FCP Bob 1,312 Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Jeffrey D. Sachs @JeffDSachs In 1996, Australia banned semi-automatics. In the 18 years before, there were 13 mass shootings. Since then, none. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Well, almost none More like a couple Okay maybe more than a couple Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Let's just say that it probably helped a bit, but to pretend it eradicated the problem is pure spin On the other hand, a 2006 analysis by scholars at the University of Sydney concluded that gun fatalities decreased more quickly after the reform. Yet another analysis, from 2008, from the University of Melbourne, concluded that the buyback had no significant effect on firearm suicide or homicide rates. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Then again, this article says it had almost no effect Sharing the shock of his people, the newly elected Prime Minister, John Howard — just two months into his eleven-and-a-half years in power — seized the chance to overhaul Australia's gun laws, trampling all opposition to make them among the strictest in the developed world. "I hate guns," he said at the time. "One of the things I don't admire about America is their slavish love of guns ... We do not want the American disease imported into Australia." Howard argued the tougher laws would make Australia safer. But 12 years on, new research suggests the government response to Port Arthur was a waste of public money and has made no difference to the country's gun-related death rates. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Well, almost none More like a couple Okay maybe more than a couple Your last link is to an incident of police shooting unarmed people. The claim is that there haven't been any mass shootings in Australia and your first two links aren't mass shootings. The issue if far from a simple one for the US but the reality is that the effect of there being so many guns in the US is that a lot more people are shot whether by somebody else, by accident or by suicide than if there were less guns. The "right" to bear arms comes with a price. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Interesting article in The Economist that I mostly agree with. http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2012/12/gun-control Here is my small thought. It is quite possible, perhaps probable, that stricter gun laws of the sort that Mr Obama may or may not be planning, would not have stopped the horrible killings of this morning. But that is a separate question from whether it is a good idea to allow private individuals to own guns. And that, really, is what I think I understand by gun control. Once you have guns in circulation, in significant numbers, I suspect that specific controls on things like automatic weapons or large magazines can have only marginal effects. Once lots of other people have guns, it becomes rational for you to want your own too. . . . And, to be crude, having few guns does mean that few people get shot. In 2008-2009, there were 39 fatal injuries from crimes involving firearms in England and Wales, with a population about one sixth the size of America’s. In America, there were 12,000 gun-related homicides in 2008. . . . But here is the thing. The American gun debate takes place in America, not Britain or Japan. And banning all guns is not about to happen (and good luck collecting all 300m guns currently in circulation, should such a law be passed). It would also not be democratic. I personally dislike guns. I think the private ownership of guns is a tragic mistake. But a majority of Americans disagree with me, some of them very strongly. And at a certain point, when very large majorities disagree with you, a bit of deference is in order. So in short I am not sure that tinkering with gun control will stop horrible massacres like today’s. And I am pretty sure that the sort of gun control that would work—banning all guns—is not going to happen. So I have a feeling that even a more courageous debate than has been heard for some time, with Mr Obama proposing gun-control laws that would have been unthinkable in his first term, will not change very much at all. Hence the gloom. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 I hate these people so so much Connecticut school shooting: Westboro Baptist Church planning to picket (Video) 1 Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Powerful article from the Mother of a mentally ill 13 year old. http://thebluereview...-lanzas-mother/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/16/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother-mental-illness-conversation_n_2311009.html Link to post Share on other sites
JustDoIt 10 Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 I hate these people so so much Connecticut school shooting: Westboro Baptist Church planning to picket (Video) These people are defiantly way way out there on the fringe, and are very very sick. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Your last link is to an incident of police shooting unarmed people. The claim is that there haven't been any mass shootings in Australia and your first two links aren't mass shootings. In order for it to be a 'mass' shooting, 4 people must have died. In the first link 7 people were shot, but since only 2 died it wasn't a 'mass' shooing. That shows the disingenuousness of the debate. The issue if far from a simple one for the US but the reality is that the effect of there being so many guns in the US is that a lot more people are shot whether by somebody else, by accident or by suicide than if there were less guns. The "right" to bear arms comes with a price. The number of homicides has been fairly consistent, any drop has been mirrored in many countries that haven't just made sweeping changes to their gun laws. This 'mass shooting' qualifier is being used to create a narrative that isn't consistent with the implication. Their new gun laws did not result in a stopping of gun deaths, and mass shootings are rare occurrences. The 7% gun ownership stat pre-law makes it a poor example to compare to America as well. Link to post Share on other sites
timwakefield 68 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 These people are defiantly way way out there on the fringe, and are very very sick. Well at least they're good for one thing - uniting everybody else in hatred of them. No matter what side of the aisle, what ethnicity, what socio-economic background and everything else, everybody can agree that WBC are the absolute dregs of humanity. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 They do serve the purpose of making us question the value of freedom of assembly... Link to post Share on other sites
colonel Feathers 5 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I hate these people so so much Connecticut school shooting: Westboro Baptist Church planning to picket (Video) They have a right to protest. Not a right to police protection. Invite them in and give them no protection. Link to post Share on other sites
colonel Feathers 5 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 name='colonel Feathers' timestamp='1355796163' post='3574114']They have a right to protest. Not a right to police protection. Invite them in and give them no protection. [/u] Also I doubt the second amendment woulda passed as written if the authors knew about weapons that could slaughter a hundred people in seconds. Link to post Share on other sites
akoff 0 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Also I doubt the second amendment woulda passed as written if the authors knew about weapons that could slaughter a hundred people in seconds. I am sure it would have passed regardless. Remember they had to fight to gain independance. i have no doubt if our founders had to do it all over again they would have found a way to protect it more....and i don't own a gun, never went hunting, never shot an automatic weapon and don't have interest in it. I honestly believe that if our forefathers saw what we have become, how our government functions and what our government thinks it is entitled to they would start planning another revolution. I don’t think there is much doubt about that Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIAxafRMVBg&feature=youtu.be Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Funny, I was reading about the "Real History of the democrat party and race" the other day. Many people would be more shocked by that, than this video. Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,352 Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Link to post Share on other sites
InternetExplorer 2,609 Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 if I were a republican aide I would be extremely wealthy off of trading. anyone who knew the way these votes would go has been crushing the s&p for a guaranteed few percent per day. and it isn't even illegal/deplorable in the way the insider trading stuff is. I am continually amazed that the markets see this as anything but theater. Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,352 Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 That NRA Press Conference was very ill advised. It will be very, very difficult for substantive gun control legislation of any kind to get passed through the house, given the current climate/leadership, so what's the upside of that speech? The is no reason to stir up the hornets nest with a speech like that, all that did was galvanize the opposition, not further the NRA's cause. The best play for the NRA is to play it cool, go into stalling mode, and let people's apathy do it's work for them. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Andrew Kaczynski @BuzzFeedAndrew The look Cory Booker gave Peggy Noonan when she blamed gun violence on video games. via @Vote4Will pic.twitter.com/fv8ekSap Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Japan had 11 gun murders in 2008, USA had 11,000. Wonder if Japan has video games... Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 They also had 58,000 acts of violence in school, an increase for the 8th year in a row. Link to post Share on other sites
colonel Feathers 5 Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 Japan had 11 gun murders in 2008, USA had 11,000. Wonder if Japan has video games... You really think your average japanese youth spends hours a day playing video games? Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 You really think your average japanese youth spends hours a day playing video games? I think they play plenty of video games Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now