Gun control in work

[left alone]

GUNS IN AUSTRALIA Here's a thought to warm your hearts... From ......., a police officer in Australia.

Hi Yanks and Canadians - I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under. 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 3.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 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.

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." You won't see this on the American /Canadian evening news or hear your government or members of the State Assembly and Ottawa parliament disseminating this information.

The Australian experience proves it. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens. Take note Americans and Canadians before it's too late!

 

[insein]

Not that i dont believe you but could we get a link.

 

[5stringJeff]

Amazing! Just like the NRA has been saying for years!

 

[dilloduck]

GUNS IN AUSTRALIA Here's a thought to warm your hearts... From ......., a police officer in Australia.

Hi Yanks and Canadians - I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under. 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 3.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 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.

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." You won't see this on the American /Canadian evening news or hear your government or members of the State Assembly and Ottawa parliament disseminating this information.

The Australian experience proves it. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens. Take note Americans and Canadians before it's too late!

The thought of voluntarily surrendering personal firearms boggles my mind.

 

[manu1959]

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

any claims based on statistics (even accurate ones) which posit a cause-and-effect relationship between the gun buyback program and increased crime rates because "criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed" are automatically suspect, since the average Australian citizen didn't own firearms even before the buyback. But beyond that, most of the statistics offered here are misleading and present only "first year results" where long-term trends need to be considered in order to draw valid cause-and-effect conclusions.

 

[5stringJeff]

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

any claims based on statistics (even accurate ones) which posit a cause-and-effect relationship between the gun buyback program and increased crime rates because "criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed" are automatically suspect, since the average Australian citizen didn't own firearms even before the buyback. But beyond that, most of the statistics offered here are misleading and present only "first year results" where long-term trends need to be considered in order to draw valid cause-and-effect conclusions.

One can see the exact same cause and effect in the UK, where citizens are also unarmed. One can see the same effect in American cities and states which have stricter gun control laws. The simple fact is that armed citizens are the best protection against crime and tyranny.

 

[Mr. P]

GUNS IN AUSTRALIA Here's a thought to warm your hearts... From ......., a police officer in Australia.

Hi Yanks and Canadians - I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under. 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 3.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 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.

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." You won't see this on the American /Canadian evening news or hear your government or members of the State Assembly and Ottawa parliament disseminating this information.

The Australian experience proves it. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens. Take note Americans and Canadians before it's too late!

Hell, we've known this.....

* Washington D.C. enacted a virtual ban on handguns in 1976. Between 1976 and 1991, Washington D.C.'s homicide rate rose 200%, while the U.S. rate rose 12%. (1)

Lots of info at the link.
http://justfacts.com/gun_control.htm

 

[liberalogic]

The Australian experience proves it. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens. Take note Americans and Canadians before it's too late!

That's the key though. Gun control shouldn't be about taking everyone's guns away, it's about trying to only let sane people use them.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

any claims based on statistics (even accurate ones) which posit a cause-and-effect relationship between the gun buyback program and increased crime rates because "criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed" are automatically suspect, since the average Australian citizen didn't own firearms even before the buyback. But beyond that, most of the statistics offered here are misleading and present only "first year results" where long-term trends need to be considered in order to draw valid cause-and-effect conclusions.

Yes, but as John Lott has pointed out in More Guns, Less Crime, it isn't necessary for every citizen to own a gun. The point is that a criminal doesn't know for sure if his target is packing or not. Thus you see a drop in the crime rate, in virtually every state where concealed carry permits are available. Even though the majority of citizens are still not carrying guns.

 

[007]

Gun control is being able to safely operate your firearm, and to hit what you're shooting at... :firing:

 

[5stringJeff]

That's the key though. Gun control shouldn't be about taking everyone's guns away, it's about trying to only let sane people use them.

Fortunately for us, the Constitution says that the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, especially by people who want to determine whether you are "sane" enough to own a gun.

 

[dilloduck]

That's the key though. Gun control shouldn't be about taking everyone's guns away, it's about trying to only let sane people use them.

They got yours already huh?

 

[007]

Frankly, I don't know why people buy guns on paper, registered to ones self. I have two rifles and two pistols, none of which are registered. I may buy more fire arms at some point in the future, but I will NEVER buy one that is tracable to me.

Anyone ever shows up at my door collecting guns, I'll tell them they're at the wrong house... I don't own any.

 

[Trigg]

Gun control is being able to safely operate your firearm, and to hit what you're shooting at... :firing:

My dad used to have a plaque in his office with that statement on it.

 

[Trigg]

My husband and I actually disagree a bit on gun control.

My only position on it are handguns since the only reason for them is shooting another person, not for hunting. I wouldn't be upset if the gov. tried to get them off the street.

My husband says they're used for coon hunting and besides only the honest people would hand them in. So we agree to disagree (it's good for the marriage that way).

 

[theHawk]

So what if they are used to shoot people. The whole point of allowing people the right to bear arms is so they can defend themselves against other people, not to go hunting.

 

[Mr. P]

My husband and I actually disagree a bit on gun control.

My only position on it are handguns since the only reason for them is shooting another person, not for hunting. I wouldn't be upset if the gov. tried to get them off the street.

My husband says they're used for coon hunting and besides only the honest people would hand them in. So we agree to disagree (it's good for the marriage that way).

Well Trigg, in south Georgia the gun of choice by many to hunt wild Boar is a handgun.

And all guns can kill if used by a killer not just handguns, so ya don't have a case, yer Hubby WINS.

BTW...Knitting needles are for knitting, credit cards are for purchases, but I could "kill" someone with either. Criminal abuse and misuse are common with any item. Hammer anyone?

 

[007]

Well Trigg, in south Georgia the gun of choice by many to hunt wild Boar is a handgun.

And all guns can kill if used by a killer not just handguns, so ya don't have a case, yer Hubby WINS.

BTW...Knitting needles are for knitting, credit cards are for purchases, but I could "kill" someone with either. Criminal abuse and misuse are common with any item. Hammer anyone?

Gunny sack and a baseball bat? :bat:

 

[insein]

So i guess thats a no on the link to the orginal story?

 

[Trigg]

Well Trigg, in south Georgia the gun of choice by many to hunt wild Boar is a handgun.

And all guns can kill if used by a killer not just handguns, so ya don't have a case, yer Hubby WINS.

BTW...Knitting needles are for knitting, credit cards are for purchases, but I could "kill" someone with either. Criminal abuse and misuse are common with any item. Hammer anyone?

Yes well, he thinks he wins also which is why we don't discuss gun control in our house.

I still wouldn't mind if only the police had handguns. That being said if I, as an honest person, had one I certainly wouldn't hand it in until I knew all the badguys didn't have them either.