It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)! In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and 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 the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home. 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....'
In the US you also see higher crime rates where gun laws are most strict (correlates, in large part. Can always argue about causation). One should look askance at any individual who, upon reaching power, wants to take your rights. And shake ingress head at the easily duped citizen all too eager to hand rights over.
This is one of those controversial thread topics which we will take a very firm line on. Basically, it's been tried before and ended badly. I'm happy to give it a chance, but I'm placing a warning, right here at the beginning. Anything other than civil conversation on the topic WILL NOT be tolerated. If you can't say it in a respectful way, don't say it at all. If this thread starts down the road towards fighting and flaming, it will be closed and those whose behaviour is deemed unacceptable will be infracted. You have all been warned.
Perhaps credible references should be provided before we all start jumping to baseless conclusions. And even if it's exactly as Felipe says there are also a few variables we need to take into consideration.
You can find a little discussion of these statistics on Snopes and wiki, and probably elsewhere too. Essentially, without context the figures don't really mean much, especially as Australians never had a constitutional right to own firearms like in the US, and also that first year results arent nearly as important as long term trends. Those stats relate to the buy back campaign that took place in 1997- what are the figures like now? And what were the crime rates like in general over this time, and what were socio-economic conditions? It appears a study was published in 2010 in the American Law and Economics Review, that showed that up to that point since the buyback there has been an almost 80% reduction in gun related suicides, and a significant drop in gun related homicides. I'm not interested enough to hunt that study out, but it might be worth doing for anyone interested in the subject, it may well include figures on armed robbery and other crimes also. Gun ownership isn't an emotive issue for me, being a Brit, but it always rankles when people (the publishers of mass emails and the like, not anyone here!) use stats to support their stance on something, while ignoring context or other studies that may contradict them.
http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp And, some groundwork for the discussion that will follow: Things that are not like guns: baseball bats, cars, belts, kitchen knives, four-irons, hefty books, umbrellas, vases, garden ornaments. Things that are like guns: small rocket launchers
I would also like to see a source for these claims as I also live in Australia and haven't heard of such substantial increases in these statistics. I definitely know that firearm related crimes have risen recently but these figures are quite staggering.
Here in Finland there's been a lot of talk on the right to own guns after the school shootings in 2007 and 2008. There's a big dilemma here: if you give people guns, they can defend themselves, but the attackers also have access. If all students in schools carried guns, school shooters would be stopped quickly, but we would also be making sure all potential shooters have access to guns, meaning more shootings. And don't tell me this can be solved by denying guns from criminals; it doesn't work cause all criminals commit their first crime at one point. We should also deny guns for the dangerously insane, but we don't really have the resources to check the mental health of gun license applicants. Many spree killers have a clean record. People also say people can get illegal guns anyway. That is true, but getting them legally might be easier. Check how many mass shooting/spree killings have been done with legal weapons and how many with illegal. Both Finnish school shooters and many American and Canadian ones, plus Breivik in Norway had legal guns. Of course many, for example the recent Belgian shooting are committed with illegal weapons. However I agree somewhat with the idea behind the American right to bear arms. It's because the people could defend themselves against an oppressive government and don't say it's farfetched, it's happened in other countries before. In countries like the Soviet Union, possession of firearms was illegal. In Finland gun issues are always complicated because so many people hunt in here. Hunting also has benefits for the society, cause reducing the moose population means less collisions with cars and less damage to crops. There has been talks of hunting clubs and sportshooter clubs keeping their guns in their clubs, not at home, but this would mean the clubs would be tempting targets for organized crime to rob.
I only know that when the same thing was implemented in Turkey, there was a marked reduction in gun-related and small gang crime. In England guns have never been an issue because apart from sporting guns, or collectors items, they have always been illegal, so we don't feel the loss of that particular 'freedom'. Thank God.
Speaking personally, I quite like the freedom to walk down the street and not have to wonder how many of the people I pass could shoot me Rule Britannia.
A quick Google search of "gun statistics in Australia" will reveal many leads to "the source" of these statistics. Snopes is a mom and pop operation that has been proven wrong and has a liberal slant so I rarely go there, besides when I do my firewall goes into hyperdrive. Snopes, in this case says it is "true and false" then babbles about statistics using home runs as an example. In my particular part of America it is common knowledge that if you try to kick in a door to do a home invasion you will without a doubt be shot. The same cannot be said of the town in which I work just 58 miles away. Home invasions are common there. Mainly it's the elderly who are attacked. I would be willing to bet that 90% of the homes in my community have firearms, mainly for hunting but you can bet that at least one shotgun is loaded for home defense. Those facts speak for themselves. I was raised in this town where I now work in what would be considered "the hood". I know the attitudes there. They know not to mess with people who live in the country because they will get shot, so they choose a softer target. As has been said, the areas of America which have the most strict gun laws have the highest amount of gun related crime. Criminals don't turn in their guns as law abiding citizens do when asked to do so by the government.
Source? Anecdotes are fine at a pub with your friends, but if you want to convince people, you're going to need to produce some credible studies, not just tell us about the place you live and to google to find where you got the information from. Sorry for asking for verifiable statistics and not blindly believing everything I read, how very liberal of me.
To be honest I don't really think statistics matter much in this kind of debate - you form a gut feeling on it based on your upbringing, culture and experiences, and it is something that reasonable people can disagree on. As much as it irritates me when people cherrypick stats that confirm their existing views and ignore or dismiss anything that contradicts them, I just don't think any facts or figures would change people's minds either way on this issue.
Not to be rude but If you don’t wonder that anywhere you’re a little of your rocker. Honestly of all the gunshot victims I have seen I don’t think a single one was inflicted by a legal gun. NYC has some of the strictest gun laws in America, we still see plenty of GSW in our ER’s. Hate to say it but you seem to suffer a false delusion of your surroundings.
I don't believe him to be suffering from a delusion at all. People in the US are so use to being around firearms and being able to legally obtain them that I think your perception is slightly skewed. In other countries guns are illegal. I have never seen a gun before in my life other than on TV. The only other time I have actually seen a real gun was when a Police Officer was presenting at my High School about the dangers of cyber bullying and other illegalities relating to people under the legal age. In this instance the Officer did not even unholster his weapon. While I would still like a source on the original statistics quoted, I have heard enough in the news that gun-related crime has risen in Australia. Nonetheless I agree with Banzai's view that I quite like the fact that I am able to walk down the street and not have to wonder how many people could shoot me. I suppose as I said earlier, if you are living in the US, firearms are some what second nature to all of your lives. Other countries function fine however, without them.
Source? Anecdotes are fine at a pub with your friends, but if you want to convince people, you're going to need to produce some credible studies, not just tell us about the place you live and to google to find where you got the information from. Sorry for asking for verifiable statistics and not blindly believing everything I read, how very liberal of me. If you insist...http://www.reasonorforce.com/2010/08/australian-gun-ban-facts-statistics.html To be honest I don't really think statistics matter much in this kind of debate - you form a gut feeling on it based on your upbringing, culture and experiences, and it is something that reasonable people can disagree on. A criminal will more than likely choose a soft target, that is one whose government has taken their guns away. In my area, as I said, break in's are very rare if non existent and a home invasion would result it the crook being dead, no doubt. The same can't be said for the town where i work because the general household is not armed. The entire neighborhood knows when I'm sighting my 50 caliber in on my property and has no complaints. As the other poster mentioned about upbringing and culture. Turkey shoots take place every weekend to raise money for local charities. Deep in the piney woods of southeast Texas where I live citizens are much more likely to be armed and those who aren't are the rarity. The low incident of burglary and no home invasions attests to this knowledge.
As you know, guns are not illegal in the UK, just restricted. And even despite this it's actually amazingly easy to get your hands on a firearm. With all due respect, you do have to wonder about things like this anywhere. Even here in blighty.
How about the flip side? Walking down the street and wondering how many of the people you pass are going to mug you at gun or knife point? At least if you are armed the playing field is level.
In the city where i work today a man was shot over a parking spot, a pizza delivery man was robbed at gunpoint, a home invasion took place and a man assaulted another with a hammer... and the night is young. More good reasons for an armed citizenry. See our local news here.... http://www.kfdm.com/sections/local-news/
Got to be honest, it's not a thought that's ever crossed my mind either. Not even when wandering down the back alleys of Newcastle at four in the morning. I've had thoughts of being mugged at knifepoint cross my my mind in that sort of situation, but guns just don't figure in my thinking.
^ I wrote: 'you do have to wonder about things like this anywhere'. I don't think I've ever consciously thought 'this person could shoot me' but I have been aware of certain people I've not trusted on sight, and am always more conscious of my things in a crowd. It's really more about a potential attack, rather than the method of attack, but just because gun-crime isn't as common in the UK as it is in other parts of the world does not mean it does not happen; and does not mean you shouldn't be at least aware of the potential for it.
