Australia whats up with this?

I guess that proves that gun control doesn't prevent gun ownership.

 

It was never meant to - the real advantage has come from securing the weapons because THAT is what prevents spur of the moment injuries and homicides

 

It wasn't about preventing gun ownership or they would have just outright banned all firearms. Stop believing the NRA. They don't have a clue when they speak about Australia.

 

I understand that.
What I wrote was for the benefit of those who insist that all forms of control and registration invariably lead to bans.

 

No worries mate - we understood that and were more intent on getting the message to those who do not understand and think that the Australian government "banned" all guns and took away every firearm and weapon

 

Good lord would someone please refute this or go home?
http://www.melbourneinstitute.com/downloads/working_paper_series/wp2008n17.pdf

And y'all want us to follow your failures...sheesh!

 

Given the per capita rates in Aus and the US, it seems pretty obvious which system is a "failure".
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AonYZs4MzlZbdExSbktqRWpLMjNUMkFGVk5VODRyTnc#gid=0

 

We are talking about Australia and their failures not the US please stay on topic. Thanks

 

I see, you want to claim is that Australia's system is ineffective and unsuitable for the US, but you don't want to discuss the fact that it is far more effective than the system in the US...

That's the most blatant dodge I've ever seen.

 

Please stay on topic...especially when you are responding to a post that has nothing to do with the US Thanks

 

Actually, in post #381, you discuss the notion of implementing of the Australian system in the US - so you opened that door.
Besides, when throwing around terms comparative like "failure" and "ineffective", you have to provide a basis of comparison.

Keep dodging, it just illustrates that you have no valid response and is very entertaining.

 

AUS effectively banned many firearms. Specifically all center fire semi-auto rifles, most handguns, most shotguns (Class C, D, H firearms). Theoretically a person has a chance of getting one of these if tehy prove a true need, but thats hard to do if not impossible.

How convenient, you show FIREARM DEATHS alone. As I have always said, firearm deaths did decrease, but total homicide increased from 1995 (3.63 per 100,000) to 2001 (4.2 per 100,000). Showing only firearm deaths is extremely misleading.

Victims of violent crime has been increasing until 2010. The rate is still far above the pre-ban rate as your chart shows.

Once again, here is the link:
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@...e Issues&prodno=4510.0&issue=2011&num=&view=&

 

And here I was hoping that THIS time you would give the link correctly to the precise page and not to a generic site! I have learnt on the internet that when people will not be precise it is usually because the truth is being twisted

Now according to THIS page our murder rate is 1.1 per 100,000 (want to compare THAT with America's - go on!) in 2012
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/5424F3E2222CA19FCA257B8800129524?opendocument

I went to compare that to the murder rate in 1995 - 1996 before the gun laws and guess what - not there

So how come I think that is is a baseless claim you are making

And BTW - there are TWO sites that keep crime stats for Australia - the ABS and the AIC



- - - Updated - - -

Bit hard to stay on a topic that is one giant straw man!

 

The link I provided is to the crime data reports (most downloadable directly into excel) for 1993 to 2012. You left click on the year, that sends you to another page, click the "download" tab, that gets you to the report.

When you do those steps for 1995, you get a PDF report (oldest years have not been updated to Excel). If you read that report, you will find that the rate for murder was 1.8 (only 18% by firearm), attempted murder 1.66, manslaughter 0.17, for a total homicide rate of 3.63.

I just tested the link. It works just fine.

Wait, weren't you just a little while ago claiming that crime data between nations could not be compared because of differences in labels? And now you compare crime data!

How about comparing total violent crime, or aggravated assault, or sexual assault? Its easy to cherry pick only what suits your fancy, its a bit harder to take the true comparison of violence in the USA vs. violence in AUS when you see that AUS is more violent, and violence in AUS increased dramatically after the gun bans in 1996.

 

Then we go on with this.

Yet Australia continues to see a proliferation of illegal guns and gun violence. It's what I have said all along...it ain't the guns....you cannot stop the evil in mans heart eh?

 

you would have more luck quoting mother jones LOL...Good post mate

 

He would since MoJo has better referencing in that when it links it is to the actual research rather than a vague "it is here somewhere"

 

LOL Dagone a gubberment website from down under....and MOJO is better That is actuall side splitting

 

No - to explain so there is no misunderstanding, although at times writing anything in simple enough terms to make that occur is difficult, I was referring to the repeated attempts by certain members of this board to post misinformation that appears to be backed by resetarch which in fact is not even remotely backed. It is a common ploy and designed to waste opponents time

And yes MoJo is better than most links provided by those who are afflicted with worldview bias

 

I see you are only familiar with the second half of the second amendment, and choose to ignore the first half...

Why would be proud of it? I didn't cause it. Honestly, I have no idea where that odd question comes from.

More to the point, I believe it was your post that ended with something like:

I simply provided the "what is".

"Struck a noise"? Do you mean "struck a nerve"? In either case, you didn't.

- - - Updated - - -

Compared to where?

Maybe not, but you don't have to make it easy for him to carry out that evil.

 

Compared to Australia itself. The entire arguement for the gun restrictions was to make Australia safer. It did reduce firearm crime but total crime has increased, so the banners were wrong and the gun bans have failed. And now firearm related crimes are on an upwards trend.

 

Total crime in Australia has only increased in line with Australia's population growth, as I've already illustrated on this thread.
The only crimes directly relevent to gun control are gun crimes, which you admit have decreased. Given that reducing gun crime was the goal, the gun control measures implemented in Australia have worked.

Now, please illustrate that the system we have in the US is working.