# Some random international crime statistics



## DoctorCosmonaut (Jan 31, 2010)

Random Crime Statics (interesting comparisons of a few countries):

Homicide rates: 
- 1 in 2,700 in South Africa
- 1 in 2,800 in Colombia
- 1 in 6,000 in Russia
- 1 in 10,000 in Mexico
- 1 in 18,500 in the U.S.
- 1 in 44,000 in Switzerland
- 1 in 54,000 in Canada
- 1 in 73,000 in England/Wales
- 1 in 83,000 in Australia
- 1 in 113,000 in Denmark
- 1 in 227,000 in Japan

Die by firearms (homicidal, suicide, and unintentional):
- 1 in 1,500 in South Africa
- 1 in 2,000 in Columbia
- 1 in NA in Russia
- 1 in 8,300 in Mexico
- 1 in 8,600 in the U.S.
- 1 in 15,600 in Switzerland
- 1 in 21,000 in Canada
- 1 in 34,000 in Australia
- 1 in 38,500 in Denmark
- 1 in 260,000 in England/Wales (higher death rate in Scotland and North Ireland)
- 1 in 1,430,000 in Japan

Rape:
- 1 in 1,195 in South Africa
- 1 in 1,265 in Australia
- 1 in 1,360 in Canada
- 1 in 3,333 in the U.S.
- 1 in 7,045 in the U.K.
- 1 in 8,130 in Mexico
- 1 in 11,111 in Denmark
- 1 in 18,520 in Switzerland
- 1 in 21,000 in Russia
- 1 in 23,090 in Colombia
- 1 in 56,495 in Japan

... Dang we need to do whatever Japan is doing!


----------



## dmmj (Jan 31, 2010)

what be a one raced society?


----------



## Madortoise (Feb 1, 2010)

It's an interesting question--why Japan's crime rates are relatively lower compared to other countries...Evidently, there are a lot more diversity there w/neighboring Asians immigrating and working in Japan but in general, I'm sure it certainly helps to have less racial tension there. We need to remember though there are less discrepancies among people in incomes/living status compared to elsewhere and very little homelessness and what we call poverty here. Also, they take drug abuse (except for alcohol) more seriously and they put more emphasis on people being a part of a productive society. It has it's down side like internalized shame and unfostered creativity/individualism for the sake of universal conscientiousness. We have to look at her history and spiritual beliefs as well...being beaten to the ground in War with many civilian deaths and having learned to be humble...how fragile life is (atomic bombs), not to mention respect for all sentient beings taught in Shintoism/Buddhism--all help to reduce crime rates down, I think. 
However, Japan is certainly not what it used to be when I was a kid there. Some blames U.S. for the increased incidents of murders/crimes mimicking horror movies and other culturally sanctioned violence shown in media. Some emerging (well...probably for the last 15 years) disturbing incidents include culturally specific crimes such as "oyaji-gari," or an old man hunt, where teens gang up and prey on an older gentleman typically 40s to 60s in a business suit for taking out their aggressions by beating and taking money. I think of James Dean's character in Rebel Without a Cause despising his father for not being strong enough and feeling displaced because he has no role model...


----------



## stells (Feb 2, 2010)

The UK didn't come out as badly as i thought it would... doesn't surprise me that there are more by firearms in Scotland and Northern Ireland though


----------



## Stephanie Logan (Feb 2, 2010)

Madortoise said:


> It's an interesting question--why Japan's crime rates are relatively lower compared to other countries...Evidently, there are a lot more diversity there w/neighboring Asians immigrating and working in Japan but in general, I'm sure it certainly helps to have less racial tension there. We need to remember though there are less discrepancies among people in incomes/living status compared to elsewhere and very little homelessness and what we call poverty here. Also, they take drug abuse (except for alcohol) more seriously and they put more emphasis on people being a part of a productive society. It has it's down side like internalized shame and unfostered creativity/individualism for the sake of universal conscientiousness. We have to look at her history and spiritual beliefs as well...being beaten to the ground in War with many civilian deaths and having learned to be humble...how fragile life is (atomic bombs), not to mention respect for all sentient beings taught in Shintoism/Buddhism--all help to reduce crime rates down, I think.
> However, Japan is certainly not what it used to be when I was a kid there. Some blames U.S. for the increased incidents of murders/crimes mimicking horror movies and other culturally sanctioned violence shown in media. Some emerging (well...probably for the last 15 years) disturbing incidents include culturally specific crimes such as "oyaji-gari," or an old man hunt, where teens gang up and prey on an older gentleman typically 40s to 60s in a business suit for taking out their aggressions by beating and taking money. I think of James Dean's character in Rebel Without a Cause despising his father for not being strong enough and feeling displaced because he has no role model...



Japan is proof positive that a violent culture can become a peaceful one. Think of the samurai culture that led to the Rape of Nanking and other atrocities on the mainland in the decades before they bombed Pearl Harbor. Japan was the country that truly espoused "live by the sword, die by the sword", and now they are one of the most non-violent countries in the world. So, it can happen!


----------



## Tom (Feb 2, 2010)

I've just got one thing to say about this.

Sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs.


----------



## chadk (Feb 2, 2010)

You should provide a source of you are going to post stats like that.

One thing to keep in mind when looking at numbers and statistics - 89% of all stats are made up on the spot...


----------



## Yvonne G (Feb 2, 2010)

LOL, Chad...did you make that up?


----------



## Madortoise (Feb 2, 2010)

Stephanie Logan said:


> Madortoise said:
> 
> 
> > It's an interesting question--why Japan's crime rates are relatively lower compared to other countries...Evidently, there are a lot more diversity there w/neighboring Asians immigrating and working in Japan but in general, I'm sure it certainly helps to have less racial tension there. We need to remember though there are less discrepancies among people in incomes/living status compared to elsewhere and very little homelessness and what we call poverty here. Also, they take drug abuse (except for alcohol) more seriously and they put more emphasis on people being a part of a productive society. It has it's down side like internalized shame and unfostered creativity/individualism for the sake of universal conscientiousness. We have to look at her history and spiritual beliefs as well...being beaten to the ground in War with many civilian deaths and having learned to be humble...how fragile life is (atomic bombs), not to mention respect for all sentient beings taught in Shintoism/Buddhism--all help to reduce crime rates down, I think.
> ...



I agree with you there and this applies to all "civilized countries" that share similar history of romanticized medieval knighthood and dark age practices/mindset. It's always interesting to me, too, throughout the history of men/women that the winners of the wars justify the war crimes and continue to perpetrate violence while the beaten ones pay dearly for what they did--sometimes they learn, sometimes they don't...as was the case of Germany from WWI. In my fantasy I would like for all to carry the burden as well as the joy of sharing global community...but that's another topic.


----------



## DoctorCosmonaut (Feb 2, 2010)

chadk said:


> You should provide a source of you are going to post stats like that.
> 
> One thing to keep in mind when looking at numbers and statistics - 89% of all stats are made up on the spot...



I got all the stats from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)'s Eighth and Seventh "United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems" (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-...e-Operations-of-Criminal-Justice-Systems.html) and the FBI's "Crime in the United States 2005" and from the United States Bureau of Justice Statistics "2002 National Crime Victimization Survey" .... Pretty unreliable sources of course...

Where's your statistic of 89% from? Probably the same people in the Department of Justice/FBI sat around and made that one up too huh? You know that these are compiled from police reports, hospitalizations, and self reports not phone polling...


----------



## chadk (Feb 2, 2010)

Global community? Not gonna happen. Try 'community' in Detroit first. Then we'll move on...


----------



## DoctorCosmonaut (Feb 2, 2010)

Oh I forgot to mention that the reported deaths that are counted in are from "Data presented in this report regarding nonfatal injuries are from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. National estimates of nonfatal firearm-related injuries were derived using weighted data for patients treated in a nationally representative, stratified probability sample of U.S. hospital emergency departments (EDs). Death data presented in this report are from CDC's National Vital Statistics System, which includes information from all death certificates filed in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Population data for calculating rates were obtained from the U.S. Bureau of the Census. " ... The CDC, another suspicious contributor... and a lot of the international data was also contributed from the UN World Development reports...


----------



## chadk (Feb 2, 2010)

emysemys said:


> LOL, Chad...did you make that up?


----------



## DoctorCosmonaut (Feb 2, 2010)

Anyways I just posted this stuff for food for thought, as I came across it while reading I thought it was intriguing... I have no agenda if that is perhaps what you are suspicious of. I more was interested in what other people had to say. I'm here for no debate (just to watch one). ^_^


----------



## chadk (Feb 2, 2010)

Jordon, are you saying you personally went to each of those sources and peiced together that list yourself? Must have taken quite some time... Was this a school project or something? Or were you just really bored? 

Also, I'm wondering how the CDC info you cited factors in. Since the focus on the CDC info says "filed in the 50 states", where did the info from the other countries come from for example? Did the CDC do the same exact data gathering techniques in each country listed? 

In many countries, the way they collect data on these things varies greatly from country to country. So if the CDC says x amount of deaths from y, another country may report their numbers that look better or worse, but the sources do not report the information the same way.


----------



## DoctorCosmonaut (Feb 2, 2010)

I was really bored. And the international info is from the U.N., most of what I used was from the U.N., what was missing I substituted from the FBI, etc. I wish I would have just thought to cite the whole thing through since my motives and numbers seem so suspicious (why would I bother?). Anyways, do your own research, I don't care what you think of the numbers I posted. My point was to show the spectrum, you'll find evidence of it wherever you go. I'm done with this topic because the discussion got killed and turned into you hounding me.


----------



## Stephanie Logan (Feb 2, 2010)

It is true, even if the numbers are not exact, that countries with strict gun ownership laws have MUCH lower rates of death by firearms. Period.

Dead sheep, dead sheepdogs, and dead wolves.


----------



## chadk (Feb 2, 2010)

DoctorCosmonaut said:


> I was really bored. And the international info is from the U.N., most of what I used was from the U.N., what was missing I substituted from the FBI, etc. I wish I would have just thought to cite the whole thing through since my motives and numbers seem so suspicious (why would I bother?). Anyways, do your own research, I don't care what you think of the numbers I posted. My point was to show the spectrum, you'll find evidence of it wherever you go. I'm done with this topic because the discussion got killed and turned into you hounding me.



LOL. Look, if you post something, be ready to back it up. Pretty simple. Nothing to cry about. 


Stephanie - don't believe the propoganda. Have you looked as switzerland for example?

From wiki - but can be found in many other places if that doesn't work for you...

"Switzerland
Main article: Gun politics in Switzerland
In one study by David Kopel of seven countries, including the United States and Japan, Switzerland is found to be one of the safest countries in the study.[33] In recent times political opposition has expressed a desire for tighter gun regulations.[33] Switzerland practices universal conscription, which requires that all able-bodied male citizens keep fully-automatic firearms at home in case of a call-up. Every male between the ages of 20 and 42 is considered a candidate for conscription into the military, and following a brief period of active duty will commonly be enrolled in the militia until age or an inability to serve ends his service obligation.[34] During their enrollment in the armed forces, these men are required to keep their government-issued selective fire combat rifles and semi-automatic handguns in their homes.[35] Up until September 2007, soldiers also received 20 rounds of government-issued ammunition in a sealed box for storage at home.[36] In addition to these official weapons, Swiss citizens are allowed to purchase surplus-to-inventory combat rifles, and shooting is a popular sport in all the Swiss cantons."



In many countries with recent tough gun laws, the violent crime rate has increased.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/04/20/DI2007042001760.html


----------



## Maggie Cummings (Feb 2, 2010)

chadk said:


> DoctorCosmonaut said:
> 
> 
> > I was really bored. And the international info is from the U.N., most of what I used was from the U.N., what was missing I substituted from the FBI, etc. I wish I would have just thought to cite the whole thing through since my motives and numbers seem so suspicious (why would I bother?). Anyways, do your own research, I don't care what you think of the numbers I posted. My point was to show the spectrum, you'll find evidence of it wherever you go. I'm done with this topic because the discussion got killed and turned into you hounding me.
> ...



Let's play nice now!!! And treat each other with respect...


----------



## DoctorCosmonaut (Feb 2, 2010)

Chad, people who carry guns are 4.5 x more likely to be shot and 4.2 times more likely to get killed compared with an unarmed citizen (source: http://www.newscientist.com/article...un-increases-risk-of-get-shot-and-killed.html). Not to mention that people with guns in their home are 5 times more likely to have suicide committed in their home, plus regardless of storage "practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home," having a gun in the home increases the risk of firearm homicide (source: http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/160/10/929). Many other studies find that guns kept in the home are associated with an increase in the risk of homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance. Another study also finds that gun owning families in which abuse/assaults take place are far more likely to end in death (source: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/329/15/1084). Chad, if you decide to list counter articles I ask that you please list scholarly articles, such as the ones I listed from "Oxford Journal" (Oxford Univ. publication) or "the New England Journal of Medicine" or the "American Journal of Public Health," just so our sources can be on par in reputability.


----------



## Stephanie Logan (Feb 2, 2010)

chadk said:


> Stephanie - don't believe the propoganda. Have you looked as switzerland for example?
> 
> "Switzerland
> Main article: Gun politics in Switzerland
> In one study by David Kopel of seven countries, including the United States and Japan, Switzerland is found to be one of the safest countries in the study.[33] In recent times political opposition has expressed a desire for tighter gun regulations.[33] Switzerland practices universal conscription, which requires that all able-bodied male citizens keep fully-automatic firearms at home in case of a call-up. Every male between the ages of 20 and 42 is considered a candidate for conscription into the military, and following a brief period of active duty will commonly be enrolled in the militia until age or an inability to serve ends his service obligation.[34] During their enrollment in the armed forces, these men are required to keep their government-issued selective fire combat rifles and semi-automatic handguns in their homes.[35] Up until September 2007, soldiers also received 20 rounds of government-issued ammunition in a sealed box for storage at home.[36] In addition to these official weapons, Swiss citizens are allowed to purchase surplus-to-inventory combat rifles, and shooting is a popular sport in all the Swiss cantons."



I have no problem with a well regulated militia.

I have a family member who is an air marshal, my brother-in-law is an FBI agent.

None of your information changes the numbers Jordan posted. Americans are more likely to be killed by firearms than the citizens of most other 1st world countries.


----------



## chadk (Feb 2, 2010)

DoctorCosmonaut said:


> Chad, people who carry guns are 4.5 x more likely to be shot and 4.2 times more likely to get killed compared with an unarmed citizen (source: http://www.newscientist.com/article...un-increases-risk-of-get-shot-and-killed.html). Not to mention that people with guns in their home are 5 times more likely to have suicide committed in their home, plus regardless of storage "practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home," having a gun in the home increases the risk of firearm homicide (source: http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/160/10/929). Many other studies find that guns kept in the home are associated with an increase in the risk of homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance. Another study also finds that gun owning families in which abuse/assaults take place are far more likely to end in death (source: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/329/15/1084). Chad, if you decide to list counter articles I ask that you please list scholarly articles, such as the ones I listed from "Oxford Journal" (Oxford Univ. publication) or "the New England Journal of Medicine" or the "American Journal of Public Health," just so our sources can be on par in reputability.



Japan has one of the highest suicide rates of all countries. A gun is not needed to have high suicide rates....

And your theory does not hold - look at the suicide rate by gun comparing Japan (few have guns) to Switzerland (everyone had guns).

And guess what, the suicide by knife rate is much higher in homes where their are knives, no matter how they are stored...



Stephanie Logan said:


> None of your information changes the numbers Jordan posted. Americans are more likely to be killed by firearms than the citizens of most other 1st world countries.



The numbers posted were not even a valid set of data points. So it was really a meaningless post. You can't pull stuff from a UN source not having any idea how the data was collected, and then compare to the CDC in the US. It works only if the outcome matches your pre-concieved ideas.



DoctorCosmonaut said:


> Chad, people who carry guns are 4.5 x more likely to be shot and 4.2 times more likely to get killed compared with an unarmed citizen (source: http://www.newscientist.com/article...un-increases-risk-of-get-shot-and-killed.html).



And this statistic is so flawed it's crazy. The study took place in Philly... Gangsters and thugs packing heat. Drug dealers. Crackheads. 

Notice they did not do this study in a rural area in Montanna for example - where honest hard working citizens with legal guns and permits to carry abound... 

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics


----------



## Stephanie Logan (Feb 2, 2010)

I do not believe your suggestion that every source that does not agree with yours is some kind of left-wing conspiracy...

The gun figures have been done and redone for years, and the trends are consistent and valid.


----------



## DoctorCosmonaut (Feb 2, 2010)

chadk said:


> DoctorCosmonaut said:
> 
> 
> > Chad, people who carry guns are 4.5 x more likely to be shot and 4.2 times more likely to get killed compared with an unarmed citizen (source: http://www.newscientist.com/article...un-increases-risk-of-get-shot-and-killed.html). Not to mention that people with guns in their home are 5 times more likely to have suicide committed in their home, plus regardless of storage "practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home," having a gun in the home increases the risk of firearm homicide (source: http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/160/10/929). Many other studies find that guns kept in the home are associated with an increase in the risk of homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance. Another study also finds that gun owning families in which abuse/assaults take place are far more likely to end in death (source: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/329/15/1084). Chad, if you decide to list counter articles I ask that you please list scholarly articles, such as the ones I listed from "Oxford Journal" (Oxford Univ. publication) or "the New England Journal of Medicine" or the "American Journal of Public Health," just so our sources can be on par in reputability.
> ...






Did you read the three studies? While one didn't, the others did cover rural and national statistics. And in the study I posted they specifically said that gun suicide is higher than knife suicide. You didn't read them, yet you are so quick to discredit them. You criticize us for our sources yet never provide any expect for one about Switzerland from Wikipedia (If you are so fond of Wikipedia over direct sources, then check out their article on suicide methods in which it lists that firearms accounts as the most common method of suicide (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_methods#Firearms )), yet I report to you from medical journals, Oxford press, the UN, the FBI, the Department of Justice, and the CDC, and you don't look at any of them and make comments that confirm that you haven't critically analyzed any of them.

You are just here to attack Stephanie and I unjustly.


----------



## dmmj (Feb 2, 2010)

I can not believe anyone could seriously use newscientist.com as a legitamate news source, or wikipedia?


----------



## alfiethetortoise (Feb 3, 2010)

It would be interesting to see where China, and Antartica were on this list....

And the gun buisness, if you have a gun, and will use it to shoot, then obviously it's going to reflect the crime rates in the county, country, whatever. And it depends on the 'culture' surronding the gun. When we were kids, we were not allowed toy guns, period. Not even those ones you put into a potato. Because my parents thought that promoting shooting other people, even in game play, was not good. But we grew up in a small village with no real crime. It is different if your facing real threats in say South Africa, and you need your gun for safety. I appreiate that for some people, even others knowing you have a gun, will stop them breaking an entry into your property. 

p.s. I once used Wikipedia in a dissertation at univeristy. Actually, i didn't reference wikipedia, but i did reference the reference Wikipedia had put. And the Assignment got a 1st. It was on the Christian Ideology in Childrens Literature, namely Harry Potter and C.S. Lewis. And it even won a prize. So Wikipedia must count for something!


----------



## dmmj (Feb 3, 2010)

welll I don't trust wiki since anyone at anytime can edit the info there, just sounds like fraud heaven to me personally.


----------



## chadk (Feb 3, 2010)

Stephanie Logan said:


> I do not believe your suggestion that every source that does not agree with yours is some kind of left-wing conspiracy...
> 
> The gun figures have been done and redone for years, and the trends are consistent and valid.



See Stephanie, that is what I'm talking about. Because the original stats listed match what you believe is 'truth', you don't question the source.

OK, I never said anything about conspiracy of any kind. What I said was that Jordan cherry picked data from various sources and put it all together in a nice neat table as if it was the a valid study comparing countries on a equal level. Do you not see how that is just not a good way to post meaningful statistics? Using that methodology, you could make those number reflect any trend you wanted. Again, NOT saying that is what was done. I just don't see the point behind all the crying when I ask a couple reasonable questions about the source(s).


----------



## Yvonne G (Feb 3, 2010)

This is sorta' turning into a heated argument, isn't it? Why so concerned about statistics in an off topic chit chat? Nobody said anything about if you don't believe this data I'm going to come take away all your tortoises. You can take it or leave it can't you? Can't you just say I don't agree with your statistics and let it go at that?


----------



## chadk (Feb 3, 2010)

DoctorCosmonaut said:


> chadk said:
> 
> 
> > DoctorCosmonaut said:
> ...


----------



## Maggie Cummings (Feb 3, 2010)

OK, I asked you all to settle down and I was ignored. I am tired of the personal insults Chad. If you cannot talk to other members with respect you are done with this thread. 
This is not in the debatable section and I think the way you have talked to Jordan and Stephanie is just not acceptable.


----------

