American cops kill more Americans than there are homicides in Japan of any kind


I think the point it is making is that there are a lot of people with a lot of guns in the US.

I can’t find the 2007 survey they refer to but the 2002 survey is here:

That seems to be focussed on small arms numbers (and prices, well supply generally) because that is what governments were worrying about.

They make some statements about for example being able to gauge the volatility of the political situation or the desire for insurgency, etc. by the price of fire-arms in a region. If Columbian rebels are paying a fortune for AK-47s, they evidently want them quite badly. If they could buy more, for less - presumably they would use them more, etc. Arms prices in Afghanistan tell you how likely an upsurge in violence is and so on.


Shoot first, ask questions later. Ok, got it…


According to Killed by Police, 1220 people died because of US police in 2015. The deaths cataloged by Killed by Police are tallied using media reports of the deaths. In any given year, there are likely more killed that don’t make it into media reports due to the victim’s status in our society.

So far, US police are documented as having killed 91 people in 2018. The month’s not over, but at the current rate, police will kill approximately 1,277 people in the US this year.


“America first”


Well, since we’re dropped down to #8 in the list of great countries these days, we might as well be #1 in something.


For some demographics (i.e. black men) in some areas, police are the number one cause of homicides. So we can’t even pretend it’s some sort of scaling problem (i.e. that there’s just more violence in the US, thus the cops are more violent).

I’m sure we can expect banner years under the Trump admin. He’s set the tone and made it clear the Justice Department won’t be holding anyone accountable, certainly.

That’s certainly a big part of it, and always has been…


Is this the “American Carnage” Trump promised to end?


I read that 20% of police are truly outstanding people who are truly devoted to making their communities safe and improving the lives of the residents. Another 60% are OK, but they just go along with the culture of the force where they serve. Finally, there are another 20% who are just horrible people.


But not really. Which is more “dangerous” 1 guy with 100 guns, or 10 guys with 1 gun?

Eh, it may be an interesting estimation, but not really sure if it is relevant. My dad owns over 2 dozen guns from over his 70+ years on earth. But due the types and capabilities, is that any more relevant than if he had only 2 or 3? One can’t really use more than one gun at a time.

Right, but I still think it is less relevant than number of owners. Like if you look at total GNP of the US one would think we are all doing well, when it the upper class are throwing number off.

But anyway…


If we are comparing to Japan, it’s important to account for the way in which the murder rate is kept so low.

This article offers one perspective:

“You can commit a perfect murder in Japan because the body is not likely to be examined,” says Hiromasa Saikawa, a former member of the Tokyo Metropolitan Police security and intelligence division.


As long as the other 80% cover up and excuse that 20% then it is 100% are horrible people.


We’re still #1 is incarceration. It doesn’t even matter if you’re talking about the % of people in prison, or the absolute number of people incarcerated. We win either way.




Perhaps it’s because the ownership of multiple guns indicates a degree of fetishisation, and so they’re citing the number owned as a psychological indicator?

(I am doubtful that’s why they presented the figures like that, but I do think it’s a relevant take-away)


That might be what some people want the take away to be, but I don’t know if there is any actual evidence of this. (Nor do I really think that was the intent of the info graphic either.) That would be like saying golfers who have more than one club do so because of “fetishsation”.


Sadly, given the apparently draconian court and penal systems in Japan, it’s probably not a great model to aim for. :wink:

I’m more interested in the fact that Canada has 33% as many guns but not nearly that proportion of murders, be it by police or otherwise.

(of course, a large part of this is likely the number of long guns owned by our prolific hunters up north…)


I think a lot it is down to violent tropes in US movies and TV shows. It starts with the wild west where everybody has a gun on their hip and continues with cop shows where absolutely every police officer gets shot at and has to return fire to save their life.


Yes, there’s been very few Andy Taylor’s or Columbo’s on TV who never even draw their guns. But I also think the saturation level of weapons leads cops to believe, with cause, that any random person they confront is armed. That 66% difference between US and Canada is plenty to justify that difference in response. I’m certainly not excusing the rate of wanton murder by cops, just saying there’s something there besides their own behavior.


It is more complicated than the other replies seem to understand.

You can count gun amount by the amount produced and sold, and the models and serial numbers.

Ownership you really can’t accurately assess. What if someone buys 100 guns and sells them off the books to 99 people. Sure in that group of 100 people it would apear 1% own guns. When really 100% own guns. It doesn’t even have to be sold, what if your father owns 10 guns and has 5 people living in his house. 1 person owns them but 5 have access.

Amount of guns is not a perfect metric, but its the only one they can calculate to a reasonable accuracy using real data.


the number of tool owners is the real problem, if you emphasize the proPER sylLAble