https://www.smh.com.au/national/study-shows-nra-is-wrong-about-aussie-gun-laws-20180312-p4z41i.html some people might be interested in this one.
All that tells me is that most Australians, 99.9% are not Mass Murderers. That sweet 70 year old Lady that makes Tea, scones and treats and crumpets, would not Murder anyone, Guns or not. Most People at a Pub, 99.9 %, are not Murderers, not having guns is not a significant factor. If a Murderer wants to commit Mass Murder, a simple Petrol bomb would instantly kill more people than a machine gun. Or do you postulate that most Australians are at heart, powdered Serial Mass Murderers, that only need easy access to a Gun, Ammo, just add water, and ¡¡¡ POOFERS !!! They simply plump up, and become dead bang Serial Killers and Mass Murderers ? People that would never hurt a fly, get a gun and suddenly kill everyone in sight ? I have trouble believing that. Or that a Mass Murderer, on not gaving access to Guns will simply say; Shucky Darns ! I can't get Gun(s) so I will not turn Mass Murderer, To-Day. I simply do not Believe that crock of fish baloney.
Australians have had 30% of the banned guns for the last 20 years, and still allow ownership of handguns with 10 round magazines. They allow ownership of 22 rifles. Given this, how did their laws stop mass shootings?
It isn't the gun culture that commits mass shootings or else we'd have hundreds of thousands of them.
Only you keep repeating that. 99.9 % of People in Australia that own guns, will never kill anyone, will never mass murder anyone, and you prefer to credit Gun Control and not good honest people that do no harm, and do not kick wee puppy dogs or cats. Amazing, simply Amazing.
Yes. All these developed countries with gun control and low gun deaths....its just a big coincidence. LOL
Aussie gun laws do not prevent mass shootings as any Aussie who can legally buy a a bolt-action rifle can obtain an 'assault weapon' and shoot up a school or whatever else he desires.
Anyone pointing out the Australia argument. Is it not conceivable that the Australians did OTHER things in addition to extreme gun controls to stop mass shootings too? There's simply not enough data to conclude gun control was the reason mass shootings dropped, or that they've even dropped in a statistically significant way. Sure, Australia did enact strict gun control, and sure, mass shootings dropped. But the murder rate still kept dropping in the same degree as it had the following years. Gun control didn't improve, or worsen the situation. Australia also enacted improvements on their mental health sector, which really should not be disregarded in this whole argument.
How ? A petrol bomb is not a gun and can effectively kill more people than a belt fed machine gun, do you know what the survivability rate of immolation of over 30 % full thickness burns is ? Or inhaling flame ? ZERO. Ever treat burn Patients ? Flash burns ? Industrial White Phosphorus ? No ?
By 'allow' you mean 'require govt permission which can be denied for any and no reason.' You can't have a paintball gun in Australia without a permit.
No it isn't coincidence. The causation is that gun control 'works' in cultures that don't value guns, and are thus less likely to use them and more likely to commit violence by other means regardless. The same cultural and social dynamics that allowed for the higher restrictions to be implemented authoritatively are responsible for the low incidence that existed before the restrictions AND the low incidence after. They had ONE mass shooting before gun control and zero after. That is hardly proof of a causal relationship by any legitimate scientific method. Its barely suggestive of one even in a vacuum. But its not a vacuum. Australia has followed (and in some ways LED) the rest of the civilized world in mental health reform, while the US as a comparison lags far behind.
