Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 47 of 47

Thread: A SERIOUS Question for Gun Control Proponents

  1. -41
    NY8123's Avatar
    Sophisticated Redneck

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2008
    Posts:
    11,819
    vCash:
    6766
    Loc:
    out in the Ding Weeds
    Thanks / No Thanks
    If you want another good point of reference for your debate look at this site as well.

    http://factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/
    "I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally" ~ W.C. Fields

    Quote Quote  

  2. -42
    El Scorcho's Avatar
    Scout Team

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2012
    Posts:
    47
    vCash:
    1102
    Loc:
    Adelaide, Australia
    Thanks / No Thanks

    Re: A SERIOUS Question for Gun Control Proponents

    Quote Originally Posted by KTOWNFINFAN View Post
    As a matter of fact you are over 9000 times more likely to be killed by a doctor who makes a mistake in America, than someone with a LEGAL gun. Should we ban doctors?? What about cars. There is a much higher chance that you will be killed by a drunk driver than by either guns or doctors. So since some misuse cars and drive cars illegally does that mean all those that use cars correctly have to give up their cars because some use theirs incorrectly??
    This is absolutely ridiculous.

    Doctors and cars have absolutely vital positions in society. Guns have one purpose. The comparison is ridiculous.
    Quote Quote  

  3. -43
    El Scorcho's Avatar
    Scout Team

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2012
    Posts:
    47
    vCash:
    1102
    Loc:
    Adelaide, Australia
    Thanks / No Thanks

    Re: A SERIOUS Question for Gun Control Proponents

    Quote Originally Posted by NY8123 View Post
    It has had very little impact on the overall totals in Australia, the article that you quoted in your post is flat out wrong information other than the amount of killings over 4 at a time. Facts and Figures for Australian gun related violence and death buy back years bolded:

    In Australia, annual homicides by any means total

    2010: 21716
    2009: 26116 17
    2008: 25116 18 17
    2007: 216
    2006: 256
    2005: 199
    2004: 164
    2003: 278
    2002: 291
    2001: 300
    1999/00: 30218 17
    1998/99: 327
    1997/98: 298
    1996/97: 299
    1995/96: 302
    1994/95: 326
    1993/94: 32318
    1992/93: 331
    1991/92: 313
    1990/91: 323
    1989/90: 307

    In Australia, annual firearm homicides total

    2010: 3016
    2009: 3616 17
    2008: 27
    2007: 28
    2006: 41
    2005: 1516 17 21
    2004: 1516 17
    2003: 5416 22 17
    2002: 45
    2001: 47
    2000: 5722 17
    1999: 50
    1998: 57
    1997: 79
    1996: 104
    1995: 67
    1994: 7622
    1993: 64
    1992: 96
    1991: 84
    1990: 79
    1989: 80
    1988: 123

    In Australia, annual suicides by any means total

    2010: 2,35923
    2009: 2,284
    2008: 2,340
    2007: 2,227
    2006: 2,118
    2005: 2,101
    2004: 2,098
    2003: 2,21323 22
    2002: 2,320
    2001: 2,454
    2000: 2,36322
    1999: 2,492
    1998: 2,683
    1997: 2,720
    1996: 2,393
    1995: 2,368
    1994: 2,258
    1993: 2,081
    1992: 2,294
    1991: 2,360
    1990: 2,161
    1989: 2,096
    1988: 2,197

    In Australia, annual firearm suicides total

    2010: 16223
    2009: 169
    2008: 183
    2007: 190
    2006: 181
    2005: 147
    2004: 167
    2003: 19323 22
    2002: 217
    2001: 261
    2000: 22222
    1999: 269
    1998: 235
    1997: 329
    1996: 382
    1995: 388
    1994: 420
    1993: 431
    1992: 488
    1991: 505
    1990: 486
    1989: 450
    1988: 521


    http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/australia
    Ah, statistics without context. The NRA would be proud.

    The stats above are absolutely meaningless because there is no way of having a control group. You have nothing to compare the statistics to.

    In fact, the statistics show that overall violent crime has steadily decreased over time in the US along with the murder rate. However in Australia the violent crime rate has increased over the past 20-30 years, while the murder rate has continued to fall. Australia became more violent but the murder rate decreased.

    The semiautomatic weapons ban and tighter gun control in Australia also coincided with a dramatic increase in drug related gang crime, as well as a slashing of the mental health budget which both would have had an effect on the violent crime rate.


    The other important point to consider is that even before gun control, guns were not particularly common in Australia. The (legal, accounted for) ownership rate was far lower than in the US. Less than 1/4. The impact of theoretically removing all semiautomatic weapons from the US would be far, far more pronounced than it was in Australia.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -44
    GoFins!'s Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Feb 2008
    Posts:
    492
    vCash:
    1096
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Interesting video from the gun control hearings:


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi6gZU01yF8#t=200s


    - proposed assault weapons ban is an ineffective piece of legislation
    - fully automatic machine guns are already functionally illegal
    - according to DOJ (under Janet Reno/Bill Clinton) the previous assault weapons ban did not reduce the number of victims per incident or multiple gun shot wound victims
    - proposed legislation based on cosmetic features (scary looking guns), NOT performance features, functionality, power, lethality.
    - according the the DOJ, before background checks went into effect 1.9% of firearms used in crimes were obtained at gun shows
    Im somewhat disappointed that more African Americans dont think for themselves and just go with whatever theyre supposed to say and think."


    - Dr. Benjamin Carson
    Quote Quote  

  5. -45
    NY8123's Avatar
    Sophisticated Redneck

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2008
    Posts:
    11,819
    vCash:
    6766
    Loc:
    out in the Ding Weeds
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by El Scorcho View Post
    Ah, statistics without context. The NRA would be proud.

    The stats above are absolutely meaningless because there is no way of having a control group. You have nothing to compare the statistics to.

    In fact, the statistics show that overall violent crime has steadily decreased over time in the US along with the murder rate. However in Australia the violent crime rate has increased over the past 20-30 years, while the murder rate has continued to fall. Australia became more violent but the murder rate decreased.

    The semiautomatic weapons ban and tighter gun control in Australia also coincided with a dramatic increase in drug related gang crime, as well as a slashing of the mental health budget which both would have had an effect on the violent crime rate.


    The other important point to consider is that even before gun control, guns were not particularly common in Australia. The (legal, accounted for) ownership rate was far lower than in the US. Less than 1/4. The impact of theoretically removing all semiautomatic weapons from the US would be far, far more pronounced than it was in Australia.
    Not really dude the context is right there for the taking. Stats are what you make them and to pretend that the NRA is the only group using stats as propaganda to further their cause is as shortsighted as saying "but there is really no good reason for an everyday citizen of a 1st world country to carry a gun or keep a gun in their home." You say there is no control to compare to but the control is in the past data that has been collected, you bench mark what you had verse what you have now. Ten years is more than enough time in a chunk to have a statistically valid control group, in fact you could make the case that five years is more than enough.

    You typed it right out in your post, the buying back of guns in Australia did nothing to curtail drug related violence or crime rate. It also did nothing for the suicide rate, people killed themselves all the same. So again what it is the purpose behind the ban? Is that you just don't agree with the second amendment or is that you truly think it is going to help? It will not help in the overall totals, just like the Harrison Act did nothing but create a market for criminals to profit from illegal drugs.

    If you want to know everything about the relevance of the Australian buy back and correlation to guns read this paper from page to page, as I did: http://andrewleigh.org/pdf/GunBuyback_Panel.pdf

    It shows a strong correlation that the buy back lowered gun deaths but the error bars are also large. It also cannot explain away the suicide substitution rate, it gives a theory to support the notion that the suicide substitution rate is related to a proposed change in reporting practices but the paper found no reason that the practices were changed so it is merely speculation. The problem with Australia is the fact the rates are low anyway providing little certainly that the NFA worked, as I said there is a R2 value that the correlation is strong for deaths and suicides being lower when correlated with the buy back and suggests that it helped, the range of error in those findings extended from zero to above the national averages for deaths per 100,000 so the suggestion is questionable because of the overall low numbers of deaths by these means in Australia anyway. However the suicide substitution rate was over 100% which implied a rise in suicides which was unexplainable by the study. There was also a little blurb in there about the type of guns that were handed in and they were mostly .22 caliber and shotguns which are not being discussed here in the US or on the Australian ban list. There is also evidence to suggest that the gun related deaths were falling before the NFA so while there is a reason of confidence that the NFA worked there is also holes in the study. Which leads me to my original statement of whether it worked as intended or not or if the overall trend was already there to begin with and the NFA came in the middle of a downward trending cycle.

    I own guns and I always will own guns, my son owns a gun, my dad does and so does almost every single person that I know. It is a right granted by the constitution of the Untied States of America and I cherish those rights. If you have cause to support your actions are for the greater good, so be it but if you pass laws to make yourself feel good while not addressing the fundamental problem of the US which is the civility and social respect we show each other than it is as fruitless as drinking water from the back of the glass.
    Last edited by NY8123; 01-31-2013 at 01:00 AM.
    Quote Quote  

  6. -46
    MoFinz's Avatar
    Uwe Von Schamann's Bastard Son

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2002
    Posts:
    3,052
    vCash:
    1016
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by El Scorcho View Post
    This is absolutely ridiculous.

    Doctors and cars have absolutely vital positions in society. Guns have one purpose. The comparison is ridiculous.
    Guns have multiple purposes, among them Protection and Defense. I'd say they are pretty vital.

    Have you figured out how to disarm bad guys yet?


    Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
    Quote Quote  

  7. -47
    MoFinz's Avatar
    Uwe Von Schamann's Bastard Son

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2002
    Posts:
    3,052
    vCash:
    1016
    Thanks / No Thanks
    A School shooting...a 5 yr old taken hostage.....how would disarming Joe Citizen have stopped these crimes? Seriously, how many laws were already broken in the commission of these crimes?
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. Gay Marriage Proponents Attack Elderly Woman
    By FinFatale in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 11-21-2008, 09:17 AM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-19-2007, 10:47 AM
  3. ATTN: Fire Mularkey Proponents
    By SkapePhin in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 10-24-2006, 11:47 PM
  4. Government out of control with control!
    By FINintheMOON in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-07-2006, 10:01 PM
  5. Gay marriage amendment proponents lose momentum
    By BAMAPHIN 22 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-29-2004, 02:34 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •