How is it that Great Britain only had 53 deaths by firearms in 2007-08?

"The level of gun ownership world-wide is directly related to murder and suicide rates and specifically to the level of death by gunfire."

In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in the United States, according to the latest national data released in 2002. That is one child every three hours; eight children every day; and more than 50 children every week. And every year, at least 4 to 5 times as many kids and teens suffer from non-fatal firearm injuries. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics) (And it has only gone up.)

鈥ˋmerican children are more at risk from firearms than the children of any other industrialized nation. In one year, firearms killed no children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France, 153 in Canada, and 5,285 in the United States. (Centers for Disease Control)

America is losing too many children to gun violence. Between 1979 and 2001, gunfire killed 90,000 children and teens in America. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)

In one year, more children and teens died from gunfire than from
cancer, pneumonia, influenza, asthma, and HIV/AIDS combined. (Children's Defense Fund)

America is losing too many children to gun violence. Between 1979 and 2001, gunfire killed 90,000 children and teens in America. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)
鈥?In one year, more children and teens died from gunfire than from cancer, pneumonia, influenza, asthma, and HIV/AIDS combined. (Children's Defense Fund)

I'm not trying to "rant," but what is GB doing right? They don't have criminals getting guns legally or illegally, so everyday citizens don't feel the need to own guns. Personally, I'd love to see the U.S. have fewer than 100 gun deaths each year.

http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01....

Basketball Fan88, Give me a break. Ok, how's this--the U.S has 14.24 per 100,000 people and Great Britain has 0.10 per 100,000 and those stats are several years old. Gun violence in America has INCREASED, by Great Britain's has DECREASED.

There is a huge problem with crime in the US. The United states outpaces any advanced industrialized nation with the exception of South Africa, when it comes to violent crime AND handgun death. The problem lies in the fact that there are far more handguns in the United States than there are people-- more than enough to go around! And guns are not like drugs an other social ills; they don't get used up and go away. England on the other hand banned guns while they were still quit rare. Its too late here.
I believe the only way to deal with the problem is by having extremely strong penalties for those illegally owning a fire arm or those who use guns during a crime. I also believe in registration of weapons, and cannot really see any reason to own an assault rifle.

One thing I also found interesting is the fact that the US has a higher rate of homicides committed WITHOUT a gun than the than the entire homicide rates of any country in Europe. In other words, erase all the firearm homicides, and our rate is still higher. Check out this link.

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvi...

It is shameful. Perhaps the fact that the US is now controlled by a weapons manufacturer has something to do with it. However, I think that you'll all need guns to protect yourself from the next republican administration. Signs indicate that WW3 will be started by the US.

England is #6 in the top 10 reported crime rates in the world. The thugs just whack you with knives and clubs instead of guns.

They aren't allowed to own firearms so they have to use other implements to murder people.

I would rather have the means to overthrow a tyrannical government as our 2nd amendment affords.

BTW - My guns have never killed anyone.

Check out their stab stats. And the fact that...well... two wars later, and the Brits just can't admit that Americans are better shots than they are. Plus, our minority gang groups are more prone to violence and have better access to arms smugglers than theirs.
Peace

And what about knives,clubs,etc,etc...... Add those up and your question is rather a non issue.
If those 53 had been armed, they would probably still be alive.

I would guess only 53 were fatally-wounded by gunshots.

Because they prefer stabbing and blunt objects.

"In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire"

We'll send GB all of our ghetto people. Let's see how well you do with that.

Maybe if people were more responsible....

Either gun control works, or the English are lousy shots.

bad aim?

Why just firearm related deaths??? What about the 871 that were murdered in the USA by drowning including 51 kids aged 1-4 yrs age??? Or the 663 people that were beat to death with blunt objects??? Or the 155 that were strangled to death not to mention the 105 folks that were asphyxiated by their murderers. 114 more victims were burned to death, 76 victims had narcotics pushed down their throats till they OD on them plus 11 victims were poisoned & 1 victim blown up.
AND, that does not include the 993 victims that were beat to death with fists & kicked to death with feet of which 151 victims were aged 1-4 yrs of age. Now throw in the 1,866 that were stabbed to death & we got quite a few needless homicides. Sure, all totaled up the other methods of murder are only 45% of the 9,326 firearm related deaths, but whats the diff if the victims all end up dead?
I mean would you rather be shot dead or be one of the 114 victims that were murdered by being burnt alive??? Maybe ya would prefer to see people including babies drowned to death as it's "just LESS messy!" Good Christ, you political activists can only concentrate on inanimate objects that further your communal agenda. Did you ever think that it takes a sadistic deranged human being to activate the weapon of murder???
It's OBVIOUS from the content of your post that the victims of all the above mentioned crimes mean nothing to you at all. Only the weapons used, & at that, ONLY the firearms that were used count to you at all because they further YOUR agenda.
Below is the chart that I took my statistics from. The link is from the Department Of Justice Federal Bureau Of Investigation. The chart is number 2.10 on the link... & is dated 02/17/06

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_...

Look it up. I was watching a show last week about massacres on A&E. In it, it was talking about a massacre in Great Britain a long time ago. One of the surviving victims became a government legislator and pushed a very strict gun control laws. Britain is known to have the world's strictest gun control laws.
And that's why. It's so darn hard to get a gun in GB.

Whoa, more liberals trying to take away even more rights?

Oh just great! Lib-tards love micro-managing the populous and raising taxes!

At the same time, Britons are now panicking over skyrocketing knifepoint crimes.

Disarming people, and abrogating the right of armed self defense, is no solution to social problems.

What they MAY be doing right is HAVING A SOCIAL SYSTEM THAT AT LEAST PRETENDS TO HELP PEOPLE TAKE OF THEMSELVES, unlike the U.S.

Besides gun rights, which you are trying to blame, the U.S. ALSO have the least extensive and most poorly funded social programs in the industrialized world.

Canadians are almost as heavily armed as we are. If you only count long arms, not handguns, they are MORE heavily armed than we are.

However, even Canada's conservatives support social programs that the most "left-wing" Democrat doesn't advocate, or would even oppose.

That's why they have less violence in their society.

I think you are making a mistake.

It's not having the means of implementing the legitimate social right of armed self defense that is the problem.

It's the almost complete ABSENCE of OTHER social rights.

When people aren't given a REASON to align themselves with society at large, they won't.

And we Americans are given very little reason to do so.

EDIT: Did you actually READ what I wrote or are you knee-jerking? That's the only way you could come to the conclusion that I am "wrong."

They have extensive social programs. We don't. Our "liberals" would be thrown out of their Conservative Party as ultra-right embarrassments.

Well-fed, working, medically treated, well-housed, happy people seldom turn their guns on strangers at random.

It really IS that simple.

Even if some people insist on making it complicated.
.

Just the facts most gun control stats count children as old as 24, most violent crimes are committed in the age group of 16 - 24. Suicide accounts for half of all firearms deaths we should be more concerned with that stat. 13 teens die every day in auto accidents, 4 die from parental abuse each day, and 15 people are killed each day by felons. Hope this starts some people to study up on gun control because gun control does not work.

More than half of gun deaths in this country (about 55 percent) are not homicides, but suicides. The number of suicides would not change if guns weren't available. There are many more reasons, I could go on and on, including the fact that we have a bigger population, but your mind is made up, you're just looking for reassurance from like minded, uninformed gun haters.

1. You are now and always have been subjects, being a slave comes naturally to you

2. We have many more feral minorities than you do, and many times the population you do.

3. Since Britain banned guns, gun crimes are actually up, and so is aggravated assaults, knife crime etc. Being fearful manlets the Brits allowed their nanny state to install millions of cameras, yet the London police admit they still only solve around 15% of assaults and robberies.

4. Those kids you cry over are mostly minority gang bangers who would shoot you for your toothpick if they had the chance. They were killed by other minority monster children. I refuse to cry for them.

The number 1 killer of teenagers is driving and has been for over 40 years. Maybe we should eliminate cars? The population of GB is vastly different than the US so your comparisons are apples and oranges. It seems your stats are overstated and skewed, accidental gun accidents vs punk teenage criminals and gang bangers killing each other so if you look at the stats on accidental gun accidents, they are very low comparatively.

They had a low incidence of teen gun deaths in the USSR, want to live under that system?

Freedom isn't free. Life is inherently dangerous. Those who sacrifice liberty and freedom for a little security will have neither.

Firearms ban.

It works, just like in Japan.

Contrary to what the NRA types tell you...