Dear Paul,

Prof. Rick Sarre, Professor of Law and Criminal Justice
at the University of South Australia (he teaches criminology)
wrote an article in the Salus Journal, V.3. No.3, 2015,
pg.1-13 that may be of interest.

In it Professor Sarre writes on gun control in Australia
from a criminological perspective. Social commentators insist
that guns make our nation safer. This essay questions these
assertions. The paper provides evidence to support a contrary
affirmation. That is - in order to have a reduction in gun
violence - there needs to be a reduction in the number of guns
generally and a continuation of the legal controls that
currently shape firearms policy in Australia.

It makes perfect sense.

http://www.salusjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2015/10/Sarre_Salus_Journal_Volume_3_Number_3_2015_pp_1-13.pdf

cont'd ...

Dear Paul,

Just a quick comment on leoj's constant attacks on
George Soros. Forbes magazine recently published a
list of the US billionaires who back and financially
support gun-control. Just to name a few:

Former New York City Mayor - Michael Bloomberg.
Bill Gates and his wife, Warren Buffet, Oprah Winfrey,
Paul Allen, Steve Ballmer, Rupert Murdoch, and of course
George Soros.

Gotta laugh.

Foxy,

" That is - in order to have a reduction in gun [car]
violence - there needs to be a reduction in the number of guns [cars] generally and a continuation of the legal controls that
currently shape firearms [motor vehicle] policy in Australia."

Makes sense, can also be applied to axes, knives, hammers et al.

Dear Is Mise,

You need to read the link by Professor Sarre.

What he actually questions is the fact that guns
make our nation safer and he provides evidence
to support a contrary affirmation. He makes it
quite clear that in order to have a reduction in
gun violence - there needs to be a reduction in
the number of guns generally and a continuation of
the legal controls that currently shape firearms
policy in Australia.

It can't be made any clearer. His essay talks about
gun control in Australia from a criminological
perspective.

You are being deliberately obtuse.

Foxy,

I'm not being deliberately anything, other than pointing out that his thinking can be applied across the board, and as cars and their drivers kill far more people than do guns, then cars ought to be well regulated. Motor vehicles are lethal weapons and in the wrong hands can be very deadly, as has been seen in England, in France and in Melbourne; the very least that can be done is that potential drivers be thoroughly vetted by the police and no one with a criminal history or anyone subject to a Domestic Violence Order should be allowed access to one.

Make Australia a safer place.

Foxy,

You posted a link that I thought was funny, in the sense of being both hilarious and strange.

"Gun violence has halved in Australia since laws were changed under the National Firearms Agreement adopted in the wake of the 1996 Port Arthur massacre."

The trend was downward for years before the 1996 laws and continued its overall downward trend, except that it peaked to a new high of violence AFTER the introduction of the laws (1998-99)
So that's wrong.
http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.html

"In 1987, five people in the Northern Territory and Western Australia were killed because Queensland’s laws allowed the sale of assault rifles. German tourist Joseph Schwab, named the Kimberley Killer by the press, drove across state borders for his killing spree."

Shwab did not have an assault rifle.
He had a Ruger Mini 14 Semi-automatic rifle, which is definitely NOT an assault rifle.

I could go on but two fundamental mistakes in the first paragraph are enough for now.