The Forum > General Discussion > Shock new research on gun law benefits
Shock new research on gun law benefits
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
-
- All
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
-
- All
The National Forum | Donate | Your Account | On Line Opinion | Forum | Blogs | Polling | About |
Syndicate RSS/XML |
|
About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy |
The AAP reports http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Gun-laws-havent-cut-murder-rates-study/2006/10/23/1161455654112.html aggressively dismissed the researchers’ credentials and extensively quoted Professor Chapman without mentioning his career of anti-gun activism, including authoring an extended gloat over their success ‘Over Our Dead Bodies: Port Arthur and Australia’s Fight for Gun Control’.
After ten years we should have a detailed cost-benefit analysis from the official umpire, the Australian Institute of Criminology, but we don’t. Why? Because the results on an objective basis do not justify the costs, and that is because the connection between gun control laws and the desired outcomes of less murder are not there. Only one outcome seems right: NO MASSACRES SINCE. But, we ask, what in the gun laws stops massacres while not preventing ordinary murders and suicides? Especially when at the time John Howard said he ‘did not for a second pretend that the laws would prevent future massacres’. The laws were to ‘make Australia safer’.
Now little-publicised research by forensic Psychiatrist Professor Mullen of Monash University supports an ugly truth: media reports and the activism itself may have been one of the causes of the Port Arthur Massacre., and the other massacres around Australia and the world. The evidence is here http://www.c-l-a-s-s.net/Ideas_Kill_-_Science_and_the_Massacre3.pdf
THe references in that paper paint a picture about why massacres may have stopped: not so much the laws, as 'the message' they inadvertently sent.