After a 1996 Mass Shooting, Australia Enacted Strict Gun Laws. It Hasn't Had a Similar Massacre Sinc - Polidicks

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;38877514]No they're not. They have a report that's been scientifically means tested and supports a conclusion. You provided a graph that's been debunked by scientists and provides no substance. Give people something of raw substance and they'll clammer down. Arguing that your data is best (When it's not), and going into other threads saying 'Oh these idiots don't understand me', is called trolling or being a spoilt brat who can't take argument.[/QUOTE] No it hasn't, it comes from a study that thinks gun control in Australia worked, AND it was published in 2004, not 2006 as the debunked study was

[QUOTE=download;38877393]Or it could be the result of mental health reforms, or a crackdown on crime, of the introduction of licensing or anything. Correlation does not equal causation[/QUOTE] Ok can you find these policies that were enacted at the same time?

[QUOTE=download;38877531]No it hasn't, it comes from a study that thinks gun control in Australia worked, AND it was published in 2004, not 2006 as the debunked study was[/QUOTE] I couldn't care less, I'm trying to give you an idea of what is wrong with that you're doing/saying. If you're going to battle with that, then I'll keep reporting you.

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;38877542]I couldn't care less, I'm trying to give you an idea of what is wrong with that you're doing/saying. If you're going to battle with that, then I'll keep reporting you.[/QUOTE] Haha, you have to resort to reporting me, right...

[QUOTE=download;38877488]Our mental health system might be bad, but it was a lot worse[/QUOTE] Barely any better - you still can't get proper treatment on Medicare. Instead of being locked up like the mentally ill were in years past, they're out on the street, trying to live a normal life without any of the help they need. [QUOTE=Protocol7;38877495]But again, that's fine and dandy for Australia. It doesn't do a lick of good for the U.S.[/QUOTE] You're agreeing with me, so what's your point? [editline]19th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=download;38877531]debunked study was[/QUOTE] you srs

[QUOTE=DogGunn;38877558]You're agreeing with me, so what's your point?[/QUOTE] I'm not replying to you specifically, I'm just reiterating to people that we can't use other countries as a reference for what works in regards to gun control and what doesn't.

[QUOTE=DogGunn;38877558]Barely any better - you still can't get proper treatment on Medicare. Instead of being locked up like the mentally ill were in years past, they're out on the street, trying to live a normal life without any of the help they need. You're agreeing with me, so what's your point? [editline]19th December 2012[/editline] you srs[/QUOTE] My mums a mental health nurse in Adelaide, and they lock plenty of people up, especially the ones who are a threat to the community. Guess the opinion of my mum isn't evidence, but it is an insight to it

[QUOTE=zombieslaya;38876630]We could copy the Israeli model and require teachers to be armed, if I was wanting to commit mass murder I wouldn't do it in a place where the entire staff is armed.[/QUOTE] lol what Teachers in Israel aren't armed

[QUOTE=download;38877393]Or it could be the result of mental health reforms, or a crackdown on crime, of the introduction of licensing or anything. Correlation does not equal causation[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Protocol7;38877412]Correlation is not causation though. I'm not saying the gun laws didn't help, but to assume that gun laws stopped massacres outright is ridiculous.[/QUOTE] Dismissing it as 'correlation does not equal causation' is a little absurd. The correlation shown by the data on the previous page is that the exact year gun control was implemented, the rate at which violence was decreasing sharply steepened. A 60% drop in gun homicides and 11 homicides before and none after are also pretty big changes. It's not slam dunk proof by any means, but would you really dismiss it entirely because it isn't a controlled environment showing precisely that one thing caused another?

[QUOTE=catbarf;38877876]Dismissing it as 'correlation does not equal causation' is a little absurd. The correlation shown by the data on the previous page is that the exact year gun control was implemented, the rate at which violence was decreasing sharply steepened. A 60% drop in gun homicides and 11 homicides before and none after are also pretty big changes. It's not slam dunk proof by any means, but would you really dismiss it entirely because it isn't a controlled environment showing precisely that one thing caused another?[/QUOTE] I have not dismissed it entirely. If you actually read what you quoted you'd understand this.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;38877925]I have not dismissed it entirely. If you actually read what you quoted you'd understand this.[/QUOTE] 'but to assume that gun laws stopped massacres outright is ridiculous.' It's not an [I]assumption[/I] when it's indicated or at least very heavily implied by the data. And yes, it's just one factor when there are others at work too. But the data happens to line up with a particular date, and that date happens to be when the gun laws were implemented. In the real world, where we can't isolate all potential factors and plot it out to three decimal places, that's about as good as it gets.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;38877412]Correlation is not causation though. I'm not saying the gun laws didn't help, but to assume that gun laws stopped massacres outright is ridiculous.[/QUOTE] I don't think anything will stop massacres (or gun crime in general) outright, but this is really compelling evidence that stricter laws (not necessarily a ban) on guns actually does help.

[QUOTE=catbarf;38877985]'but to assume that gun laws stopped massacres outright is ridiculous.' It's not an [I]assumption[/I] when it's indicated or at least very heavily implied by the data.[/QUOTE] An implication is not direct proof though. I can only imagine that introducing stricter gun laws was not the only thing Australia did to combat their massacre problem. [QUOTE=GoDong-DK;38877990]I don't think anything will stop massacres (or gun crime in general) outright, but this is really compelling evidence that stricter laws (not necessarily a ban) on guns actually does help.[/QUOTE] It might have helped Australia, but again, doesn't matter for the U.S.

[QUOTE=catbarf;38877985]'but to assume that gun laws stopped massacres outright is ridiculous.' It's not an [I]assumption[/I] when it's indicated or at least very heavily implied by the data. And yes, it's just one factor when there are others at work too. But the data happens to line up with a particular date, and that date happens to be when the gun laws were implemented. In the real world, where we can't isolate all potential factors and plot it out to three decimal places, that's about as good as it gets.[/QUOTE] Ehh, massacres aren't that frequent, so to be honest, it's kinda hard to say whether it's coincidence or actual progress. To be totally honest, I don't think massacres matter much when it comes to making laws, they're extreme cases. Gun crime in general matters, though, and this definitely shows that stricter laws [I]do[/I] help, even if they can't do all the difference.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;38878028]An implication is not direct proof though. [/QUOTE] Which is exactly what I said. 'If you actually read what you quoted you'd understand this.' Cue snarky dumb rating. [QUOTE=Protocol7;38878028]I can only imagine that introducing stricter gun laws was not the only thing Australia did to combat their massacre problem.[/QUOTE] Can you point to anything in particular that occurred at the same time as the gun ban that would be a strong factor, or are you making assumptions that support your position?

[QUOTE=download;38877578] -All your posts- [/QUOTE] [IMG]http://www.hmag.com/files/2010/06/AutismSpeaks.gif[/IMG] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Replying with an image/ Image macro" - Swebonny))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Protocol7;38878028]An implication is not direct proof though. I can only imagine that introducing stricter gun laws was not the only thing Australia did to combat their massacre problem. It might have helped Australia, but again, doesn't matter for the U.S.[/QUOTE] What the hell does matter, then? You can't just say something doesn't apply because you feel like it, explain yourself.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;38878068]What the hell does matter, then? You can't just say something doesn't apply because you feel like it, explain yourself.[/QUOTE] The US borders Mexico, has roughly one firearm for every adult, and has much deeper-seated issues with mental health and drug crime. The circumstances are very different, so the results would not necessarily parallel those of Australia. In fact, gun ownership has steadily declined in the US over the past few decades, while mass shootings have become more and more prevalent.

[QUOTE=catbarf;38878061]Which is exactly what I said. 'If you actually read what you quoted you'd understand this.' Cue snarky dumb rating.[/QUOTE] I don't think you understand the idea of "correlation does not equal causation." [QUOTE=catbarf;38878061]Can you point to anything in particular that occurred at the same time as the gun ban that would be a strong factor, or are you making assumptions that support your position?[/QUOTE] I made no claim that I was researched in the subject and that I was right. I explicitly stated "I can only imagine." Since, y'know, we can clearly see that there are countries with strict gun laws and less violence, and countries with lax gun laws and less violence, that there is not a direct correlation between gun laws and violence. It is a summation of things. [editline]18th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=GoDong-DK;38878068]What the hell does matter, then? You can't just say something doesn't apply because you feel like it, explain yourself.[/QUOTE] I never said that the gun laws in Australia have had no effect on their state of violence.

[QUOTE=Nicca;38878064][IMG]http://www.hmag.com/files/2010/06/AutismSpeaks.gif[/IMG][/QUOTE] How mature from a guy with 8 posts

[QUOTE=catbarf;38878094]The US borders Mexico, has roughly one firearm for every adult, and has much deeper-seated issues with mental health and drug crime. The circumstances are very different, so the results would not necessarily parallel those of Australia. In fact, gun ownership has steadily declined in the US over the past few decades, while mass shootings have become more and more prevalent.[/QUOTE] While I completely agree that the circumstances are different, gun ownership hasn't declined at all. The ATF has reported massive spikes in the number of background checks for gun sales over the past 4 years.

[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;38877505]I'm pointing out why half of these gun control debates we have on FP are retarded. Guns are just a means by which violent crime is carried out, it's not the cause. Sweden for example has an actual assault rifle in the house of almost every male, yet has ridiculously low firearm homicide. Why? Perhaps we need to stop screaming about banning firearms and start looking at the social and economic issues that might lead someone to spraying a bunch of people down on the sidewalk.[/QUOTE] Sweden like Australia probably has a good mental health care system in place that prevents homicides and such I'm going to retract my statements about we should have stricter gun laws and just say that mental health reforms would be the way to go, but still a little work needs to be done to control it, such as longer waiting periods and no backroom deals

[QUOTE=fruxodaily;38878183]Sweden like Australia probably has a good mental health care system in place that prevents homicides and such I'm going to retract my statements about we should have stricter gun laws and just say that mental health reforms would be the way to go, but still a little work needs to be done to control it, such as longer waiting periods and no backroom deals[/QUOTE] Gun laws in the US aren't perfect but with the amount of guns in the US, no amount of legislation would stop people from breaking the law. The fact that he was stealing his mother's guns didn't stop Lanza, and stealing is definitely illegal!

[QUOTE=catbarf;38878094]The US borders Mexico, has roughly one firearm for every adult, and has much deeper-seated issues with mental health and drug crime. The circumstances are very different, so the results would not necessarily parallel those of Australia. In fact, gun ownership has steadily declined in the US over the past few decades, while mass shootings have become more and more prevalent.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html[/url] There's some numbers in there - I don't know exactly how reputable this paper is, but if the data is right, "straw purchases" are one of the most normal ways for a criminal to get a gun. I've noticed that many of you mention Mexico as a source for illegal guns, but I couldn't find anything on google (maybe because of "Fast and Furious" clogging the search up), so if you could provide a source of some kind, it's be nice. And even though they may not be totally parallel, I'd say this shows that there at least (and we're talking [I]at the fucking least[/I]) must be some kind of relation between gun crime and gun laws. And who says the laws need to be identical to the Australian ones? Make them more fit for US and see if it works.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;38878109]I don't think you understand the idea of "correlation does not equal causation."[/QUOTE] Correlation does not [i]equal[/i] causation, but it does imply a causal relationship, and when the correlation is extremely specific and unique it very heavily implies a causal relationship. By your reasoning, the conclusion that increased American unemployment was a result of the stock market crash of 1929 is a correlation and can't be 'proven' to be causation. Doesn't matter that unemployment rose immediately after the crash and the data indicates a clear difference before and after, since we can only imagine that other factors were present. Either it's an extremely unlikely coincidence or there's a relationship.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;38878109] I never said that the gun laws in Australia have had no effect on their state of violence.[/QUOTE] Ehh, but that wasn't what you posted either? You said it wouldn't matter in the US and I asked you to give a few good reasons why it would have absolutely no effect at all?

[QUOTE=catbarf;38878241]Correlation does not [i]equal[/i] causation, but it does imply a causal relationship, and when the correlation is extremely specific and unique it very heavily implies a causal relationship. By your reasoning, the conclusion that increased American unemployment was a result of the stock market crash of 1929 is a correlation and can't be 'proven' to be causation. Doesn't matter that unemployment rose immediately after the crash and the data indicates a clear difference before and after, since we can only imagine that other factors were present. Either it's an extremely unlikely coincidence or there's a relationship.[/QUOTE] I never said there isn't a relationship, simply that the introduction of stricter gun laws is likely not the only reason gun violence declined.

[QUOTE=Gordy H.;38878148]While I completely agree that the circumstances are different, gun ownership hasn't declined at all. The ATF has reported massive spikes in the number of background checks for gun sales over the past 4 years.[/QUOTE] You are correct, I didn't specify that I meant over the past several decades.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;38878247]Ehh, but that wasn't what you posted either? You said it wouldn't matter in the US and I asked you to give a few good reasons why it would have absolutely no effect at all?[/QUOTE] Because the US and Australia are two completely different countries, both culturally and how the government interacts with their people?

[QUOTE=Protocol7;38878263]Because the US and Australia are two completely different countries, both culturally and how the government interacts with their people?[/QUOTE] So changing the way the government interacts with people wouldn't help or what? Just saying that gun crime is in the US "culture" doesn't help at all. Unless you mean that gun laws aren't inherent in US culture, but then again, that doesn't make it a bad, unworkable idea. It's definitely not just gun laws, there's a lot of social structure and other stuff influencing it, but changing something doesn't mean that you can't change something else as well.