Aussie has the answer for US gun control

You still have not pointed out where in my post I showed any fear! It's you who highlighted the paranoia of "gun nuts"

 

If you can't see the difference between a country that has vast borders with other countries and one surrounded by water, then I can't help you.

 

No claim about it being "easy" was made, only that legal access still exists. So long as the firearms are physically available, there is nothing to prevent them from being misused by those who actually have access to them.

Is there anything in the above citation that would physically prevent a qualified individual, from taking said firearm and committing a mass shooting?

 

No. Howrver the likelihood has been massively reduced. That matters yes?

 

Australians have access to firearms that are more than capable of being used to dramatic effect in mass shootings.
Why doesn't it happen there?

 

You are repeating yourself, a passive aggressive technique to belittle.
I dont have all the answers, never claimed I did.

 

Because you keep avoiding the question, a technique to avoid having to admit you are wrong.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ia-able-to-kill-17-peope-in-3-minutes.530389/
The fact Australia did not have a mass shooting yesterday has nothing to do with the legal availability of suitable firearms.

 

Look up Probability.

 

Pray tell how? How is the likelihood reduced, when there is nothing to actually prevent such from happening?

It does not.

 

Not by your gun control laws.

 

You have more guns now than before the gun ban. What was reduced?

 

You're entitled to your opinion. Regardless of you stamping your feet,, I'm entitled to mine.

 

Yes... but yours is unsupportable nonsense.

 

Arent your feet sore?

 

.

Kind of wraps it up

 

No - I don't mind illustrating your inability to soundly support your position.
Easy peasy.

 

When you have a position you can show sound. let us know

 

Well there are tens of thousands of those steel screen doors sold here I'm sure you know if you live in Arizona and tens of thousand carrying weapons. So I think many people want to feel safe.

 

http://crimestats.aic.gov.au/NHMP/1_trends/#causeDeath

The total homicide rate was not affected by the ban and in some cases it resulted in other weapons being used.

 

Your graphs show knife crime did not change whereas gun crime went down after the gun ban: Cause of death, 1989-90 to 2013-14 (N)

 

You mean the bit in your link where it says

http://crimestats.aic.gov.au/NHMP/1_trends/#causeDeath

 

Yeah why not?

Like to hear your theory

Why did mass shooting numbers drop so dramatically over the last 20 years?

 

The nation of Australia was never plagued by a significant number of mass shootings to begin with. Therefore any deviation in annual trends, either positively or negatively, would be marked as significant. If the nation of Australia experienced a single mass shooting each year, a temporary absence would be noted as dramatic. However as was seen last year, a mass shooting is still entirely possible.

It is not the availability of firearms that resulted in the twenty year absence. Rather it was the people themselves.

 

[QUOTE="Xenamnes, post:

It is not the availability of firearms that resulted in the twenty year absence. Rather it was the people themselves.[/QUOTE]
Oh spare me. Maybe it was- in the water