The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Why the NRA has Australia in its sights > Comments

Why the NRA has Australia in its sights : Comments

By Andrew Leigh, published 23/7/2015

The rarity of mass shootings is almost certainly a direct result of the gun buyback.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 25
  11. 26
  12. 27
  13. All
To what LEGO and ConservativeHippie have said I would like to draw attention to some other contributors to violence:

1. Fatherless homes and one could add to that the resultant effects of babysitting young developing minds in front of the TV, movies and games, and in some cases also being the neglected, sometimes abused victim (mum's boyfriends);

2. General denial of love, time, (reasonable)boundaries and recognition by parent/s, usually solo and drug affected, which causes the child to gravitate to drugs, crime and gang membership;

3. An unsatisfactory example being modelled in the home by parents and their acquaintances (see Struggle Streets [SBS]). There are generations of ferals all caught up in a cycle of unemployment, poor choices and violence.

-The involvement of young urban black youth in some known and predictable US suburbs in drugs and gangs is a sure predictor of serious violence, where knives, brass knuckles, baseball bats, firearms and other tools of their trade will always be in plentiful supply. That is regardless of whatever bans and laws duplicating other laws, might be enacted as part of populist 'gun control' politics.

Gun control is ineffective through being misdirected. It is misdirected because the root causes, the fundamental contributors and precursors to violence are not being properly identified and treated.

4. Irresponsible commentators, political lobbyists and news outlets MUST stop sensationalising certain crimes to draw audiences. That applies to follow-ups after the offender is gaoled. It should be quite apparent to authorities that it is the nation-wide and now world-wide notoriety guaranteed by irresponsible media and commentators with a secondary agenda in mind, that is encouraging offenders to commit certain crimes, eg mass killing with firearm.

Australian authorities should be very careful indeed not to arrogantly assume that they are alone in the World in being so clever in inventing the multicultural policy that proofs against imported hatreds and imported toxic political systems and values.

Australian authorities are already being cowered by political correctness into not gathering and analysing data that could point to any negative consequences of immigration and multicultural policy.
Posted by onthebeach, Friday, 24 July 2015 11:36:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The BS gets piled higher and deeper, as of course I knew it would.

Lets just ignore the fact that countries with strict gun laws have lower gun-related crimes.

Now we are accused of not addressing violence at its root cause before restricting access to the very tools that allow violence on larger scales.

Sorry, I just can't get into your 'conservative' screwed up views on how society is to blame and guns are the answer.

Of course this site is always inhabited by old fogies, so some historical anachronistic fantasy will also be employed again to justify why we as people who don't really take much interest in firearms should allow 'law abiding citizens' (who would most likely have a much different political philosophy to their own) access to them. Are we expecting another Japanese invasion? I suppose a few more pump action shotguns in circulation might deter them.

Of course, the argument that criminals always have access to illegal guns, well that would only increase (only a fantasist would argue otherwise) with a relaxation of our current gun laws.

Seriously, you guys might be arguing for pleasures (or rights?) that were taken for granted in bygone eras, but that doesn't really cut the mustard. Did you know 'Heroin' was a brand name of a drug that was sold in pharmacies? Old laws get overturned for good reasons.
Posted by Bugsy, Saturday, 25 July 2015 12:48:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
First it was Rhrosty pulling figures out of his arse now it is Lego.

Lego wrote;

“Despite the reduction of firearm related suicides, the suicide rate actually rose. People considering suicide simply used another method.”

No it didn't. Suicide rates per 100,000 were rising alarmingly for the 25 years before the Port Arthur Massacre. From 1997 after the Howard gun buyback there has an equally steady decline to some of the lowest levels ever recorded.

http://www.mindframe-media.info/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/11868/Suicide-Figures-ABS-2015.pdf

Don't the pair of you get that it reveals just how little you really know and how sheep-like the both of you are at regurgitating easily refuted crap?

So Lego when you assert that the gun buyback was ineffective because 'suicide rates increased' then the opposite must be true if instead the rates had in fact declined. Since they have will you now be touting their effectiveness? Obviously not because being hypocritical is a small price to pay to maintain a soundly discredited but doggedly held mantra.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Saturday, 25 July 2015 1:49:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The problem, Bugsy, is that laws should be based on evidence and not on the emotional demands of some vocal pressure group.

Particularly not on the say-so of the unrepresentative, secret squirrel few, who are behind 'gun control' in Australia.

Maybe as someone with knowledge of gun control you might be so good as to detail exactly who is presently behind 'gun control' in Australia, the number of signed up members (since it boasts 'Australia' in its name), the sources of its funds and how they are expended (details of independent audits would be nice since it always has the begging bowl out) and what links it has to foreign interests and to political parties (the NSW Greens?).

If others are involved, what specifically is their interest and what role do they play?

Y'know, the ordinary information that any responsible organisation or political lobby group should be providing as a matter of course.

After all, you wouldn't want to be taking the word of a secretive outfit, with connections that conceal their business with 'gun control' as 'gun control' conceals its links with them and their probable support and funding.

On the other hand there are legitimate associations of the highly respectable citizens with firearms licences who have satisfied the rigorous checks including character and are known to be upright and reliable. However you wouldn't have a bar of what they say.

'Gun control'(sic) where the political parties are concerned is all about political spin: buying votes with fear and not addressing the real underlying fundamental, thorny issues. You are happy with that though.
Posted by onthebeach, Saturday, 25 July 2015 2:20:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think the difference between us and America is the purpose of owning a gun. When America's constitution was established the right to bear arms was inserted to protect the individuals from the government, not each other. Considering how much power the church had in the middle ages in Europe the right to bear arms was created to allow the people ultimate freedom from the tyrant. In australia, by comparison a revolution would be virtually impossible and a civil war laughably one sided because of the illiteracy of the people in using and handling weapons.

While many people praise, rightly, the removal of slavery in the USA let's not forget that it came about through an armed public which allowed the civil war to be successful.
Posted by Prebs, Saturday, 25 July 2015 8:02:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To Steelredux.

OK, I submitted my figures from memory, and I admit that I got it wrong.

We have two premises here. Yours appears to be, that reducing the number of firearms reduces suicides, and that this is born out by your graph. If that was correct, the USA and Switzerland must have the highest suicide rates in the world. And those countries with very strict firearm laws must have the lowest suicide rates in the world.

Mine premise is, that the very wide discrepancies in world wide suicide rates and crime rates is more a factor of cultural conditioning than the mere presence of firearms.

Lets look at Japan and Mexico.

Japan has probably the highest suicide rate in the world because it's culture stresses that those who violate the nations cultural norms (or WU) should torment themselves with feelings of shame that make the Christian concept of shame seem lenient by comparison. Suicide is seen as an honourable way out for those who have erred in a big way. Japan also has extremely strict firearm laws. It is also supposed to have a very low crime rate, but things in Asia are not always what they seem. Japan is the only country in the world that has no problem having a criminal class with semi official status. Judges, politicians and mob bosses are regularly seen together disporting themselves in nightclubs and brothels, while too many people and bagmen who know too much seem to have a habit of "suiciding" late at night from tall buildings.

Mexico has extremely strict firearm laws, a murder rate (from memory) about 15 times higher than Australia, and a very low suicide rate. Suicide is considered unacceptable because the catholic culture considers suicide a mortal sin.

Therefore, culture is more important than the mere presence of firearms in suicide rates, and since crime rates can be independent of firearm availability (eg Switzerland and the rural parts of Australia), culture is more important than firearm availability in crime rates.
Posted by LEGO, Saturday, 25 July 2015 9:15:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 25
  11. 26
  12. 27
  13. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy