CiG
Approximately Infinite Universe
Less guns lead to less crimes involving guns. You haven't shown that violent crime itself has dropped.
The Great American Gun Fetish
- Thread starter UltimateApathy
- Start date
Article about how gun control reduced gun violence in Australia:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...s-shootings-and-reduced-homicides-study-finds
Australia's gun laws stopped mass shootings and reduced homicides, study finds
Reforms still having positive effect 20 years on, as landmark study shows accelerated reduction in rates of suicide and homicide deaths caused by firearms
After the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, rapid-fire long guns were banned in Australia; a year later there was a mandatory buyback of prohibited firearms. In 2003, a handgun buyback program was introduced. Australian has had no fatal mass shootings since 1996.
Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP
Wednesday 22 June 2016 16.00 BST Last modified on Friday 14 July 2017 20.11 BST
Since major gun law reforms were introduced in Australia, mass shootings have not only stopped, but there has also been an accelerating reduction in rates of firearm-related homicide and suicides, a landmark study has found.
It has been two decades since rapid-fire long guns were banned in Australia, including those already in private ownership, and 19 years since the mandatory buyback of prohibited firearms by government at market price was introduced. A handgun buyback program was later introduced, in 2003.
It took one massacre: how Australia embraced gun control after Port Arthur
Read more
Researchers from the University of Sydney and Macquarie University analysed data on intentional suicide and homicide deaths caused by firearms from the National Injury Surveillance Unit, and intentional firearm death rates from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. For the period after the 1996 reforms, rates of total homicides and suicides from all causes were also examined to consider whether people may have substituted guns for alternative means.
From 1979 to 1996, the average annual rate of total non-firearm suicide and homicide deaths was rising at 2.1% per year. Since then, the average annual rate of total non-firearm suicide and homicide deaths has been declining by 1.4%, with the researchers concluding there was no evidence of murderers moving to other methods, and that the same was true for suicide.
The average decline in total firearm deaths accelerated significantly, from a 3% decline annually before the reforms to a 5% decline afterwards, the study found.
In the 18 years to 1996, Australia experienced 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, with the study defining a mass shooting as having at least five victims.
The findings were published in the influential Journal of the American Medical Association on Thursday, days after the US Senate rejected a string of Republican and Democrat measures to restrict guns. The reforms were proposed in response to the deadliest mass shooting in US history, at an LGBTI nightclub in Orlando.
The 1996 reforms introduced in Australia came just months after a mass shooting known as the Port Arthur massacre, when Martin Bryant used two semi-automatic rifles to kill 35 people and wound 23 others in Port Arthur, Tasmania. The reforms had the support of all major political parties.
When will the US learn from Australia? Stricter gun control laws save lives
Rebecca Peters
Read more
The lead author of the study, Professor Simon Chapman, said a similar study had been conducted 10 years ago, and that the researchers had repeated it to see if gun-related deaths were continuing to decline, finding that they had.
“I’ve calculated that for every person in Australia shot in a massacre, 139 [people] are shot through firearm-related suicide or homicides, so they are much more common,” Chapman said.
“We found that homicide and suicide firearms deaths had been falling before the reforms, but the rate of the fall accelerated for both of them after the reforms. We’ve shown that a major policy intervention designed to stop mass shootings has had an effect on other gun-related deaths as well.”
Advertisement
He said the researchers had chosen to publish the results in an American medical journal not just because the title was a prestigious one, but also because the findings would have a greater impact.
However, he does not believe the findings will have an impact on gun ownership laws in the US.
“The US is a good example of where evidence is going to take longer to prevail over fear and ideology,” he said.
“When people like [Republican candidate] Donald Trump talk about gun violence, he’s essentially not talking about the facts or the evidence, he’s talking about ideology and saying people want the right to protect themselves and their homes.
“The irony is the person you have to protect yourself most from in a home is the person who owns the gun.”
Chapman said more than half of those who had conducted mass shootings in Australia and New Zealand had been licensed gun holders.
Port Arthur survivors remember – and say gun laws must never change
Read more
A co-author of the paper, Associate Professor Philip Alpers, who is also the founding director of GunPolicy.org, said it was “amazing” that the reforms were still having a positive effect 20 years after they were first introduced.
“When these laws came in the hope was they would curb mass shooting, but what we didn’t realise was the laws would be followed by huge changes in other types of shootings, particularly in suicide,” he said.
“The breadth of the change was unexpected. But in America, things will get worse before they get better. In Australia we had a government that was prepared to act, and what [the then prime minister] John Howard did amounted to the confiscation of private property.
“You just can’t imagine the US ever seeing that as feasible.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...s-shootings-and-reduced-homicides-study-finds
Australia's gun laws stopped mass shootings and reduced homicides, study finds
Reforms still having positive effect 20 years on, as landmark study shows accelerated reduction in rates of suicide and homicide deaths caused by firearms
After the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, rapid-fire long guns were banned in Australia; a year later there was a mandatory buyback of prohibited firearms. In 2003, a handgun buyback program was introduced. Australian has had no fatal mass shootings since 1996.
Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP
Wednesday 22 June 2016 16.00 BST Last modified on Friday 14 July 2017 20.11 BST
Since major gun law reforms were introduced in Australia, mass shootings have not only stopped, but there has also been an accelerating reduction in rates of firearm-related homicide and suicides, a landmark study has found.
It has been two decades since rapid-fire long guns were banned in Australia, including those already in private ownership, and 19 years since the mandatory buyback of prohibited firearms by government at market price was introduced. A handgun buyback program was later introduced, in 2003.
It took one massacre: how Australia embraced gun control after Port Arthur
Read more
Researchers from the University of Sydney and Macquarie University analysed data on intentional suicide and homicide deaths caused by firearms from the National Injury Surveillance Unit, and intentional firearm death rates from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. For the period after the 1996 reforms, rates of total homicides and suicides from all causes were also examined to consider whether people may have substituted guns for alternative means.
From 1979 to 1996, the average annual rate of total non-firearm suicide and homicide deaths was rising at 2.1% per year. Since then, the average annual rate of total non-firearm suicide and homicide deaths has been declining by 1.4%, with the researchers concluding there was no evidence of murderers moving to other methods, and that the same was true for suicide.
The average decline in total firearm deaths accelerated significantly, from a 3% decline annually before the reforms to a 5% decline afterwards, the study found.
In the 18 years to 1996, Australia experienced 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, with the study defining a mass shooting as having at least five victims.
The findings were published in the influential Journal of the American Medical Association on Thursday, days after the US Senate rejected a string of Republican and Democrat measures to restrict guns. The reforms were proposed in response to the deadliest mass shooting in US history, at an LGBTI nightclub in Orlando.
The 1996 reforms introduced in Australia came just months after a mass shooting known as the Port Arthur massacre, when Martin Bryant used two semi-automatic rifles to kill 35 people and wound 23 others in Port Arthur, Tasmania. The reforms had the support of all major political parties.
When will the US learn from Australia? Stricter gun control laws save lives
Rebecca Peters
Read more
The lead author of the study, Professor Simon Chapman, said a similar study had been conducted 10 years ago, and that the researchers had repeated it to see if gun-related deaths were continuing to decline, finding that they had.
“I’ve calculated that for every person in Australia shot in a massacre, 139 [people] are shot through firearm-related suicide or homicides, so they are much more common,” Chapman said.
“We found that homicide and suicide firearms deaths had been falling before the reforms, but the rate of the fall accelerated for both of them after the reforms. We’ve shown that a major policy intervention designed to stop mass shootings has had an effect on other gun-related deaths as well.”
Advertisement
He said the researchers had chosen to publish the results in an American medical journal not just because the title was a prestigious one, but also because the findings would have a greater impact.
However, he does not believe the findings will have an impact on gun ownership laws in the US.
“The US is a good example of where evidence is going to take longer to prevail over fear and ideology,” he said.
“When people like [Republican candidate] Donald Trump talk about gun violence, he’s essentially not talking about the facts or the evidence, he’s talking about ideology and saying people want the right to protect themselves and their homes.
“The irony is the person you have to protect yourself most from in a home is the person who owns the gun.”
Chapman said more than half of those who had conducted mass shootings in Australia and New Zealand had been licensed gun holders.
Port Arthur survivors remember – and say gun laws must never change
Read more
A co-author of the paper, Associate Professor Philip Alpers, who is also the founding director of GunPolicy.org, said it was “amazing” that the reforms were still having a positive effect 20 years after they were first introduced.
“When these laws came in the hope was they would curb mass shooting, but what we didn’t realise was the laws would be followed by huge changes in other types of shootings, particularly in suicide,” he said.
“The breadth of the change was unexpected. But in America, things will get worse before they get better. In Australia we had a government that was prepared to act, and what [the then prime minister] John Howard did amounted to the confiscation of private property.
“You just can’t imagine the US ever seeing that as feasible.”
CiG
Approximately Infinite Universe
Nate Skalman
What’s in the basket?
You're still avoiding my question you fucking pussy. You're straight up getting called out for lying about where you live. Answer the question, or fuck off...You probably don't live in Asia- you're just some uneducated twink who wants to talk shit...You won't speak up, because you know your shitty third world countries problems will get picked apart quickly. Funny stuff
Last edited:
zabu of nΩd
Free Insultation
- Feb 9, 2007
- 14,620
- 805
- 113
He seems to have stopped replying to everyone, so I'd say we're just being trolled at this point
Oh my God, how much dumber could this conversation get? Not only is gun crime a FORM of violent crime, it is THE MOST SEVERE form of violent crime. Obviously a drop in gun crime also results in a drop in overall violent crime, unless you're hypothesizing that more people actually get killed by knives and screwdrivers and such in the absence of guns. Seriously, son, haven't you ever heard of the concept of tool efficiency resulting in a greater likelihood to both attempt and achieve a given task? Would you feel the same desire to demolish a house with a sledgehammer as with a bulldozer? Same logic holds for violent crime, OBVIOUSLY. Just look at the frequency of mass killings in the U.S. compared to basically all the other countries in the world, which are non-coincidentally also far less gun-happy than the U.S.
I mean, seriously, every time someone posts something so incredibly, irretrievably dumb and logic-flawed like that, I'm simply going to repost this to emphasize my point:
Turns out that most of the N.R.A.'s funding (millions of dollars) comes directly from gun corporations themselves, which they then use to brainwash lots of nonsense into gullible American fools, thereby making their country the most dangerous developed country in the whole fucking world. It's always amusing trying to have a conversation with brainwashed people: they mechanically parrot the illogical phrases that have been meticulously hammered into their poor little brains, flagrantly disregarding any and all statistics, facts, figures, and even logical common sense that you might serve up to them that contradicts their poor, little closed-minded world view. I would expect very much the same kind of mindless parroting we've seen in this topic so far to appear in conversations with North Koreans regarding Kim Jong Un, or ISIS followers regarding religion. Basically, brainwashed bullshit looks the same all over the world.
CiG
Approximately Infinite Universe
No. Statistics here in Australia showed that as gun crime rates dropped, crime rates with most other popular weapons rose.
I have, which is why I support using firearms for self-defense rather than poles, baseball bats etc. You have a higher rate of success fighting off a gang with a gun or stopping a robbery with a gun.
Surprise surprise, criminals still have and use guns here in Australia.
TechnicalBarbarity
Poser Disposer
Nate Skalman
What’s in the basket?
CiG
Approximately Infinite Universe
Murdering people or threatening people with any weapon was already against the law you fucking idiot, you've merely made possession of a gun against the law.
That meme is absolutely retarded.
That meme is absolutely retarded.
Nate Skalman
What’s in the basket?
Here, definitive proof that non-gun-based violent crime did NOT increase after the Australian gun ban:
https://www.google.com.tw/amp/s/amp...s-shootings-and-reduced-homicides-study-finds
"From 1979 to 1996, the average annual rate of total non-firearm suicide and homicide deaths was rising at 2.1% per year. Since then, the average annual rate of total non-firearm suicide and homicide deaths has been declining by 1.4%, with the researchers concluding there was no evidence of murderers moving to other methods, and that the same was true for suicide."
https://www.google.com.tw/amp/s/amp...s-shootings-and-reduced-homicides-study-finds
"From 1979 to 1996, the average annual rate of total non-firearm suicide and homicide deaths was rising at 2.1% per year. Since then, the average annual rate of total non-firearm suicide and homicide deaths has been declining by 1.4%, with the researchers concluding there was no evidence of murderers moving to other methods, and that the same was true for suicide."
CiG
Approximately Infinite Universe
That study only relates to homicides and suicides.
I am talking about assaults, attacks and other non-fatal crimes, which increased across the board after Howard's gun regulation policy.
http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violent crime/victims.html
I am talking about assaults, attacks and other non-fatal crimes, which increased across the board after Howard's gun regulation policy.
http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violent crime/victims.html
Nate Skalman
What’s in the basket?
You live in Australia right?...do you feel safer leaving your house? That's a more important question to me- I'd rather listen to firsthand experience. I'm sure crime patterns fluctuate by city and town, but I'd be curious to know your take on it...?
Are you seriously implying that minor pub scuffles are of similar severity to murder? Murder is the most severe form of violent crime, and the murder rate is much higher when people have more guns. Therefore, it's bad to allow people to have guns. Case closed.
CiG
Approximately Infinite Universe
Case not closed. I am not implying that pub scuffles are of a similar severity to murders, I am saying your utopian ideal means that home invasions and violent robberies have increased since 1996 and now people have no way to stop them.
I have not said that gun related murders and suicides have increased, I have said that only one pillar of violent crime has decreased, the rest increased. Criminals are emboldened by a 75% decrease in gun ownership.
Luckily I own firearms so I can shoot any scumfuck that breaks into my house.
I have not said that gun related murders and suicides have increased, I have said that only one pillar of violent crime has decreased, the rest increased. Criminals are emboldened by a 75% decrease in gun ownership.
Luckily I own firearms so I can shoot any scumfuck that breaks into my house.
Nate Skalman
What’s in the basket?
To be honest, I think most people know that statistics don't accurately reflect opinions, and feelings...My wife and I don't carry a gun because we're concerned about other people carrying guns. In Portland, Oregon drug addicts (meth, heroin, fentanyl) and zombie homeless people have become an epidemic. They can't afford guns (usually), but are no less a threat. Stabbings, and assaults are way up. Some wacko recently slit 3 people's throats, killing 2 of them on our mass trans train along with daily stabbings, beatings with bottles, clubs, and fist fights. Protests here have gotten pretty destructive- Seattle and Portland have become a social experiment, of sorts in extreme liberal sensibilities (except their violent lol). Once I exposed my holster to a homeless bum and notified him I was armed and ready to shoot him because he was drugged out and pulled a "bowie" knife on me when I told him I didn't have a cigarette (I don't smoke)...anyway, he took off running and I was glad I was armed that day. It only mattered how I felt at that moment...no statistic would have readied me for that situation. When I lived in Alaska for 9 years, EVERYONE is armed- you're expected to be armed...moose, bear, wolves, cougars etc. can fuck you up, and kill you quickly...and your family. If guns were removed from that environment, the death rate would climb quickly and current statistics would no longer be in play. Places are different, and not everything is black and white.
Last edited:
This is just simple statistics. Below is a graph of Australian population growth over time, and you can see that after the gun ban the population of the gun increased by A LOT, and therefore it's a matter of there simply being more people around to commit minor crimes, not because the criminals are "emboldened" or whatever. An increase in minor crime relative to population growth is expected, but it's very telling that the murder rates went way down after the gun ban despite the increasing population. Simply put, guns make a society in general much more dangerous:
Similar threads
