Suicide

It is simplistic, damned BS and an insult to the many professionals in government and the private sector who have been working so hard on initiatives aimed at reducing suicide to claim as some here have done, that it was the gun buy-back that was responsible instead.

Bugsy,

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

Let us not ignore your statement because it simply isn't true.

Many countries with strict firearms laws have high gun related crime rates, far higher than the USA.

"• The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people
• But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people
• Puerto Rico tops the world's table for firearms murders as a percentage of all homicides - 94.8%. It's followed by Sierra Leone in Africa and Saint Kitts and Nevis in the Caribbean"
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

By the reasoning of those opposed to gun ownership, the USA with the highest ownership rate in the world should have the highest gun crime rate but it doesn't; I wonder why?

Has the subject research by Andrew Leigh and another, ever been subjected to peer review in any of the well recognised scientific journals? I don't mean in the occupational interest mags, but for peer review in a scientific journal of substance.

If not why not? Because it does appear contentious, even from a layperson's normal reading.

Here is an alternative view (excerpt) from John R. Lott, Jr., President, Crime Prevention Research Center, Swarthmore, United States,

"Conclusion
It is very hard to look at the raw data on firearm suicides and homicides and
see any benefits from the gun buyback. In 2004, the US National Research
Council released a report reaching this same conclusion (p. 95): “It is the
committee’s view that the theory underlying gun buy-back programs is
badly flawed and the empirical evidence demonstrates the ineffectiveness of
these programs.”
It is very difficult to use Australian data to evaluate the impact of a law
because you only have one experiment and it is difficult to disentangle other
factors that might be coming into play. When there is only one experiment it
is not even possible to disentangle two different factors that might have
changed at the same time."
http://tinyurl.com/knwhb34

tbc..

Since Steelredux is missing in action, I guess I will turn the blowtorch on Bugsy. Although, have the feeling that he is another "hit and run" artist, who runs into the arena, lets fly with a few insults and sneery one liners, then runs back into the stands thinking that he is a hero.

Your premise is, that communities with strict gun control have low crime rates. That is just not true. Australia once had almost non existent firearm laws and a very low crime rate. Same for England and New Zealand. The example of Switzerland completely blows your theory out of the water. So too, even today in Australia, those areas of Australia where firearm ownership is high are the rural areas where violent crime rates (if you take out the aborigines) is very low. Some country towns have never had an armed robbery in their entire history.

If you stopped parroting the slogans of the anti gun, animal loving vegans, and thought for yourself, you might have the intelligence to figure out that what I just wrote should give you pause to think again.

Law abiding societies do not need strict gun laws but violent societies do. Australian society was once very law abiding, but something happened to change that. You don't want to think about what that could be, because that is too hard. Better to just adopt a superior air and mouth off against "old fogies" who you obviously detest, and sneer at guns and gun owners.

If you knew your history like us "old fogies", you might have cause to think again. England once had the lowest homicide rate ever recorded in the industrialised world, and almost non existent firearm laws. That changed in the late 20's when the British government made firearm ownership very hard to obtain. That was not in response to rising crime rates, but because the British government feared an armed socialist revolution. After the Dunkirk debacle, the British government appealed to sporting shooters in the USA to donate their rifles to Britain, so the British could defend themselves.

contd from previous post..

and regarding suicide, from Australian researchers,

"Results
• There was no evidence of an impact of the 1996 firearms restrictions on
firearm suicide rates among young people (aged 15 to 24, and 25 to 34, years).
• Where structural breaks were found, they typically occurred a number of years
before the 1996 legislative changes.
Conclusions
• The current study confirms and extends Lee and Suardi’s (2010) finding of a
lack of structural breaks in firearm suicide around the time of the 1996
legislative reforms.
• The results suggest that the significant financial expenditure associated with
Australia’s firearms method restriction measures may not have had any impact
on youth suicide.
• Overall, these findings contribute to the growing body of evidence
documenting the limitations of various forms of method restriction as a means
of addressing youth suicide.
• This highlights the importance of early detection of (and response to) suicide
risk factors in younger people, as well as the need for careful evaluation of the
costs and benefits of interventions intended to contribute to suicide prevention."

Suicide Prevention and Method Restriction: Evaluating the Impact
of Limiting Access to Lethal Means among Young Australians
McPhedran, S., & Baker, J. (2012).
Archives of Suicide Research, 16: 135-146

The 'gun control' abolitionists are a secretive, unethical crew. Their spin deliberately conflates the unlawful gun ownership and offences of criminals - which in Australia is almost invariably the Middle Eastern dominated outlaw motorcycle gangs - with the many thousands of highly respectable citizens who have sought and obtained licences, who are the most unlikely people to offend, ever.

<Ethnic crime: Middle Eastern bikie gangs at war in Sydney

On Monday July 29, 2013 two Middle Eastern males with links to bikie gangs and terrorists were killed just kilometres - and minutes - apart, becoming the latest victims of Sydney's out-of-control gun violence..

But it’s not just turf wars.
One former counter terrorism officer, who asked not to be named, said the gun culture had become so ingrained among Middle Eastern males in southwest Sydney that they have taken to settling so-called “honour” disputes with guns.
“The culture is all guns and drugs. If someone looks at your wife the wrong way, you shoot them. They think they’re bulletproof and they have this wilful disregard for authority.”
For the past two years there has been more than one shooting incident reported to police every three days, centred in an arc from Punchbowl and Bankstown to Auburn and Berala, but with shootings as far afield as Kings Cross, Bellevue Hill and Birchgrove..

The State Crime Command’s Middle Eastern Organised Crime Squad launched Operation Apollo in February 2013 to try to get on top of gun violence. They have arrested more than 320 people, laid more than 600 charges, and seized more than 80 firearms.
But the shootings continue."

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/criminal-bikie-gangs-boost-numbers-with-young-muslim-and-eastern-european-recruits/story-fnihsrf2-1226733840346

The 'gun control' abolitionists are about disarming legally licensed Australia Ordinary reputable citizens, farmers, competition shooters and game hunters are their targets. They are not about criminals.

What is especially concerning is that the few activists (some allegedly on the public payroll and moonlighting?) who are the movers and shakers behind 'gun control' -their euphemism for abolition- are so guarded and secretive about their political and other links, domestic and overseas. Why?