The inference that the Great Gun Buy-Back was not a success could be drawn from the NSW Nationals policy statements in the run-up to Saturday's voting.
Apart from promising reforms and some relief from Labor's harsh gun laws, (funny, I thought that the Gun Laws were Liberal Party Laws that were forced on the States by unprecedented blackmail by the Federal Liberal Govt) they have this to say:

"Labor's firearms laws have not stopped crimes being committed with firearms, in the last two years robbery with a firearm [and therefore potential murder] in innner Western Sydney is up by 32.1% and in Inner Sydney is up by 110.9%"

Ref. NSW Recorded Crime Statistics. June Qtr. 2006.

There you have it folks, straight from the horse's mouth.
The same horse that will come second in the Futility Stakes at the NSW Meeting on Saturday next.

You never cease to amuse. You would of course believe what they say about the statistics and yet not believe what they say about whose fault it is. Only because one statement fits what you already believe and the other doesn't. Thats objective, NOT.

Why don't you take a look at the source?:

http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/pages/bocsar_mr_2006qrt3

Ok, it's the September Quarter, not June, but you can still get the idea.

Inner Sydney, robbery with firearms: up 50% total recorded cases in increased by 35 from 70 in 2005, for a TOTAL in the 12 mnths ending Spt. 2006 of 105 cases.

Inner Western Sydney: up by 70% from 24 cases in 2005 to 41 cases in 2006.

In TOTAL the number of cases has increased by 51 incidents in those 2 regions. If you look at NSW in total, crime is DOWN, across the board. It's a goddamn crimewave. Run for the hills! Arm every responsible citizen! 51 robberies with a firearm! Just out of interest, how many criminals do you think it takes to do 51 robberies in a year?

But I guess that the NSW coalition doesn't go in for cynical vote grabbing from rural areas, they are just concerned with the welfare of the poor crime ridden residents of inner Sydney.

Bugsy, I really wonder what point you are trying to make. I think (I might be wrong) that Is Mise is just making a case that self defense wiht a firearm is a legitimate use for one, and therefore it should be a reason to issue a licence.

You seem to imply that he is a complete idiot and that it doesn't matter becauses there aren't enough crimes to call it a crime wave. Is that right?

If so, I don't think whether there is or is not a high level of these crimes ON AVERAGE is very relevant. Risk factors apply to life situation for individuals. One homicidal ex-husband is a terrifyingly high risk factor for his ex-wife, the kids, her lawyer and the neighbour that dobbed him to the cops. On average that is a handful of lives that don't count. To the people involved it is life or death.

And just who is more likely to own or want to use a firearm? A "homicidal" ex-husband or his ex-wife, children, lawyer or neighbours?

And which one of these people is more likely to actually use one?

To paraphrase Is Mise, if you see a fellow citizen who is threatening another, would you give them the means to carry through with that threat? Or would you attempt to remove those means?

Dear Bugsy,

In my last post I was being just a trifle sarcastic; you know taking a poke at the Nationals who are now blaming the State Labour Party for the woes inflicted upon us by John "I now wear a Leather Jacket" Howard* and the Federal Coalition. Now listen carefully, Bugsy, the Coalition consists of the Liberals and the Nationals.
So the Nationals are laying the blame on Labor for the very laws that they brought in.
Don't you see the irony in that?

* "Just like my mate George W.".

Oh sure, it's ironic alright. It's even doubly so when you're attacking people who happen to agree with you. I love it!