It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Australia Crime since gun control

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 10:38 AM
Here is some of the text I copied from an e-mail that is going around. Now I am not one to blindly buy into any and all information sent by e-mail. I like to check the facts first. Lets look at the text first:

It has now been 16 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year statistics are now in: Australia-wide: Homicides are up 3.2 percent. Australia-wide: Assaults are up 8.6 percent. Australia-wide: Armed robberies are up 44 percent.. Victoria-wide: Homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, so criminals still possess their guns!) While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey are unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort, and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it. You won't see this data on the U.S. evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

I went to google and looked for some numbers, but the reports I found were more about words than numbers. So I went to snopes. They are supposed to be an unbiased fact based site right?
Here is there information. I found it quite strange that they spent most of the article defending gun control and trying to explain away the numbers. I can't copy any text from snopes, but please check it out in my link.

How about our Aussie friends, is there any truth to this from your perspective?

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 11:05 AM
I'm no aussie, by any means...

But, I think in this day and age, crime is rising regardless of guns.
Australians now have no way to defend themselves and have to fully rely on the gov't.
THAT sucks.
Although, I can guarantee that not ALL guns were just given to the gov't.

Good luck Aussie's.
We all know that when you take the guns away from the law-abiding citizens... take away the only means necessary to protect their lives.
Unless they all take Krav Maga lessons.

You can't take away the guns from criminals.

PS: I should move there and start up a huge studio to teach anti-gun self-defense.
CAPITALISM at its finest!

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 11:13 AM
You would think they would have put more thought into this law...

I mean look at Mexico... they too have some of the strictest gun control laws in the world... 22,700 KIA to date...
Oh sure the bleeding heart libs blame the US as the source of their weapons but let me say... We normal Americans don't have access to rocket launchers handgrenades or full auto machine guns...

Maybe the down under folks need to rethink this plan

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 11:19 AM
Gun control isn't about lowering crime. It's about having an unarmed populace that cannot stand up to the city, state, federal, or world govt. It's about control over the people. It's been proven over and over limiting legal firearm owners and usage does not lower crime.

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 11:58 AM
reply to post by network dude
What the heck! One flag? and I gave it to you.
More people need to read this.

More people need to actually ask LEO's what they can do for the average citizen in the event of a home invasion. If they answer truthfully, and most I know will, they will tell you that they can't do a thing to help you. It will be over before they get there.

Citizens have a right to self-protection!

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 12:22 PM
There was a similar (but not exact) thread like yours several months ago. It dealt with the accusations that American Weapon Brokers were selling rifles, pistols and ammo to the drug gangs. Some of the respondents to the OP favored ZERO "gun" ownership in the USA. I think Oz was in favor of the restrictions. I posted 7 or 8 Australian newspaper articles regarding an increase in robbery, home invasion and rape. I do not recall if he ever to respond to my post.
When "guns" are outlawed, only outlaws will have "guns"!
I rarely agree with you, but this is a much different subject, S&F.

[edit on 26-4-2010 by Violater1]

[edit on 26-4-2010 by Violater1]

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 01:10 PM
Interesting question!

I am unable to find a very recent document relating to gun related stats - though there are a few up until 2006 which gives stats as well as explains the gun related catagories ...

Extract from the site (link above)
How many offences involve firearms?
According to the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), Recorded Crime–Victims 2006, a weapon was used in 74 per cent of attempted murders, 63 per cent of murders and 44 per cent of robberies. A knife was the most common type of weapon used in committing these offences. Over one third (34 per cent) of murder victims, 35 per cent of attempted murder victims, 22 per cent of the victims of robbery and 10 per cent of kidnapping/abduction victims were subjected to an offence involving a knife. A firearm was involved in 25 per cent of attempted murder, 17 per cent of murder and 7 per cent of robbery offences.

The latest Australian Crime: Facts and Figures 2006 from the AIC states that the percentage of homicides committed with a firearm continues a declining trend which began in 1969: ‘In 2003, fewer than 16 per cent of homicides involved firearms. The figure was similar in 2002 and 2001, down from a high of 44 per cent in 1968.’ The Homicide in Australia: 2005–2006 National Homicide Monitoring Program (NHMP) annual report points out that while the use of firearms to commit homicide had decreased over time, the use of handguns as a percentage of all firearm homicide has increased. In 1992–93, 17 per cent of firearm homicides were committed with a handgun, compared with 47 per cent in 2005–06.

Firearm deaths
While much of the firearm debate focuses on murders, most firearm deaths in Australia are suicides. In 2005 the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare’s National Injury Surveillance Unit (NISU) released a briefing paper, Firearm deaths and hospitalisations in Australia, which found that:

Suicide was consistently the most common type of firearm-related death over the period 1979–2002, accounting for a mean annual proportion of 77 per cent of all firearm deaths during that time frame. The next most frequent type of case was homicide, which accounted for 15 per cent of all firearm deaths. The frequency of unintentional firearm-related deaths was comparatively low (6 per cent).

The latest available information shows that:

in 2005 there were 147 firearm suicides (ABS, Suicides Australia 2005)
in 2006 there were 46 firearm homicides (ABS, Recorded Crime–Victims 2006)
in 2003–04, there were 48 accidental firearm deaths. It should be noted, though, that assessment of the source of these data (the National Coroners Information System) suggests that many of these cases would be reassigned as suicides, on the basis of information available after completion of coroners’ inquiries. (National Injury Surveillance Unit of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Injury deaths, Australia 2003–04).
In addition to the NISU briefing paper mentioned earlier, some recent articles that have analysed the number and type of firearms deaths in Australia over recent years include:

P. Alpers, K. Agho and S. Chapman, Australia's 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings, Injury Prevention, no. 12, 2006 (includes data from 1979 to 2003)
J. Baker and S. McPhedran, Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?, British Journal of Criminology, vol. 47, 2007 (includes data from 1979 to 2004).
All of the data and analysis show a general downward trend in firearm deaths since 1979, particularly for firearm suicides since the late 1980s

End extract from publication.

I'd be interested to find any more updated info to cover 2006-2009.

and just to clarify, we can hold guns in Australia - though it is regulated.

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 01:21 PM
I am still very interested in hearing from the people who live with this law. I am very much for protecting our 2nd amendment rights and also an advocate for gun safety. Perhaps I was missing something, but I thought Australia had a mild crime rate compared to the rest of the world. I also have a big issue with not being able to have a gun when 90% of what crawls around could kill you. Some of the spiders there are big enough to need more firepower than a 22LR.

Forgetting the fluff snopes put on this, are these numbers a good representation of the way things are?

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 01:30 PM

Originally posted by network dude
I am still very interested in hearing from the people who live with this law. I am very much for protecting our 2nd amendment rights and also an advocate for gun safety. Perhaps I was missing something, but I thought Australia had a mild crime rate compared to the rest of the world. I also have a big issue with not being able to have a gun when 90% of what crawls around could kill you. Some of the spiders there are big enough to need more firepower than a 22LR.

Forgetting the fluff snopes put on this, are these numbers a good representation of the way things are?

Would it really matter if it was. I understand the post and I gave S+F for you. You have to understand that with AU's border they could almost completely get rid of guns just because they would be hard to get back in. That said the U.S. has two borders and both could get guns in. From the Mexican border you could get guns in that were made as far south as Chile and all places in between. Canadian border could allow traffic from as far as Russia if need be. Not to mention how easy Cubans can get here (raft) and bring guns from the black market with them. AU might have a lower homicide rate by means of ending guns in their country. The US with our culture would only see a higher yield of death by guns. Aside from culture differences you also have to think about population. Criminals with guns in America will always have guns in America. There is no effective way to end it. It is best to keep the armed citizens armed. If the criminals don't take us out then as someone said, our government certainly wouldn't waste the chance with our lack of guns.

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 02:07 PM
reply to post by network dude

Given you started your thread @ 01.38am Australian Eastern Standard Time its hardly surprising you've only had one reply from an Australian on the subject of the OP

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 02:22 PM
As for getting guns into a country. With basic machining tools, I can create a gun very easily.

You know that guns are not made by the Gods and given to man through some holy divinity?

Sorry, I was just being snarky.

Guns do not kill people. Guns can be used to protect ones self. That is one of their main purposes. I am sick of people that think a gun leaps out of the holster or rack and shoots someone.

If you use a gun to commit a crime 20 years minimum. How bout that?

Frelling leave my guns alone!

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 03:24 PM

Originally posted by Retrovertigo
reply to post by network dude

Given you started your thread @ 01.38am Australian Eastern Standard Time its hardly surprising you've only had one reply from an Australian on the subject of the OP

But doesn't everyone operate on Eastern Standard time?

I forget about the simplest things sometimes.

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 08:25 PM
The moment they made our guns illegal they also made them very valuable. This cause a little boom in illegal gun trade so it became easier for crims to get armed after the legislation passed, no longer would they have to go through the proper application process. Nowhere near all the guns were handed in, I was too young to own my own gun at the time but even my law abiding family had guns that werent on the record and one never got handed in despite the mass media campaign.

Ive witnessed seven stabbings in my short life, two were fatal. Taking guns out of the mix just means youve got more balls in a conflict and know the worst your likely to be facing is another knife. The mere prescence of guns on the other hand can act as a deterrent in and of itself. If our population was armed I would have been alot more reserved while out on the piss, but they arent and so unless your picking a fight with a hardend crim you expect it'll just be a biff and your bruises will heal so you loose the fear factor of "what if" and pick fights for lame little reasons and with just about anyobody. The amount of fist fighting resulted in deaths many of which were from just one or two hits, so they launched the "one punch can kill campaign". But the fights are still on the rise, you know the other guy aint likely to pull a gun on ya.

Guns are a way for skinny little folk or disabled or elderly to be evenly matched in a fight. Relegating the buff blokes to uncertain pussies. It evens out the playing field. It makes break and entering are scary business.

People here often say well "at least if I get in a road rage incident or something I know the other guy isnt going to pull a gun out" and I say exactly they know you wont pull one out either and hence have no fear in bashing the living daylights out of ya.

I cant help but wonder though, theres a chance if guns were around I would have lost more than my front teeth while growing up.

Edit to add; deleted, too personal

[edit on 26-4-2010 by polarwarrior]

[edit on 26-4-2010 by polarwarrior]

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 03:23 PM

Originally posted by polarwarrior

People here often say well "at least if I get in a road rage incident or something I know the other guy isnt going to pull a gun out"

but are you sure about that? do criminals still have guns? are there still a few holdouts?

Is there or has there been and gun crime in your area since the bill passed?

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 07:16 PM
reply to post by network dude

Yeah of course, you can still get guns for security guards, cops and pro shooters who visit the range. So there does end up being alot that make it into the black market but never have I seen an illegal gun or heard of a shooting. Ive barely ever read the word "shot" in the newpaper and when you do its because the cops did it. The only real shootings are those associated with organized crime which doesnt happen so much where I live, even in areas it is prevelent the shooting are still few and far between. It would still be like a 0.001% chance the other bloke has a gun in a road rage.

Edit: out in the country the chance theyd have a gun is much higher, but you wont get road rage there the way ya do in the city

[edit on 27-4-2010 by polarwarrior]

posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 02:05 AM
As an Aussie who knows in the country areas of Australia many guns were held in ownership and almost no murders by guns were perpertated by the average Aussie who owned a gun legally.
Why? because you were on a data base as the holder of a firearm license.
A crime is comitted in your area involving a gun, you are investigated along with others who have a firearm license, your firearms are matched against the forensics.
No criminal is concerned about the law.
Th ethnic gangs in Australia must s'n-word' in unison as they lay waste to a defenceless nation.
Hey they wanna attack a local who cuts them off ate the intersection ect hey the locals got no guns .
Some say that the China towns in every city and major town almost in the west are a sleeping series of cells for the Communist plot originating from Ho chi mins time to ultimately take over the world, I do not know if what they say is true, but there arean awful lot of Chinese in every major city and town across the world, and not that many Chinese Restauraunts to equate with this number?
Whether they are armed with illegal gun or have them stowed away who would know, but it is strange that the average country Joe had to hand in their Guns ,yet the Chinese have machetes and knives, as well as Guns .
A person a few years ago in a major central street of Melbourne was hacked to death neara chinese restauraunt in broad daylight by Asian persons armed with machetes ect.
Perhaps if someone witha legally held gun was present they could have saved the victims life?
A few yeras ago Aussies were bashed and terrorised by rampaging Lebanese thugs in Sydney, would they have been so brave if the Average Aussie held a gun?
Guns are lethal, but so is being bashed by thugs , espescially if you are old, or frail.
Imagine your wife being bashed and raped in front of your face , as intruders laugh, because you hanbded in your..... gun.

posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 02:11 AM
You know I heard there was a conspiracy behind the Port Arthur massacre to bring this law into existence.

posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 02:44 AM
reply to post by ghostsoldier

The fact they used a false flag to illegally take them away from us in the first place kinda renders this conversation about violence rates null. Port arthur is like 9/11, if you look into it for long enough you'll eventually find all the evidence that will leave you pretty much convinced.

posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 02:45 AM

Originally posted by ghostsoldier
You know I heard there was a conspiracy behind the Port Arthur massacre to bring this law into existence.

This is what some believe I guess, but basically it was an angel faced blond young man armed with deadly firearms, he asked about wasps according to witnesses prior to the carnage(he said according to media quote"there area lot of wasps about today arent there" or very close to that, (a smoke screen perhaps)?
He massacred approx 30 innocent Aussies and wounded several others with high powered guns.
He acted alone and was caught as he escaped flames after being surrounded by police away from the massacre scene.
Shortly afterwards all semi automatic rifles were banned, with a legal order for them all to be surrendered to police stations ect.
The argument being it would save lives.
Apparently Martin Bryant the perpertator of the Port Arthur Massacre was a
bona fide Firearm license holder.
Therefore the logic being "only registered firearm owners would kill people so lets make Firearms illegal unless you have a strictly defined reason for doing so ie A farmer.
It was reported in the media that some of the millions of firearms handed in ended up being sold on.
Who knows conspiracy theories are a dime a dozen, probably this guy was just a crazy who knew how to aim a rifle and shoot .
Has the new law made Australia a safer place?
Only for the invader some would say.

posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 03:01 AM
australian gun laws may be strict for some, but that doesn't mean that no one can own one.

the handing over of weapons only applied to automatic, some semi automatic and other military grade firearms which any responsible owners of such really don't have a good use for in the first place.

people can still get a licience to buy and own firearms so it's not an issue of this, we are regulated yes but the ownership of guns is still there.

gun crime probably wouldn't change much even if all guns are taken away from society or not.
these who commit those offences are the criminals of society and can most always find new ways of getting what they want, but having these laws does make it more difficult for them and the type of crimes they commit.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in