Not all bomb-makers are terrorists either... Sooo dynamite for all? You know, just in case the government comes to bum your cat...

'logic'.

I just want to say that the total number of homicides in Australia has steadily declined since the 90s despite our increase in population. There are probably many reasons for this but I wouldn't be surprised if gun control is one of them.

Also on a side note, due to gun restrictions, there are fewer suicides from guns. More people are now FAILING to commit suicide by not having as easy access to more lethal means. Despite more attempts at suicide. Maybe they can get help after the first attempt.

Anyway, sorry if this triggers people, but I think its important to mention. lifeline.org.au - 13 11 14. mensline.org.au 1300 78 99 78.

Yeah, it was really hard for Man Monis wasn't it :roll:

Face it, whether guns are legal or not - bad people will find a way to get them.

All you're doing is preventing law abiding citizens from going out and getting them themselves.



America has also shown a decrease in gun violence, despite also having an increased supply. It's just that high-profile cases and the wider proliferation of news create the image that there is some sort of increasing trend, when in reality it's the oppostie. Source: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/

Places like Switzerland (4th highest gun ownership per capita in the world) also have one of the lowest gun homicides in the world (0.5 per 100,000 people). Source: http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/

How's that for sample space?

We get it. Your opinion is the only correct opinion. This isnt unusual for you.

Brave man trying to make a difference. He's hopeful that because it was someone in the media the media may give more weight to addressing gun control more seriously.

[youtube]PgoYZBQ_Ku4[/youtube]

When did I ever say that? All I did was provide a counter-argument (with cited statistics and sources mind you). All I did was engage in discussion instead of resorting to fallacies and personal attacks like you've just done.

Grow up.

Why would anyone need a gun?





Edited by 433: 30/8/2015 05:52:26 PM

You're right in suggesting that certain elements of the criminal underworld will always get their hands on weapons. To that end, I agree with you that more should be done to stop the importation of weapons illegally. But if we maintain the status quo with respect to regulating licensing and acquisition of firearms (I'm not sure if we need to be stricter), then that's hardly a huge cost. We can spend more money, as you suggest, on policing it.



To be perfectly frank. I don't agree. You've got to look at the profile of people who go on shooting sprees. Some are very intelligent and thus would be perfectly capable of gaining access to firearms illegally. However, a number of famous cases have been individuals who are severely intellectually challenged. It's highly likely that such individuals lack the wherewithal to obtain firearms illegally. It's simply too hard for them. We can't bank on this happening, but it's all part of risk-management. The kind of people who go on shooting sprees have often been simpletons who bought/acquired guns by legal means. If they cannot do this, then that seriously reduces the chance of them being able to go on a shooting spree.

Thanks for the stats. The sample space is still too small at three countries. Plus, there are other influences which play their part. For the statistics to be truly meaningful, we need to unpack it far more. Who owns those guns, what kind of jobs are prevalent in Switzerland, etc? Then there are cultural influences as well. Some countries are culturally better-suited to dealing with a high incidence of firearms.

As for the US, take those statistics with a grain of salt. Even if violence has decreased, in spite of an increase in guns, the amount of violence is so prolific that the statistics can't be taken qualitatively to argue in favour of relaxing gun laws. The US is just fucked in so many ways.

Most people have no need for guns, especially semi-automatic/automatic weapons. They may want such weapons. But most people have no need for such weapons. Basic economics. The difference between wants and needs. So they can just suck it up. It may seem unfair, but if it saves lives then so be it. It was different in 1791, when the Second Amendment was written. Back then, in the absence of a proper police form and the prevalence of a greater degree of lawlessness, the individual deserved the right to arm himself (or herself). Permitting the right to bear arms was the best means of protecting the individual's rights. Back then, the individual needed to be able to protect himself (or herself). But today we have a proper, empowered police force, law-abiding societies and we decry vigilante justice. There's no need for people to have the right to such weapons anymore.

The issue is that if we fuck this up, it could have monumental consequences which will destroy lives. We certainly can't look at statistics, which haven't been deconstructed, and use that as an argument in favour of relaxing restrictions. It's not worth the risk.


u4486662 is right. Gun-related incidents have decreased in Australia since stricter regulation. There may be more guns around, but the regulation is strict. Clearly the regulation is working. As such, we need to maintain the status quo with respect to regulation of legal firearms (at the very least). And, by all means, let's target illegal firearms too.

Excellent post

It is a complex issue, the Wikipedia article on Australian gun laws does a good job explaining things:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia

Also, whilst there are more guns, the population is also bigger. Gun ownership rates seem to have decreased (at least as of 2013).

http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/01/16/cause-for-alarm-australia-has-more-guns-but-theyre-less-dangerous/?wpmp_switcher=mobile

"Alpers said the estimated number of firearms at the time of the Port Arthur massacre was 3.2 million. Australian Bureau of Statistics data shows the number of guns per 100 people in 1996 would have been 17.3, based on the 3.2 million figure. Today that number is estimated at 13.9 guns per 100 people, making the number of guns per capita significantly less than it was in 1996. (Australia’s population has grown by more than 4.4 million since 1996.)"

The other point raised in the same article above, is the type of guns here now:

"Alpers says you also need to factor in the types of guns legally available to Australians today. “They’re different types of guns,” he said. “They’re not the semi-automatics which were specifically banned after Port Arthur.”

This article is interesting in terms of the "do more guns mean more gun deaths?" argument:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/editorial/three-million-guns-is-more-than-enough-20130114-2cppg.html

"The Swiss have national military service and an extensive army reserve program, which means there are guns in most homes. Switzerland is held up by the gun lobby in support of the adage that guns don't kill, people do".

"It turns out that Switzerland is not the paragon it appears. The rate of homicides involving guns in Switzerland is 0.52, four times higher than the Australian rate and more than double the rates in France and Germany. The only nation that makes Switzerland look good is the United States, which is so far above all other advanced economies, with a rate of 3.59 gun homicides per 100,000 people, that it is in a category of its own, with a grisly sequence of gun massacres to show for it".

I don't know anything about guns from first hand experience, but it seems logical to me that more guns equals at least an increased risk of firearm death.

you also have the issue of pre-emptively arming yourself in anticipatory self-defence if your suspicion is that your society has a lot of guns.

I think there are things that can be done (better monitoring of the importation of guns) that are not targeting legal owners. But I don't buy the argument that restrictive gun laws do not have a positive impact in reducing gun violence.

Only the willfully ignorant or the disingenuous think that restricting guns doesn't have an effect on reducing gun deaths.

And on the gun per capita statistic that everyone loves to quote, shitloads of gun owners have more than one gun (my former neighbour had eight) so the stats are skewed to sound worse than they are. I'd imagine the US would be the same.




Edited by munrubenmuz: 31/8/2015 12:17:57 PM

Just to re-emphasis a point:

Yes, all crime has decreased across the USA (and the rich world) over the last 20 or so years after reaching an apex in the 1990s.

However, the USA when compared to other rich countries has an extremely high murder rate, and an extremely high gun death rate. For gun deaths I think the figure is 3.14 per 100,000 people, compared to about 0.03 in Europe, and I think 0.13 for Australia.

So it isn't just the trend that is relevant (although it is relevant), but also the actual rate itself.

This cuts both ways - it is hard to confirm that the harsher Australian laws have themselves led to reduced gun homicide when there is a general trend of reducing crime overlaying that.

But you also can't argue that gun availability in the USA has led to reduced gun violence either, for the same reasons.

The simple fact is that the USA is a statistical outlier - both in rates of gun ownership, and in gun homicide rates.

I am in favour of strict gun laws in order to control the development of a strong NRA-esque lobby group developing in Australia.

Except there was no reason for it as part of the NFA, Tony did it via his anti-terrorism laws which was just a knee jerk reaction.

Also doesn't take into account that there have been shotguns exactly the same as the Adler that have been sold in Australia for over 100 years and nothing has been mentioned about them.

The Adler is no different to people buying a car from one brand over another, the reason why it was popular was because of its quality and price point, not because its a lever action and its capacity (as mentioned there have been plenty of shotguns with the exact same specs sold for over 100 years).

The reason why the Adler copped the flack it did is because the silly Turkish bastards used heavy metal music for their promo vid and it got some greenies raging.

Restricting the import of this to legal gun holders won't stop this shotgun from getting into the hands of criminals, something that uninformed people such as yourself don't seem to understand. Guns used in gun violence in Australia are seldom guns stolen from legitimate owners, they are illegally imported.

Not only that, these types of guns wouldn't be used in atypical gun violence. People can't run around with a 20" shotgun, they saw them off and the get either SxS or pump actions in stead. Further to that they use handguns and other forms of semi-automatics. You don't see bikies getting into an OK Corral with a bolt action with a 5 round mag. Just doesn't happen.



Wrong once again. Go have a look where Monis got his from. Certainly wasn't a gun shop or from a legitimate owner.



No they weren't, they suited the Categories set down by the NFA and other state licensing bodies (just like all the other level actions and level action shotguns sold in the last 100+ years). The only Police department that was thinking of reclassifying them as a C or D was ACT, no other state Police body had an issue with its categorization.



So best to take away bow and arrows? Spear gun fishing? 90% of knives? Garden spears?

Heaven forbid someone would have a hobby like sport shooting or to make a living as a professional hunter that helps with things like wildlife conservation.

-PB

No such thing as a "need" for a gun.

A want yes, a need no.

I want a gun because I am a sport shooter and I go hunting.

-PB

Unfortunately that's where people are delusional, it is very easy to get your hands on an illegal firearm.

People also thought it was hard to get their hands on heavy drugs like Heroin and Ice when they first hit the streets, look how easy it is to get now.



As for this part here and especially in the bold, I'm defending Australia gun laws and so forth here, not American.

People also seem to overestimate just how "easy" it is to get a gun in Australia. It's a colossal pain in the arse let alone the license itself.

The idea that someone can get their hands on a handgun/ccw or some other type of semi-auto (legally) in Australia and go on a Port Arthur 2.0 is pretty long winded (not only just for the time and costs involved).

-PB

@ PB.

Stop bullshitting.

The Adler has an 8 round capacity. As such it should have been a Cat D at a minimum. The rules are crystal clear but in case others want to check they can go here. https://www.police.qld.gov.au/programs/weaponsLicensing/licenceApplication/weapons/categories/categories.htm

But you knew that anyway.

I'm glad there's "greenies raging" if that means there's 7000 less, as a pre-ordered minimum, high capacity, quick reloading shotguns, floating about in the hands of gun "enthusiasts" who hold the least restrictive and easiest to get gun license.

Lucky we have the greens because the police are obviously incompetent if they can't follow their own guidelines.

There may well have been (or are) shotguns like that around in Australia for the last hundred years but that doesn't mean it's OK to have them now. Shit, I had a semi-automatic rifles myself before the buyback but that doesn't mean I can own one now.





My original point stands. The more guns in circulation the easier it is to get one.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/hundreds-of-guns-stolen-across-nsw-as-thieves-target-private-homes-and-firearms-charges-rise/story-fni0cx12-1227048229707
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/police-investigate-shotguns-and-rifles-stolen-from-berrimah-business/story-fnk1w5xw-1227472453749?sv=2dbd07b7b95829e24ee343cadf7828a1
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/four-firearms-stolen-from-yass-garage-20150706-gi5yiz.html

Where do you think these legally obtained, licensed, stored securely guns might end up?

Responsible gun owners are put out because of these gun laws that's true but as I said previously I have to drink out of a plastic schooner glass because of unhinged fuckheads wandering around society.

Plastic schooner glasses don't eliminate glassings altogether because cockheads will use a stubby or a wine glass or whatever but as a risk management strategy it's a sound approach that leads to a better outcome.



Far more difficult, though not impossible, to go on a massacre with a bow and arrow, speargun or a garden spear. Knives are a possibility.



No problem here. Hobbyists will just have to make do with the existing available cache of weapons. Professional shooters are another category altogether and if they can prove they need the Adler then that's something that should be looked at.

Nth Qld Bogans with Rum Pig stickers, 4 CB and UHF antennas, Mack track mudguards and 300 spotlights all over their utes that go pigging and are category A licensed need to be kept well away from the Adler and guns like it.

Ha ha. Typed "ute" into google images to find one close to the above description and this was about the 8th photo down. Couldn't have scripted it better. (Kenworth mudguards rather than Mack truck.)











Edited by munrubenmuz: 31/8/2015 02:41:16 PM

And stop telling everybody who hasn't a clue how "unbelievably hard" it is to get a gun license. More bullshit.

Fill in a few forms, get someone to say you're allowed to shoot on their property, do a 6 hour ($100) course and you sir are a licensed shooter.

As for secure storage. Well a heavy wooden box with a padlock will do very nicely thanks very much.

Manrub out of his depth and resulting to personal insults :lol:

Toasted.

-PB

So you have a gun license then? :lol:

You've applied for one and done said course? :lol:

-PB

PaulbagzFC out of his depth and "resulting" to personal insults.

Crumpeted!

Keep patting yourself on the back champion. I haven't called you any names or "resulted" to "personal insults". I'll leave that to you and your ilk.

I've simply said you're talking bullshit and I've proved it.

If you'd like to refute any of my 2 previous posts then go ahead. But if you continue to distort (or lie some would say) then expect to be called out.




Edited by munrubenmuz: 31/8/2015 05:29:26 PM

Gun registration actually contributes to likelihood of premises being targeted by criminal groups who are able to obtain such information by insiders in the police force

I'm not. You are the one who won't answer the question about having a weapons license or doing any of the said courses. For someone who goes on about people using anecdotal evidence in debates you sure are coming across as quite the hyprocrite.



Cat D as per the legistlation that you linked;

Category D weapons

(1) Each of the following is a category D weapon—

a) a self-loading centre fire rifle designed or adapted for military purposes or a firearm that substantially duplicates a rifle of that type in design, function or appearance;
b) a non-military style self-loading centre fire rifle with either an integral or detachable magazine;
c) a self-loading shotgun with either an integral or detachable magazine with a capacity of more than 5 rounds and a pump action shotgun with a capacity of more than 5 rounds;
d) a self-loading rimfire rifle with a magazine capacity of more than 10 rounds.

(2) Subsection (1) applies to a weapon mentioned in the subsection even if the weapon is permanently inoperable.

The Adler is none of those things, nor is round capacity mentioned for lever actions, only pump actions. It is a lever action centrefire shotgun, and as such it was put in the same catergory as lever action rifles (Catergory B).

The reason for the 12 month suspension of the rifle was actually stated by Catherine Smith (Assistant Secretary to Hon Michael Keenan MP) in an email to me just yesterday actually;

The Government is conscious that the regulation of firearms is of great interest to many members of the Australian community. For this reason, in addition to incorporating advice from all federal and state law enforcement and justice agencies, the review of the NFA will also involve consultation with the firearms community (industry, recreational groups and licensed shooters) and community safety organisations in order to produce sensible, practical
changes where required. As part of that consultation process, on 12 August 2015, the Government announced the establishment of an Industry Reference Group to provide advice to Government and the Firearms and Weapons Policy Working Group (FWPWG) – which comprises representatives of all Australian Governments – on any updates to the technical elements of the NFA.

Minister Keenan will chair the Industry Reference Group and will meet with members in the lead up to first ministers considering any proposed update to the NFA at the first COAG meeting of 2016.

The Adler block was more about the upcoming look at the NFA as a result of the outcomes of the Sydney Siege Enquiry.





Once again with the anecdotal evidence. Also, a very large percentage of Adler imports were from hunters and skeet/trap competition shooters according to the correspondance sent out by the importer Robert Noia, so yes they were "enthusiasts" as you so sarcastitcally put.





The Police (in QLD at least) follow their guidelines just well, doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement for more work to be under taken to find the non law abiding holders of firearms or to crack down further on gun related crime. I can't speak for other states.





But you can own them now, provided you have a license to do so. It's not like SKS, AK-47s, AR-15s, M14s and the like just don't exist in this country anymore, they still do and in large number no less. Go fo a walk to Cleaver Firearms (I assume you live in Brisbane) and have a look. Also it is commonly known the reason why semi-automatic rifles were a huge part of the ban/reclassification/buyback is because one was used at Port Arthur. Had he used a lever-action shotgun like the Adler you can bet your bottom dollar it would have been restricted just as tightly. Pump action shotguns were also reclassified at the time as they were seen as the single biggest threat against law enforcement officers (based off USA related data at the time, also before the changes in body armour/kevlar changes that are available today).

New Zealand doesn't have as tight classification of firearms as Australia does (can own semi-autos more easily, can buy supressors for firearms, can use Airsoft [which funnily enough Australia is one of very few countries in the world where it is illegal]) and yet they have far less issues that we have now but similar firearm ownership per capita as Australia.





Congratulations, you plugged "Stolen", "Firearms" and "News" into Google and took the first handful of easy to get results however that doesn't align with the data realised by the Institute of Criminology's National Firearm Theft Monitoring Program where the amount of firearms from year to year was on a decline while firearm ownership was increasing.

While it is incredibly hard to source any data on just how many illegal firearms are in circulation, it can be seen that legitimate firearms account for very little of that market (based off reported thefts, although this doesn't cover thefts that weren't reported as the firearm was illegal in the first place, making the owner not a law abiding firearm owner - the whole side of this debate).

The Australian Crime Commission (ACC) estimates there are more than 260,000 firearms in the illicit market — 250,000 long-arms and 10,000 handguns.

According to the ACC website, most of those guns have been diverted from the legal market through a variety of means.

"The grey market consists of all long-arms that were not registered, or surrendered as required during the gun buybacks, following the National Firearms Agreement (1996)," the website said.

"Illicit handguns have principally been sourced by criminals who took advantage of differences in state and territory definitions of firearms and other loopholes which have been closed for more than a decade.





The guns would end up in the hands of criminals, just like any other stolen goods. Your analogy of the schooner glass would also be correct, however what you are implying should happen (and directly due to your Adler comments) is that it isn't about the glass it all, it should be a complete ban on alcohol altogether.





Then should we not be restricting them as well? Why can I go into my local sporting good store and buy a compound bow with optics that can hit a 50c piece @ 100 metres without the need of any license or background checks?





So you want to restrict the choice of purchase of consumers? To limit what people can choose of one brand over another? Sorry you can't have this car that has more features and a better price point, you HAVE to buy these other crappier cars with less features and is more expensive.





And this is where you break your side of things down and start with the attacks and generilizations (singalling out North Queensland residents) which just throws your whole debate out the window.

Would also like to see where/when one of these types of hunters had committed a crime with their firearms, if you could produce some form of statistical data that links stickers on a car, a radio, some anttenas and mud flaps equalling gun related crime I'd be happy to see it.

Try not to be anecdotal now, wouldn't want you to be perceived as a fuckwit.

-PB

Manrubz should be banned from this forum. Too often is he allowed to post about things he obviously knows nothing about.

if there is something to point out

This is a unique situation involving the individuals, where they all knew each other. The danger with the gun only involved those in the story?

GRANTED if there was no gun they would all still be here, but STILL...

http://shootingtracker.com/wiki/Mass_Shootings_in_2015

Thanks for getting this back on topic.

Is pretty crazy when you look at the date gaps for some of those.

They really need to reel that shit in.

I'm still honestly surprised Obama didn't go harder on gun control, specially once he won his second term.

-PB

Because he'd be murdered

It's obvious that you think, despite facts and evidence to the contrary, 7000 rapid fire weapons should be available to gun owners in possession of the least restrictive and easily available category of gun license.

You know that license you get when you do the $100 course that takes 6 hours with the 3 breaks for smoko, lunch and then smoko in between and the multiple choice test you have to take that you can study for before by asking them for the booklet. That test do you mean?

We differ on what we believe to be fair and reasonable. Fine.



I spent years in the Territory and North Qld. I've been shooting many times with clowns/mates exactly like that.

Whilst a slight exaggeration on the ute front it's not far from the truth as you would well know. Fuck mate drive out to Charters Towers and have a look around. Every 2nd car is like that. (No, it's not a crime to have a ute like that.)

As for your assertion that the Adler is not a Cat D weapon you would know that the only reason it was going to be allowed to be imported was that although it held more than 5 rounds, making it a Cat D, it was a lever action which was not covered by the Cat D status.

Fortunately someone was paying attention.

You'd also know that the government is looking to close that loophole, possibly retrospectively, which should be fun for all the lads that would then be in possession of a weapon they don't have a license for.

As for semi-auto's of course they're still available and you can own them but they're strictly controlled and if you're a Cat A license holder you can go nowhere near them. (Like I said, not having the appropriate license, I had to hand mine back.)




Yes I do.

Wait, what?

I though the problem was illegally imported weapons?



Anyway you'll only have to wait a year before your Bundy rum pigging mates can own one because Tone's jumped into bed with Leyonhjelm and done a slimy deal to get his immigration policies through.

The same Tone that promised not to do deals with cross-benchers before he was elected.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-13/adler-shotgun-importation-ban-to-be-lifted-after-leyonhjelm-deal/6694586






Edited by munrubenmuz: 1/9/2015 10:55:05 PM