• Lenient gun control leads to greater homicide rates.
    400 replies, posted
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;38404899] In 1996 Australia passed perhaps the most restrictive gun control laws in the world.[/QUOTE] Australian Laws and Culture =/= American Laws and Culture Just stating the facts.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;38404912]Australian Laws and Culture =/= American Laws and Culture Just stating the facts.[/QUOTE] Australia has proven results from their gun restrictions.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;38404899][url=http://www.ministerhomeaffairs.gov.au/Mediareleases/Pages/2012/First%20quarter/4-March-2012---Crime-falling-across-Australia.aspx]There has been a 27 per cent drop in the number of homicides between 1996 and 2010, with a drop of 11 per cent between 2009 and 2010;[/url] In 1996 Australia passed perhaps the most restrictive gun control laws in the world.[/QUOTE] [quote]but we still have a lot more work to do – the recent shootings are proof of that,” Mr Clare said.[/quote] So then shootings are still happening regardless of the gun control, and do you have anything to backup that the crime rates weren't already in decline before Ausie's gun control acts were passed in the first place?
[QUOTE=Protocol7;38404843]Actually, the primary function of guns is to send a high-velocity projectile on a linear path. Whether or not the projectile is harmful to the object it strikes is a very important distinction.[/QUOTE] logarithmic
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;38404947]Australia has proven results from their gun restrictions.[/QUOTE] Australia and America are 2 different countries with 2 different sets of people, with 2 different mindsets.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38404953]logarithmic[/QUOTE] I mean I'm not sure I'd put faith in some people to understand advanced concepts, so I just went with linear. I'm fully aware that it isn't a straight line.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;38404899][url=http://www.ministerhomeaffairs.gov.au/Mediareleases/Pages/2012/First%20quarter/4-March-2012---Crime-falling-across-Australia.aspx]There has been a 27 per cent drop in the number of homicides between 1996 and 2010, with a drop of 11 per cent between 2009 and 2010;[/url] In 1996 Australia passed perhaps the most restrictive gun control laws in the world.[/QUOTE] Homocide was already dropping before 1996 [QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;38404947]Australia has proven results from their gun restrictions.[/QUOTE] Nope This graph is from Gun Control Australia [img]http://guncontrol.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/1995-2006-1.png[/img] They are the biggest anti-gun group in Australia (with a membership that doesn't even reach double digits). Their own graph shows gun crime was dropping before and after the 1996 buyback, though they seem to think this graph backs their view up, obviously they have no knowledge of statistics or are so blind they assume the data will back them
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;38404899][url=http://www.ministerhomeaffairs.gov.au/Mediareleases/Pages/2012/First%20quarter/4-March-2012---Crime-falling-across-Australia.aspx]There has been a 27 per cent drop in the number of homicides between 1996 and 2010, with a drop of 11 per cent between 2009 and 2010;[/url] In 1996 Australia passed perhaps the most restrictive gun control laws in the world.[/QUOTE] So, a damn near 95% drop in gun ownership led to a 27% drop in homicide. Wonderful.
[QUOTE=download;38404979]Homocide was already dropping before 1996 Nope This graph is from Gun Control Australia [img]http://guncontrol.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/1995-2006-1.png[/img] They are the biggest anti-gun group in Australia (with a membership that doesn't even reach double digits). Their own graph shows gun crime was dropping before and after the 1996 buyback, though they seem to think this graph backs their view up, obviously they have no knowledge of statistics or are so blind they assume the data will back them[/QUOTE] Isn't it the conservative Americans' view that crime will increase if guns ownership is illegal. Hell I hear people say that concealed carry will result in less crime. Why didn't crime rates increase after the gun ban in Australia because now people clearly can't defend themselves?
[QUOTE=Ridge;38405035]So, a damn near 95% drop in gun ownership led to a 27% drop in homicide. Wonderful.[/QUOTE] It didn't change the number of people who own guns, just removed 700,000 "military" firearms. Mostly .22s, and pump and semi shotguns. Only about 100,000 of them were "military" rifles (semi-auto centrefire rifles; SKSs, AR15s etc)
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;38405062]Isn't it the conservative Americans' view that crime will increase if guns ownership is illegal. Hell I hear people say that concealed carry will result in less crime. Why didn't crime rates increase after the gun ban in Australia because now people clearly can't defend themselves?[/QUOTE] Because maybe the decrease in the crime rate had nothing to do with gun ownership?
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;38405062]Isn't it the conservative Americans' view that crime will increase if guns ownership is illegal. Hell I hear people say that concealed carry will result in less crime. Why didn't crime rates increase after the gun ban in Australia because now people clearly can't defend themselves?[/QUOTE] because its firearm homicide the graph is detailing firearm homicide
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;38405062]Isn't it the conservative Americans' view that crime will increase if guns ownership is illegal. Hell I hear people say that concealed carry will result in less crime. Why didn't crime rates increase after the gun ban in Australia because now people clearly can't defend themselves?[/QUOTE] And I'm not a Conservative American. I live in Australia. Would you like to come back to the topic at hand? That being the buyback had no effect on crime, because to me it looks like you're dodging the topic
[QUOTE=Disotrtion;38405077]because its firearm homicide the graph is detailing firearm homicide[/QUOTE] Crime, firearm homicide, whatever you know what I mean. The conservative position is that by taking away guns it makes it easier for criminals to commit crimes (with firearms or otherwise) because people can't shoot back. This graph shows that didn't happen in Australia.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;38405117]Crime, firearm homicide, whatever you know what I mean. The conservative position is that by taking away guns it makes it easier for criminals to commit crimes (with firearms or otherwise) because people can't shoot back. This graph shows that didn't happen in Australia.[/QUOTE] I don't think anyone here has had that position in lieu of the opinion that getting rid of guns does not solve the root cause of firearm homicide.
[url]http://www.ssaa.org.au/research/1997/1997-12_the-great-australian-gun-buyback.html[/url] [code] Considerations Credit Debit Balance Opening balance of recorded imports 1934-97 5,005,060 Gaps in recorded import statistics 1934-97 750,000 5,755,060 Other imports prior to 1934 and back to 1895 2,000,000 7,755,060 .303 production balanced against loss & replacement 640,000 8,395,060 Internal production, non-military types only 450,000 8,845,060 Illegal, covert and undeclared imports 200,000 9,045,060 Less total recorded exports 1996-1997 536,288 8,508,772 Less natural attrition by age or loss 1,500,00 7,008,772 Less "Buyback" total 640,381 6,368,391 [/code] Now, according to government data, there are 2.6 million registered firearms in Australia ([url=http://www.ic-wish.org/WiSH%20Fact%20sheet%20Firearms%20registration%20in%20Australia.pdf]HERE[/url]). Seems like a pretty substantial amount of missing firearms, yet we don't have spree killings very often (like once every 10 years) [editline]11th November 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;38405117]Crime, firearm homicide, whatever you know what I mean. The conservative position is that by taking away guns it makes it easier for criminals to commit crimes (with firearms or otherwise) because people can't shoot back. This graph shows that didn't happen in Australia.[/QUOTE] You're an idiot. No one here has expressed that opinion, all you're doing is making yourself look like a tool. We're here discussing "does firearms ownership lead to more crime" not other firearms policy
[QUOTE=download;38405186][url]http://www.ssaa.org.au/research/1997/1997-12_the-great-australian-gun-buyback.html[/url] [code] Considerations Credit Debit Balance Opening balance of recorded imports 1934-97 5,005,060 Gaps in recorded import statistics 1934-97 750,000 5,755,060 Other imports prior to 1934 and back to 1895 2,000,000 7,755,060 .303 production balanced against loss & replacement 640,000 8,395,060 Internal production, non-military types only 450,000 8,845,060 Illegal, covert and undeclared imports 200,000 9,045,060 Less total recorded exports 1996-1997 536,288 8,508,772 Less natural attrition by age or loss 1,500,00 7,008,772 Less "Buyback" total 640,381 6,368,391 [/code] Now, according to government data, there are 2.6 million registered firearms ([url=http://www.ic-wish.org/WiSH%20Fact%20sheet%20Firearms%20registration%20in%20Australia.pdf]HERE[/url]). Seems like a pretty substantial amount of missing firearms, yet we don't have spree killings very often [editline]11th November 2012[/editline] You're an idiot. No one here has expressed that opinion, all you're doing is making yourself look like a tool. We're here discussing "does firearms ownership lead to more crime" not other firearms policy[/QUOTE] The law was still effective however, contrary to what you believe.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38405226]The law was still effective however, contrary to what you believe.[/QUOTE] Would you like to back that up? Because, at the moment, you're pulling facts out of your fedora topped ass
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38405226]The law was still effective however, contrary to what you believe.[/QUOTE] he's got his sources proving otherwise. Once again, your sources are nowhere to be found.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38405226]The law was still effective however, contrary to what you believe.[/QUOTE] So did you just scroll past half the page or... It should be reiterated that Australia is not America and what works for one people doesn't work for another people.
[QUOTE=download;38405232]Would you like to back that up? Because, at the moment, you're pulling facts out of your fedora topped ass[/QUOTE] Right here: [img]http://guncontrol.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/1995-2006-1.png[/img] As shown earlier. [editline]11th November 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Protocol7;38405245]So did you just scroll past half the page or... It should be reiterated that Australia is not America and what works for one people doesn't work for another people.[/QUOTE] Except it's still a fact that increasing the number of guns does nothing to avail crime rates.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38405249]Right here: [img]http://guncontrol.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/1995-2006-1.png[/img] As shown earlier.[/QUOTE] Did you even look at that graph? (which, by the way, I posted)
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38405249]Right here: [img]http://guncontrol.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/1995-2006-1.png[/img] As shown earlier. [editline]11th November 2012[/editline] Except it's still a fact that increasing the number of guns does nothing to avail crime rates.[/QUOTE] congrats on proving that you haven't read anything any of us have posted
[QUOTE=download;38405260]Did you even look at that graph? (which, by the way, I posted)[/QUOTE] The rate declined.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38405278]The rate declined.[/QUOTE] the rate was already declining
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38405249]Except it's still a fact that increasing the number of guns does nothing to avail crime rates.[/QUOTE] This is true. Similarly, reducing the number of guns does decrease gun related crime (a stretch, I know.) But something motivates people to use guns for crimes, and it's not access to guns, it's a motive to commit a crime, and [B]that[/B] is the problem, not guns.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38405278]The rate declined.[/QUOTE] The rate declined before as well, do you know anything about statistics, or you haven't you gotten to that part in your 8th grade maths?
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38405282]the rate was already declining[/QUOTE] But it kept declining despite the introduction of less lenient laws. Surely it should be the opposite according to the gunnuts?
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38405282]the rate was already declining[/QUOTE] Where do you see that? Unless you're looking at something else, the rate was remaining pretty stable the preceding 9 years
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38405298]But it kept declining despite the introduction of less lenient laws. Surely it should be the opposite according to the gunnuts?[/QUOTE] "Hurr, everyone who owns guns is a redneck" Go to hell
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.