kiterboy said...
....
The moronic argument is taking the spoons comment literally.
And again totally missing the point.

What point am I missing? You are saying the cause is that the bigger underlying social/health issues is the thing to fix. That is obviously part of the problem but countries with much bigger populations presumably have just as many crazy people but nowhere near as many deaths from guns or from crazy people.

The gun death statistics of the US come second only to a bunch of war torn countries or countries in the grip of drug wars.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

As for spoons, you tried to trivialise the idea of removing guns from society by making an absurd example. It is a common and lazy tactic used all the time.

The bottom line in all this is that decent, ordinary people have a right to live their lives without needing guns. The rest of the world does not have guns and the vast majority of us live our lives without guns.

T 11 said...

Funny I could not see Switzerland on that list! Over there every citizen has a full auto assault rifle with amo at home!? Maybe it is the culture? Prohibition doesn't work! Look at booze and drugs, outlaw the guns and they won't vanish..... only outlaws will have guns!

How about:

1. 5500 kids dying every single day in Africa.

2. More than 3000 kids killed by the American troops in the Iraq and Afghanistan only.

3. 17800 kids under 15 years of age killed every year in traffic accidents.

Mikedobee said...
How about:

1. 5500 kids dying every single day in Africa.

2. More than 3000 kids killed by the American troops in the Iraq and Afghanistan only.

3. 17800 kids under 15 years of age killed every year in traffic accidents.

Your point being..? It's fine what happened to those poor kids and families because worse things happen in other parts of the world?

Gee sn you really spent some time sorting out my post! And your mum has a gun in her cupboard? Look out guys! Haha

nah- not quite "in the cupboard"
Her shotgun (.410 snakecharmer/feline fixer) is locked up as per the regulations in her safe.

We have most of our firearms on co-operative licensing within the family so we can use each others firearms legally.

Stephen.

southace said...
Well that's fair enough but we have a lot of dangerous animals .....man eaters! We need guns to protect ourselves (well its a good excuse to own one) but in the states it seems their worst enemy's are there own people's .....After the Martian Briant incident do I recall our government destroying auto and semi weapons?

We never had auto's here.

Semi-auto's were handed in. Interestingly only the licensed ones...... there is still about 10,000 semiauto "assault rifles" in australia that were never handed in.

Touted as success by the Govt and taken hook, line and sinker by the public who are completely ignorant about firearms.

Mark _australia said...
We never had auto's here.

Semi-auto's were handed in. Interestingly only the licensed ones...... there is still about 10,000 semiauto "assault rifles" in australia that were never handed in.

Touted as success by the Govt and taken hook, line and sinker by the public who are completely ignorant about firearms.

... the federal Labor MP Andrew Leigh believes Howard's success will endure. Leigh, as an academic, published research in 2010 that found the buyback of 500,000 semi-automatic rifles and shotguns had cut firearm suicides by 74 per cent, saving 200 lives a year. Gun homicides were down 59 per cent.

Read more: www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/australians-still-sticking-to-their-guns-20121216-2bho7.html

sn said...
After the martin bryant killings, howard took our legally owned semi-auto shotguns, pump action shotguns, semi-auto centrefires and semi auto rimfires.
Later they heavily restricted our handguns
(which were very difficult to obtain for sporting use- and impossible to license for protection)
and took many of our legally owned, licensed and tightly controlled handguns away from us as well.

Criminals were not forced to hand over anything in either "buyback"........

...
Stephen

You have lost the use of some toys and a bunch of people are alive today because of it. You could be proud of it but you complain.

... comment deleted ...

felixdcat said...

T 11 said...

Funny I could not see Switzerland on that list! Over there every citizen has a full auto assault rifle with amo at home!? Maybe it is the culture? Prohibition doesn't work! Look at booze and drugs, outlaw the guns and they won't vanish..... only outlaws will have guns!

The "only the outlaws will have the guns" theory really is a puny one. So Australia's got gun control( not enough in my opinion) and by the theory then only the outlaws will have guns........And do they? is armed crime on the rise since Howards gun control policies were introduced? .....answer :NO.....end of theory.

"Prohibition doesn't work" Realy? .... As you've pointed out, the Swiss have guns in their houses and they have prohibited the citizens to use them in other than national defence. An example of prohibition.

And why do people find it so hard to understand that there isn't just one reason for massacres and there is more than one solution to ending them. If you have tighter gun control it will not end massacres......but it will reduce the likelyhood.........If you have a change in cultural attitudes toward violence it will not end massacres it will reduce the likelyhood of massacres.......if you have better mental health services yadah,yadah yadah.......get it.

log man said...
"Prohibition doesn't work" Realy? .... As you've pointed out, the Swiss have guns in their houses and they have prohibited the citizens to use them in other than national defence. An example of prohibition.

Where did you read this?

According to the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, they have:
3.5 million privately owned firearms.
A firearms ownership rate of 45%.
The right to own firearms is guaranteed by law.
Hunting, target shooting and collecting are valid reasons to own firearms.
Defence is a reason to own (subject to conditions)
Semi-auto "assault" rifles can be privately owned.
Some types of manually operated firearms do not require licensing.
Firearms- including handguns can be carried in public (conditions apply)

The military issue firearms held in civilian homes are another matter altogether.
These are covered by thier Defense regulations as they are Govt. Property- but usually, when your military service is finished- you can keep your issued firearm, as the way the Swiss see it- you have earned it.

I understand that the Swiss- like most European countries, allow silencers for firearms- but I need to confirm this.

Stephen

America has had fire arms available to all and sundry for a couple of hundred years, and Australia has also had a long free availability of them. It's only in recent decades that mass slaughter has been an option to anyone who does not like Monday or whatever. I waiver that there were genocidal slaughters by both countries, but the basis of these were not revenge or simple dissatisfaction. They were for the misguided belief in the right of conquest. So what has changed. The guns were always deadly. Perhaps values have changed.

I grew up with several firearms in Dads wardrobe, as did many where I grew up. If we touched them we would consequently be severely dealt with. No one shot the **** out of a class room just because they didn't feel accepted, or harshly dealt with.

What clearly has changed in my 60 years is the sense of self and sense of responsibility to family and society. I, as a member of the cultural revolution of the 60's and 70's take responsibility for this.
One of the key changes has been the disintegration of the extended and nuclear family. Although there is valid argument for separation in some cases, perhaps less self centeredness and protecting the kids by working on the relationships could have saved a lot of grief. In my line of work in mental health, I see ample evidence of this, despite the drive to "protect women" by destroying families. We are now into the third generation of disintegrated families, with a downward spiral of social rules and boundaries. The ones that I see that cope least well are males, with inevitable change in personality traits that err towards antisocialism and self entitlement.
Look at the profile of those shot and killed in Australia in recent years. The majority have been turf wars between bikies, not by "crazies".
What is the difference between antisocial and crazy? Crazy is a chemical imbalance caused by genetics, injury, severe trauma, and sometimes for unknown reasons. Antisocialism is a learning phenomena, based on lengthy absent or inadequate nurturing by the parents.

There are other countries which have high gun ownership ratios, but they don't have the mass murder of their own that we see in the USA. Countries like Israel Switzerland Finland and Sweden etc who have many armed forces/national guard members who are compelled by law to keep assault rifles for perceived threat, and do not seem to have the same murderous/self entitled mentalities.
Interestingly, it is modern western nations that have meaningless mass slaughter of innocents as a phenomena. Other world slaughters are generally politically, financially or survival motivated. As an aside, it is also first world nations that have serial killers. Such as the USA and Australia. Is there relationship between the two, in regard to callous self entitlement of the perpetrators?

I personally do not see the need in Australia or the USA for the abundance of firearms that some seem to have, particularly assault weapons, but I also don't believe that complete disarmament is the answer. Although I feels little johnnies motivation for gun law review was politically motivated, the result is that legal gun owners are the most vetted and acceptable individuals in the country, and therefore, according to the legislation appropriate and safe to own firearms. This has a wide range of application in the US, where some states have more stringent gun laws than Australia. And worse firearm crime. Interestingly, Texas, which has an "open carry" law, has relatively little violent crime.

I believe in a social state, but I feel that the individual needs to learn responsibility to themselves, others, and the community, to provide reciprocal values and balance. That is what I see is missing in modern society. It is all about me, and what I can get out of it. For instance, how many here try to buy Australian at the supermarket. Or better, buy at the corner shop. More expensive, but it keeps someone in a job, and away from the street/dole/gaol/asylum. That's a bargain.
Many individuals seem to miss the lessons of taking responsibility for their actions, and consequences no longer seem meaningful. Caring for others seems to be a diminishing commodity.
I believe it is personal and societal values that need to change.

I have not researched this tonight, as I don't have time. This is an amalgam of research by others that I have observed over time, and my own observations. If you find error in these observations, I hope it is based on valid research, not prejudicial emotion.

Rant over.

poor relative said...
If society has changed so dramatically perhaps gun laws need to change accordingly.

That's just silly.
So we allow the degradation of society and ban guns then as things get worse we progressively ban more and more things ????

Beerdead's post was the best thing I have ever read in any of the numerous gun control threads here. And they know cos they work in the psych system.

poor relative said...
If society has changed so dramatically perhaps gun laws need to change accordingly.

They have changed. We now have;
-legislated requirement to be authorised by government authority in order to be considered fit to own firearms,
-with routine screening by Police.
-We now need to store firearms more securely, separate from ammunition and firing mechanisms (bolts),
-a minimum of education regarding gun usage and safety, limits to the amount of ammunition to be purchased and stored, which looks looks being reduced in volume in the near future.

I see these as good changes. Perhaps we need to become more stringent in ownership requirements, but before that I would like to see the figures of legal ownership linked to firearm crime in Australia, as opposed to illegal and criminal firearm activities. I have known persons who have been participants in crime and activities that included firearms, but none of them were legal gun owners. They were members of the seedy side of society, with the backgrounds as I described before.

My previous post mentioned societal values based on family and personal values. The issue is multifactorial with many other aspects. I simply did not have time or space to go into it all. I don't know it all. I just try to keep an open mind, and to apply the three C's of community engagement, care courtesy and respect. This does not mean I am Jesus Christ, far from it, but I don't shoot anyone who I feel dismissed by.

Couple of great posts beerdead.
Lets just take the USA for a minute. How in any way whatsover would the "rights" of gun owners be infringed if they introduced the laws that we have in Au. The US gun lobby have spun a web of crap that is destructive to American society.