First amendment in danger

Vin · 29 August 1999, 04:02 AM

Mike,

Two years ago, 1977, each State and Territory in Australia implemented the Nationwide Agreement on Firearms. This was in response to the massacre at Port Arthur, Tasmania, in 1996. In 1997, Australia recorded 85 fewer firearm-related deaths than in 1996 (50 fewer if one excludes the victims of Port Arthur from the 1996 total). The Australian Institute of Criminology has been monitoring the effects. In May 1999, it published its findings in a paper which is available to be read at

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi116.html

Generally, it has concluded that, nationally, there was a decline in firearm-related deaths in 1997, mostly due to a decline in the rate of suicides and accidents. The Australian experience does not support the notion that serious crime increases when guns are removed from the community.

Vin

Vin · 29 August 1999, 04:03 AM

Mike,

Two years ago, 1977, each State and Territory in Australia implemented the Nationwide Agreement on Firearms. This was in response to the massacre at Port Arthur, Tasmania, in 1996. In 1997, Australia recorded 85 fewer firearm-related deaths than in 1996 (50 fewer if one excludes the victims of Port Arthur from the 1996 total). The Australian Institute of Criminology has been monitoring the effects. In May 1999, it published its findings in a paper which is available to be read at

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi116.html

Generally, it has concluded that, nationally, there was a decline in firearm-related deaths in 1997, mostly due to a decline in the rate of suicides and accidents. The Australian experience does not support the notion that serious crime increases when guns are removed from the community.

Vin

mike_baram · 29 August 1999, 05:57 AM

Vin,
According to the the report by Jenny Mouzos, she states in the beginning paragraphs that:....
"as a result of the many issues associated with evaluation research, it is still too soon to determine definitively whether Australia’s uniform firearms laws have achieved their aim in reducing firearm-related violence and misuse."
She goes on to add..... "statistics seem to indicate that, nationally, there has been a decline in firearm-related deaths in 1997, mostly due to a decline in the rate of suicides and accidents. This reduction has occurred in each State and Territory, with the exception of NSW and Victoria. There is also preliminary evidence that in some cases, for example suicide and armed robbery, firearms may be being displaced by other methods or weapons. Without an outcome evaluation that also takes into account socio-demographic factors, we cannot determine more conclusively the impact of the new firearms restrictions."
Now, this relates to 1997 statistics, not to 1998. Additionally, she states that the findings are inconclusive and further study is needed.
What is interesting is that it seems that, in the absence of firearms, someone bent on harming himself or others will still find a way.
Fact: In Kennesaw, GA, it's the law that every home must have a firearm. Fact: There ain't nearly no robberies in Kennesaw, GA. In fact there ain't nearly no crime in Kennesaw, GA. The baddies are too scared to do anything when they think they might get shot.
So.....this argument will go on and on. I wish you Aussies well. Me, I'd rather know that if something nasty takes place, at least I'll be on a level playing field.
VBR,
Mike

29 August 1999, 06:49 AM

Vin, why do the Aussies who report less violence with guns neglect to mention the vastly increased violence with knives?

mike_baram · 29 August 1999, 07:12 AM

Jay,
For the same reason that the media ignore the thousands of crimes that are foiled and the thousands of citizen's arrests made by responsible citizens with firearms....it doesn't fit into accepted social theory.
Mike

29 August 1999, 08:13 AM

Mike,
Salute! Your last reply is what I alluded to in my first reply to this thread that some seemed to discount. GEE! It's amazing how what I said has a whole lot of bearing on fact! A few bad apples that get the publicity spoil things for the rest of us that are responsible firearm owners.
VBR,
Jim

Barrett · 29 August 1999, 08:27 AM

There's been an Australian govt report all over the net the past few months regarding violent crime statistics since the firearms confiscation; will try to find it again. Anyway, it includes '98 figures which show increases across the board with about a 3% increase in firearms homicides.

29 August 1999, 09:46 AM

Barrett,

I had found the following on John Wrisley's site a while ago (www.wrisley.com). It is no longer there, and I'm not sure where it can be found now - but I saved it. The text follows.

Rich

The one-year results are in from the confiscation of 640,381 personal firearms in Australia:

OBSERVABLE FACT AFTER 12 MONTHS OF DATA
-------------------------------------------------
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2%.

Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6%.

Australia-wide, armed-robberies are up 44%. (yes, FORTY-FOUR PERCENT)

In the state of Victoria, homicides-with-firearms are up 300%!

The steady decrease in homicides-with-firearms that occurred during the previous 25 years became an increase in the last 12 months.

The steady decrease in armed-robbery-with-firearms that occurred during the previous 25 years became an increase in the last 12 months.

There has been a dramatic increase in breakins-and-assaults-of-the-elderly.

At the time of the ban, the Prime Minister said "self-defense is not a reason for owning a firearm".

From 1910 to present, homicides in Australia have averaged about 1.8-per-100,000 or lower, a safe society by any standard. The ban was not in response to any high rate of crime.

In 1996, the head of the gun registration bureau had testified that gun control "has not prevented or solved a single crime", and called for the abolition of his agency and his job.

The ban has destroyed Australia's standings in some international sport shooting competitions.

The membership of the Australian Sports Shooting Association has increased by 200% in response to the ban and in an attempt to organize against further controls, which are expected.

Australian politicians are on the spot and at a loss to explain why no improvement in "safety" has been observed after such monumental effort and expense was successfully expended in "ridding society of guns". Their response has been to "wait longer".

This operation cost the Australian taxpayers 500 million dollars!

Barrett · 29 August 1999, 03:10 PM

Rich:
That's the one--thank you. I saw the report a half-dozen times but never kept it 'cause I naively figgered "everybody knows that."
recently talked to a British competitor who reports similar results in the UK.
At present rate, how long will we be able to continue flying (omigosh!) combat aircraft? Especially those with the dreaded "A" prefix??? (A-20, A-26, A-4, etc.)
BTW: just heard from a warbird pal who says that Lad Doctor, who pranged the Dallas-based Corsair at Oshkosh, is out of danger but partly paralyzed.

Barrett · 29 August 1999, 03:11 PM

Rich:
That's the one--thank you. I saw the report a half-dozen times but never kept it 'cause I naively figgered "everybody knows that."
recently talked to a British competitor who reports similar results in the UK.
At present rate, how long will we be able to continue flying (omigosh!) combat aircraft? Especially those with the dreaded "A" prefix??? (A-20, A-26, A-4, etc.)
BTW: just heard from a warbird pal who says that Lad Doctor, who pranged the Dallas-based Corsair at Oshkosh, is out of danger but partly paralyzed.