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.

 

Mass GUN killings in Australia

page: 2
17
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2018 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

The real question is...are people still being murdered down under? If so then the tool doesnt matter so much now does it? I love how people act like a gun is the only and easiest way to kill someone...news flash it isn't and having a legal ability to defend one's self is paramount to the livelyhood of any human no matter the country they live in. Regulating and criminalizing the means to defend one's self is pretty awful...whether its guns or anything else it makes no difference.




posted on May, 11 2018 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties




What about a shooting without the "mass" part? Australia doesn't suffer them in nearly as large a number (even per capita with population differences taken into account) either - yet American news reports shootings there every day.


I honestly don't think Australian gun laws has much to do with it. It's probably more of a cultural thing....and apparently there's more firearms in Australia now than before the buyback. When Lil' Johnny introduced that crap, only honest firearm owners (like myself) were affected. I know plenty of people who stashed theirs. In fact, gun shops were completely sold out of stock when the law was introduced and all those guns are now circulating illegally. It was a case of punishing the innocent while the not-so law abiding weren't affected at all.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: StallionDuck
Uhhhh

Did I just read the responses correctly?


Uhhh....

Did you somehow miss the thousands of times Aussies have said that our gun control doesn't COMPLETELY stop crime, just drastically reduces it?


I could argue the same where americans are allowed to have guns unhindered. With or without gun control, we'd have the same issue. Guns serve more than one purpose in this country. Government - Hunting - Defence to name a few. They aren't 'meant' for murdering innocent people. That happens with or without guns.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 10:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: Kryties

The real question is...are people still being murdered down under?


Not in anywhere NEAR the numbers they were before gun control. The fact is it works, and the statistics prove it.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 10:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties
a reply to: Raggedyman

To be honest I'm still a little confused as to what happened. They said 7 dead - the two grandparents/owners, the daughter and her 4 kids. The papers, however, keep pointing out that the daughters ex-husband had been stalking her and implied he had shot them all - yet the police say they aren't looking for anyone else.

So who shot who? I'm guessing we'll know more in the morning when the police have another press conference, but for now suffice it to say there are unanswered questions in my mind.


The truth will be shuffled pretty quickly
We are gun haters and they will blame the gun

Make no mistake, there will be no truth out of this
Our media is as bad as yours



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 10:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: Kryties

The real question is...are people still being murdered down under?


Not in anywhere NEAR the numbers they were before gun control. The fact is it works, and the statistics prove it.


It will get worse as justice becomes more skewed, make no mistake



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: StallionDuck

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: StallionDuck
Uhhhh

Did I just read the responses correctly?


Uhhh....

Did you somehow miss the thousands of times Aussies have said that our gun control doesn't COMPLETELY stop crime, just drastically reduces it?


I could argue the same where americans are allowed to have guns unhindered. With or without gun control, we'd have the same issue. Guns serve more than one purpose in this country. Government - Hunting - Defence to name a few. They aren't 'meant' for murdering innocent people. That happens with or without guns.


Judging by the Australian experience, less guns = less deaths. The stats don't lie.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: StallionDuck

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: StallionDuck
Uhhhh

Did I just read the responses correctly?


Uhhh....

Did you somehow miss the thousands of times Aussies have said that our gun control doesn't COMPLETELY stop crime, just drastically reduces it?


I could argue the same where americans are allowed to have guns unhindered. With or without gun control, we'd have the same issue. Guns serve more than one purpose in this country. Government - Hunting - Defence to name a few. They aren't 'meant' for murdering innocent people. That happens with or without guns.


Judging by the Australian experience, less guns = less deaths. The stats don't lie.


But it's not really that clear cut.


Did the Australian model at least reduce gun-related homicides? That is hotly disputed. University of Melbourne researchers Wang-Sheng Lee and Sandy Suardi concluded their 2008 report on the matter with the statement, “There is little evidence to suggest that [the Australian mandatory gun-buyback program] had any significant effects on firearm homicides.” “Although gun buybacks appear to be a logical and sensible policy that helps to placate the public’s fears,” the reported continued, “the evidence so far suggests that in the Australian context, the high expenditure incurred to fund the 1996 gun buyback has not translated into any tangible reductions in terms of firearm deaths.” A 2007 report, “Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?” by Jeanine Baker and Samara McPhedran similarly concluded that the buyback program did not have a significant long-term effect on the Australian homicide rate.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: Kryties

The real question is...are people still being murdered down under?


Not in anywhere NEAR the numbers they were before gun control. The fact is it works, and the statistics prove it.


Over the last 25ish years, there's been a less than 25% decline in homicide rates. Yes, that's a decline worth noting but let's not make it out to be some sort of massive reduction in homicide rates. The number of people killed by firearms has been reduced. The number of people killed by edged weapons is for the most part unchanged.

The gun ban has impacted gun crime. There's no need to try and paint it as having effected crime across the board.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: theatreboy

I cannot speak for Australia or Australians. All I see is what the media presents in the US. Most gun control advocates apparently believe they are doing a good thing. I can't hate on someone for that.

However, it does seem they are being used. Used by those who want the general public to be unable to seriously oppose those in power. Gun control is just a means to that end. Very media hysteria friendly. The 1st and 4th amendments are going down without much outcry. The 2nd not so much.

It seems the first step is getting the public to allow an incremental encroachment of liberty. Wait a while. Humans will be humans. Then encroach some more. Let the masses argue over what could or could not have happened with this or that law. Those arguments are immaterial as public safety is not really the concern.

I feel bad for those crying for safety. They are the ones who will be slapped with reality the hardest when they realize their well meaning concerns were pimped for reasons miles away from their "safety".



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: theatreboy


How many mass shootings have Australia had??



So what happened after the assault-weapon ban? Well therein lies the other half of the story twist noted above: Nothing.




Australian independence didn’t end. Tyranny didn’t come. Australians still hunted and explored and big-wave surfed to their hearts’ content. Their economy didn’t crash; Invaders never arrived.





Not one in the past 22 years.


Australia Gun control


At least have some facts and read up about its history before spouting rubbish.


edit on 11-5-2018 by Kurokage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 11:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: ABNARTY
a reply to: theatreboy

However, it does seem they are being used. Used by those who want the general public to be unable to seriously oppose those in power.


That's something I've always been confused about. What are your comparative peashooters going to do against Bombs, Tanks, Missiles, Gatling Guns, Rpg's, Grenades, Fighter Jets, Drones, Nukes etc etc?



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: theatreboy


How many mass shootings have Australia had??



So what happened after the assault-weapon ban? Well therein lies the other half of the story twist noted above: Nothing.




Australian independence didn’t end. Tyranny didn’t come. Australians still hunted and explored and big-wave surfed to their hearts’ content. Their economy didn’t crash; Invaders never arrived.


Australia Gun control


At least have some facts and read up about its history before spouting rubbish.


The way these people see it we live in some sort of dystopian nightmare where the government controls all of our actions. That's about as laughable as the assertion that America is somehow more "free" than most other western countries.

In other words they watch WAY too much fiction.




posted on May, 11 2018 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties


Thats so very true.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Kurokage

For what it's worth, if one were to use the definition that politicians like to use here in the US (being that a mass shooting is any shooting involving four or more victims, including the perpetrator), then Australia has had several.

Sydney Siege would be a mass shooting, arguably. Hunt family murder. Hectorville. Monash University. The Hells Angels shooting.

Now, before somebody comes along and tries to twist my comment into something it's not, I'll go ahead and acknowledge that clearly Australia has had less mass shootings by any definition than America has. That's not debatable. But when we don't even have a firm, across the board definition of what a mass shooting is and what it isn't, then it's easy to say this country has zero and this country has one every day.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 04:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: theatreboy


How many mass shootings have Australia had??



So what happened after the assault-weapon ban? Well therein lies the other half of the story twist noted above: Nothing.




Australian independence didn’t end. Tyranny didn’t come. Australians still hunted and explored and big-wave surfed to their hearts’ content. Their economy didn’t crash; Invaders never arrived.





Not one in the past 22 years.


Australia Gun control


At least have some facts and read up about its history before spouting rubbish.




So what you're saying is.... Before gun control, Oz was a horrible place to live with people gunning each other down in the streets... A mugger on every corner, a robber in every liquor store... I didn't know Oz was so violent before gun laws. I'm sooooo sorry for you guys loss....





posted on May, 11 2018 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: StallionDuck

We had regular mass shootings that no longer happen regularly. Very sparsely, in fact.

Gun deaths also went down significantly.

So yeah, there's that. Australia is a much better place for having the laws, than before.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties
a reply to: StallionDuck

We had regular mass shootings that no longer happen regularly. Very sparsely, in fact.

Gun deaths also went down significantly.

So yeah, there's that. Australia is a much better place for having the laws, than before.


Regularly huh?

Unless the sources I'll provide here are totally false... It was more like one general incident that involved the deaths of 35 people.

Source

The 1996‐1997 National Firearms Agreement (NFA) in Australia introduced strict gun laws, primarily as a reaction to the mass shooting in Port Arthur, Tasmania, in 1996, where 35 people were killed. Despite the fact that several researchers using the same data have examined the impact of the NFA on firearm deaths, a consensus does not appear to have been reached. In this paper, we reanalyze the same data on firearm deaths used in previous research, using tests for unknown structural breaks as a means to identifying impacts of the NFA. The results of these tests suggest that the NFA did not have any large effects on reducing firearm homicide or suicide rates.


I also noted that the argument presented here showed that the gun laws at that time didn't really make a difference. I mean, how could it if you can't really see what would have or have not happened since then. Though, be my guest and read the links provided for your pleasure, then let me know what you think.

Source

The development of legislation aimed at reducing the incidence of firearm-related death is an ongoing interest within the spheres of criminology, public policy, and criminal justice. Although a body of research has examined the impacts of significant epochs of regulatory reform upon firearm-related suicides and homicides in countries like Australia, where strict nationwide firearms regulations were introduced in 1996, relatively little research has considered the occurrence of a specific type of homicide: mass shooting events. The current paper examines the incidence of mass shootings in Australia and New Zealand (a country that is socioeconomically similar to Australia, but with a different approach to firearms regulation) over a 30 year period. It does not find support for the hypothesis that Australia’s prohibition of certain types of firearms has prevented mass shootings, with New Zealand not experiencing a mass shooting since 1997 despite the availability in that country of firearms banned in Australia. These findings are discussed in the context of social and economic trends.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 05:41 PM
link   
In your first paragraph....so well put man....flagg



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

I understand the point you are making here, but there is a small point that I think the OP was hinting at.
Regardless of laws, regulations, gun bans, if someone really wants to kill other people, no rule will stop that. And the real issue isn't that a gun was available, it's that someone though so little about the miracle of life, that he chose to end the lives of others. Morality can't be legislated.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join