Gun Control Debate #4

Status
Not open for further replies.

Karinna

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
8,616
Reaction score
11,273
They are facts to pertain to the least populist territory in Australia, not a state.

From your post #494 on previous page
SBM
Hunters who go to NT to shoot wild boar do not have to pass shooting range tests.


You stated about the NT in your post so i just posted up about gun laws/licences there for clarity.
And looks like it depends on the type of shooting license you require as to the requirements, because they aren't all the same from reading at the link.
 

Karinna

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
8,616
Reaction score
11,273
Eh? you are quoting NT law? I am sure that you know what percentage of Australians live in NT.

I don't need to know how many people live there, i am linking to their gun licensing requirements there because you mentioned the NT. I was talking about a friend in NSW prior, and licensing laws there are probably a little different as well. I guess it does vary state to state but haven't really read about every state in Aus.
 

rosemadderlake

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
3,392
Reaction score
6,356
Australia has a constitution which is linked the the British Bill of Rights, which your bill of rights is copied directly from.

Even more importantly, there is a distinctively qualitative difference in the emerging Colonial American version of rights. Unique is the emergence of the individual right of religious worship, the political rights of press and assembly, and what became the Sixth Amendment in the U.S Bill of Rights dealing with accusation, confrontation, and counsel. These are home grown.
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/bor/roots-chart/

^^^This link^^^ is a great interactive showing the evolution from the Magna Carta blueprint to the greatly expanded American bill of rights.

A couple of differences between our two nations is that America was established through war, the American Revolution, and Australia was colonized. The second amendment's DNA runs deep in our fight for independence.

The protection of the 2A or acceptance of tightly regulated gun laws are respectively different values, the former being America, the latter Australia.

Australia is center left. America is center right.

While we share great similarity in European heritage, America's ethnic and cultural diversity evolved in tandem with its history. As violent as that history is America is home to that diversity in massive numbers.

In some strange way I think Americans while allied in spirit with its close friends in England, Canada, and Australia, we are very stubborn about our departure in government.


Jmo
 

Karinna

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
8,616
Reaction score
11,273
Yes, Australia was a penal colony where they sent prisoners to from England in 1788.
 

Tawny

Bye
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Messages
5,576
Reaction score
64



There are other alternatives to firearms for self defense.

Baseball bats
Add barbed wire for extra WTF CRAZY PERSON factor! Fun for all involved!
Machete
Pepper spray
Tasers
Fire extinguiser

True fact: A scared, half asleep, panicking individual firing a handgun is more likely to injure themselves or someone else in the home than hit their intended target. I'm not willing to take that risk, and I'm trained in firearms.
 

black_squirrel

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2013
Messages
1,111
Reaction score
508
Hi all. I am new to this thread. I have thought about the gun control debate for some time.

In my opinion, an important factor in this debate is fear. Fear drives gun sales. But many of threats are exaggerated.

If one watches the local news (for example in the Metro Detroit area where I live), it is all murder, drive-by-shootings etc.
Because of the 24/7 news, people get the impression that violent crime is worse than ever, but this is not the case.

The coverage of all the school shootings has everyone on edge. They are even practicing the response to mass shootings
at schools now. Thus instilling fear in our children. How big is the threat of being shot in a mass shooting? It is not zero but very small. Probably comparable to the risk of being struck dead by lightning.

Even though the number of people killed by mass shootings is small compared to the number of people killed by other types of murder, such events have a great impact on the country because of the media coverage. Those shootings are an act of terror and are intended to get attention and strike fear.

I do favor common sense gun laws to reduce gun violence and mass shootings. In particular, gun registration without loopholes is important, and to reduce the magnitude of mass shootings I would also support a ban on weapons that are designed to shoot many bullets in a short amount of time. However, there is much resistance against such laws, in part because people are afraid.

Organizations such as the NRA play into this fear. Some people are afraid that the government will take all their guns away, but I do not know of any mainstream politicians that favor a ban on all guns. Also the idea that one would need to accumulate guns in order to fight against a US government that would turn against its people does not seem like a realistic fear in the USA in the year 2018.
 

rsd1200

If there's no link, it's just my own 2¢.
Joined
Apr 25, 2016
Messages
10,057
Reaction score
22,882
There are other alternatives to firearms for self defense.

Baseball bats
Add barbed wire for extra WTF CRAZY PERSON factor! Fun for all involved!
Machete
Pepper spray
Tasers
Fire extinguiser

True fact: A scared, half asleep, panicking individual firing a handgun is more likely to injure themselves or someone else in the home than hit their intended target. I'm not willing to take that risk, and I'm trained in firearms.

A scared, half asleep, panicked individual, might not be best person to wield a machete either. j.s.

Pepper spray is not all it's cracked up to be, again, half asleep or outside, and you can spray yourself. Outside you may just get blow back and then you're incapacitated.

Tasers are a good option, just ensure that, like a firearm, one keeps them away from kids, as they can kill a child, and some adults (see link). Get comfortable handling the one you choose. Note: If you choose a stun gun, be comfortable with it as well, you must be up close to the assailant for a stun gun to be effective, and you'd also want to keep them away from children.

The fire extinguisher is a good option.

My bro sleeps w/a L'vlle Slugger by his nightstand. If folks want to pack them around for defense though, I'd tell them to also take up "baseball" and carry the glove and ball. Who know when you might come up on a game? Bats are considered deadly weapons. If you are just packing a bat as a weapon, that's frowned upon. People use the bat, just to beat folks up, many times, so it doesn't appear they've used a deadly weapon, when, in fact, they have..

Police Use Stun Gun on Eight Year Old, Killing Her
https://www.cnn.com/2014/08/09/us/south-dakota-taser-lawsuit/index.html
 

Gardenista

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2016
Messages
14,985
Reaction score
112,556
The Australia Gun Control Fallacy

When someone says the United States ought to adopt Australia’s gun laws, he is really saying that gun control is worth risking violent insurrection.

You simply cannot praise Australia’s gun-laws without praising the country’s mass confiscation program. That is Australia’s law. When the Left says that we should respond to shootings as Australia did, they don’t mean that we should institute background checks on private sales; they mean that they we should ban and confiscate guns. No amount of wooly words can change this. Again, one doesn’t bring up countries that have confiscated firearms as a shining example unless one wishes to push the conversation toward confiscation.

Modeling Australia Means Civil War
When someone says the United States ought to adopt Australia’s gun laws as its own, he is really saying the cause of gun control is so important that he is willing to impose these laws even at the cost of violent insurrection. Make no mistake, armed rebellion would be the consequence. Armed men would be dispatched to confiscate guns, they would be met by armed men, and blood would be shed. Australia is a valid example for America only if you are willing for that blood to be spilled in torrents and rivers. To choose Australia is to choose civil war.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/06/25/the-australia-gun-control-fallacy/

And that's a war the gun control crowd will lose.
 

Gardenista

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2016
Messages
14,985
Reaction score
112,556
Hi all. I am new to this thread. I have thought about the gun control debate for some time.

In my opinion, an important factor in this debate is fear. Fear drives gun sales. But many of threats are exaggerated.

If one watches the local news (for example in the Metro Detroit area where I live), it is all murder, drive-by-shootings etc.
Because of the 24/7 news, people get the impression that violent crime is worse than ever, but this is not the case.

The coverage of all the school shootings has everyone on edge. They are even practicing the response to mass shootings
at schools now. Thus instilling fear in our children. How big is the threat of being shot in a mass shooting? It is not zero but very small. Probably comparable to the risk of being struck dead by lightning.

Even though the number of people killed by mass shootings is small compared to the number of people killed by other types of murder, such events have a great impact on the country because of the media coverage. Those shootings are an act of terror and are intended to get attention and strike fear.

I do favor common sense gun laws to reduce gun violence and mass shootings. In particular, gun registration without loopholes is important, and to reduce the magnitude of mass shootings I would also support a ban on weapons that are designed to shoot many bullets in a short amount of time. However, there is much resistance against such laws, in part because people are afraid.

Organizations such as the NRA play into this fear. Some people are afraid that the government will take all their guns away, but I do not know of any mainstream politicians that favor a ban on all guns. Also the idea that one would need to accumulate guns in order to fight against a US government that would turn against its people does not seem like a realistic fear in the USA in the year 2018.

All crime is at close to all time lows with gun ownership at all time highs.
 

Gardenista

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2016
Messages
14,985
Reaction score
112,556
When was the last time an AR-15-style rifle (or similar) saved a life / the day?

March 1, 2018

Dave Thomas was getting ready for work Monday afternoon when he heard women screaming in his apartment building in Oswego.

Thomas, a gun instructor, peeked out the door and saw blood in the hallway. He went to his bedroom, where a handgun and an AR-15 assault-style rifle were lying on the bed. He picked up the rifle.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/subur...-stabbing-charges-st-0227-20180227-story.html
 

EuTuCroquet?

“What's happening to my special purpose!?”
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
5,404
Reaction score
8,688
How can their numbers be valid when we have no idea how many illegal aliens are here?

There’s a pretty good idea of how many, Gardenista. Regardless, the facts, data and research still stand. So the subject is irrelevant in this thread, imo. Thanks for asking.

There are plenty of link to research, data, studies and articles; many are in the post you responded to.
 

EuTuCroquet?

“What's happening to my special purpose!?”
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
5,404
Reaction score
8,688
Jumping off your post Footwarrior.

Bbm : Yes, agreed. The sad part is so did we recognize it, too. And then we let the assault ban expire in 2004. And now, that horse left the barn so long ago, and the issue is so politically mired, it's going to take a Herculean effort to turn the thinking around. I would love nothing more than sensible regulation, like Canada, or the ability to stick to a consensus of banning certain weapons, like Australia.

Because we are at critical mass. Ironically, in the name of liberty, we are becoming a nation of outlaws. And this is not the nation I grew up in.

On the other hand, perhaps it is the eloquence of the teens from Parkland Florida who are meeting with legislators, governor, the president, gathering steam, nationally broadcast Town Hall, gonna go March on Washington, got Walmart, and Dicks behind them, got some big name funding behind them, not afraid to tell the NRA to stick it, that there is hope. They achieved more in three weeks than I don't know, how long... And all this in the midst of their trauma, one that most of us will never know.

And the hope is that we wake up and ask ourselves, liberty at what price? Because these kids are the future.

Rose, you really do have a way with words: Common-sense, rational, evidenced-based and yet supportive. Not a twinge of naïveté, and unafraid to speak the truth.

Thank you. ❤️
 

Lulu_la_Nantaise

New Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2018
Messages
173
Reaction score
1

black_squirrel

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2013
Messages
1,111
Reaction score
508
All crime is at close to all time lows with gun ownership at all time highs.
Well, crime is lower than it has been for a long time (but not at an all time low).
For example, the homicide rate is at a 51 year low according to an FBI statistic:
https://mises.org/wire/fbi-us-homicide-rate-51-year-low
and there are similar trends with other violent crimes and property crimes.

Gun ownership, however, is also at a low. It is the lowest in 40 years.
Only 36% of the US households has a gun, compared to 53% in 1994.
So if there is a relationship between the number of people owning guns and crime
rate, then it would be "less people owning guns ==> less crime".
However, though fewer people own guns, some people stockpile on guns,
so the total number of guns being bought might have gone up.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-now-at-a-30-year-low/?utm_term=.1c1c75f536e4


edit: I would like to add that the goal of gun policy shouldn't be to make gun ownership
as small as possible. The goal is to keep guns out of the hands of individuals who are dangerous.
Also, certain weapons that are suitable for mass murder should not be sold.
 

EuTuCroquet?

“What's happening to my special purpose!?”
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
5,404
Reaction score
8,688
All crime is at close to all time lows with gun ownership at all time highs.

ALL crime? The assertion seems a little oversimplified and maybe misleading. Source please. TIA

And, to clarify, *fewer* people own guns, but those who do own more of them. As most of us know, correlation doesn’t always =/= causation.


American gun ownership drops to lowest in nearly 40 years
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...erican-gun-ownership-is-now-at-a-30-year-low/

“The downward trend in gun ownership remains consistent across*the national polls. According to Gallup, gun ownership has fallen by about 10 percentage points since its peak in 1993. The General Social Survey shows a 20-point drop since the mid-1970s.

“But gun purchases, as measured by FBI firearm background checks, are at historic highs. And data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms shows that gun manufacturers are churning out record numbers of guns.”


Hm. Gun ownership not cited as a reason for drop in crime rates in this story/research in this story?!
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/07/us/crime-police.html?referer=

“The factors driving the crime rate are complex, mysterious and can vary from city to city. Data-driven policing strategies, economic growth and decreased alcohol consumption were bigger contributors to the overall drop in crime than having more police or higher incarceration rates, said Inimai Chettiar, the director of the Brennan Center.

“Last year, a study by three economists found that opening a new drug treatment center could save a city about $700,000 a year in crime-related costs. Another new study found that expanding Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act caused a 5.8 percent reduction in violent crime.” (snip)

“Officers are increasingly relied on to deal with mental illness, homelessness and drug addiction. But tough-on-crime rhetoric has made it hard to have discussions about reallocating resources to address those problems, according to Ronal Serpas, a former police chief in Nashville and New Orleans and a co-chairman of Law Enforcement Leaders to Reduce Crime and Incarceration, a group of current and former police chiefs and prosecutors.”


More:

Do Right-to-Carry Gun Laws Make States Safer?

In a new paper, researchers dispute a popular argument for arming everyday citizens. “There is not even the slightest hint in the data that [these] laws reduce violent crime,” they write.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/531297/


More:

Study (downloadable pdf)

“The findings do not support the hypothesis that higher population firearm ownership rates reduce firearm-associated criminal perpetration. On the contrary, evidence shows that states with higher levels of firearm ownership have an increased risk for violent crimes perpetrated with a firearm. Public health stakeholders should consider the outcomes associated with private firearm ownership.”
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/bc6f/104b5b658796ce6b7ca1e1afe8caeb55ff6b.pdf
 

Credulious

Former Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
390
Reaction score
1
All the mass shooters are on meds. They all pick AR15s which is indicative of their mindset.

I read the other day something like 95% of the school shootings have happened in the last 25 years in America. Whats gone wrong with America?

Anyone being treated, shouldn't have access to firearms.

Who shoots unarmed schoolkids? It must be one of the most cowardice acts possible?

Hi all. I am new to this thread. I have thought about the gun control debate for some time.
In my opinion, an important factor in this debate is fear. Fear drives gun sales. But many of threats are exaggerated.

If one watches the local news (for example in the Metro Detroit area where I live), it is all murder, drive-by-shootings etc.
Because of the 24/7 news, people get the impression that violent crime is worse than ever, but this is not the case.

The coverage of all the school shootings has everyone on edge. They are even practicing the response to mass shootings
at schools now. Thus instilling fear in our children. How big is the threat of being shot in a mass shooting? It is not zero but very small. Probably comparable to the risk of being struck dead by lightning.

Even though the number of people killed by mass shootings is small compared to the number of people killed by other types of murder, such events have a great impact on the country because of the media coverage. Those shootings are an act of terror and are intended to get attention and strike fear.

I do favor common sense gun laws to reduce gun violence and mass shootings. In particular, gun registration without loopholes is important, and to reduce the magnitude of mass shootings I would also support a ban on weapons that are designed to shoot many bullets in a short amount of time. However, there is much resistance against such laws, in part because people are afraid.

Organizations such as the NRA play into this fear. Some people are afraid that the government will take all their guns away, but I do not know of any mainstream politicians that favor a ban on all guns. Also the idea that one would need to accumulate guns in order to fight against a US government that would turn against its people does not seem like a realistic fear in the USA in the year 2018.
 

bluesneakers

not today satan
Joined
Aug 6, 2014
Messages
19,147
Reaction score
9,342
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top