SUXBNME 1,596 Posted July 22, 2015 All you gotta do is look at Australia. They had the worst gun massacre in history. Then they banned guns. Haven't had one since, and gun deaths have plummeted. Ban guns and wimmen get kilt by blunt objects at alarming rates One woman is killed every week in Australia by her partner or former partner. That tragic 'statistic' is referred to more frequently than ever: in newspapers, on television, in parliament and on social media. It seems like the number of Australians who recognise that fact and appreciate its gravity is approaching critical mass. Unfortunately, in the time it has taken for that fact to enter the collective Australian consciousness, the figure has doubled. As of this week, 13 Australian women have reportedly been killed as a result of domestic violence in the first seven weeks of 2015. That’s almost two women per week. Last Friday, Kerry Michael was found dead on a bushwalking trail after suffering severe head trauma. Police are alleging she was killed by her husband while the two were out hiking during a holiday in Tasmania. See...If the men had guns to play with, they would have got their aggressions out in that way versus bricking a b1tch upside the head. Duh Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SUXBNME 1,596 Posted July 22, 2015 AUSTRALIANS are shooting each other less and stabbing each other more. The latest homicide in Australia report by the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) shows 13 per cent of people murdered in 2008/09 and 2009/10 were killed by firearms, down from 25 per cent in the late 1980s. But knife murders have risen from 30 to 41 per cent over the last decade. The report shows Australia's homicide rate is at a historic low since reporting began in 1989, but the murder rate of indigenous people, although falling, is still four times the national level. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/knife-killings-on-the-rise-in-australia-as-gun-murders-fall-says-new-criminology-report/story-e6frg6nf-1226581896001 Say it ain't so, Australia Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tubby_mcgee 701 Posted July 22, 2015 Why did the gunman stop shooting people? Did he have a change of heart? I'm surprised he stopped at killing just 5 people. I believe the answer I was looking for.....was..."A good guy with a gun took him out". If not for that...not only this guy, but many other shooters...would have kept shooting, and shooting and shooting, and shooting.... And as for "banning guns". Not gonna happen in our lifetime. So whining, debating, meh. It's fun at times, but a waste of time. As far as "Why do you need this gun or that gun to hunt or defend yourself" ? I dunno. Cuz I want too? Oh..and the reason for the 2nd Amendment, was to protect ourselves from an overzealous government. So, gee, I guess..hmm..that's why. I feel more safe with more firepower. I don't get why they don't just ban murder. Then, that way, we'd all be safe from all sorts of weapons. As soon as they "banned" murder, all those thinking of it, would immediately stop. Because they have to behave themselves now. Guns aren't going anywhere....for a long...long....lonnng time. So why sit back and be victims? Imagine if the pilots during the 911 attacks would have been trained and had guns. Imagine if teachers had been trained with guns during the school shootings. Or if the school had an armed guard or poilceman staffed by the school. You don't hear of many shootings taking place at trap shoots, or at the police station, or at the local gun show. You hear of plenty at "gun free zones". Schools. Churches. Movie theaters. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SUXBNME 1,596 Posted July 22, 2015 More stats from Australia regarding their gun ban? OK. Sounds good. It has now been over 10 years 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 statistics for the years following the ban are now in: Accidental gun deaths are 300% higher than the pre-1997 ban rate The assault rate has increased 800% since 1991, and increased 200% since the 1997 gun ban. Robbery and armed robbery have increase 20% from the pre-97 ban rate. From immediately after the ban was instituted in 1997 through 2002, the robbery and armed robbery rate was up 200% over the pre-ban rates. In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 171 percent There's graphs, charts and stuff in the below link if anyone is really interested http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2974487/posts Granted, FreeRepublic.com prolly isn't a bastion of neutrality and open mindedness, but if they are correct with their "facts" then who cares. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Magnificent Bastard 192 Posted July 22, 2015 I believe the answer I was looking for.....was..."A good guy with a gun took him out". If not for that...not only this guy, but many other shooters...would have kept shooting, and shooting and shooting, and shooting.... And as for "banning guns". Not gonna happen in our lifetime. So whining, debating, meh. It's fun at times, but a waste of time. As far as "Why do you need this gun or that gun to hunt or defend yourself" ? I dunno. Cuz I want too? Oh..and the reason for the 2nd Amendment, was to protect ourselves from an overzealous government. So, gee, I guess..hmm..that's why. I feel more safe with more firepower. I don't get why they don't just ban murder. Then, that way, we'd all be safe from all sorts of weapons. As soon as they "banned" murder, all those thinking of it, would immediately stop. Because they have to behave themselves now. Guns aren't going anywhere....for a long...long....lonnng time. So why sit back and be victims? Imagine if the pilots during the 911 attacks would have been trained and had guns. Imagine if teachers had been trained with guns during the school shootings. Or if the school had an armed guard or poilceman staffed by the school. You don't hear of many shootings taking place at trap shoots, or at the police station, or at the local gun show. You hear of plenty at "gun free zones". Schools. Churches. Movie theaters. Google- shooting police station Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted July 22, 2015 http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/knife-killings-on-the-rise-in-australia-as-gun-murders-fall-says-new-criminology-report/story-e6frg6nf-1226581896001 Say it ain't so, Australia So the homicide rate is historically low after the gun ban, correct? No one has stated homicides will cease to exist in the absence of guns. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted July 22, 2015 More stats from Australia regarding their gun ban? OK. Sounds good. It has now been over 10 years 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 statistics for the years following the ban are now in: Accidental gun deaths are 300% higher than the pre-1997 ban rate The assault rate has increased 800% since 1991, and increased 200% since the 1997 gun ban. Robbery and armed robbery have increase 20% from the pre-97 ban rate. From immediately after the ban was instituted in 1997 through 2002, the robbery and armed robbery rate was up 200% over the pre-ban rates. In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 171 percent There's graphs, charts and stuff in the below link if anyone is really interested http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2974487/posts Granted, FreeRepublic.com prolly isn't a bastion of neutrality and open mindedness, but if they are correct with their "facts" then who cares. Those stats contradict your earlier link, and Titan's - what is the source? Never mind. They just cherry picked stats to try and support their cause. Overall violent crime and crimes involving guns are down according to the government website. See for yourself: http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giants Fan 85 Posted July 22, 2015 At what point do these "patriots" admit that the proliferation of guns in our country actually hurts our national security? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tubby_mcgee 701 Posted July 22, 2015 Google- shooting police station I didn't say it hasn't happened ever. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Magnificent Bastard 192 Posted July 22, 2015 I didn't say it hasn't happened ever. I bet happens more there than a church Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
parrot 789 Posted July 22, 2015 You hear of plenty at "gun free zones". Schools. Churches. Movie theaters. I'm a gun rights guy, but I'm getting really tired of hearing this false cause. Those are also "People-O-Plenty" zones. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
5-Points 3,766 Posted July 22, 2015 I think the best argument is the harm of gun-related accidents + suicides exceeds the benefit of crimes averted/lives saved + enjoyment from gun sports. Estimates over the number of defensive gun uses vary, depending on the study's population, criteria, time-period studied, and other factors. Higher end estimates by Kleck and Gertz show between 1 to 2.5 million DGUs in the United States each year.[1]:64–65[2][3] Low end estimates cited by Hemenway show approximately 55,000-80,000 such uses each year.[4][5]Middle estimates have estimated approximately 1 million DGU incidents in the United States If we go with the middle estimates it would seem that guns are used defensively far more often than they're used to commit violence. Even if we go with the lower estimates, defensive gun use saves more lives than are lost due to illegal/accidental shootings. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted July 22, 2015 If we go with the middle estimates it would seem that guns are used defensively far more often than they're used to commit violence. Even if we go with the lower estimates, defensive gun use saves more lives than are lost due to illegal/accidental shootings. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use Are there any safer alternatives for those DGUs - Pepper spray? Tasers? A dog? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
5-Points 3,766 Posted July 23, 2015 Are there any safer alternatives for those DGUs - Pepper spray? Tasers? A dog?Safer for whom? The bottom line is, of all the guns in the U.S., an astronomically low .00004% (I rounded up btw) are used to commit murder. That is assuming that a different gun is used in every murder, which is most likely not the case and the overwhelming majority of the time its dooshbags killing other dooshbags. Hardly an epidemic and not worth trampling on the rights of millions of law abiding gun owners in my opinion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted July 23, 2015 Safer for whom? The bottom line is, of all the guns in the U.S., an astronomically low .00004% (I rounded up btw) are used to commit murder. That is assuming that a different gun is used in every murder, which is most likely not the case and the overwhelming majority of the time its dooshbags killing other dooshbags. Hardly an epidemic and not worth trampling on the rights of millions of law abiding gun owners in my opinion. My original point was there are more salient problems with ready access to guns than murder - namely suicide and accidental injuries. When you responded that guns prevent crimes, I countered that there may be other ways to accomplish the same crime reduction, ostensibly without the risks of guns. For the record, I don't really have a strong opinion about gun control, though I think the idea of protecting oneself from an oppressive government a la the second amendment is absurd. Our military would annihilate any gun-toting opposition. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
5-Points 3,766 Posted July 23, 2015 My original point was there are more salient problems with ready access to guns than murder - namely suicide and accidental injuries. When you responded that guns prevent crimes, I countered that there may be other ways to accomplish the same crime reduction, ostensibly without the risks of guns. For the record, I don't really have a strong opinion about gun control, though I think the idea of protecting oneself from an oppressive government a la the second amendment is absurd. Our military would annihilate any gun-toting opposition. I understand. I brought the DGU stats in response to the bolded below. I think the best argument is the harm of gun-related accidents + suicides exceeds the benefit of crimes averted/lives saved + enjoyment from gun sports. I thought it was important to illustrate just how often guns are used to avert crimes/save lives each year. I think most anti-gunners are either ignorant of that fact or choose to disregard it because it destroys their argument. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted July 23, 2015 I understand. I brought the DGU stats in response to the bolded below. I thought it was important to illustrate just how often guns are used to avert crimes/save lives each year. I think most anti-gunners are either ignorant of that fact or choose to disregard it because it destroys their argument. Fair enough. But I'll reiterate that guns may not be the only way to prevent those crimes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JTB 52 Posted July 23, 2015 Yes. They evolved into it, and then back out. I don't know if the Church ever officially did away with that nonsense or not. You sir talk right out your azz hole. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JTB 52 Posted July 23, 2015 I think the best argument is the harm of gun-related accidents + suicides exceeds the benefit of crimes averted/lives saved + enjoyment from gun sports. I think your argument sucks. Please elaborate on how much enjoyment I get from "gun sports." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted July 23, 2015 I think your argument sucks. Please elaborate on how much enjoyment I get from "gun sports." It isn't my argument. And I have no idea what enjoyment you derive from firearms. But you can read my response to 5-points if you are still confused. As a bonus, you may learn how to discuss something in a civil manner despite difference of opinion. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745 Posted July 23, 2015 You sir talk right out your azz hole. What the fock? All I said is that, at one point, the church encouraged martyrdom. That is historical fact. I didn't say they still encourage it. I didn't say it was a problem today, like it is in Islam. I was merely trying to make the point that there isn't a fundamental difference in the two creeds, from a philosophical basis. Their modern differences stem more from other historical developments. That's all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewbieJr 541 Posted July 23, 2015 What the fock? All I said is that, at one point, the church encouraged martyrdom. That is historical fact. I didn't say they still encourage it. I didn't say it was a problem today, like it is in Islam. I was merely trying to make the point that there isn't a fundamental difference in the two creeds, from a philosophical basis. Their modern differences stem more from other historical developments. That's all. I think what he meant to say was" "You proved me wrong and I don't have a comeback" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
