Administrators Gail Posted April 28, 2016 Administrators Share Posted April 28, 2016 Australia's gun laws and the results over 20 years Quote Isaiah 32:17 And the work of righteousness shall be peace; and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance for ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 29, 2016 Share Posted May 29, 2016 Where is the evidence that proves that the removal of guns from law abiding Australian citizens is the reason for the decline in shootings? I see nothing but a bald assertion. Is it really true that the average Australian who obeys all other laws is the most frequent murderer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted May 30, 2016 Moderators Share Posted May 30, 2016 (Speaking here as both an Australian and an academic who edits a research journal and writes books about research methods) There were mass shootings in Australia before the gun buyback and there have been none since. The citizens are the same (largely - obviously there are generational differences), and the only variable changed is removing the guns. Statistically, the difference between before and after the buyback is too great to be explained by chance. The experiment has been done and the results are in. phkrause 1 Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoarrge Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 I'm not seeing it here. Australian Government Institute of Criminology statistics: http://www.aic.gov.au/dataTools/facts/vicViolentCol.html There's not yet enough data to see if getting over the spike in robberies amounts to a total downward trend, homicides have gone down, but sexual assaults are up. I'm not altogether comfortable with the idea that women (or the elderly or disabled) ought to have to defend themselves hand-to-hand. It seems like a callous position to take. 8thdaypriest 1 Quote To be an agent of creation is to serve the Creator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted May 30, 2016 Moderators Share Posted May 30, 2016 Those are flat numbers for all crimes over decades in which the population of the country rose sharply, from 18 million at the beginning of the period covered by that graph to 24 million now. Flat crime stats in the context of 30% population growth mean a strongly falling per capita crime rate. Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Cochoa Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 1 hour ago, David Geelan said: Those are flat numbers for all crimes over decades in which the population of the country rose sharply, from 18 million at the beginning of the period covered by that graph to 24 million now. Flat crime stats in the context of 30% population growth mean a strongly falling per capita crime rate. I hesitate to correct your math, but, nonetheless, your math doesn't add up for me. You're likely stronger at math, so correct me if I'm wrong, but if that period began with 12,000+ sexual assaults and ended with nearly 20,000, as I'm seeing in the statistics, isn't that about 61% increase? That's a bit more than 30%, isn't it? Suppose the population did grow by 30%, as you say. The sexual assault rate has, therefore, doubled, right? But I don't see homicides only halving. The net result, for them, is about a 15% reduction of murder rates (not accounting for population growth) in exchange for quadruple that figure in terms of increase in sexual assaults (again, ignoring population growth). I see George's point, I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted May 31, 2016 Moderators Share Posted May 31, 2016 You may be right: by 'flat numbers' I was referring to the last decade more than the whole period of the graph, but I should then have used the population at the start of that period. I stand by the conclusion but will be back to tweak the evidence and the claims later... and the conclusion as well if the evidence doesn't support it. Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LifeHiscost Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 On 5/29/2016 at 3:01 PM, Guest guest said: Where is the evidence that proves that the removal of guns from law abiding Australian citizens is the reason for the decline in shootings? I see nothing but a bald assertion. Is it really true that the average Australian who obeys all other laws is the most frequent murderer? http://www.reuters.com/video/2016/04/28/20-years-on-australias-gun-laws-are-work?videoId=368292332&videoChannel=118169 God is Love!~Jesus saves! phkrause and Bravus 2 Quote Lift Jesus up!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossw Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Just a couple ignorant questions. Are violent crimes in the U.S. caused by the same motivations as in Australia? Such as drugs, alcohol, socioeconomic inequality. Would a gun buy back program in the U.S. have similar reductions in crime as in Australia? What prevents a criminal from not participating in the buy back program? The problem in the US is the availability of guns for criminals and the restrictions put only put on law abiding citizens. Is it really fare for law abiding citizens to participate in a buy back program but not criminals? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members phkrause Posted July 19, 2016 Members Share Posted July 19, 2016 12 minutes ago, Rossw said: Are violent crimes in the U.S. caused by the same motivations as in Australia? Such as drugs, alcohol, socioeconomic inequality. Why would it be different? Besides only someone from that country could speak to that question, but I'd say its pretty much the same in all countries. 15 minutes ago, Rossw said: Would a gun buy back program in the U.S. have similar reductions in crime as in Australia? We have done that in a few different states from what I've heard and read! It seems to have worked in California, forgot the name of the city. 17 minutes ago, Rossw said: What prevents a criminal from not participating in the buy back program? Not trusting I would imagine!! 20 minutes ago, Rossw said: The problem in the US is the availability of guns for criminals and the restrictions put only put on law abiding citizens. Is it really fare for law abiding citizens to participate in a buy back program but not criminals? I do agree about the availability of guns, and not just for criminals, but for all. My question would be, Why are they so available to criminals? Quote phkrause By the decree enforcing the institution of the papacy in violation of the law of God, our nation will disconnect herself fully from righteousness. When Protestantism shall stretch her hand across the gulf to grasp the hand of the Roman power, when she shall reach over the abyss to clasp hands with spiritualism, when, under the influence of this threefold union, our country shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government, and shall make provision for the propagation of papal falsehoods and delusions, then we may know that the time has come for the marvelous working of Satan and that the end is near. {5T 451.1} Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossw Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 California has some of the strictest gun laws yet is extremely violent. Chicago and DC have strict gun laws yet are extremely violent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members phkrause Posted July 19, 2016 Members Share Posted July 19, 2016 8 hours ago, Rossw said: California has some of the strictest gun laws yet is extremely violent. Chicago and DC have strict gun laws yet are extremely violent. Yes there are some strict gun laws in many states, but from what I've heard there are way to many loop holes!! Quote phkrause By the decree enforcing the institution of the papacy in violation of the law of God, our nation will disconnect herself fully from righteousness. When Protestantism shall stretch her hand across the gulf to grasp the hand of the Roman power, when she shall reach over the abyss to clasp hands with spiritualism, when, under the influence of this threefold union, our country shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government, and shall make provision for the propagation of papal falsehoods and delusions, then we may know that the time has come for the marvelous working of Satan and that the end is near. {5T 451.1} Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeMo Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 2 hours ago, phkrause said: Yes there are some strict gun laws in many states, but from what I've heard there are way to many loop holes!! I don't think it's just loopholes; I don't think existing laws are adequately enforced. Rossw 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 I have four words to defeat the argument that gun control laws work. Paris, Nice, and Brussels. There are very strong gun control laws in France and Belgium. However, many people have been murdered there by people using guns. Did the laws stop them? No. How about all the shootouts that happened when the police were tracking down the terrorists? Major gun battles. Did the gun control laws stop the bad guys from getting weapons? No. Nothing demonstrates more clearly the futility of gun control. All it does is take weapons away from those who would use them for nothing more than to defend themselves and others. It turns those who would defend themselves and their loved ones, neighbors, and fellow citizens into helpless sheep who can only present their backs to the shooters. If the guy in Nice on the motorcycle who tried to stop the madman in the truck had had a gun a whole lot fewer people would have died and been injured. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 On 5/29/2016 at 5:00 PM, David Geelan said: (Speaking here as both an Australian and an academic who edits a research journal and writes books about research methods) There were mass shootings in Australia before the gun buyback and there have been none since. The citizens are the same (largely - obviously there are generational differences), and the only variable changed is removing the guns. Statistically, the difference between before and after the buyback is too great to be explained by chance. The experiment has been done and the results are in. This is, again, nothing but a bald assertion. Where is the evidence that the only factor at work here was the gun buy back? How many other factors have been looked at and eliminated? I'm guessing absolutely zero because it doesn't fit the agenda to look at other possible causes. The assertion that there have been zero societal changes other than a gun buy back seems to me to show an complete lack of integrity and lack of research in making that assertion. Society changes all the time and there are alway multiple factors in any change. To assert otherwise is far less than honest, or at least, far less than intelligent.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted July 20, 2016 Moderators Share Posted July 20, 2016 I'm afraid you have failed to understand the nature of the statistical claim made. It is possible for there to be a range of other factors and yet a single factor to explain *most* of the difference. Your assertion would require, at the very least, being able to nominate another dramatic change in Australian society that occurred in 1996 that explains the very dramatic difference. Can you? I have no agenda but the truth. What is your agenda? Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted July 20, 2016 Moderators Share Posted July 20, 2016 An example: socioeconomic status determines more of academic achievement than any other variable. That is not to say no other variables - individual child effort, school culture, highly effective teachers - have an influence. But our statistical tools are powerful enough to tell us when one influence is dominant. In the case of mass shootings in Australia, the dearth of semiautomatic weapons is the single variable that explains the largest proportion of the difference between the incidence before and after the buy-back. LifeHiscost 1 Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossw Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 David, not to disagree with you, but, the reason why I brought up socioeconomic inequality it because most violent crime occurs in low income areas where many of the guns are not acquired legally. Why in general does most crime occur in low income areas? My point being the gun or knife is not the cause of a crime, correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted July 21, 2016 Moderators Share Posted July 21, 2016 Mass shootings are a different phenomenon than crime in general, though. I don't think the gun *causes* the shooting in either case: it is a human action. The gun *facilitates* the killing of many more people than would otherwise be possible. That's all: but from the perspective that every life is important, fewer deaths is an important and worthwhile outcome. Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted July 21, 2016 Moderators Share Posted July 21, 2016 'No Man is an Island' No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as any manor of thy friends or of thine own were; any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind. And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. John Donne - 1624 Rossw 1 Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossw Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 How many mass shootings were there before the one that led to the buy back program and subsequent laws? One thing that impacts crime is economic prosperity. Was the intention for the buy back program to stop mass killings or to stop general violent crime? The statistics may be over reaching its impact into general violent crime when the intention was to stop mass killings. Mass killings may have been an extremely rare occurrence in Australia in the first place. For example, there was a fatality in a Tesla a few weeks ago. Compared to the national average of fatal auto accidents in all cars Tesla does very well but with a very small minority of cars on the road even a couple more fatalities ruins the statistic comparison with all cars. If mass shootings were very rare in Australia in the first place it's hard to decisively say the buyback program worked but they may be using the reduction in overall violent crime stat to mask that reality. As far as the US goes, Pandora's box is open with the hundreds of millions of guns already out. I really doubt an all out ban on guns will stop violent crimes in my home town, Detroit, LA, Chicago, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members phkrause Posted July 21, 2016 Members Share Posted July 21, 2016 On 7/19/2016 at 11:01 AM, JoeMo said: I don't think it's just loopholes; I don't think existing laws are adequately enforced. Exactly! I agree 100% rudywoofs (Pam) 1 Quote phkrause By the decree enforcing the institution of the papacy in violation of the law of God, our nation will disconnect herself fully from righteousness. When Protestantism shall stretch her hand across the gulf to grasp the hand of the Roman power, when she shall reach over the abyss to clasp hands with spiritualism, when, under the influence of this threefold union, our country shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government, and shall make provision for the propagation of papal falsehoods and delusions, then we may know that the time has come for the marvelous working of Satan and that the end is near. {5T 451.1} Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted July 21, 2016 Moderators Share Posted July 21, 2016 Massacres were not uncommon in Australia before 1996. There's a list on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia There have been multiple killings since but only one that involved a gun meets the definition of mass killings (more than 4 fatalities). Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted July 21, 2016 Moderators Share Posted July 21, 2016 (I do realise it's in poor taste to count the bodies as points in an argument, and won't do more of it.) In the end, those who will not be convinced by the evidence will continue to be unconvinced. It's not certain knowledge, but it's pretty strongly supported. phkrause 1 Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonnie Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 On 7/21/2016 at 4:35 AM, David Geelan said: (I do realise it's in poor taste to count the bodies as points in an argument, and won't do more of it.) In the end, those who will not be convinced by the evidence will continue to be unconvinced. It's not certain knowledge, but it's pretty strongly supported. Seems there are some that have not heard of gun laws in their country Gun legislation in Germany is considered among the strictest gun control in the world. The current law, the German Weapons Act, dates from 1972, and includes as well as modifies previous gun laws. This statute regulates the handling of knives, firearms and ammunition as well as acquisition, storage, commerce and maintenance of weapons. The New York Times 45 mins · The death toll climbs in Germany. Follow our live blog for the latest updates. Live: Several Killed in Munich 'Shooting Rampage' At least nine people were killed in a shooting attack across from a shopping mall in Munich on Friday, according to the police. The authorities say they are searching for up to three suspected attackers armed with “long guns” and are treating it as a… NYTIMES.COM|BY THE NEW YORK TIMES 53 Comments136 Shares 491491 More Stories Quote Everything you do is based on the choices you make. It's not your parents, your past relationships, your job, the economy, the weather, an argument, or your age that is to blame. You and only you are responsible for every decision and choice you make, period ... ... Wish more people would realize this. Quotes by Susan Gottesman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.