Have there been any studies in jurisdictions where guns are not legal, and what sort of alternate behavior that psychopaths use to take out rage, frustration, etc., which traditionally would have resulted in gun violence in countries where guns are legal?
Put this in Great Debates, due to the topic, but if this should be in Factual Questions, please feel free to relocate.
As no Debate framed and it appears to be a poor fit for FQ, moved to IMHO.
There have been recent stabbings on different cities’ public transit systems in Canada recently, some fatal. And there have also been the odd someone pushing someone off of a subway platform on to the tracks.
Though I don’t recall any specific, explicit connections to mental health, the news item is often accompanied by an interview with some mental health expert or advocate describing how we need to devote more resources to mental health.
I recently watched all 5 seasons of Luther. At some point I thought how odd it was that all the psychopaths were using hammers and knives as their weapon of choice. And then I realized that it is set in the UK and the public don’t find it easy to get a gun. Mind you, the absence of guns didn’t make the psychopath’s actions any less scary.
Yeah, only less deadly.
Ah yes, the lovely sociopath Alice Morgan.
Fairly gave me the screaming igits, that one did.
My 15yo daughter had a passing resemblance in looks and manner which was frankly bloody disconcerting.
Elliot Rodger’s plan to kill people involved cars and knives as much as guns. In the absence of firearms, he probably would have gone on a lengthier ramming spree with his car than he did (he had gone so far as to assess which kind of vehicle would inflict greater harm). And half of his victims died by knife.
Car attacks are easily rendered impossible by erecting discrete concrete stops at places where large numbers of pedestrians gather. These do nothing to stop a gunman / knifeman.
A good answer to the OP’s question is to look at almost any other country on earth, they don’t have the guns like we do and shockingly, they don’t have the gun deaths.
And no developed country has a higher murder rate. Guess there are very few psychopaths outside the US.
It’s almost as if making it harder for people to get guns leads to fewer murders, but if it was that simple we would have done by now. I mean, I keep hearing America is the greatest nation on earth, we wouldn’t let thousands of people be needlessly slaughtered if we could prevent it. That would make us a nation of psychopaths.
In Japan, arson has been a tactic.
Also in Germany, and there were some severe attacks with cars on pedestrians in the last years. Also attacks by people with guns they owned legally and had a licence for. But everything combined, not even in the ballpark of gun victims in the USA.
Yes, I’m not presuming that the murder rate in countries with limited access to guns was as high as the US (4th on the list). But more curious about any specific studies that may have been done. Anecdotes are great, but aren’t as substantive as scientific studies.
I can only speak for Germany, but I think that for meaningful studies, the number of significant samples of mass killings is much too low. What significance can a study have that only has one sample/year for a population of over 80 million people?
ETA: ok, I just realized that your question isn’t going only for mass shooting events, but general murder. I could imagine that there are studies for preferred weapons/methods for murder in Germany and will be looking for some. Would this satisfy you? If not, what kind of studies are you imagining?
ETA: nope, I find no such studies, not even police statistics about murder weapons or methods in Germany. The most interesting number I found is the latest number of yearly murder victims in Germany that was 264 for 2022. I think that this are still too few samples to generate significant studies from.
I pointed out on another board that in the past, especially when fire codes were not as sophisticated as they are now, that arson was a not-uncommon method of mass murder.
Not- less deadly at all. Machete “sprees”, axe murderers, bombings, etc.
Bombs can kill even more than guns-
The Oklahoma City Bombing killed 168.
In 1927 a psychopath blew up a school with dynamite killing 45, mostly children.
And so forth.
Then there are serial killers-
Some asshole in South America known as “La Bestia” killed 200-300 young children, and did not use a gun. Another SA psychopath called “The Monster of the Andes” killed 110- 300 young children. No gun.
And the list goes on
Sam >>>>> was the USA most prolific serial killer, killing around 93. 1970-2005. he mostly strangled his victims.
Yeah, a psycho with a gun can rack up a dozen or so in a single day, but the real records go to the bombers or the one or two at a time serial killer psychopaths.
Like when protesters are in the streets?
But they do have the murders. “Gun deaths” is a bad term. Are we comparing murder rates or deaths by guns, which include suicides?
Define “developed country”…
Note that the biggest totals by serial killers were down in South America.
This threat isn’t just about mass shootings, but killings by psychopaths.
Most gun murders in the USA are drug/gang related. Those shooters would not likely qualify as true “psychopaths”. While I would agree that many mass shooters are psychopaths, not all murderers are.
This page from the Harvard Injury Control Research Center lists a number of peer-reviewed sources. Discussion of the particular weaponry used is likely to be secondary to the comparative data on overall rates of homicide relative to rates of firearm availability, but I do see some discussion of knife violence in at least some of the articles.