It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Connecticut's strict gun law linked to large homicide drop

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 07:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: vor78
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

People always mention what happened after the ban. Rarely do they speak of the statistics before. As it turns out, Australia didn't have much of a problem to begin with. I'm not sure the Australian gun laws actually stopped anything. Rather, I think they were a vast overreaction to a few ugly incidents.


Yeah, we've always had a lower rate of gun violence than the US. But there still has been a clear continued drop in gun related homicides since the bans of more than half. Meaning that you are now more than half as likely to be shot in Australia.


CompareRate of Gun Homicide per 100,000 People
Australia, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is

2012: 0.18
2011: 0.14
2010: 0.18
2009: 0.17
2008: 0.13
2007: 0.13
2006: 0.20
2005: 0.09
2004: 0.09
2003: 0.27
2002: 0.23
2001: 0.24
2000: 0.30
1999: 0.26
1998: 0.30
1997: 0.43
1996: 0.57


There has also been a decrease in total homicides, to show people don't automatically use other weapons to kill if guns aren't available.


Rate of Homicide per 100,000 People (any method)
Australia, the annual rate of homicide by any means per 100,000 population is

2012: 1.24
2011: 1.05
2010: 1.20
2009: 1.28
2008: 1.19
2007: 1.04
2006: 1.25
2005: 0.98
2004: 0.82
2003: 1.41
2002: 1.49
2001: 1.55
2000: 1.78
1999: 1.81
1998: 1.68
1997: 1.73
1996: 1.97


gunpolicy.org


Looking at what a person can still buy, I'm even less impressed, especially when I see those Remington 7615s for sale...a rifle marketed to police departments here in the US as a politically correct AR-15 alternative during the first AWB. I know that they, and the 760/7600 hunting rifles they're based on, are very popular for the same purpose among Australian firearm enthusiasts. And so the market adapts as does the industry. Go figure.


But you can only buy them here with magazines that have 10 round capacities and I'm almost positive there not semi-auto's (well the models being sold in Australia anyway).

That's where our strict gun laws have been so successful, by totally banning high capacity semi-auto long barreled guns, we have eliminated mass shootings. We had over 13 mass shootings in the 18 years leading up to the bans, yet since the bans we have had none. You can't argue with the results.

It's not even matter of banning 'everyone' from owning guns either. Since as you have pointed out, you can still legally purchase some nice firearms in Australia. It's just a matter of banning the type of firearms that are most commonly used in mass killings, then requiring people to go to a little effort to prove there responsible gun owners.

It's actually a very rational policy if you think about it. Minimize the damage done by irresponsible and dangerous people, well still allowing responsible people to posses firearms in a safe manner.


The trouble is, that you have trouble with correlation vs causation with your stats as above. Murder rate in Australia in the 1940's was nearly half what it is today without the gun bans, and gun banners selectively crop out the long term rates in hope that the numbers bolster their point but if you look at the totality of the last 100 years of data, Australians are less safe now than they were before the gun bans.

Even the US, with all the the expansion of our concealed carry laws and increase in "assault weapon" sales and the "mass shooting incidents" our murder rate is back down to where it was in 1950.

book... s.google.com/books?id=V6whaMaDMMQC&pg=PA483&lpg=PA483&dq=murder+rate+australia+by+year+1900&source=bl&ots=5K__34NLJq&sig=T7QRuG-7vg8sD6o0v7cYnoP1UBQ&h l=en&sa=X&ved=0CDoQ6AEwBGoVChMI4ICNq5mUxgIVySusCh2ScQ-C#v=onepage&q=murder%20rate%20australia%20by%20year%201900&f=false

Us murder rate 1950 was 4.6 and in 2012 it was 4.6

Thus, based on statistical data, one cannot say that gun laws reduce murder and one cannot say that more guns per capita --especially "assault weapons" -- increases murder.
edit on 16-6-2015 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 05:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: jackjoedoe
a reply to: CB328

Since you a so adverse to people owning guns, move to mexico, their gun laws are very strict...I have heard it is working out great for the common law abiding citizens...


So where do the majority of illegal automatic assault rifles in Mexico originate from............. I wonder?

I just don't understand how all those anti gun regulation people can be so blatantly blind to basic logic. I mean fair enough, be pro guns and passionate about your rights and all that. But don't try to claim that nonsense about how it makes society safer, the ignorance of that logic is just sad.

It's just basic mathematics, the more guns in society, the more harm done to said society...... like wise, the more rounds a gun can fire in a short period of time, with a single trigger squeeze, the more people a mass shooter can kill in said short period of time. This isn't rocket science people!



Since automatic assult rifles are very close to completely illegal in the US and those that can browned cost as much as a low end car and take a personal sign off from the chief LEO in your area, yeah, where are they coming from? Because it definately is not the U.S. unless you count guns given by the U.S. Givernment to Mexico that are them given to cartels by a corrupt government.



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 08:04 PM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc

Whether auto or semi-auto, it's kind of an established fact that the majority of firearms used by the cartels originate in the US, isn't it? No need to nitpick at 'phrases used' to disprove an established fact. Drug's are moved north of the border, well firearms are moved south of the border.


An open question is where the cartels get their guns. It's generally accepted the bulk come from two places: The United States and Central America. In April, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms found that 68,000 out of 99,000 guns discovered in Mexico and submitted to the ATF since 2007 originated in the United States. That's about 68 percent of the total submitted for tracing. The subject is also fraught with U.S. domestic politics, and was at the heart of the scandal around the ATF's botched Fast and Furious operation, which resulted in an estimated 2,000 straw-purchased firearms being smuggled into Mexico after purchase in Arizona gun stores.


Cartel Weapons

From my understanding it's extremely easy to legally purchase firearms within the US and sell them to the cartels, because a lot of states don't even require weapons to be registered.

But, it's kind of useless requiring hand guns to be registered in New York (for example), when surrounding states don't require it. They'd need to enact a nation wide law that requires all guns sold in the US to be documented and registered to the buyer, which is kind of a mute issue, since the American public would never stand for a federal law like that.

That's why I guess what Australia did to lower gun violence and eliminate mass shootings, just wouldn't be realistically workable in the US. Not even considering the billions it would cost to enforce a compulsory $500 buy back for all semi-auto long barreled guns, the American public obviously just wouldn't except it. Since, the American public are notoriously suspicious & hostile towards the federal government (maybe rightly so).

So considering that, I will concede that debating whether what Australia did would work in the US in decreasing gun violence and eliminating mass shootings, is a futile exercise.



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: NavyDoc

Whether auto or semi-auto, it's kind of an established fact that the majority of firearms used by the cartels originate in the US, isn't it? No need to nitpick at 'phrases used' to disprove an established fact. Drug's are moved north of the border, well firearms are moved south of the border.


An open question is where the cartels get their guns. It's generally accepted the bulk come from two places: The United States and Central America. In April, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms found that 68,000 out of 99,000 guns discovered in Mexico and submitted to the ATF since 2007 originated in the United States. That's about 68 percent of the total submitted for tracing. The subject is also fraught with U.S. domestic politics, and was at the heart of the scandal around the ATF's botched Fast and Furious operation, which resulted in an estimated 2,000 straw-purchased firearms being smuggled into Mexico after purchase in Arizona gun stores.


Cartel Weapons

From my understanding it's extremely easy to legally purchase firearms within the US and sell them to the cartels, because a lot of states don't even require weapons to be registered.

But, it's kind of useless requiring hand guns to be registered in New York (for example), when surrounding states don't require it. They'd need to enact a nation wide law that requires all guns sold in the US to be documented and registered to the buyer, which is kind of a mute issue, since the American public would never stand for a federal law like that.

That's why I guess what Australia did to lower gun violence and eliminate mass shootings, just wouldn't be realistically workable in the US. Not even considering the billions it would cost to enforce a compulsory $500 buy back for all semi-auto long barreled guns, the American public obviously just wouldn't except it. Since, the American public are notoriously suspicious & hostile towards the federal government (maybe rightly so).

So considering that, I will concede that debating whether what Australia did would work in the US in decreasing gun violence and eliminating mass shootings, is a futile exercise.



It's not a "nit pick" because those are very important distinctions.

Besides, why buy an $800 semi-auto AK from the U.S. when you can easily buy a full auto from Ek Salcador at half the price along with RPGs, belt Feds, and grenades.

What the article conveniently ignores is that most of those "US supplied" arms are not coming from gun shows but from the U.S. government via grants to the Mexican givernment to fight the "war on drugs" and the corrupt government gives them to cartels. That is not really the fault of the U.S. gun owners.

Besides, if the Mexicans can't be bothered to police a border they don't want us to police, they don't have the right to complain.

Regardless, Mexico is a example of gun control does not work and that laws only affect the law abiding as it has the strictest laws and the greatest crime in the western world.



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 08:48 PM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc


Regardless, Mexico is a example of gun control does not work and that laws only affect the law abiding as it has the strictest laws and the greatest crime in the western world.


No!......... Mexico is a perfect example of what happens when a developing country borders a wealthy country that has ridiculously lax gun regulations and ridiculously harsh drug laws.

It's not about having "strict gun laws". It's about enacting intelligent regulations.

Anyway, I'm done with this debate, debating basic logic with a fanatic, is about as fruitful as banging your head against a brick wall.



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: NavyDoc


Regardless, Mexico is a example of gun control does not work and that laws only affect the law abiding as it has the strictest laws and the greatest crime in the western world.


No!......... Mexico is a perfect example of what happens when a developing country borders a wealthy country that has ridiculously lax gun regulations and ridiculously harsh drug laws.

It's not about having "strict gun laws". It's about enacting intelligent regulations.

Anyway, I'm done with this debate, debating basic logic with a fanatic, is about as fruitful as banging your head against a brick wall.


Nonsense. It is proof that criminals find a way and, as in Mexico, you only disarm the law abiding. You can't buy RPGs in the US. Cartels have them, as well as belt feds and grenades. You can't buy those at the gun shows. If you want to plug your ears so your mind is not sullied with logic, go ahead, but your premise fails when faced with any sort of critical thinking.



posted on Jun, 19 2015 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: pronto
G,day hutch.
No its not not
i got bitten by a bloody brown snake several months ago
figure i need a bren gun
nar that wont work a m79 will do tbe trick lol


Or maybe you could just watch where your walking. Not like a automatic weapon or grenade launcher would help much, once you've already stepped on a brown snake, lol, it's kind of spilled milk mate. Anyway, if your so determined to carry out a revenge attack on some venomous snake after it's already bitten you (because of your own carelessness), then just apply for a gun licence. It's not really that hard if you haven't been charged with a crime in the last 5 years.

I mean, you need a license to legally drive a car, so where's the logic in not needing a licence to own a tool that's only sole purpose is to kill or injure.




Hmm.
i should have got back to this sooner.
truly i am in awe of your psychic powers.
i am all for gun control
consume no coffee beer or coke before going hunting
ensure you maintain a sure grip and a steady aim
hit your target first time everytime
kill shots are the only shots
i purchased my first packet of .22 ammo at the deli main street two wells south aussie.
lunch time in grade 5.
the cost 2 shillings oh thats about 20 cents
you starting to get my drift
i purchased my first own rifle from bert harmers pushbike shop main north road sefton park when i was in grade 6
i worked all summerr to pay for that working in the paddocks of my old man

but i was given my first rifle christmas holidays between grade 4 and 5
re the snake. i was not walking at all and i think just watching where you walk instead of also watching the low bushes and trees will def get you into trouble.
joe blakes get into all the above and vehicles sheds houses hedges gutters and roofs, under sea weed on the beach and lets not forget hay stacks and morphett st city centre adelaide. plus hide behind rock walls of outside fireplaces whilst your on your hands and bloody knees weeding your mates lawn with your eyes full of stinging salty sweat
the fire place is large enough to park a bloody vw golf inside ok
my comment to HUTCH about brens and m79.s was humour, nothing less nothing more
please try to remember never assume you will always come undone
oh and the two weapons i mentioned i used professionally
come to think of it i have used the bren gun in both cals.








posted on Jun, 19 2015 @ 01:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: NavyDoc


Regardless, Mexico is a example of gun control does not work and that laws only affect the law abiding as it has the strictest laws and the greatest crime in the western world.


No!......... Mexico is a perfect example of what happens when a developing country borders a wealthy country that has ridiculously lax gun regulations and ridiculously harsh drug laws.

It's not about having "strict gun laws". It's about enacting intelligent regulations.

Anyway, I'm done with this debate, debating basic logic with a fanatic, is about as fruitful as banging your head against a brick wall.


Nonsense. It is proof that criminals find a way and, as in Mexico, you only disarm the law abiding. You can't buy RPGs in the US. Cartels have them, as well as belt feds and grenades. You can't buy those at the gun shows. If you want to plug your ears so your mind is not sullied with logic, go ahead, but your premise fails when faced with any sort of critical thinking.


G,day doc.
like your post totally agree well said mate
have a good one
the old digger



posted on Jun, 19 2015 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Blame the families. If people start suing and ruining the lives of people who let psychos have guns, things will change. Like in the old western day. Families took care of the jerks because they were shamed by their locals if not. Could not go to church, socials, even buy at the grocery store if the community turned its back on you.



posted on Jun, 19 2015 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3
Right, sure, let's blame everyone else along with the responsible. I am sure you would just love it if you were shunned by your community if one of your kids screws up.



posted on Jun, 19 2015 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: TKDRL

Guns don't kill people. So someone is to blame. His family and friends admitted he had lost his mind. So, he is not responsible.

I think I love my grown children enough to do whatever I need to do to protect them. Even if it is from themselves, like suicide.



posted on Jun, 19 2015 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
Like in the old western day. Families took care of the jerks because they were shamed by their locals if not.


Riiiiight.

The families of the James-Younger gang were local heroes and were welcome everywhere they went despite the known, murderous reputations of their relations.



posted on Jun, 19 2015 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I don't think they would have liked him much if he went into churches and social functions killing people. Bankers and Railroad Robber Barons were ok. And people were not as educated on mental illness as we are now. The families know.


(post by AugustusMasonicus removed for a manners violation)

posted on Jun, 20 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
This is what we get when gangsters and criminals get glorified and romanticized lol.

But sure, let's keep plastering that racist # and his manifesto all over the idiotbox and internet right?
edit on Sat, 20 Jun 2015 10:07:32 -0700 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2015 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I was not there, neither were you. So we all rely on stories. But I am pretty sure serial killers have better manners than you at least. The thought of a weapon in your hand is terrifying,



posted on Jun, 20 2015 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
I was not there, neither were you. So we all rely on stories. But I am pretty sure serial killers have better manners than you at least.


The murderous exploits of the James-Younger gang, which you horribly rationalize as justified due to your belief that they were against rich people when they were not, are well documented by newspapers, eyewitness and court testimony so they are much more than stories, they are fact.


The thought of a weapon in your hand is terrifying,


Actually, the terrifying thought is people who feel it is acceptable to murder other human beings who happen to be part of a different social strata.



posted on Jun, 20 2015 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: TKDRL
This is what we get when gangsters and criminals get glorified and romanticized lol.

But sure, let's keep plastering that racist # and his manifesto all over the idiotbox and internet right?


Exactly, it is okay to murder someone when it is the 'man' but in most cases the ones who get murdered are the ones who happen to be working for the man.



posted on Jun, 20 2015 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Well, at least that was more pleasant to read. Dead wrong, but at least you did not call me a name. I accept the founding fathers as heroes although most were slave owners and murderers just being in that business with other social strata.



posted on Jun, 20 2015 @ 01:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
Dead wrong...


What was dead wrong? Your despicable lamentation that it is okay to murder 'Bankers and Railroad Robber Barons' or that the James-Younger Gang did not murder any?



new topics




 
13
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join