Foxy,

Do you mean that they were murders carried out by an individual, if so; Martin Bryant was an individual?

If you mean that they were slayings of an individual then, most obviously you are wrong as all of them were multiple slayings.

"More guns means more crime" and "More guns mean less crime" are both open to interpretation but the US is getting more guns and the crime rate is falling and our crime rate is falling as we get more guns so, is it not obvious that more guns equal less crime?

If "More guns mean more crime" why are the crime rates falling?

//Then more guns means more crime?

Only goes to shew that the above is a foolish simplistic statement.//

At what point did I say that, Mr. Iceberg lettuce?

I was simply pointing out that your claim about 'more guns since whenever' isn't very meaningful if you don't factor in the population growth since whenever.

Apparently not content to attempt to employ misleading statistical arguments in the mistaken belief that we won't see through them, you now feel it necessary to try and put words in my mouth.

You're just not trying any more, are you Mr. Iceberg lettuce?

//The US has more guns than ever but crime is falling and the same goes for Australia//

Well that's good to know, but I'm not sure what relevance it has to the discussion at hand. We're not talking about crime in general, Mr. Iceberg lettuce. We're talking about limited subset of crimes. It may surprise you to learn that there all manner of illegal activities one can engage in without the use of firearms. Do you really think that rates of gun ownership have any bearing on the rates of, say, wire fraud?

I think you should stick to your cute little ethical dilemmas about teachers with guns. You're not very good at the third kind of lie.

Issy, is it true that you will be on the Martin Bryant Float at the next G & L mardi gras? That't the Gun & Loony mardi gras, not the other one tonight.

Toni,

You're starting to get it.

The mantra "More guns mean more crime"
is a stupid statement, and just unprovable as "More guns means less crime"

and there hasn't been a lucid observation on:

"Salt Lake City, Utah, teacher Kasey Hansen said the idea to arm herself in school began with the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, where 20 children and six adults died.

“It just really hit home that these teachers, all they could do was pile those kids in a corner and stand in front of them and hope for the best,” said Hansen, who carries a concealed handgun as she teaches special education students."

“I’m not here to tell all teachers that they have to carry a gun,” she said. “For me personally, I felt that it was more of a solution than just hiding in a corner and waiting.”

http://www.sltrib.com/news/2018/02/22/utah-already-allows-concealed-weapons-on-campus-could-arming-teachers-stop-shootings/

anyone care to tell this teacher where she is wrong and suggest a workable alternative for her?

Mass killings are multiple-casualty events.
There are shootings where criminal gangs are involved,
domestic violence or family violence springs from different
causes - all these are considered separately and do not
meet the federal definition of "mass killings."

Now to Australia's gun reforms?
The bottom line is - the reforms had the effect of
reducing the number of guns that are available in Australia.
This was strongly correlated with gun homicides and suicide
deaths on the wane.

Very few people would argue that there has been at least
some minimal benefit as a result of the gun reforms.
In Australia most of us don't revere guns in the same way
that Americans do. Of course, we have certain exceptions
who do but thankfully they are a minority who'll continue
baying at our heels. Best to walk away.

Foxy,

"The bottom line is - the reforms had the effect of
reducing the number of guns that are available in Australia.
This was strongly correlated with gun homicides and suicide
deaths on the wane."

Utter rot, there is no such correlation; gun homicides and suicides were falling at a steady rate before 1996 and continue to fall at a steady rate.
There are now more guns in Australia than before the buyback.

There was a sharp spike after the introduction of the new laws but no one attributes that upward spike to the introduction of the laws.