I didn’t know on where to post my comment, so I opened a new topic. Mods fell free to move it to where it seems more suitable.
Every time a mass shooting occurs, people tend to come back to the same discussion about gun laws and how easy is to get your hands on a firearm.
Sometimes, some one throws the argument about how restringing the access to guns affects freedom, while others says that this is the very root cause of the issue.
I’d like to point out that the discussion is much more complex than just freedom rights and gun laws. It is also about culture, and how a country ended up being the way it is.
To better clarify what I mean, check the table below:
|El Salvador||82.84||Restrictive||65 (Democracy)|
|Bosnia and Herzegovina||1.28||Permissive||102 (Hybrid regime)|
|Honduras||56.52||Permissive||82 (Hybrid regime)|
|Thailand||3.24||Restrictive||107 (Hybrid regime)|
|Uganda||11.52||Restrictive||98 (Hybrid regime)|
|United Arab Emirates||0.89||Permissive||147 (Authoritarian)|
|Republic of the Congo||9.32||Permissive||132 (Authoritarian)|
It shows a comparison between different countries homicide rate, firearm regularion and political regime.
- Homicide Rate is measured as the number of victims of homicide per 100,000 people, sourced from UNODC or WHO estimation
- Gun Legislation qualified in permissive or restrictive, according to gunpolicy.org
- Political Regime classified as Democracy, Hybrid regime or Authoritarian, using the Economist Democracy Index as reference
My point is that one can see that the criminality can be high or low, regardless the legislation or regime of the country.
Just focusing in one aspect of the problem as the solution for everything is a big mistake.