Maybe this is what the second amendment meant...

I'm not sure what your point is, as the United States does have a high ranking in violence in your links as well. If you look at page 29 in the World Health Organization's report, you'll see the deathrate of "youths" due to "violence". Of course every study doesn't have the same numbers, because they have different classifications. Still, it makes sense that any region with more overall violence also has gun violence. Here's a quote from that report showing the disconnect with the US vs other developed countries:

"Apart from the United States of America, where the

rate stands at 11.0 per 100 000, most of the
countries with youth homicide rates above 10.0 per
100 000 are either developing countries or those​

experiencing rapid social and economic changes."

That report is also more meaningful then the Global Burden of Disease reports, which doesn't seem to break down deaths by violence. Table 20 in the United Nations Yearbook compares a few countries: the US being one of them. One interesting thing to note, besides the US having higher rates then many other countries in assault....is that it has way more deaths due to self inflicted violence. Gun control won't help those rates that much, as there are other ways to kill yourself. This table also doesn't list accidental gun death, so there's not much more you can infer. But if we wanted to see what percentage of homicides were from guns, there's either my link or wikipedia ....If you wanted to go by Wikipedia's table, the US only trails Columbia and Guatamala in the percentage of homicides by gun.

 

Unfortunately I can't see the various methods of "microstamping" solving anything either. If you put the number on the bullet, it doesn't prevent anyone from reloading their own, unnumbered bullets. If you put it on the firing pin, it can be filed off, or replaced, or the bad guy can use a revolver which doesn't leave the nicely microstamped casings behind. It's another "solution" that only hurts the "good guys."

Zhe Wiz

 

Great, you don't like my "fists" example, and completely ignored everything else, including my point. How convenient! How about your Prius? Shall we take that away? You can take out a lot more people with your car than you can with an "extended-clip Glock." Lots of car accidents kill people every day. Oh no! Let's outlaw them! Yeah, make a law, that'll solve E V E R Y T H I N G.

The "anti's" like to parade around shouting "get rid of the bad, evil guns," but you never tell us how we're going to accomplish that lovely sounding feat! Any reasonable person can see "banishing" them is not the solution. It's completely unrealistic and will not solve the problem you think you're solving.

Well now, isn't that misleading (again!) You neglect to point out that the 13 individuals killed WERE NOT ARMED. Why didn't you mention that? How did their training help them since they had nothing to shoot???? They were fish in a barrel. It is not legal to carry a firearm on an army base. The 13 individuals shot were following the rules. See how well the "rules" work? Your example is actually a very good example of why we should be allow to carry if we so choose.

Zhe Wiz

 

Like this?

The same paragraph notes that the highest rates are among our neighbors, from which I notice substantial immigration: Latin America and the Carribean. This is why I previously noted the common exclusion of all western hemisphere countries south of the Rio Grande -- including them undermines the desired debate point.

Try Table A1 and your own calculator to calculate the per-capita rates (per 100k) for Violence (excluding Self-Inflicted and War):
5.5 in Americas (U.S. / Canada / Bahamas)
25.1 in Americas (rest of hemisphere)
24.7 in Africa
9.3 Worldwide

As I mentioned, not all editions cover the whole subject. When I first saw this data a decade ago, in the dead-tree 2000 edition, Table 21 covered more the 60 countries. It is now posted online.

Again, per-capita rates are a more useful way to compare countries with different populations. The U.S. suicide rate is higher than most of the lesser developed world, but lower than average for developed countries, and lower than the planet's average.

Try a user exercise by sorting the per-capita rates at this WHO source. Out of 192 countries listed, the U.S. ranks 55th in suicide, 99th in homicide.

I'm not sure what your point is. Wikipedia says whatever you or the most recent activists want it to say. And when I see percentages displayed to six significant figures, but the first digit doesn't even match the supposed source ...

Violence in the U.S. is a serious problem, but the common efforts to treat it via gun control, and only gun control, have only sidelined any real violence reduction. In actual practice, the two issues are orthogonal.

 

Yes, if you looked at the subsequent table of the 2000 project...you would see that the US ranks high in the dark grey areas (and many other "developed" countries are light grey).

The report from which you cite the graphic already has the statistics for per-capita rates of each country (and the most current year data was collected by Y2000). I would be careful to generalize the US suicide and homicide rates just on one sample year, though. For the 2000 report, they mention that the world average suicide rate was one percent higher then the US suicide rate. If you look at the few years represented in the United Nation's Demographic, tough, you'll see how assualt and self inflicted deaths fluctuate for a given year.

The point was that all sources do say that the majority of violence in the US is from gun violence. The WHO's report does go over this trend of youth violence:

" Remarkable differences in youth homicide trends for the period 1985–1994 were observed

across the American continent. In Canada, where around one-third of youth homicides involve guns, rates fell by 9.5%, from 2.1 per 100 000 to 1.9 per 100 000. In the United States, the trend was exactly the reverse, with over 70% of youth homicides involving guns and an increase in homicides of 77%, from 8.8 per 100 000 to 15.6 per 100 000. In Chile, rates in the period remained low and stable, at around 2.4 per 100 000. In Mexico, where guns account for some 50% of all youth homicides, rates stayed high and stable, rising from 14.7 per 100 000 to 15.6 per 100 000. On the other hand, in Colombia, youth homicides increased by 159%, from 36.7 per 100 000 to 95.0 per 100 000 (with 80% of cases, at the end of this period, involving guns), and in Venezuela by 132%, from 10.4 per 100 000 to 24.1 per 100 000."​

That's actually an interesting trend...you'll see other countries have either steady or lowering rates of gun violence (the exception being Columbia, our neighboring Latin countries have stayed more stable )...but there was a large upsurge in violence in the US. So I'm not sure you can just blame the Latinos for the upsurge in violence in the US. With that logic, the hooligans who would have left the Latin countries would then lower those countries rates...yet they're actually staying the same.

I agree that preventing violence is a complex issue, and that while I believe having some gun limits would help, it's not the only course to be taken. A case in point could be the shooting of Giffords. Jared Loughner legally bought his handgun at a sporting store: the manager said that they ran the usual check and he came up clear. When more was revealed about him, it was clear that he had been mentally unstable for some time. At one point, he was suspended by Pima Community College and informed him that he could return only if he obtained “a mental health clearance indicating that, in the opinion of a mental health professional, his presence at the college does not present a danger to himself or others.” He wasn't in the database because he had fallen through the cracks, and wasn't ordered to have a mental health assesment. Apparently, he had been arrested a couple times before for minor infringements (like possession of drugs). Perhaps having criminals mentally assesed while in jail could be one solution. Either way, had Loughner been declared mentally unfit (as he should have been), then he could not buy a gun.

It's still not easy to practice what does become law, though, as VT gunner Seung Hui Cho had previously been declared mentally unstable.....yet somehow he wasn't in the NICS. Congress even tried passing a law in 2007 holding states accountable for better record keeping.