It doesn't happen nearly as often as the millions of people charged with theft and have a court appointed attorney because they cant afford their own.
Not necessarily. Civilized countries have guns for sport, and their semiautomatics are all registered.. The civilian populations in these countries do not own guns designed for efficiently killing people because they are both illegal to own and are not available for sale in these countries.. These other civilized countries do have criminals, but the criminals don't have semi-automatics with bumpstocks and large magazines. The idea that you can't rid the population of particular kinds of guns is preposterous, but there has to be a will to do it and a government to accomplish it. . .
Ugh...no other country has ever had a starting point where hundreds of millions of guns are on the street already, and millions of illegally owned weapons already are in the hands of criminals. You simply cannot make a comparison. What is it you would do? If President Piezoe were elected tomorrow, what would be your first step? Lets see if you can solve this problem. I promise to debate you in this civilly. You provide the answers.
This is absurd on its face. People are fundamentally the same everywhere. And the mix of cultures in Canada and the UK are, if there is any difference, even greater than in the U.S. The differences in types of violence come down to social and educational factors and availability of certain types of guns. These are all things that policy can change.
You had me convinced at one time that this was an issue. Now I know it is not a significant factor impeding the control of ownership of certain types of dangerous weapons because the distribution of these particular weapons is far from uniform. Well, were I President, I would first strongly advocate for the adoption of Canada's gun laws, word for word (leaving out any reference to the Queen, of course. ) Canada's gun laws are very friendly toward sportsmen. I would then advocate legislation that would create a long transition period with just compensation for anyone owning guns that would not be allowed under the new law. (In Canada pistols with short barrels are not available and I believe semi-automatics must be registered with the government -- those types that are allowed. Some types of otherwise banned weapons can be owned with special licensing, if sufficient justification can be shown.) After the transition period, I would advocate for adoption of the same penalties Canada imposes on those in violation of their gun laws.
If you correct for the number of rich vs number of poor how does it come out. Probably the same I would guess, but not necessarily. So although the statistics don't preclude the assumed cause and effect, they just don't prove it. You would have to look at the underlying factors, largely social in nature, I would think.