Australian States / Territory - Higher Homicide Rates than some U.S. States that allow Self Defence Handguns
The homicide rates for 2012, 2013 and 2014 in the Northern Territory of Australia were 8.9, 9.5 and 3.7 per 100,000. (But see below re comparing like with like.) The rates for South Australia were 1.6, 1.5 and 1.1. The rates for Tasmania were 1.8, 1.6 and 1.2.
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/DetailsPage/4510.02014?OpenDocument
The homicide rate in the U.S. States of Vermont and Maine in 2014 was 1.6 per 100,000. The rate for New Hampshire was only 0.9. Rates in those U.S. States in 2012 and 2013 were from 1.1 to 1.9.
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-5
Australia is subject to the stringent Australian National Firearms Agreement laws which deny gun ownership for self defence. The U.S. State of Vermont is the least regulated of all the U.S. States. The State of New Hampshire has a “shall issue” law that provides that any “suitable person” must be issued a licence to carry a concealed handgun. The State of Maine allows open or concealed carriage of a handgun.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_United_States
Compare Like with Like
The Northern Territory is an obvious exception in Australia with far higher crime rates. In particular, a higher rate of alcohol-related violence involves indigenous communities in the N.T. It all stems from overall issues of disadvantage, and living in such difficult circumstances. It is not therefore a valid exercise to compare the N.T. crime rates with Australian States rates. (http://www.news.com.au/national/crime/the-northern-territory-has-the-highest-homicide-rate-in-australia/news-story/49b81f284c9500ea027a338e01271325)
The example of the Northern Territory demonstrates how simplistic comparisons between Australian and the U.S. crime rates can also be erroneous because the factors contributing to crime rates are not the same.
FBI Cautions Against Ranking
The FBI cautions against merely ranking jurisdictions on crime rates because there are many varying causes of crime which make simple comparisons unreliable. Some factors stated by the FBI include;
Population density and degree of urbanization,
Variations in composition of the population, particularly youth concentration,
Stability of the population with respect to residents’ mobility, commuting patterns, and transient factors,
Economic conditions, including median income, poverty level, and job availability,
Modes of transportation and highway systems,
Cultural factors and educational, recreational, and religious characteristics,
Family conditions with respect to divorce and family cohesiveness,
Climate,
Effective strength of law enforcement agencies,
Administrative and investigative emphases on law enforcement,
Policies of other components of the criminal justice system
i.e., prosecutorial, judicial, correctional, and probational,
Citizens’ attitudes toward crime
Crime reporting practices of the citizenry
(https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr-statistics-their-proper-use)
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/DetailsPage/4510.02014?OpenDocument
The homicide rate in the U.S. States of Vermont and Maine in 2014 was 1.6 per 100,000. The rate for New Hampshire was only 0.9. Rates in those U.S. States in 2012 and 2013 were from 1.1 to 1.9.
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-5
Australia is subject to the stringent Australian National Firearms Agreement laws which deny gun ownership for self defence. The U.S. State of Vermont is the least regulated of all the U.S. States. The State of New Hampshire has a “shall issue” law that provides that any “suitable person” must be issued a licence to carry a concealed handgun. The State of Maine allows open or concealed carriage of a handgun.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_United_States
Compare Like with Like
The Northern Territory is an obvious exception in Australia with far higher crime rates. In particular, a higher rate of alcohol-related violence involves indigenous communities in the N.T. It all stems from overall issues of disadvantage, and living in such difficult circumstances. It is not therefore a valid exercise to compare the N.T. crime rates with Australian States rates. (http://www.news.com.au/national/crime/the-northern-territory-has-the-highest-homicide-rate-in-australia/news-story/49b81f284c9500ea027a338e01271325)
The example of the Northern Territory demonstrates how simplistic comparisons between Australian and the U.S. crime rates can also be erroneous because the factors contributing to crime rates are not the same.
FBI Cautions Against Ranking
The FBI cautions against merely ranking jurisdictions on crime rates because there are many varying causes of crime which make simple comparisons unreliable. Some factors stated by the FBI include;
Population density and degree of urbanization,
Variations in composition of the population, particularly youth concentration,
Stability of the population with respect to residents’ mobility, commuting patterns, and transient factors,
Economic conditions, including median income, poverty level, and job availability,
Modes of transportation and highway systems,
Cultural factors and educational, recreational, and religious characteristics,
Family conditions with respect to divorce and family cohesiveness,
Climate,
Effective strength of law enforcement agencies,
Administrative and investigative emphases on law enforcement,
Policies of other components of the criminal justice system
i.e., prosecutorial, judicial, correctional, and probational,
Citizens’ attitudes toward crime
Crime reporting practices of the citizenry
(https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr-statistics-their-proper-use)