GUN CONTROL!!!

[Platypus]

get a map of the federal parliamentary seats in Victoria, make all the Melbourne based seats in favour of gun control, all the very rural ones no, and the rest 50/50. Basically, Victorians would be at least 80% in favour of some form of gun control; i'd say maybe 40-50% would be like me, wanted guns banned for everyone but police, famers (rifles only), park rangers, etc.

[Platypus]

i think the peoblem with the us is that there are just too many bloody guns. Take away law-abiding citizens rights to guns and they're 'undefended' (although I read that more people die from their own guns then kill others in self defence) from the mountains of guns possessed by cruiminals. Australia has the fortunate circumstances of only the big crims having guns, and only using them to shoot eachother. In the US, your gun culture has led to a 'damned if you do, an damned if you don't' set of circumstances; although we only know that the latter is true. I reckon that trying gun control is necessary now, after we've seen that laz gun laws simply don't work and make for a more dangerous society.

[Platypus]

Now, this is BEFORE we had tight gun laws:

The gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in 1994 by country were as follows:

    * U.S.A. 14.24
    * Brazil 12.95
    * Mexico 12.69
    * Estonia 12.26
    * Argentina 8.93
    * Northern Ireland 6.63
    * Finland 6.46
    * Switzerland 5.31
    * France 5.15
    * Canada 4.31
    * Norway 3.82
    * Austria 3.70
    * Portugal 3.20
    * Israel 2.91
    * Belgium 2.90
    * Australia 2.65
    * Slovenia 2.60
    * Italy 2.44
    * New Zealand 2.38
    * Denmark 2.09
    * Sweden 1.92
    * Kuwait 1.84
    * Greece 1.29
    * Germany 1.24
    * Hungary 1.11
    * Ireland 0.97
    * Spain 0.78
    * Netherlands 0.70
    * Scotland 0.54
    * England and Wales 0.41
    * Taiwan 0.37
    * Singapore 0.21
    * Mauritius 0.19
    * Hong Kong 0.14
    * South Korea 0.12
    * Japan 0.05

(according to a study published April 17, 1998 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the International Journal of Epidemiology.)

I'll try and find a more recent figure.
------------------------------------------------------------

"There was a decrease of almost 30% in the number of homicides by firearms from 1997 to 1998."

-- Australian Crime - Facts and Figures 1999. Australian Institute of Criminology. Canberra, Oct 1999. The Gun laws were introduced in late 96/early 1997, iirc, immediately following Port Arthur.

-----------------------------------------------------

The Australian Bureau of Statistics counts all injury deaths, whether or not they are crime-related. The most recently available ABS figures show a total of 437 firearm-related deaths (homicide, suicide and unintentional) for 1997. This is the lowest number for 18 years.

The Australian rate of gun death per 100,000 population remains one-fifth that of the United States.

------------------------

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_wit_fir_cap

[Platypus]

indeed, and over 3/4 of australia's gun-related deaths are from suicides. (78% to the period to 1995; can't find more recent info)

I also suggest people take a look at this:

http://www.harvardmagazine.com/on-line/090433.html

it is not necessarily a statistical proof of anything, but it's a very interesting read.

[Platypus]

hardly. Guns in the house=quick and very efficient way to kill yourself. You're a hell of a lot more likely to suceed in a suicide attempt by putting a bullet through your head, then by taking a few too many sleeping pills.

BTW, If it's 'inflating' the numbers, it would be inflating the number for each country. Take away suicides and the number drops, sure; I'm not sure how much for the USA, but uif you don't want to count them, the number drops for Australia to roughly 0.75. It's the lack of guns that keeps the rate so low; Australia isn't less violent then America-perhaps we're even more violent, I'm not sure-but the lack of access to guns means less people die from them-either at their own hands, or at the hands of criminals, or insane people like Martin Bryant.

[Platypus]

but the access to the weapon is what's producing the deaths!

Criminals will still try to kill people sometimes, sure; but they'll be a lot less sucessful.

ANd I think the right to live in a society where there is no need for self-defence is more important.

[Platypus]

but Australia is a lot closer to it. I can walk down the street in any neighbourhood in Australia and not be fearful of having a gun-or a knife-stuck in my face.
I point to the figures-after gun control came into effect in Australia, gun related deaths-including homicides-fell. Total homicide rates also fell.

[Platypus]

Dibs-Australia and the USA, are, however, very similar countries culturally, historically, etc. We have similar crime rates, etc. Whilst not a perfect comparison, I think it is pretty reasonable. About the suicide thing-I'll try to find the source, but I remember reading that whilst attempted suicides had increased in Australia over the last decade, sucessful suicides had not increase significantly at all. Whilst this is not an absolutely direct corellation with lack of guns, I think it is reasonably sound to put the two together, at least partially.

[Platypus]

Are, a) Blacks more likely to posses guns?, and b) More likely to use guns in crimes?

You can use all the abusiveness you have in you, I don't care. Guns kill people. Through people, sure, but they kill people, and a LOT more effectively then any other personal weapon.

I'm not even sure why i'm bothering. I have the fortune to live in a society that is relatively safe from gun-related crimes, and also a society in which I have no fear of gun-related crimes. Ask a single mother in Houston-black or white-if they are concerned about gun-related violence, and the answer you'll get almost all the time in 'yes'.

And whilst it's vaguely off topic, is it acceptable that in the USA a social group can be so significantly poorer then the rest of the population, so significantly more involved in crimes, including those related to guns, and so significantly more likely to have problems with drug addiction? Australia had these problems with our Aboriginal population, which makes up 2% of the total population. We've dealt significantly with the second problem; the first and third are still at unacceptably bad levels, but at least something has been done. It's also much harder to cope with Aboriginal communities, and whilst I won't go into that here, the basics are culture, isolation and poverty. The third is shared by both, but unlike in the United States, the average wealth of aboriginal Australians has skyrocketed over the last few decades-it's still very very low, but it is improving.

Once you become involved, Carl, arguments get abusive and messy. I will not continue to post in this thread. But it is my firm belief that once you take away all the ifs and buts, the core of the problem is higher rates of gun ownership, and thats why you're more likely to die at the hands of someone else then me. Enjoy your liberty to own a weapon of destruction; i'll enjoy my extra years of life.

[Platypus]

I can't stop myself. Last post here.

People kill people, sure, but guns are a LOT more effective at doing it. In premeditated murders, there is no difference, basically, it's the spur-of-the-moment killings that really push the murder rate up, and guns are undeniably the best personal weapon for doing that, particularly pistols. A pull of a trigger is a split second thing; stabbing someone sufficiently to kill them takes far, far longer in most cases.

About suicide-the same thing applies. If someone gets all depressed and tries to kill themselves, as a spur-of the moment type of thing, they're likely (well, certain) to succeed with a gun. With other methods, their chance of success is lowered. If it's premeditated and they've taken every sep to ensure death, it'll still happen. The fact of the matter is, there is no other method that is uicker, painless and as effective as a bullet through your brain.

[Platypus]

Dibs-Australia and the USA, are, however, very similar countries culturally, historically, etc. We have similar crime rates, etc. Whilst not a perfect comparison, I think it is pretty reasonable. About the suicide thing-I'll try to find the source, but I remember reading that whilst attempted suicides had increased in Australia over the last decade, sucessful suicides had not increase significantly at all. Whilst this is not an absolutely direct corellation with lack of guns, I think it is reasonably sound to put the two together, at least partially.

Here's a url which refutes the allegations about suicide rates:

http://www.uni-wuerzburg.de/IASR/suicide-table1.htm

For those who don't want to take the time to check it out, the suicide rates in the US and Australia compare as follows:

County Male Female

United States 19.8 4.4

Australia 21.5 5.0

Guess people can effectively commit suicide without firearms.

But, that's just common sense.

Well, that's another thing Hughento lacks.

read what i posted. Suicide rates are higher here, but, and i'll make this easy for you:

WHILST ATTEMPTED SUICIDE RATES HAVE RISEN SIGNIFICANTLY, SUCCESSFUL SUICIDES HAVE REMAINED AT A RELATIVELY STABLE LEVEL[/SIZE][/I]

No other suicide method has had restrictions put on it, so it's pretty bloody clear that guns are more sucessful in suicide attempts then other (common*) methods.

*at the very least