24 Comments

  1. Avatar

    The difference is your more likely to survive a punch up, a bat or knife compared to a gun that is designed to kill humans so the stats make perfect sense because as you said US has a higher murder rate and doesn't it make it even worse that uk has a lot more violent crime yet US has a higher murder rate! Rifles are way less popular than handguns just like hand grenades aren't the first choice when robbing a store. Use some common sense

    Reply
  2. Avatar

    I couldn't agree more that the detail within the statistics needs to be dissected but it is staggering that this guy has failed to point out that the definition of violent crime is totally different between the US and UK. Comparing apples to pears makes no sense at all.

    Reply
  3. Avatar

    This guy is so full of shit. As he says you must be careful when comparing countries and yet ignores completely the fact that "violent crimes" have different definitions in the US (murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) and UK (add the following to the list : simple assaults, all robberies, and all sexual offenses). While pointing out USA has 6 times more cities than the UK he also casually forgets that there is also a 5 times population difference.

    Reply
  4. Avatar

    The average person is bombarded with so much incomplete data and misinformation on daily basis. Combine that with their own racism, internal biases, natural prejudices etc and you have the recipe for exactly what we see on the planet today. Everyone, (grouped or individually), is out for themselves. Shit, how could you blame them in a world where (whether by design or at their own choosing) 97% of the ppl are TOTALLY clueless.

    Reply
  5. Avatar

    violent crimes 386.3 per 100,000 4.7 murder rate. US
    violent crimes 1,361 per 100,000 1.3 Eng/Wales.

    what statical analysis could you run to find the difference between those variables? could be interesting to see which is statistically significant.

    Reply
  6. Avatar

    look at the differing definitions for violent crime. and I don't get your point that the US has 6 times more large urban areas. you should discuss on a per capita basis.

    Reply
  7. Avatar

    Hmm this guy seems to not know that he himself is pick and choosing data in a video where he complains about people pick and choosing data! The U.K. classes more things as "violent crime" than the U.S. does. If you view like with like then the U.S. is so much higher than the U.K.

    Reply
  8. Avatar

    How can you compare the uk and the us when the definition of violent crime is much more closed than the uk, in the uk things such as hate speech and threats of assault are classed as violent crime, whereas in the us it doesn't include any kind of hate speech or any threats that you make against another person.

    Reply
  9. Avatar

    United Kingdom:

    “Violent crime contains a wide range of offences, from minor assaults such as pushing and shoving that result in no physical harm through to serious incidents of wounding and murder. Around a half of violent incidents identified by both BCS and police statistics involve no injury to the victim.” (THOSB – CEW, page 17, paragraph 1.)

    United States:

    “In the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Violent crimes are defined in the UCR Program as those offenses which involve force or threat of force.” (FBI – CUS – Violent Crime)

    Reply
  10. Avatar

    Man I just thought of a great would you rather question: Would you rather have a rough night out with Bill Cosby or listen to this guy say the word 'data' one more fucking time? It's a tough call but I'd probably go with Bill Cosby because at least his voice doesn't sound like his nasal passage is constantly clogged with a hive of bees. The facts in this video were more fictional than this dude's eyebrows and honestly the first step in preventing violent crime would be to arrest this guy before he shoots up an elementary school.

    Reply
  11. Avatar

    Disgustingly misleading. Pretend to be all about scientific method and fail to even look at how data is collected and what each country defines as violent crime. You're a fucking fraud serving an agenda. No better than the media idiots who don't even cite sources.

    Reply
  12. Avatar

    It is true that murder can be committed with a variety of weapons and that a ban on gun ownership would not necessarily directly reduce the fear, anger, alienation that lies behind these attacks on the person. However, the more disconnected one is from the results of ones actions the easier it can be to carry out a violent act. Taking aim and shooting someone at a distance is easier than being in close with a knife. With a gun it can be a less personal act than with a knife. And accidents occur much more easily with a gun. My great uncle shot his brother in an accident and his mother never forgave him. Proponents of carrying weapons should own up to the fact that there are no logical reasons to defend it and stop coming up with lame attempts at rational argument.

    Reply
  13. Avatar

    The British government has a much looser definition of what constitutes "violent crime" compared to the US. Not surprised you neglect to mention that…

    It's an empirical fact that you're significantly more likely to be shot in the US than in the UK, and Occam's razor would suggest to us that this is because of looser restrictions on who can buy a gun in the former. You're being completely disingenuous if you think that gun control doesn't have at least some effect on gun-related homicides.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *