to tinker with the parts to see how senseless rampages can be affected. Japan gives us a good model to look at. Knowing that, I bet the NRA and gun toting right advocates wish Japan just never existed, because they give up the lies and falsehoods that you guys keep trying to push

As an aside, I am not and have never been associated with the NRA. The facts that I have quoted are all verifiable, so spare me the nonsense about "lies and falsehoods". All I see from you is more bilious blather and insults.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: RickSp As an aside, I am not and have never been associated with the NRA.

Never said you were. Why do you feel a need to distance yourself from them. I clearly had a conjunctive with "and", as in gun toting advocates. You are a right to gun ownership advocate, aren`t you? That is the category you fall into of my statement. Why obfuscate and address the other?

[RickSp]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Never said you were. Why do you feel a need to distance yourself from them. I clearly had a conjunctive with "and", as in gun toting advocates. You are a right to gun ownership advocate, aren`t you? That is the category you fall into of my statement. Why obfuscate and address the other?

If you bothered to read my posts you might have seen a statement that I have made more than once - Guns are neither the problem nor the answer.

This might be hard to grasp by a single issue zealot yourself but there it is. Simplistic answers to complex problems invariably miss the point.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: RickSp Guns are neither the problem nor the answer.

Oh, I understand now. High velocity projectiles get into bodies by being museum pieces.

[RickSp]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Oh, I understand now. High velocity projectiles get into bodies by being museum pieces.

Not even a particularly coherent response. Simplistic answer to complex social problems are invariably wrong. Clearly you do not understand.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: RickSp Simplistic answer to complex social problems are invariably wrong. Clearly you do not understand.

Oh, you mean like simply stating guns are an inanimate object?

Well, gee whiz, then inanimate objects just can`t hurt anyone then, huh? No products are dangerous for consumer use. Guns for everyone. There you go.

[RickSp]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Well, gee whiz, then inanimate objects just can`t hurt anyone then, huh? No products are dangerous for consumer use. Guns for everyone. There you go.

You really don't bother to read other people's posts do you?

Are you implying with this most recent foolish rant that I have claimed that guns are harmless? An idiotic implication, at best.

Simple answers to complex problms are simply wrong.

But I've wasted enough time here. I'll let you have the last word. You always do.

[Chris the Chees]

Had guns been available in these cases in Japan, the death toll per rampages would undoubtedly increase.

SHW, I shouldn't bother pointing that out. Such obvious logic is apparently a "simplification" of the situation. Apparently gun availability has nothing to do with the reason why some countries with high violent crime also have high murder levels, while those which also have high violent crime, but low gun numbers have low murder rates. I guess that as gun cultures are irrelevent it must be something in the water in Japan, Britain, etc, which subdues wouldbe murderers.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Chris the Chees I guess that as gun cultures are irrelevent it must be something in the water in Japan, Britain, etc, which subdues wouldbe murderers.

lol, yeah, apparrently, CTC.

It kind of reminds me of the early 80's when Japan was resisting lowering their trade barriers to American manufactured skis. Their argument was that Japanese snow was special, and therefore American skis wouldn`t work on Japanese snow and therefore it would be irrelevant to permit their sales in Japan because Japanese skiers wouldn`t purchase them. You know, it`s a cultural thing with snow and guns. Physics, math, and probability has nothing to do with it.