U.S.is exporting crime and terror to Canada

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Large cities can end up having entire districts with poverty and high crime. Smaller towns don't seem to have that problem. But lets compare two cities.

I have lived in a few smaller cities nearer the size of Burlington so lets compare for fun!

I lived in Napa California. California, not exactly a gun lovers paradise. In fact they are very restrictive.

So lets compare:

Napa, CABurlington, VT National

Murder: 1.3 2.6 7

Forcible Rape: 27.83 59.61 32.2

Robbery: 92.8 41.5 205.8

Aggravated Assault: 323.4 298.1 336.5

Burglary: 531.4 673.9 813.2

Larceny Theft: 2071.4 3265.6 2601.7

Vehicle Theft: 265.1 114 501.5

So other than the fact that your more likely to get your car stolen or robbed on the street, Napa comes ahead of Burlington. Both are clearly safer than the US average.

Lets compare a more moderate town.

Eureka, MO Burlington, VT

Population: 9,022 38,584

Murder: 0 1

Forcible Rape: 0 23

Robbery: 0 16

Aggravated Assault: 10 115

Burglary: 19 260

Larceny Theft: 196 1260

Vehicle Theft: 7 44

Now Missouri gun laws are probably about average for the nation, but clearly not up to vermont...

so why is Eureka so much safer than Burlington?

Simple. Irrelevent.

Eureka does not make gun laws, neither does Burlington. Eureka, CA is not safer than Oakland, CA (or Burlington) because of gun laws, they have the SAME gun laws as Oakland. Burlington has the SAME gun laws as the rest of Vermont. Comparing jurisdictions that have little, if any, legislative authority to affect crime is silly. Your example only proves that gun laws have nothing to do with crime rates. That has been my point all along. Thanks.

If you want to compare parking violation rates...OK, go for it.

Compare Vermont to California crime rates. Or are you a 'fraidy cat?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Simple. Irrelevent.

Eureka does not make gun laws, neither does Burlington. Eureka, CA is not safer than Oakland, CA (or Burlington) because of gun laws, they have the SAME gun laws as Oakland. Burlington has the SAME gun laws as the rest of Vermont. Comparing jurisdictions that have little, if any, legislative authority to affect crime is silly. Your example only proves that gun laws have nothing to do with crime rates. That has been my point all along. Thanks.

If you want to compare parking violation rates...OK, go for it.

Compare Vermont to California crime rates. Or are you a 'fraidy cat?

Uh so we are in agreement then?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I am rereading your posts, and you seem to indicate that having loose gun laws lowers crime....which doesn't seem to be the case.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

By the way, I just notice i posted the actual crimes for eureka and burlington

here are the rates (per 100,000 - same for the napa/burlington rates):

Eureka, MO Burlington, VT National

Murder: 0 2.6 7

Forcible Rape: 0 59.61 32.2

Robbery: 0 41.5 205.8

Aggravated Assault: 110.8 298.1 336.5

Burglary: 210.6 673.9 813.2

Larceny Theft: 2172.5 3265.6 2601.7

Vehicle Theft: 77.6 114 501.5

Eureka is still safer btw.

still irrelevent btw. I bet I could cherry pick a city with the same population as Burlington with a higher crime rate. It is irrelevent so I won't.

I am rereading your posts, and you seem to indicate that having loose gun laws lowers crime....which doesn't seem to be the case.

Yes... it does. Compare crime rates state to state (the jurisdiction that makes gun laws)

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Uh so we are in agreement then?

If you believe restrictions on firearms ownership and use by law abiding citizens does not reduce crime, yes, we agree.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

still irrelevent btw. I bet I could cherry pick a city with the same population as Burlington with a higher crime rate. It is irrelevent so I won't.

Yes... it does. Compare crime rates state to state (the jurisdiction that makes gun laws)

Ok lets!

.........index Violent Property Murder Rape Robbery assault BurglaryTheft Vehicle Theft

Vermont: 2,532.8 131.4 2,401.4 1.1 19.9 17.9 92.5 555.2 1,774.2 72.1

New Hampshire: 2,320.6 159.6 2,161.0 0.8 30.2 34.4 94.3 372.0 1,704.1 84.9

2009 data.

Edited August 7, 2011 by Sousuke

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

If you believe restrictions on firearms ownership and use by law abiding citizens does not reduce crime, yes, we agree.

The data shows me that at least in the US, the legality of guns does not really factor into the crime rate for better or worse.

IE. Legally armed citizens don't appear to affect the crime rate either way.

Edited August 7, 2011 by Sousuke

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Ok lets!

index Violent Property Murder Rape Robbery assault BurglaryTheft Vehicle Theft

Vermont: 2,532.8 131.4 2,401.4 1.1 19.9 17.9 92.5 555.2 1,774.2 72.1

New Hampshire: 2,320.6 159.6 2,161.0 0.8 30.2 34.4 94.3 372.0 1,704.1 84.9

2009 data.

In 2009 Vermont had 6 homicides. 3 were negligent homicides related to hunting. New Hampshire does not count those as homicides, Vermont does. A vagary in the law. In 2010 Vermont had 4 homicides and a rate of .75

The others are not gun related. So what?

Do you thin Chicago would like a .75 homidice rate? How about a 1.1?

Edited August 7, 2011 by Gary and Alla

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Yep New Hampshire is nearly identical to vermont in terms of crime.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

The data shows me that at least in the US, the legality of guns does not really factor into the crime rate for better or worse.

IE. Legally armed citizens don't appear to affect the crime rate either way.

Then why would you be against it?

Yep New Hampshire is nearly identical to vermont in terms of crime.

And in gun laws. New Hampshire requires a lisence to carry concealed but issues it to anyone that has no criminal record.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Then why would you be against it?

I am not, I support the 2nd amendment. However I do know better than to assume gun ownership has the power to drop crime rates given the data at hand.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

By the way does anyone else find the irony of Gary accusing me of cherry picking data? Given his entire argument?

[SMOKE 1,426]

I am not, I support the 2nd amendment. However I do know better than to assume gun ownership has the power to drop crime rates given the data at hand.

do you think a person w/ a firearm is more or less likely to be a victim of a crime?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

do you think a person w/ a firearm is more or less likely to be a victim of a crime?

It depends on that person's level of training with the firearm and their situational awareness. Someone is does not have much training, or has poor situational awareness is likely going to be more of a victim.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I am not, I support the 2nd amendment. However I do know better than to assume gun ownership has the power to drop crime rates given the data at hand.

Both the examples you give have low crime rates and loose gun laws. Comparing cities that have no jurisdiction to make gun laws is cherry picking.