Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They have effective gun confiscations. Let's not mince words here.
MORE BULLCRAP! They do not have "effective firearm confiscations"...they have effective firearms controls.
No entity "confiscated" firearms in either Australia or the U.K.
You're seemingly immune from the facts of people VOTING to enact controls, then either voluntarily turning their firearms in, relinquishing them on buy-back programs or simply keeping the ones not restricted.
Which part do you not understand? Quoting the article:
"In the 18 years prior to federal and state government gun reforms (1979-1996) Australia saw 13 fatal mass shootings in which 104 victims were killed and at least another 52 were wounded. There have been no fatal mass shootings since that time. 'Mass shootings' were defined as five or more victims killed by gunshot, not counting the perpetrator(s). From 1979 to 1996, total firearm deaths in Australia were declining at an average 3 per cent per year. Since then, the average decline in total firearm deaths has accelerated significantly to 5 per cent annually."
You're doing yourself no favors here.
A few things:
1. According to your article gun-used deaths were already IN DECLINE in Australia.
2. According to your article a 3 percent decline to a 5 percent decline is "accelerated significantly". Seriously?? Maybe if it went from a decline of 3 percent to 15 percent, or 3 percent to 30 percent would I consider that "accelerated significantly," but your biased source is smoking dope if they think a difference of 3 to 5 is "significant".
3. You're deliberately side-stepping the most important fact: making guns illegal had no effect on HOMICIDES, whatever the way they were carried out.
From my previous source:
Quote:
Australia: Australia enacted its gun ban in 1996. Murders have basically run flat, seeing only a small spike after the ban and then returning almost immediately to preban numbers. It is currently trending down, but is within the fluctuations exhibited in other nations.
Lol. Did you read the "Key findings" section? It is in layman's terms, but you are welcome to read the original JAMA article as well.
From the key findings section:
"While there was a more rapid decline in firearm deaths from 1997 to 2013 compared to before 1997, there was also a greater acceleration in the decline in total nonfirearm suicide and homicide deaths. Because of this, it is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to gun law reforms"
Then they quote two professors unrelated to the source of the study who reinterpret the study as evidence to the contrary of the findings.
"While there was a more rapid decline in firearm deaths from 1997 to 2013 compared to before 1997, there was also a greater acceleration in the decline in total nonfirearm suicide and homicide deaths. Because of this, it is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to gun law reforms"
Then they quote two professors unrelated to the source of the study who reinterpret the study as evidence to the contrary of the findings.
They will try to throw the "mass shootings" outliers back in our face to legitimize it, watch...
Mass shootings are tragic. But encroaching on other people's rights and their freedom out of a personal fear of danger is un-American. Furthermore, abusing the state to do so is malicious. Enemies of the second amendment are enemies of freedom and liberty.
MORE BULLCRAP! They do not have "effective firearm confiscations"...they have effective firearms controls.
No entity "confiscated" firearms in either Australia or the U.K.
You're seemingly immune from the facts of people VOTING to enact controls, then either voluntarily turning their firearms in, relinquishing them on buy-back programs or simply keeping the ones not restricted.
A forced buy back is a confiscation. Hence the word force. When did we vote on the Constitution? We voted on gay marriage too.
Wow, thanks, I knew I was missing something. So that's why we have school shootings while nobody else (in the developed world) does, because we are unique.
Which part do you not understand? Quoting the article:
"In the 18 years prior to federal and state government gun reforms (1979-1996) Australia saw 13 fatal mass shootings in which 104 victims were killed and at least another 52 were wounded. There have been no fatal mass shootings since that time. 'Mass shootings' were defined as five or more victims killed by gunshot, not counting the perpetrator(s). From 1979 to 1996, total firearm deaths in Australia were declining at an average 3 per cent per year. Since then, the average decline in total firearm deaths has accelerated significantly to 5 per cent annually."
The devil's in the details. While there have been fewer mass shootings since then, the number of people killed in mass deaths of other means has skyrocketed, making the number virtually the same. While almost nobody died from arson before the gun grab, afterwards mass killing by arson skyrocketed, as did mass killings by beatings, stabbings and vehicles.
Cherry picking is never a good tactic for proving your point.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
