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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 thought of a weapon in your hand is terrifying,
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?