Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site crystal.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!uwvax!crystal!pal
From: pal@crystal.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Killing Styles
Message-ID: <389@crystal.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 3-Jan-85 13:52:25 EST
Article-I.D.: crystal.389
Posted: Thu Jan  3 13:52:25 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 5-Jan-85 02:01:20 EST
References: <985@phs.UUCP>
Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept
Lines: 57

> [From Paul Dolber]
> Re: murder by different weapons in different countries:
> [...]
> 
> An interesting article about gun control is one by D.B. Kates, Jr.
> (1981. Gun control: Can it work? National Review 33 (9): 540-542.)
> Among other points touched upon by this article is the cultural
> factor:
> 
>      ".... Those who blame
>      greater handgun availability for our greater rates of
>      handgun homicide ignore the fact that rates of murder with
>      knives or without any weapon (i.e., with hands and feet)
>      are also far lower in England. The study's author has asked
>      rhetorically whether it is claimed that knives are less
>      available in England than in the U.S. or that the English have
>      fewer hands and feet than Americans..."
This is as blatant a distortion of fact as I have seen, and I've seen a few.
Of course the knife murder rate is lower in Britain. *All* murder rates are
lower in Britain.  But the firearm death rate is lower *EVEN TAKING INTO
ACCOUNT THE OVERALL LOWER MURDER RATE*.
Whereas 65% of US homicides are committed with guns, only about 10% of those in
Britain are.
*Effective* restriction of handgun availability *will* reduce the gun death
rate.
The obvious counter is to ask whether the *overall* homicide rate will change,
or whether those who would have been killed with guns will now be killed with
knives (or fists, or..).  The analyses I have seen (see my posting
<386@crystal.UUCP> for details, show that gun attacks are 4-6 times as likely
to be fatal as are knife attacks, and about 10 times as lethal as fist
attacks.
> 
>      "European comparisons would be incomplete without mention of
>      Switzerland, where violence rates are very low though every
>      man of military age is required to own a handgun or fully
>      automatic rifle. Israeli violence is similarly low, though
Again, not the whole truth.  As mentioned previously on the net, the ammunition
for the Swiss weapons has to be stored in sealed boxes, which are subject to
inspection.  To turn the question around, does anybody have figures (Katz seems
to have an aversion to them, and not without reason) for the percentage of gun
homicides in Switzerland?  Perhaps Switzerland *does* have higher proportion of
gun deaths than other European countries.  If guns were not available, more of
the victims would have survived, and the overall homicide rate would be lower
still.

I will concede that cultural differences make valid comparisons difficult.
Comparisons like those made by Katz are highly simplified and just plain
misleading.  The books I have read (references available on request, or see
some of my earlier postings) seem to converge to the statement that guns
	"Probably have no effect on overall crime rates, but do increase the
	severity of crimes committed, and change their distribution"

I cannot speak for NRA members, but I would rather have my hubcaps stolen than
be shot.

Anil Pal
U. of Wisconsin-Madison