where do i even begin.
the first link i agree with. thats a reliable source. but youre obscurring 3 facts. (1) crime is defined different in different countries and specific offences overlap and are obscurred by (2) reporting rates, which are marginally lower in america, where ppl have guns and can shoot you if you talk to the cops.(3) the differential in the lesser crimes is unsubstantial.
the difference between europe and american murder rates is massive.
which takes us to your cute little graph in the second link. it completely obscures the statistics by including them in a context defined by the war torn leader in murders rather than in deaths per 10 000. it puts them in front of england at 18th/21st respectively. its ridiculous. even the first link you gave me, (the respectable one) lists america as 22 places above england (per capita). if you want to look at actual numbers then you are 5th in the world. 16,204 ,,, thats more than 5 x 9/11 every year mate.
lastly your useful fools web link is incongrous with reputable statistics and looks like nra hype and straight out lies. its like me saying a white murderer is more likely to kill a black person than vice versa. is it true...of course. does it mean anything to you. not really.
if you are breaking the f**** law yourself then you are part of the problem. just because you happen to be white doesnt give you a pass.
criminals do follow the law. they follow the law of the jungle religiously, believe me. if guns are illegal period, then they are begging a bullet to use one and to use one on an innocent person is pretty close to suicide. all you are really doing is victimising yourself ad your society with your lack of understanding of the dynamics involved.
if we were 100 ppl in a room and everyone had guns vs no one...which room is most dangerous. your argument that criminals would still have them is silly. the state could crush them overnight with the support of the ppl. the ira, the mafia, everyone knows this. why dont you?