I think @Geezer is pointing out that there could be a big difference between the reported murder rate in China and actual murders. If this is true a percapita murder comparison is less accurate than we would hope.

Comparing round small red apples, with round small orange 'apples'.

@TICexpats
In my post I wrote "China, 1,300,000,000 people, has, officially, the about same number of murders as the US, 310,000,000 people." What don't you understand about population?

Doing the math:
China: 1,300,000,000/100,000*1.0 = 13,000 murders
US : 310,000,000/100,000*4.2 = 13,020 murders

Or, in English, incase the math dazzles: population divided by 100,000 times the rate per 100,000 gives the number of murders.

Do you believe Americans are four times MORE likely to commit murder than Chinese?

BUT, according to China Daily, in 2005, there were 31,000 homicides cases in China and this was down 3,000.

www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2006-05/17/content_592568.htm

If you do the numbers it comes to a rate of 2.4 homicides per 100,000. A little bit more than 1.0.

"China defines a murder as the intentional taking of a human life. Homicides represent a much larger category which includes deaths that occur as a secondary result of rapes, kidnaping, robberies and other crimes." However the US includes such "secondary results" in murder stats.

Many suspect deaths in China are determined to be "accidental." This includes the stabbing and hacking deaths of children by deranged persons.

Given that Chinese police are expected to solve 85% of all homicides, any suspect deaths determined to be accidental deaths help local police look good.

So Breivik in Norway killed 77 with guns and bombs. Bombs made from fertilizer. Shall we ban fertilizer?

There will always be nut jobs.
Timothy McVeigh.
Say no more.

ok geezer you win, your only twice as likely to be murdered in the USA, happy now .

Although McVeigh was a nut job - many sympathize with his ALLEGED underlying driving forces - the increasing heavy handed aggression of our own government towards our own citizens - Waco, Ruby Ridge, etc ad infinitum, while the average citizen either cowers powerlessly or blindly accepts our government's propaganda about domestic terrorism.

The FBI was already empowered with investigating and preventing domestic terrorism - but the 911 incident allowed our government bureaucrats to seize the advantage of public fears to create a multitude of additional domestic security forces.

Security begins with each citizen - peer policing, peer pressures - not with pushing off our individual responsibilities to a government with multiple agendas - such as maintaining budget to build their bureaucratic empires. Their job is self contradictory - they're tasked with eliminating domestic terrorism - however if they achieve that mission, they're disbanded, so their techniques and processes are designed to create a mutually symbiotic relationship with the very enemies they're tasked with eliminating.

That's the reality of government - especially as practised by the USA - but also obviously rampant in China.

@Texas Boy
As has been explained many times above:
Fertiliser - helps grow crops, can be used as a weapon.
Knives - slice fruit, can be used as weapon.
Cars - transport people around, can accidentally kill people.
Guns - weapons. Designed solely to injure and kill.

About Breivik, less than 10 people were killed by a bomb and the rest by firearms.

I think it makes a big difference if you ban or control firarms, which are only designed to kill without any other purposes,
or using an random item such as fertilizers, cars, or whatever you can think of, to kill someone and compare it to guns, in the gun control argument.

You can kill someone with basically anything but the chances to get killed by such an item are far more unlikely and easier to avoid, in the intend of harming or killing you, (Broken bottle-barfight, ex-wife/husband running you over with a car, a businesswoman using poison to kill British business men..etc.).

But if you insist of bringin it into a weapon control argument, then also expose how likely it is to be killed by fertilizer bombs (in comparison with a firearm) . Then we will see that it wouldn't stand as a fact based realistic argument.

About China homicide
I agree many countries polish their homicide cases by up or downgrading them in their categories, murder manslaughter...etc..
There is one thing I want to add for all the pro gun guys living in China.
If you really believe in the points you mentioned about selfdefense, defending against the opressive gov. etc....
So I want to ask would you like to have open gun laws similar to the U.S. here in China as well?

And if the gun guys really believe in it why don't they(lobbies) try to promote it to other countires (as usually prosporpus and potentially great ideas are being lobbied internationally) ?

Has ANYONE on either side changed their mind????

If so - - WHY?????

Has ANYONE on either side changed their mind????

If so - - WHY?????