Talk:List of countries by firearm-related death rate/Archive 1

Discussion about country lists in general
A discussion has been started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries/Lists of countries which could affect the inclusion criteria and title of this and other lists of countries. Editors are invited to participate. Pfainuk talk 12:18, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Thailand
The data from the claimed Source (1) ( .. corrected link is http://www.unodc.org/pdf/crime/seventh_survey/7sc.pdf). Example, In 2000 it is reported Thailand has 23,631 INTENTIONAL homicides by gun (277 non intentional). Yet there are only 5,717 TOTAL INTENTIONAL HOMICIDES from all causes in Thailand this same year. Common sense will tell you that Thailand doesn't have a death rate by guns at 33 per 100,000. This would be a rate of 64 a day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.87.225.88 (talk • contribs) 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Murders or Suicide rates?
Is there a list that separates murders from suicide rates? Apparently places like Switzerland and Finland have had high suicide rates by firearm in recent years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Two Wrongs (talk • contribs) 23:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * There are three columns in the existing data - Murder, Suicide, Accidental. Then a total column is given.  The data you request is already here??  You can also sort by any of the columns - alphabetical, or by just murders alone, or even suicides alone, etc. Point your mouse to the right of the heading field and you'll see an up/down arrow icon for each column.  Click and play! TheBustopher (talk) 05:19, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Sort order of the list
The title is wrong. "List of countries by firearm-related death rate" would mean that it is listed in order (descending or acending) by the number of people killed by firearms. Instead this list is ordered by name of country, so the title should be "List of Firearm-related deaths by country" or something similiar. 71.51.50.38 (talk) 23:23, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Can be sorted any way you like, by any column. TheBustopher (talk) 05:20, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

New Page for Total Gun Deaths per Country?
Can we get a new page that lists Total Gun Deaths per Country? It's good to have a per 100,000 list... but it's also good to see the absolute figures. For instance, South Africa has 10 times as many gun deaths per 100,000 than the USA... but it is well known that the USA has the highest number of gun deaths. There should be a new page so this is made clear. 115.64.28.195 (talk) 07:53, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * For now, you can have a look at this page Nationmaster Stats TheBustopher (talk) 05:15, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Total numbers is a useless figure other than for someone estimating "total" policing budgets or "total" hospital costs (who already have access to those numbers in their line of work). For the rest of us, the per capita information is the only one worth looking at.--Tallard (talk) 02:57, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

This list is by country, not by death rate.
If it were by death rate, the highest death rate would come first. I work for census bureau demographic surveys, BTW. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TechnoFaye (talk • contribs) 21:58, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I second the assertion that this page really is ordered incorrectly (for what my opinion is worth). When arriving at this page the first impression I got was that australia has the highest rate of gun deaths. That is entirely misleading, especially when the related "list of countries by gun ownership", which led me to this page, is properly listed in descending numerical order. --129.247.247.240 (talk) 16:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I would argue that alphabetical ordering makes more sense here as the dates of the data collected are not necessarily the same. If one automatically assumes that the first entry must also be the highest, then perhaps that person should take the time to look at the second and third entries, as well. That said, the name of the list does somewhat imply that it would be in numerical order, it just happens that for technical reasons, it would not be wholly proper. Either way, to go as far as to say that it's "entirely misleading" is a bit extreme, as if the first entry is the only one being looked at, then the data isn't really useful in the first place. --Oceanhahn (talk) 12:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * This kind of table can be sorted by any column - see the symbols in column headings. So you can look at it in various orders. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 21:14, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Since many of the countries have no information for firearm suicides, it seems misleading to sort by death rates. This is comparing apples and oranges. I think the default sort order should be based on homicide rate, which is the most complete column. -- Andrew Myers (talk) 16:46, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

WHO data
All the WHO numbers are wrong. All deaths involving a firearm are wrongly filed under homicide. I'll be updating them when I have some time.Theothor32 (talk) 00:07, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

"NA"
What's with all the NA's Isn't NA an abbreviation of Not Applicable?! Unknown maybe? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.0.114.138 (talk) 17:17, 16 December 2012 (UTC)


 * It should be "no data" or "not reported".

See Also: Overall Homicide Rate by Country
I think this is an important and obvious link to put in that section. MistySpock (talk) 19:14, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

significant digits or fixed number of decimal places
The figures should be presented with a fixed number of decimal places if possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.210.66.115 (talk) 02:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

War zones and other missing countries
I assume that various war zones have been omitted deliberately, but there is no mention of this in the article. Someone who is not paying much attention could easily come away with the impression that El Salvador sees more people shot and killed than anywhere else in the world, in proportion to its population, but then you look more closely and it's not being compared with Iraq or Afghanistan - or Somalia, Uganda or Pakistan, for that matter. There ought to be some mention of how non-exhaustive this list is, I think, but I'm not sure what exactly to put (or how these countries were selected in the first place). --Oolong (talk) 11:18, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Figures adding up
The math doesn't add up? This is in percent right? The total being the percent of firearm deaths in total (per 100,000 population in one year), and the number under Homicide being percent of homicides through guns, Suicides being percent suicides through guns and so on of the same (deaths by - per 100,000 population in one year). So they should add up to the total, how can the total say it's something when the Homicide/Suicide/Etc add up to a different number? Am I missing something? Many of them add up but many of them do not add up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MoorganHart (talk • contribs) 17:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Apparently incorrect/unclear figures
This edit caught my eye. The edit changes the table entry for Columbia

The supporting source cited gives the following information: I don't see any info for a "Total firearm-related death rate" statistic in the cited source. It is not clear to me where the figures asserted in the table for that statistic come from.
 * Rate of Gun Homicide per 100,000 People (2010): 27.1
 * Rate of Gun Suicide per 100,000 People (2009): 0.87
 * Rate of Unintentional Gun Death per 100,000 People (1999): 0.14

A quick look at another table entry (Brazil) shows a similar situation there. It appears to me that the figures in the table need to be audited against the supporting sources cited, and that the table format might need to be revised to associate as-of dates with individual statistics rather than giving a blanket date on a per-country basis. I'm not a regular editor of this article, so I'll not dive in and make major changes to it based on what I've seen in this glimpse of it. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 21:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree - Chile has the same problem. I think they probably need to be looked at on a case-by-case basis.  In some cases, perhaps some extra notes are due in the "sources and notes" column, but in other cases, the numbers just appear to be wrong (at least according to the given sources). I don't even see where the numbers in the Chile row came from at all.  The source has nothing close to what is listed.  If you notice major errors, I would go ahead and update the page and make a note of the change here.  If a regular editor sees a major change made and has a reason as to why it was that way, they can comment with an explanation and revert the change (one of the many benefits of Wikipedia!) But so far I see no explanation for the apparently incorrect statistics. Josephmarty (talk) 23:04, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


 * There appears to be a glitch with the display of the UK entry. The underlying code has the correct figure of 0.25 but the page shows 25.25.

Suggestion: Add total homicides in the table
Hello everyone. I'm doing a bit of research on this and to me and probably anyone else reading this it would be very interesting to compare murders in general to murders by guns without having to ALT-TAB between two different pages or more. Hope you agree and that someone could do this. Thanks46.59.36.37 (talk) 16:12, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Missing data is a point of view
I came here looking for data about a certain country where lots of people are killed by guns, but the statistics for that country are excluded. The truth should not be censored, but I bet it would be censored if I said what country it is. Do you need three hints? One of them is the number of letters in the most common acronym for the country. Shanen (talk) 18:01, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

"order" column in the table
What does the "order" column mean? It doesn't correlate to any of the other columns. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

table sorting problems
Some problems with the table:
 * 1) The table is in two parts, for no reason I can see.
 * 2) sorting on the second table doesn't work.
 * 3) Sorting on the numeric columns on the first table sorts the entries by digits, not by the magnitude of the number. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 05:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Problem numbers 1 and 2 should be non-problems now. I've fixed number 3. I'm still looking at the table data and may do more work. I'll comment further in the talk page section above this one when I decide about that. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:26, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, all of that seems to be right now. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 05:52, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion - reverify & redo the table
The table is outdated in places, and the Date column's relationship to the other columns is sometimes unclear. I suggest that the table be reverified where possible and recast as a new table similar in concept to the table in the Conscription article, but with default supporting sources row-by-row instead of column-by-column. The country-by-country pages at the gunpolicy.org source hosted by the University of Sydney School of Public Health (see ) looks like a good choice as the default supporting source. There are about 75 entries in the table -- that's a week or two of work at ten entries per day or so. An under construction template could be placed above the table, a new table put in place above the current table, entries redone one by one and removed from the old table as completed, and the old table removed after being emptied. That would look something like this:


 * New table


 * Current table (wikilinks tweaked)


 * Note: I was able to access the selection matrix at the European Detailed Mortality Database, but was unable to display any data from the country-by-year reports.

Comments? Suggestions? Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:11, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I've started work on this. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:58, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I've finished redoing the table using the gunpolicy.org sources. I'm not sure about the other sources cited in the old table because, as I've explained above, I've been unable to reverify them. Some of them have later dates thn the gunpolicy.org sources cited in the new table, though, and these should probably be in the article if they are reliable and verifiable. I have to travel tomorrow, and won't be able to move on to that. I may or may not be able to get back to this in a few days. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:35, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Northern Ireland
Why is Northern Ireland included with developing nations? GeneralBelly (talk) 22:51, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Why is this list even split between developing and developed nations? Seems like a deliberate move of bias to put the US on the top of the list.204.153.16.62 (talk) 21:11, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * That's true - it doesn't seem that the developed / undeveloped country delineation makes sense in this respect. I can understand it in other lists such as GNP or education - but gun deaths are a more social issue.  Nicholas SL Smith chatter 23:36, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


 * This is probably done because developing countries tend to show greater levels of civil unrest by comparison to developed, postindustrial ones. Speaking to the issue of having "the US [at] the top of the list", if we modify the statement somewhat, we could also say that the US compares unfavourably to every developed country included on the list, as well as a significant number of developing ones. And besides, for that complaint to hold water, the US would actually have to be at the top of the list, which the current alphabetical system denies. Rather, the US is at the bottom of the list, so, aethetically speaking, there should be no problem here. Also, the idea that education is not a social issue rings somewhat bogus to me, even as an example. Firearms fatalities are only that kind of statistic which a person views them to be; calling it a "social issue" so that you can reconfigure a list represents a bit of intellectual dishonesty. This applies to all lists, not just this one, I say. --Oceanhahn (talk) 12:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Slovenia also doesn't belong on the developing countries list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.103.254.205 (talk) 12:18, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


 * South Africa rates the highest for firearm homicide, yet some people still don't believe there is a onslaught of the Boer farmers. South Africa used to be a developed nation, perhaps it could now be more accurately described as an undevoloping nationInvmog (talk) 22:10, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * northern ireland is not a nation........... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.241.61.226 (talk) 02:22, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Graphs
Did the anti-gun lobby do the graphs,etc. In the gun ownership article, which the US leads-questionably, at least the graphs tell a story the anti-gunners like. In this article, which shows that the US is far less violent with guns than many, many other countries, the graphs would never show you this. Could this be on purpose. Hey guys be intellectually honest - remember the dopes on MSNBC use these numbers. 2601:181:8000:D6D0:DC1B:4FE9:E976:99F3 (talk) 00:34, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorting?
It would be useful if there were some way to include a feature that would allow the table to be sorted on any given column. The current alphabetical listing by country is of only very limited usefulness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.249 (talk) 20:42, 30 October 2013 (UTC)


 * You can sort by any column simply by clicking the column header. 98.24.58.80 (talk) 19:48, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Murders with Firearms!!!
Why isn't there a Wikipedia page for the following information? Displayed as such. Plain and simple. Can someone please make a page like this. Thank You.

Crime Statistics > Murders with firearms (most recent) by country Showing latest available data. Rank 	  Countries   	Amount Total:	               100,693 Weighted average:	2,097.8
 * 1)  	  South Africa:	31,918
 * 2)  	  Colombia:	21,898
 * 3)  	  Thailand:	20,032
 * 4)  	  United States:9,369
 * 5)  	  Philippines:	7,708
 * 6)  	  Mexico:	2,606
 * 7)  	  Slovakia:	2,356
 * 8)  	  El Salvador:	1,441
 * 9)  	  Zimbabwe:	598
 * 10)  	  Peru:	        442
 * 11)  	  Germany:	269
 * 12)  	  Czech Repub:  181
 * 13)  	  Ukraine:	173
 * 14)  	  Canada:	144
 * 15)  	  Albania:	135
 * 16)  	  Costa Rica:	131
 * 17)  	  Azerbaijan:	120
 * 18)  	  Poland:	111
 * 19)  	  Uruguay:	109
 * 20)  	  Spain:	97
 * 21)  	  Portugal:	90
 * 22)  	  Croatia:	76
 * 23)  	  Switzerland:	68
 * 24)  	  Bulgaria:	63
 * 25)  	  Australia:	59
 * 26)  	  Sweden:	58
 * 27)  	  Bolivia:	52
 * 28)  	  Japan:	47
 * 29)  	  Slovenia:	39
 * 30)  	  Belarus:	38
 * 31)  	  Hungary:	38
 * 32)  	  Latvia:	28
 * 33)  	  Burma:	27
 * 34)  	  Macedonia:	26
 * 35)  	  Austria:	25
 * 36)  	  Estonia:	21
 * 37)  	  Moldova:	20
 * 38)  	  Lithuania:	16
 * 39)  	  UK:    	14
 * 40)  	  Denmark:	14
 * 41)  	  Ireland:	12
 * 42)  	  New Zealand:	10
 * 43)  	  Chile:	9
 * 44)  	  Cyprus:	4
 * 45)  	  Morocco:	1
 * 46)  	  Oman:	0
 * 47)  	  Luxembourg:	0
 * 48)  	  Iceland:	0

DEFINITION: Total recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm. Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence.

SOURCE: The Eighth United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (2002) (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Centre for International Crime Prevention)

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms

Cmanhattan24 (talk) 09:54, 15 December 2012 (UTC)cmanhattan24
 * Those are ten year old statistics. Mspritch (talk) 14:02, 15 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, we're probably not going to find 1-year old statistics for something this comprehensive, I suspect. But here's one from 4-5 years ago http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/crime_survey_eleventh.html "The Eleventh United Nations Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (Eleventh UN-CTS, 2007-2008)" if someone else has the time to take that data and put up on WP. Harel (talk) 20:19, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I should add, though, that such a section should state clearly those are absolute numbers and not per-capita. Both types of data are relevant, but should be labelled clearly. Harel (talk) 20:31, 15 December 2012 (UTC)


 * ' Why isn't there a Wikipedia page for the following information? Displayed as such. 'Because, it would embarrass the United States. Thanks for posting it though. That list is all I was looking for from this article.Beingsshepherd (talk) 23:59, 17 August 2013 (UTC)Beingsshepherd


 * Comparing absolute numbers between countries is worse than meaningless. Per-capita rates are the simplest measures that have any validity. 24.107.185.147 (talk) 20:19, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of countries by firearm-related death rate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.unodc.org/unodc/crime_cicp_survey_seventh.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130309231127/http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime/Homicide_statistics2012.xls to http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime/Homicide_statistics2012.xls

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:35, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

New Column
Should a column be added on whether Guns are legal in the country or illegal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul "The Wall" (talk • contribs) 19:08, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of countries by firearm-related death rate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120125212907/http://wisqars.cdc.gov:8080/cdcMapFramework/mapModuleInterface.jsp to http://wisqars.cdc.gov:8080/cdcMapFramework/mapModuleInterface.jsp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:40, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Homicide is not murder
It would be nice to see the homicide column broken out into justified versus non-justified. Mixing murder and self defense in the same column is misleading, unless one philosophically opposes self defense. -- SpareSimian (talk) 17:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

This chart is for *one* year only (or for 'mixed years'), and the years aren't even the same for each country. (This chart is *not* an accurate depiction of firearm-related deaths.)WikiFan2 (talk) 06:36, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

hom·i·cide NOUN the deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another; murder: 99.73.37.247 (talk) 05:11, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't know where you got your definition, but in the source of most of the information, homicide is one thing and murder is another. Thinker78 (talk) 07:05, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Dubious number of 6.6 guns per 100 inhabitants in the UK
I can't believe there are 6.6 guns per 100 people in the UK. I don't know what the true figure is, but I suspect less than 1%. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.131.72.170 (talk) 22:23, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * That figure is complete guesswork. I guess it just serves illustrative purposes. An expert provides his opinion on what is the number of firearms in the country and as such different expert's opinions can vary greatly. So it is an inexact number. Thinker78 (talk) 22:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Reversion of Chickakoo's edits
The reason I reverted is because I was not able to verify the data and because No original research due to the crunching of the numbers. Per WP:NOR/WP:CALC, "Routine calculations do not count as original research, provided there is consensus among editors that the result of the calculation is obvious, correct, and a meaningful reflection of the sources. Basic arithmetic, such as adding numbers, converting units, or calculating a person's age are some examples of routine calculations." When I reverted, I tried looking up the reference but I didn't find it so I came to the conclusion that the calculation failed verification and in addition therefore it was not an obvious reflection of the sources. More recently, I checked the new URL provided as reference in my talk page by the above editor but I fail to find the information that should be contained in the Wikipedia page, like firearm-related homicides, firearm-related suicides, etc. I looked up the second reference in my talk page regarding the number of firearms in Canada but, in said reference, a note is provided that the number comes from the 2007 Small Arms Survey, so it is older information than what was already in the article. If I'm mistaken in anything please let me know. Thinker78 (talk) 23:48, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Request for comment on doing math operations to present data of a source
Chickakoo added information which involved her doing calculations using the source's original numbers to present new numbers with the format required in the Wikipedia article table (further information above under "Validity of figures. Canada"). I reverted due to WP:CALC, believing the result is not obvious from the sources. Question is if the edit done by Chickakoo meets WP:CALC's threshold that "the result of the calculation is obvious, correct, and a meaningful reflection of the sources" and thus should be restored or is the revert justified and thus the edit should not be restored. Per WP:CALC, consensus is required to restore. Thinker78 (talk) 23:06, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The RFC seems a bit premature. It looks like the Canada issue consists of a single edit by each side to the article, and a single reasonable comment by each side on the talk page. In the future I'd suggest opening an RFC only after reasonable efforts had reached a clear impasse.
 * The first and biggest issue is that the ref link is invalid. www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a47 is a link to a dynamic-results page. It comes up with an error message when anyone else tries to click it. It requires a bit of elaborate effort trying to pull up the desired database results. I think that's probably a bigger concern than a presumably(?) easily obtained & not very controversial population figure to convert the numbers into a per-100,000-population style. Alsee (talk) 11:20, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I requested comments to clarify WP:CALC use in this case and in the interest of fairness. That link you mentioned doesn't work but Chickakoo provided another link under the section "Validity of figures. Canada" above.Thinker78 (talk) 21:04, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

War related deaths
Do the figures only include civilian non-war deaths? --RAN (talk) 17:23, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:54, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * List of countries by firearm-related death rate.jpg

Should we add a column marking if Guns are legal in that country?
Yes? no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul "The Wall" (talk • contribs) 18:08, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Should we add a column marking if Guns are legal in that country?
No. It is not that guns are either legal or illegal: various countries' laws regulate who may own various types of guns. Often licenses are required, but perhaps only for certain classes of guns. Marine Parade (talk) 23:03, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

removing tag, and request for assistance
I'm removing the tag that complains that much of the data is from a single source. The article is plenty unwieldy with just a single source, and has been discussed numerous times here and there, different agencies report differently, and different sources parse the data differently, and different sources collect their data in different years, so it becomes a horrible maintenance mess to use more than a single source (with some exceptions).

Secondly, I'd be grateful if anyone (with volumes of free time!) would vet my recent updates. I suspect there are tons of incorrect numbers, and we know most are out of date. Plenty of vandalism over the years, as well as innocent bad transcription. It's a lot of work to peel through the source numbers and update the many entries here. So if you see mistakes I made, please fix! And if you have scads of time, maybe update some of the other entries. Anastrophe (talk) 03:41, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


 * For example, Honduras in 2018.


 * 2631+6+23+404
 * Gun homicides+unintentional gun deaths+undetermined gun deaths+suicides (all)
 * I include the "all" suicides total as there is no seperate number for suicides by gun.
 * =3064


 * Population in 2015 = 8,318,000 (UN)


 * Population in 2018 = 9,182,766 (CIA est)


 * That gives roughly 33.37


 * Are my figures correct?


 * The current ratio is listed as 60 -> 66.4


 * That's TWICE what it should be if my figures are correct.




 * Chaosdruid (talk) 16:10, 16 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I don't think that any of the entries in the list that are missing one or more of the sub-rates, should synthesize an overall rate - since clearly, we don't have adequate data to do so. I think, instead of all the question marks in the list, "N/A" would be the better identifier, as well for total rates where sub-rates aren't available. Thoughts?Anastrophe (talk) 22:40, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

This bit of data changed, looks exaggerated
The 'total gun death rate' for the United States now says 19.51 ( as of 8/01/19 ), which sems to be almost double what it should be / was last time I looked. Cited sources also put the figure at 12.1.

39,000 total deaths in a country of 330M cannot possibly be a rate 19.5 / 100k, can it?


 * A user did a mass update to most figures in the table back in late june. A random sampling of the changes shows every entry had incorrect data plugged into it.
 * I've rolled the article back to the last edit before those the user performed, and re-applied the changes to the charts section that user User:RCraig09 had made - the only substantive changes since the mass change as best I can tell. Anastrophe (talk) 03:54, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

the paper i found in the new topic below has almost every country for 2016, which is fairly recent, but i don't have time to do data entry from it, and i'm not sure if taking the whole table is fair use? Irtapil (talk) 17:31, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

suggested source
I came across this but i don't have time to add properly. Leavingn it here so someone else can if i don't get back to it.


 * https://www.jcu.edu.au/news/releases/2018/october/tough-laws-prevent-gun-deaths

but it would probably be good to see if you can dig up the original research, since press releases aren't great.

Irtapil (talk) 17:20, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

the paper is linked in the press release
 * https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2698492

a correction lists errors in the text, just go by the tables for data in wiki tables, but the text is worth a read for comparison of data collection in different countries.
 * https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2698826

Irtapil (talk) 17:23, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

is there a standard way to deal with references with over 100 authors? this looks a bit bulky. 

Irtapil (talk) 17:47, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Table sorting not working?
Judging from comments above this isn't a new problem, but the table sorting still doesn't seem to function properly? I suspect it is due to data in the columns not matching the data specified in the column headings (e.g. "mixed years" in the "Year" column)? JezGrove (talk) 00:08, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Removed "Rank" column
Someone added a column on the left side of the table with the numerical rank of countries by firearm-related death per capita, so like Honduras is 1, Venezuela is 2, etc. While I think it would be useful in a static, unchanging table (e.g. in a printed book), or as a dynamic table where you can include a formula to display the rank (e.g. using Javascript, or a spreadsheet), the problem I see in a Wikipedia article is that every time you update a single number that changes the rankings, you have to edit the rank of between 2 and 74 other countries, which seems too laborious. I just updated data for three countries, so am facing this issue. It's enough added work that I think it would deter casual editors from updating the data.

The rank column was just added, so I removed it. If there's some consensus to add it back, by all means have at it. -Agyle (talk) 01:40, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Ok, but is there a way to automatically order this list? Cause it being unordered is utterly idiotic and makes all the information 100% useless.76.64.139.51 (talk) 15:02, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Unintentional and undetermined. What are they for?
Each should be explained above the table. --Timeshifter (talk) 12:44, 2 April 2021 (UTC)


 * What explanation were you looking for? They seem self-evident to me. Unintentional means they were determined to be "accidental" deaths. Undetermined means that intentionality could not be determined. Anastrophe (talk) 18:12, 2 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I clarified it a bit above the table. I copied the definition from a gunpolicy.org country page. --Timeshifter (talk) 04:33, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

"Sources and notes" column. It should be strictly for reference numbers.
This would narrow the table more. This would allow the table to work better in smaller screens, and would allow the use of larger fonts. --Timeshifter (talk) 12:47, 2 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I believe the idea was to provide - in advance - wikilinks to individual articles as they become created, as evidenced by some of them already be wl'ed. however, I think that would best be done by wl'ing the country name in the first column I would say. Additional feedback on that idea would be good...Anastrophe (talk) 18:27, 2 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I see only one so far: Gun laws in Switzerland. I suggest putting that in the "see also" section.


 * I think the rest of the text in the "Sources and notes" column should be removed. Any objection? --Timeshifter (talk) 04:38, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Leftmost years column. What is it for?
GunPolicy.org often has different years for different statistics for a country.

So shouldn't that column be removed? Putting the year in parentheses after each piece of data makes more sense. --Timeshifter (talk) 12:40, 2 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree that the year column is pretty pointless. There's no uniform dating for when the statistics were gathered. However, having to add the year to each and every cell is another exercise in tedious grooming. I think that where the stats are uniform for a given country to a given year, just give the year in parens next to the country name. Where specific cells have their own year, then do that. Either that - or leave years out, and keep them as notes. But that would also be another relentlessly tedious grooming task. Anastrophe (talk) 18:17, 2 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I created this article: Percent of households with guns by country. It is a work in progress. So I understand tedious. I wish gunpolicy.org would put their data in tables and spreadsheets. Can we remove the year column? I think the years in parentheses are important for readers and policy makers. To see how laws and cultural changes are effecting the statistics. --Timeshifter (talk) 04:46, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Norway murders rate probably wrong
In the "firearm-related death rate per 100,000 population per year" table Norway have 0.06 homicides that correspond to about 3 homicides per year (Norway population is about 5 millions, 2021).

This article says that in 2018 have been murdered 28 persons.

| This wikipedia page state the homicide rate is 0.6 per 100.000 inabitants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paolo.sulprizio (talk • contribs) 11:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Uniformity of Data
This list should contain more disclaimers as to the reliability of the different figures. --62.108.31.26 15:49, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Sure, I added a note about the reliability. Feel free to expand or comment. --Vsion 15:59, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The preface of the Wikipedia entry, List of countries by homicide rate, ought to serve an example for the type of qualifiers needed to discuss this kind of data. -- Sonof76 (talk) 19:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Completeness of Data
This list is by no means an exhaustive listing. The Wikipedia entry, List of countries by homicide rate, ought to serve as an example for the format of this page. -- Sonof76 (talk) 19:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Estonia
I am very confused by the figure for Estonia. The cited document by Krug (1998) claims 12.74/per 100k for 1994 but the WHO says 2.8 per 100k (2011. ‘Inter-country Comparison of Mortality for Selected Cause of Death – Total Firearm Death.’ European Detailed Mortality Database (DMDB). Copenhagen: World Health Organisation Regional Office for Europe. 15 September.)

This number feels a lot more reasonable considering thier rather restrictive firearms laws.

Here are some numbers from other countries from the same source.

great detail can be found here: http://data.euro.who.int/dmdb/ Litch (talk) 07:28, 9 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, the Estonian figure's ancient, and needs replacing. Your figures seem to come from http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/citation/quotes/5684, but those figures don't match exactly what you *currently* get from an ICD10: W32-34 X72-75 X93-95 Y22-24 query on WHO. I'll update the table with the latest values, and add a reference, as that's what Be_Bold says I should do! Fatphil (talk) 12:13, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Finland
The table in this Wikipedia article gives a number (3.64) that is an order of magnitude different from a number (0.4) quoted by United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, here: http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/Homicide/Homicides_by_firearms.xls


 * This is now fixed. All of Finland's gun deaths were incorrectly listed as homicides (actually they are mostly suicides). --91.176.193.59 (talk) 13:37, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Cited Rates are Dated
Some of the data is so obviously incorrect I feel the whole page should be deleted if you can not source reliable data.

On this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate which lists total homicides, and sources the UN office on drugs and crime shows the USA with a total rate of 4.7, while this page show 10.3 just for with firearms. This page show NZ as 1.45 – the UN data shows total homicides as 0.9 in NZ. This page has Croatia as 3.54 for firearm homicides – the UN data says 1.2 for total homicides of any type in Croatia. If accurate data can not be found this page should be deleted in my opinion. c1nzw —Preceding undated comment added 23:22, 28 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Some of these figures are so old I question what validity they hold today, some countries are over 10 years old --220.253.24.120 15:00, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Either more recent data ought to be included or it should be noted that the 1993 data for the United States represents an historical peak for "firearms-related" deaths (or both), as current data details a rate that is ~30% lower than the dates cited. -- Sonof76 (talk) 19:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed, when sorting deaths decreasingly, 2 of the worst group of countries (Canada and Switzerland) have data from the 1990s, surely there is something more recent for someone with good research skills to find?--Tallard (talk) 02:59, 15 December 2012 (UTC)


 * here's a link to more recent data- I don't have the time right now to parse the two tables and insert the more recent: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

DocKrin (talk) 13:19, 16 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Most of this data is referenced to a single research organization, but I discovered that its webpage contains this advisory, so the source will become progressively more dated and bad data is less apt to be corrected."This Site is No Longer Updated: GunPolicy.org is no longer supported by donors, and has no staff. Updates will recommence if and when funding is available." I don't think its material should be removed, as I think it's exhaustive in many cases, still recent in most, and remains valuable, but the shortcomings should be kept in mind. Can a cautionary note to that effect be placed on the page, and if new info about it surfaces, that update be included as well? Activist (talk) 19:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

United Kingdom
According to the ONS the number of firearms covered by firearms licenses in 2011 was 1,801,540 and the population was 63.26 million giving a percentage or 2.8% — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.211.90 (talk) 14:25, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Canada
The table contains out-of-date figures. I attempted yesterday to edit with updated figures from Statistics Canada http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&retrLang=eng&id=1020540&tabMode=dataTable&p1=1&p2=-1&srchLan=-1&pattern=Deaths%2C+by+cause (CANSIM Table 102-0540, "Deaths, by cause, Chapter XX: External causes of morbidity and mortality (V01 to Y89), age group and sex, Canada") clicking on Add/Remove Data, then under Step 4 selecting all categories related to "firearms" or "guns", then step 7, "apply", which results in the following shooting deaths for 2015: 11 accidental deaths, 633 suicides, 137 assault with firearms, 6 undetermined, 12 legal intervention. I then calculated the death rates per 100,000 using the Canadian population estimate of 35.85 million in 2015. Thinker78 did not approve of my edits and reverted table entry. I did notice there is a discrepancy between this data set, which I believe comes from hospital reported deaths, and the police reported homicides by firearms http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/legal01-eng.htm (which reports 179 in 2015). I am attempting to resolve by contacting Statistics Canada. I will update when I hear back from government statistician. --Chickakoo (talk) 23:58, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I think that injecting the 35.85 million number into the calculation goes a bit further than what would be an obvious reflection of the sources because it involves foreign data to the used source.. Besides, I consider that the calculation of those numbers really isn't an obvious reflection of the sources with an additional one provided for the population number. But it is just my opinion, maybe other editors would have a different opinion and you can find consensus for the information to be included. As it is now, there seems to be no consensus. Thinker78 (talk) 22:42, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Source for population number: https://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/150929/dq150929b-eng.htm --Chickakoo (talk) 16:59, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Stats Can got back to me: data in the CANSIM Table 102-0540 Deaths, by cause, Chapter XX: External causes of morbidity and mortality (V01 to Y89),"comes from Demography Statistics, which collects from different sources (hospitals and coroners as examples)", whereas the other set of data is collected from police incident counts of homicide.... for the purposes of reporting on firearm-related homicides, it is advisable to use the homicide data (CANSIM tables 253-0001 to 253-0010), in particular, tables 253-0002 and 253-0005." http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&retrLang=eng&id=2530002&tabMode=dataTable&p1=-1&p2=9&srchLan=-1 --Chickakoo (talk) 17:02, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Argentina
Figures for homicide and suicide were for any method. I updated them to be the gun-related totals. --ABehrens (talk) 16:08, 8 July 2022 (UTC)