UK vs US death rate review. re:gun control

[Professor Yaffle]

Is it? I didn't know that.

This leads to the observation that an open verdict can arise where the coroner isn't sure whether the death was from, say, natural causes or murder, or in cases where no body is ever found. So the inclusion of these cases might be skewing the suicide comparison somewhat.

Mike

Here's a paper on the subject: http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/178/5/465.full.pdf
It mentions excluding open cases where suicide is unlikely or impossible, as does this national (UK) report on suicide:

The majority of open verdicts are suicides and it is conventional to include some or all open verdicts in studies of suicide. In the Inquiry all open verdicts are included unless it is clear that suicide was not considered at inquest, e.g. in deaths in which a clear medical cause cannot be found but which were not self-inflicted. As a result the Inquiry suicide sample consists of suicides and probable suicides but all cases are referred to as suicides in this report.

http://www.scie-socialcareonline.org.uk/repository/fulltext/safetyfirst.pdf

And one more paper on the subject:
http://www.scpnet.com/paper2_3.htm

 

[MikeG]

Comparing road deaths:

Wiki, 2012 figures:

Deaths per billion kilometres
UK 5.7
US 8.5

Mike

 

[Tolls]

Really? A have a couple of American colleagues who've come over here to work and they were absolutely determined to live near the office and seemed quite surprised by my relatively modest 30 miles each way.

The joy of anecdotal evidence!

And selective memory is undoubtedly coming into play here on my part.

 

[casebro]

But, re: gun control, only looking at gun deaths is only representing one side of the argument. Doesn't America have only 1/5 as much violent crime? Seems our guns do have an advantage at deterring violence.

You seem to want to reduce the discussion to the one point- that guns is our problem, and not that we are different cultures with different views about individual vs state rights. Hive mentality vs individual, and where to draw the line.

 

[MikeG]

But, re: gun control, only looking at gun deaths is only representing one side of the argument. Doesn't America have only 1/5 as much violent crime? Seems our guns do have an advantage at deterring violence.

No. Nothing like. Ridiculous claim. Please back up your assertion.......

 

[Professor Yaffle]

http://www.civitas.org.uk/crime/crime_stats_oecdjan2012.pdf

The above is for recorded crime, so any international differences in reporting assault will also come into play. I'm trying to find data from victim surveys now, which may (or may not) give a clearer picture.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

The joy of anecdotal evidence!

And selective memory is undoubtedly coming into play here on my part.

I was asking rather than arguing although re-reading I can see why it may have appeared differently.

But, I also worked in the US briefly and from what I saw town planning was better leading to adequate housing within a shorter commute compared to the UK where space constraint has lead to a more 'organic' growth to most towns and villages with business and industrial parks slotted in wherever there is room, add a transport system which has also evolved rather than be planned and even a short 'crow flies' distance can turn into a trek (my shortest practical route for example is 50% longer than the point to point distance). But this is anecdote as you point out and I was genuinely interested in what US posters thought. I wanted to bring this up in another thread a while back but never got the chance.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

http://rechten.uvt.nl/icvs/pdffiles/ICVS2004_05.pdf

From about page 78. This gives figures for the percentage of people who have been victim of assault or threat. Interestingly, the vastly higher numbers of police recorded assault in Scotland in the link in my previous post is not reflected in the victim survey, where it actually falls below England & Wales and USA. There could be a number of reasons for that: multiple repeat victimisation in the same subgroup of people; much more likely to report to police; much less likely to categorise their experience as assault or to admit to it in survey etc.

All the above shows how difficult it is to make accurate comparisons between countries for crimes that don't end in death. In death there can't be repeat victimisation and the police are aware of the vast majority of cases.

ETA: from the above survey:

Respondents were asked whether they or someone else in their household
owned a firearm and of what type. Ownership rates of hand guns varied
between 0% in Japan, 6% in Lima, 6.8% in Argentina to 17.6% in the USA.
The average gun ownership rate of the Europe is 3.2%. The comparatively
more serious nature of assaults and threats in the USA and some cities
in developing countries seem related to greater availability of handguns.

 

[Polaris]

Really? A have a couple of American colleagues who've come over here to work and they were absolutely determined to live near the office and seemed quite surprised by my relatively modest 30 miles each way.

When I lived in West Virginia, there were a good number of people in my town who commuted to Washington DC (105 miles each way) because it was so ungodly expensive to live in any kind of comfort in the capitol.

 

[Nessie]

There is a very good site here for comparisons

http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/world-health-rankings

The USA performs worse in

Violence, UK 1.1 per 100,000, USA 6.5

Roads, UK 4.8 per 100,000, USA 13.9

Suicide, UK 6.9 per 100,000, USA 10.3

Falls, UK 3.5 per 100,000, USA 4.4

Alcohol, UK 1.1 per 100,000, USA 1.6

Heart disease, UK 68.8 per 100,00, USA 80.5

Lung disease, UK 21.5 per 100,000, USA 24.3


The UK performs worse in

Drug use, UK 2.1 per 100,000, USA 1.5

All cancers, UK 137 per 100,000, USA 123.8

Strokes, UK 36.9 per 100,000, USA 24.4

 

[MikeG]

Some categories of assault in the UK can include verbal assault........in other words being shouted or sworn at. Some surveys of violent crime include car theft.

This is why international comparisons are fraught with danger. You have to be absolutely sure you are comparing like with like....and you very seldom are.

Mike

 

[brodski]

http://www.civitas.org.uk/crime/crime_stats_oecdjan2012.pdf

From about page 78. This gives figures for the percentage of people who have been victim of assault or threat. Interestingly, the vastly higher numbers of police recorded assault in Scotland in the link in my previous post is not reflected in the victim survey, where it actually falls below England & Wales and USA. There could be a number of reasons for that: multiple repeat victimisation in the same subgroup of people; much more likely to report to police; much less likely to categorise their experience as assault or to admit to it in survey etc.

All the above shows how difficult it is to make accurate comparisons between countries for crimes that don't end in death. In death there can't be repeat victimisation and the police are aware of the vast majority of cases.

ETA: from the above survey:

is that the right link?

 

[Professor Yaffle]

is that the right link?

No it wasn't I've editied it now to the correct one:

http://rechten.uvt.nl/icvs/pdffiles/ICVS2004_05.pdf

Also from that link:

The changes or trends in reported victimisation and police recorded crime during the last four or five years hardly correlate at all, or correlate negatively. Only for motor vehicle theft and robbery weak positive correlations were found. Other studies have likewise found that crime victim surveys and police figures often produce strikingly different change estimates among developed nations (Farrington, Langan & Tonry, 2004; Cook & Khmilevska, 2005). Killias, Haymon and Lamon (forthcoming, 2007) applied a similar model as used by Farrington, Langan and Tonry for comparing trends in Switzerland over a period of 20 years. They conclude that survey data and police statistics correspond closely in describing the direction of trends but not in estimating their magnitude.
In England Stepherd and Sivarajasingam (2005) found that in England & Wales decreases in rates of victimisation by violent crime matched decreases according to hospital admissions but differed from the increases in police-recorded violent crimes.
Further research is needed but available evidence suggests that at least over a brief period of time, police recorded crime data do not seem a sufficient measure to determine trends in the actual crime in a comparative perspective. To determine trends in actual crime across countries, periodic crime victim surveys seem an indispensable tool.

 

[brodski]

No it wasn't

At least it wasn't a link to natural news.

 

[Tolls]

I was asking rather than arguing although re-reading I can see why it may have appeared differently.

Oh, I didn't take it as an argument.

But, I also worked in the US briefly and from what I saw town planning was better leading to adequate housing within a shorter commute compared to the UK where space constraint has lead to a more 'organic' growth to most towns and villages with business and industrial parks slotted in wherever there is room, add a transport system which has also evolved rather than be planned and even a short 'crow flies' distance can turn into a trek (my shortest practical route for example is 50% longer than the point to point distance). But this is anecdote as you point out and I was genuinely interested in what US posters thought. I wanted to bring this up in another thread a while back but never got the chance.

I suspect it depends where you are in the US as well.
It's a pretty big country.

It would be interesting to know the sorts of commuting distances, broken down a bit.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

Oh, I didn't take it as an argument.



I suspect it depends where you are in the US as well.
It's a pretty big country.

It would be interesting to know the sorts of commuting distances, broken down a bit.

There are some commuting stats here:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-15.pdf

 

[Tolls]

There are some commuting stats here:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-15.pdf

Well, that shows just how skewed a view you can get...
My weekday commute is not much less than the average shown on page 4 (at 20 minutes), but it takes a 2.5 hour journey on Monday morning and Friday afternoon to achieve that.

ETA: Oh, and you are Professor Yaffle, aren't you, pulling out all this info!

 

[P.J. Denyer]

There are some commuting stats here:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-15.pdf

Thanks! Interesting read. Here's the UK equivilant

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_227904.pdf

I'm really surprised by the UK figures to be honest as my experience has always been of longer commutes for myself and most of my co workers, but then that could be a reflection of having been (mostly) an office worker in the London and surrounding area. The time intervals are slightly different, I wonder how many of the people in the 30-34 minute category in the US figures would have said 1/2hr and therefore fall into 16-30min in the UK ones.

 

[jasonpatterson]

That's the impression I get from various forums.
All anecdotal, but US drivers seem to view 100 mile commutes as nothing abnormal.

Really? A have a couple of American colleagues who've come over here to work and they were absolutely determined to live near the office and seemed quite surprised by my relatively modest 30 miles each way.

More anecdote! A 100 mile commute would be very out of place in my neck of the woods. There certainly are people who do it, but everyone thinks they're either unfortunate (i.e. job moved) or nuts. I wouldn't want a 30 mile commute either, honestly, certainly not long term, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised by someone having one.

If you really care, here is some statistical information about commutes in the US. It lists commute times as opposed to distances, but I have to think that the average speed on a commute is not substantially faster than 60 mph, so as a worst case scenario you could convert them to miles. I suspect strongly that it's substantially less than that in most cases.

 

[jimbob]

Really? A have a couple of American colleagues who've come over here to work and they were absolutely determined to live near the office and seemed quite surprised by my relatively modest 30 miles each way.

<Derail>
The median commuting distance in both countries is pretty low.

Last time I looked mine was longer than the UK's and I think also the US at 25-mile round trip. I cycle it, and often wonder what the roads would be like if say 25% of commuters with a 10-mile round trip cycled.

</Derail>

Back ON topic,

I found some data that suggested about 20% of the difference in mortality rates between the US and UK could be due to the difference in the homicide rate.

However, leaving that aside, I would suggest that the facts support the suggestion that strict gun controls are indeed associated with lower levels of gun crime and gun deaths and specifically with an absence of the characteristic US-style school shootings.

Rolfe.

So a decrease in gun crime is good, even if it's not a decrease in total violent crime?

Is it somehow better to murder a man with a knife as opposed to a gun in your mind? Robberies, rapes, and assaults all must be ok too, just as long as one of those EVIL guns isn't involved!

from a previous thread:

I have found an an analysis on this:

Sloan et al. (1988) compare the crime rates in Seattle and Vancouver, two similar cities in terms of population, climate, income per household, poverty, and unemployment rates. The only significant demographic difference lies in the racial composition of minorities, with more Asians in Vancouver and more Hispanics and blacks in Seattle. Gun regulations are much stricter in Vancouver. In Seattle, handguns may be purchased legally for self-defense in the street or at home. After a 30-day waiting period, a permit can be obtained to carry a gun as a concealed weapon. Handguns need not be registered. In Vancouver, self-defense is not considered a valid or legal reason to carry a gun. Concealed weapons are not permitted. The purchase of a gun requires registration and a restricted-weapons permit. Handguns can be transported in a car, but only if stored in a locked box in the trunk. As a result, an estimated 41 percent of Seattle inhabitants own a gun compared to only 12 percent of Vancouver inhabitants.

The authors find that the two cities essentially experience the same rates of burglary, robbery, homicides, and assaults without a gun. However, in Seattle the rate of assault with a firearm is 7 times higher than in Vancouver, and the rate of homicide with a handgun is 4.8 times higher. The authors conclude that the availability of handguns in Seattle increases the assault and homicide rates with a gun, but does not decrease the crime rates without guns, and that restrictive handgun laws reduce the homicide rate in a community

If a substitution effect exists, the correlations between gun ownership percentages and rates of homicides and suicides by other means than a gun would be significantly negative. They are not (respectively, 0.441 and -0.015, both nonsignificant). The correlation of 0.441, although not significant with this small sample, suggests that the number of homicides by means other than a gun increases with raising levels of gun ownership. Thus, the data do not support the existence of a compensation effect for homicides. Similar conclusions were reached by Duggan (2000).

There isn't much evidence, but other homicides also seem to increase.

is was partly due to Jerome da Gnome's assertion that the lower US life expectancy could be explained by gun deaths. It seems that some can but not all (about 26%)...

(Corrected a couple of irritating typos in my above post)