Is Mise, lets compare apples to apples, in the developed world the US rate is certainly much higher than other developed nations, Australia included, please explain your figures. If you want the US to look good simply throw in the lawless undeveloped nations of Africa where murder rates are totally unacceptable.

Is Mise, my acceptable figure for murders is zero, what is yours? Is it like your acceptable figure for deaths on Australia's roads, which you mockingly used the Easter carnage to take a cheap shot at The Greens. You seem to have a scant regard for human life, in your ideal world, there are these acceptable levels of unnecessary human deaths, be it war, roads or hunting. All some kind of occupational hazard, in your way of thinking, possible unfortunate, but necessary.

Paul,

Is Brazil developed, is Mexico, is Argentina?

Brazil : 25.2 murders/100,000 population.

Mexico : 21.5/100,000.

Argentina : 5.5/100,000.

and let us not forget South Africa, which is a developed nation, 31/100,000.

Is Russia a developed country?

You know, space flights, vast navy and air force, nuclear capability, impressive railways, magnificent buildings, big modern cities: 9.2 murders per 100,000 population.

The Greens appear to approve highly acceptable levels of murder, rape and assaults especially against the elderly.

Looks from the Wikipedia stats that the countries with no curbs on possession of guns and with untrammelled rule by drug lords and tribal savages lead the world in murder rates. Among the more civilised counties, the US murder rate appears to be more than fourfold Australia's. Thanks Mr Howard for standing up to the gunnies who can't enjoy their day without killing at least something.

What the stats, valuable resource though they are, don't show is the 10,000 or more Americans shot dead by other Americans through incompetence and sheer self-centred carelessness, as a result of the gun anarchy decreed by America's Slave Owners' Constitutional Amendment. The Wikipedia stats relate only to deliberate murder and even then the effect of gun anarchy is plain to see.

This latest ploy by a cross-bench bunch of rednecks in Canberra looks harmless in itself, but Harry Truman wisely advised that if a finger comes under the door stamp on it or it's followed by a hand and then an arm and is soon at your throat.

Is Mise I will spell it out for you. The Greens acceptable figure for murders per 100,000 people is ZERO a big fat naught. However from your above post you seem to favor 21.5 per 100,000 being a figure you highlighted from Mexico. What is the acceptable figure from The Shooters Party? Was it a item for discussion at your shooters jamboree, what was the consensus figure 50 100 maybe 1000?

Paul,

If the Greens' acceptable figure for murders is Zero why do they deny fellow citizens any means of self defence

"Principles.
7. That personal protection should never be regarded as a genuine reason for owning, possessing or using a firearm."

Why do they consider that a person in immediate fear of their life should not use a firearm to protect that life.
Consider a person attacked by a pack of dangerous dogs, should they not be allowed to use a firearm?

Julian,
" Thanks Mr Howard for standing up to the gunnies who can't enjoy their day without killing at least something."

Did you get out of the wrong side of the couch this morn?

"This latest ploy by a cross-bench bunch of rednecks in Canberra looks harmless in itself, but...."

What say you about 'The Parliamentary Friends of AFL"?

Will someone comment on Russia, is it or is it not a developed country?

For a broadening of the mind have a look at
http://gunssavelives.net/
and for a wealth of information see:
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18319&page=1