Gun Controll Debate

[glitter]

of course other people in other countries can say what they want- but more people from other countries want to live here then there. We are the greatest country in the world- and freedom speaks for itself.

[George Jung]

  - but more people from other countries want to live here then there.

That is one bold claim.....that's all I have to sat about that.

[Falkenbach]

Whoa! I'm sure the United States is a fabulous country, but I don't want to live there. I love living in Australia, I think I'm one of the luckiest people in the world, also in one of the luckiest countries (if not THE luckiest).

[charee]

Whoa! I'm sure the United States is a fabulous country, but I don't want to live there. I love living in Australia, I think I'm one of the luckiest people in the world, also in one of the luckiest countries (if not THE luckiest).

Your spot on Cycobully, i love this country best place in the world We are the lucky country!!

[nextnoel]

A firearm has NEVER taken a life.  It is the person behind the firearm who has taken a life. 

Many things can be used to take life.  Knives, bats, cars, etc. etc. 

My point exactly - do you really think he could have killed over 30 people with "knives, bats, cars, etc. etc." before he was stopped?  If guns weren't so prevalent, massacres wouldn't be so easy . . . .

[glitter]

Whoa! I'm sure the United States is a fabulous country, but I don't want to live there. I love living in Australia, I think I'm one of the luckiest people in the world, also in one of the luckiest countries (if not THE luckiest).

not intended as a slam on your particular country or anyone elses- but it is a fact that the USA has immigration quotas which for each and every fiscal year are met and exceeded from every single country we allow immigration from...in many cases people wait a number of years, and sometimes up to 20 years.and yes that includes people from Austrailia-now on the flip side- I think alot of Americans would love to permanetly move to Austrailia, or other countires as well....but you cannot deny there are more people trying to get in then trying to leave....in any case I am as proud of my country as you are of yours.

Newsweek is also a biased liberal publication.

and was that article posted to show how much better the rest of the world is?


one of the statements for example 

"There's only one real ‘freedom' in America—the freedom to kill one anotherr… if guns weren't so readily available in the ‘land of the free,' this tragedy might never have happened."
— London's Daily Mail columnist Russell Miller

is a total BS statement- said by someone who doesn't have a clue.

[AlasdairUK]

of course other people in other countries can say what they want- but more people from other countries want to live here then there. We are the greatest country in the world- and freedom speaks for itself.

Have you left your country? There is a world out there with one or two pretty decent places.

[George Jung]

For the record, I am one American who would like to get out (if and when the opportunity presents itself I will be on my way).  There are a number of places I wouldn't mind spending the rest of my days, heck just to the North is Canada, I would rather be living there in Vancouver or something.  Maybe I could move to California, that is like another country within a country.  Part of the problem with America and it's citizens is they think they are better than everyone else, boy oh boy do they have something to learn.  America has down falls and imperfections no different than anywhere else in the world.

What is not b.s. about those articles is the fact that many people share the same views.  Discrediting those statements because of where they are printed is the easy way out..... face it, there is a problem here in the states.

[tamara]

of course other people in other countries can say what they want- but more people from other countries want to live here then there. We are the greatest country in the world- and freedom speaks for itself.

Have you left your country? There is a world out there with one or two pretty decent places.

Nothing wrong with Australia, am definetely happy I'm here.

[BigSky]

My point exactly - do you really think he could have killed over 30 people with "knives, bats, cars, etc. etc." before he was stopped?  If guns weren't so prevalent, massacres wouldn't be so easy . . . .

Actually if the cops did their jobs properly there would not have been 30 deaths.  So don't blame the firearm for some nut job and the cops who failed to do their job.

Also it has nothing to do if firearms are prevalent or not because in fact he went THROUGH the government to buy the firearm.

[glitter]

of course other people in other countries can say what they want- but more people from other countries want to live here then there. We are the greatest country in the world- and freedom speaks for itself.

Have you left your country? There is a world out there with one or two pretty decent places.

Yes as a matter of fact I have lived in Germany, Greece,The Phillipines and Iceland. As I said in the post above yours I didn't intend to slam any other country and am aware that there are many nice places to live.....but that does not change the fact that our immigration quotas are met or exceeded from every other country we allow immigration from, in many cases with a very long wait b eforehand.

[glitter]

of course other people in other countries can say what they want- but more people from other countries want to live here then there. We are the greatest country in the world- and freedom speaks for itself.

Have you left your country? There is a world out there with one or two pretty decent places.

Nothing wrong with Australia, am definetely happy I'm here.

For the record-Australia is a wonderful country.

[nextnoel]

My point exactly - do you really think he could have killed over 30 people with "knives, bats, cars, etc. etc." before he was stopped?  If guns weren't so prevalent, massacres wouldn't be so easy . . . .

Actually if the cops did their jobs properly there would not have been 30 deaths.  So don't blame the firearm for some nut job and the cops who failed to do their job.

Also it has nothing to do if firearms are prevalent or not because in fact he went THROUGH the government to buy the firearm.

It is useless to try to find the precise point where failure occurred, just cut it off violence when & where you can!

[glitter]

For the record, I am one American who would like to get out (if and when the opportunity presents itself I will be on my way).  There are a number of places I wouldn't mind spending the rest of my days, heck just to the North is Canada, I would rather be living there in Vancouver or something.  Maybe I could move to California, that is like another country within a country.  Part of the problem with America and it's citizens is they think they are better than everyone else, boy oh boy do they have something to learn.  America has down falls and imperfections no different than anywhere else in the world.

What is not b.s. about those articles is the fact that many people share the same views.  Discrediting those statements because of where they are printed is the easy way out..... face it, there is a problem here in the states.

I hope you find a way out, and I hope you give up your citizenship when you leave-


apologies for turning this thread into an immigration discussion- I have nothing left to say about gun control either- its pointless to argue with you- you are not open to any view but your own- and in fairness neither am I .

[BigSky]

It is useless to try to find the precise point where failure occurred, just cut it off violence when & where you can!

Where shall we start?

Hmm lets lock up all people with any mental illness regardless of medication.

Lets ban all airplanes.  After all Muslim terrorists have killed more people in mass with airplanes than someone with a firearm have in mass this country.   We better ban all moving trucks also as more people were killed in mass by the truck bomb at OKC than have been by firearms in mass in this country.


 

What is not b.s. about those articles is the fact that many people share the same views.  Discrediting those statements because of where they are printed is the easy way out..... face it, there is a problem here in the states.

Actually most of them that comment directly about "guns" are bs.   In fact I think only one of them even had a clue.  They are talking points out of ignorance and it doesn't matter if many people share that view.  Ignorant is still ignorant.   They are discredited by the fact that they have misconceptions behind them, thus leading them to the conclusion they did about "guns" in America.

There is not a problem with firearms in America despite the claims to the otherwise.

The one that nailed it pretty good and is actually rational instead of hysterical and fearful of guns.

" There is such a high murder rate in the United States that even if you excluded the deaths caused there by the use of guns, their homicide rate would still be higher than ours.  In other words, even if there were not a single gun in America, there would still be more murders and manslaughters than in Britain.  Bringing gun control to America would not stop it being a country where a lot of people get killed."
— James Bartholomew, political commentator at the Daily Express in London


The most IGNORANT comment of all of them.

"In Virginia at the age of 13, you can buy a revolver at a supermarket."
— From the Italian newspaper il Messaggero, in an article headlined Pistole Facili (Easy Guns). Italian newspapers carried extensive comments from Marina Cogo and Giancarlo Bordonaro, two 23-year-old Virginia Tech students from Milan. Cogo is returning home, vowing not to return.



"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."
--Sigmund Freud,

[nextnoel]

There is not a problem with firearms in America despite the claims by nutjobs to the otherwise.

You're a hoot!  God, ya gotta love freedom of speech!

[Wattle]

There is not a problem with firearms in America despite the claims by nutjobs to the otherwise.

You're a hoot!  God, ya gotta love freedom of speech!

I think the nutjobs you are talking about just gave this BABY a gun license.

Baby gets gun permit

A 10-MONTH-old Chicago boy whose application listed his height as 60cm, his weight as 9kg and was signed with a scribble, was issued a firearm permit for his 12-gauge shotgun.

Bubba Ludwig was issued the identification card by Illinois authorities after his father, Howard Ludwig, paid the $US5 ($6) fee and filled out the application.

The card lists the baby's height (68.6cm), weight (9kg) and has a scribble where the signature should be, the Associated Press reported.

"Does a 10-month-old need a (firearms owners identification card)? No, but there are no restrictions under the act regarding age of applicants," said Illinois state police officer Scott Compton.

Mr Ludwig, 30, applied for the card after his own father bought Bubba a 12-gauge Beretta shotgun as a gift.
(Herald Sun 16/5/07 news.com.au)

[Falkenbach]

  I just came in here to post the same thing that Wattle has already posted.

No age limit, huh? You can't smoke a cigarette until you're 18, but dang, why not have a gun?

[George Jung]

No age limit, huh? You can't smoke a cigarette until you're 18, but dang, why not have a gun?

Yes folks.  That is how idiotic many Americans are.  As a country, we are far from perfect.  I for one would like to see some movement in the right direction.

[BigSky]

I think the nutjobs you are talking about just gave this BABY a gun license.

I just came in here to post the same thing that Wattle has already posted.

No age limit, huh? You can't smoke a cigarette until you're 18, but dang, why not have a gun?

  Talk about jumping to wrong conclusions.

A FOID is required in Illinois to own or buy a firearm.  This merely lets you have the opportunity to legally own or buy one.   The state permit still does not let one bypass federal law on the age when one can legally buy and be in possession of a firearm.

Federal Law controls the sale of firearms, it  does not allow those under 18 to make such purchases on their own. The father says he "gave" the gun to the child.  That is merely symbolic.   Because if he actually gave the firearm to the child to do with what he wanted they would be in violation of the law.   There is still an age limit to when they can actually be in legal possession of a firearm and legally buy it and the state permit does not change that.

Cigarettes?  LOL  You might note, despite the law, that thousands, if not millions under 18 smoke in this country.   They still buy cigarettes over the counter in stores despite age restriction, either by fake ID or people who fail to card.     No so with firearms over the counter.

[glitter]

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/10/23/1161455665717.html

this is a link for the Sidney Morning Herald, I found this to be very interesting, and there are hundreds of these articles from Aussie news media on the net- probably all pissed-off gun owners!!!


Home » National » Article
Buyback has no effect on murder rate
Email Print Normal font Large font Matthew Moore
October 24, 2006

Latest related coverage
Your say: Reducing homicide
HALF a billion dollars spent buying back hundreds of thousands of guns after the Port Arthur massacre had no effect on the homicide rate, says a study published in an influential British journal.

The report by two Australian academics, published in the British Journal of Criminology, said statistics gathered in the decade since Port Arthur showed gun deaths had been declining well before 1996 and the buyback of more than 600,000 mainly semi-automatic rifles and pump-action shotguns had made no difference in the rate of decline.

The only area where the package of Commonwealth and State laws, known as the National Firearms Agreement (NFA) may have had some impact was on the rate of suicide, but the study said the evidence was not clear and any reductions attributable to the new gun rules were slight.

"Homicide patterns (firearm and non-firearm) were not influenced by the NFA, the conclusion being that the gun buyback and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia," the study says.

In his first year in office, the Prime Minister, John Howard, forced through some of the world's toughest gun laws, including the national buyback scheme, after Martin Bryant used semi-automatic rifles to shoot dead 35 people at Port Arthur.

Although furious licensed gun-owners said the laws would have no impact because criminals would not hand in their guns, Mr Howard and others predicted the removal of so many guns from the community, and new laws making it harder to buy and keep guns, would lead to a reduction in all types of gun-related deaths.

One of the authors of the study, Jeanine Baker, said she knew in 1996 it would be impossible for years to know whether the Prime Minister or the shooters were right.

"I have been collecting data since 1996 … The decision was we would wait for a decade and then evaluate," she said.

The findings were clear, she said: "The policy has made no difference. There was a trend of declining deaths that has continued."

Dr Baker and her co-author, Samara McPhedran, declared their membership of gun groups in the article, something Dr Baker said they had done deliberately to make clear "who we are" and head off any possible criticism that they had hidden relevant details.

The significance of the article was not who had written it but the fact it had been published in a respected journal after the regular rigorous process of being peer reviewed, she said.

Politicians had assumed tighter gun laws would cut off the supply of guns to would-be criminals and that homicide rates would fall as a result, the study said. But more than 90 per cent of firearms used to commit homicide were not registered, their users were not licensed and they had been unaffected by the firearms agreement.

Dr Baker said many more lives would have been saved had the Government spent the $500 million on mental health or other programs rather than on destroying semi-automatic weapons.

She believed semi-automatic rifles should be available to shooters, although with tight restrictions such as those in place in New Zealand.

The director of the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics, Dr Don Weatherburn, said he was not surprised by the study. He said it showed "politicians would be well advised to claim success of their policies after they were evaluated, not before".

[Falkenbach]

Why does the law allow for one to have a permit for something they can't buy?

And if you want to use Australian homicide rates as an argument, just look at ours compared with yours, on a per capita basis. I think you'll find that the country which has always had much easier access to guns (i.e. yours) totally obliterates us on the murder statistics.

I don't object to you having your view and arguing for it, but so far some of you have been quite objectionable about it, rather than being helpful or mature. Calling people "retarded" (via a Freudian quote) and using a head-butt icon are thinly veiled insults, an attempt to imply that I (or anyone else disagreeing with you) am lacking in intelligence. This doesn't help your debate at all. I am not stupid or ignorant, just because I don't agree with you.

[BigSky]

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/10/23/1161455665717.html

this is a link for the Sidney Morning Herald, I found this to be very interesting, and there are hundreds of these articles from Aussie news media on the net- probably all pissed-off gun owners!!!


Home » National » Article
Buyback has no effect on murder rate
Email Print Normal font Large font Matthew Moore
October 24, 2006

Latest related coverage
Your say: Reducing homicide
HALF a billion dollars spent buying back hundreds of thousands of guns after the Port Arthur massacre had no effect on the homicide rate, says a study published in an influential British journal.

Something of interest on the Port Arthur thing was one of the firearms used in that crime had been turned in for destruction to the police 3 years earlier.

[BigSky]

Why does the law allow for one to have a permit for something they can't buy?

Just because one has a permit doesn't mean they can still buy something.

One can buy a car without having a drivers license.  A minor can buy a car.   In many states anyone can license a car without a DL or having the required proof of insurance for it.

Not sure if they still do it but he US also used to sell a marijuana stamp, which was needed to sell it, despite the fact it is illegal to sell it or posses it for the most part.

And if you want to use Australian homicide rates as an argument, just look at ours compared with yours, on a per capita basis. I think you'll find that the country which has always had much easier access to guns (i.e. yours) totally obliterates us on the murder statistics.

Compare homicide rates?

Of course you do know if you remove ALL firearms from the US we still have more homicides than Australia right?  Over 5 times higher per capita ratio of population to that of Australia when all gun crimes are removed from the picture.

In the US the places that have some of the highest homicide rates are those that have harsh firearms laws and outright bans on firearms and are very similar to laws in Australia.

Compare that to Montana.  We have very few restrictions and have far more firearms per ratio than most and we have a extremely low homicide rate with firearms.

In fact our total  homicide rate (Montana) and Australia's are virtually the same despite the fact Montana has far more firearms to people than Australia.  So much for your theory.

I don't object to you having your view and arguing for it, but so far some of you have been quite objectionable about it, rather than being helpful or mature. Calling people "retarded" (via a Freudian quote) and using a head-butt icon are thinly veiled insults, an attempt to imply that I (or anyone else disagreeing with you) am lacking in intelligence. This doesn't help your debate at all. I am not stupid or ignorant, just because I don't agree with you.

The quote never called anyone retarded, however if that was what popped into your mind then that is YOUR problem, not mine.  You can play yourself out as a victim all you want.  That is what doesn't help your argument.


Hmm the headbutt.  I never called you ignorant nor suggested it.  However since you say you are not ignorant on that matter.  What do you call it then when you jump to false conclusions about our culture and firearm laws and just how they apply and to whom they apply?

You can disagree all you want. I do not care if you disagree, that is your choice to do so.   However if you think I am suppose to sit back and let you promote misinformation about the US, its firearm culture, its firearm laws and how they apply and to whom they apply you are very sadly mistaken.

[Falkenbach]

We could go on like this until we were blue in the face and another 20 pages had gone by, and still neither of us would agree with the other.

Just allow me to say that I don't believe I misrepresented your country at all, I have no intentions of throwing insults at your country, as I have nothing against it and would like to visit it one day.
 

That is all I'm going to say.