Primary Response

[ozhunter]

What occurred is a tragedy in anyones terms and my thoughts are with the families of the victims.

Saying that firearms should be banned from civilian society is as extreme on one end of the scale as the US gun culture is extreme on the other end.

I see no reason for Joe Average to possess an assault rifle. Semi automatic weapons are fine for situations like high volume pest control, but semi-automatic is different to a firearm that has a rate of fire up wards of 1000 rounds per minute, or even one that is capable of controlled bursts. If you have a genuine need for a semi-automatic rifle, have one and use it, but only for the reason you gave to get it in the first place. AFAIAC, the penalties for illegal ownership and/or use of firearms are too lax by a long stretch in this country, (along with a lot of other laws). Note I said illegal ownership/use. Why should I be persecuted because of the actions of someone else.

I own firearms. I have been around them all my life. I use them for recreation and for business. My kids use them regularly, under my supervision. I am not a mass murderer, mentally unbalanced despot walking the streets with an assault weapon under my jacket, and nor are my kids, and I object to being placed in the same basket as people that do, and calling for a civilian ban of firearms based on what one of these people do, does just that.

Saying that banning firearms from civilian society will prevent more shootings is a pipe dream.Regardless of how tough gun laws are, those that want them badly enough will get them. This latest incident is proof; his mother purchased the firearms, because he was concerned about background checks (so I read). Only threat of death or long term prison (not prison like we have here, a prison in China) are any deterrent.

The black market in firearms is as strong as ever in this country (the cops are doing their best) despite the millions that were wasted on the buy-backs. I doubt you'd get the required stats, but I'd bet a large percentage of the firearms bought by the government where rubbish that couldn't be used to harm a flea, let alone kill someone, simply because they where paying money for them.

Don't bash law abiding citizens because of the actions or others.

For the record, I believe the gun-culture is OTT in the US. That is my opinion, but I don't live there nor have a I been exposed to their culture by living in it. Nor does that mean I think firearms should be removed from civilian society altogether.

IMO, if people are so interested in stopping something from occuring again, push for more action on people like Robert Mugabe and a 20 gallon bucket full of other third world leaders. There are no statistics, and most of it is not reported, but many scores of people are killed, or die as a direct result of action, or inaction, by these people, every week. Most won't talk about, but get someone from somewhere like Zimbabwe to talk about atrocities perpetrated on the people. It will sicken you to your very core. Or closer to home, help put a stop the illegal drug trade (stop it, not legalise it)or the people smugglers that scoff at our weak and do-gooder attitude to the boat problem.

[pmcgee]

I believe I heard (ABC) - but can't back it up - that the national gun homicide rate halved after the gun buy-back.

[ozhunter]

I believe I heard (ABC) - but can't back it up - that the national gun homicide rate halved after the gun buy-back.

From The Australian Institute of Criminlogy

"The percentage of homicides committed with a firearm continued a declining trend which began in 1969. In 2003, fewer than 16% of homicides involved firearms. The figure was similar in 2002 and 2001, down from a high of 44% in 1968."

I would expect that the number of firearm related homocides would drop after an event such as Port Arthur and the ensueing media coverage and buy back (I didn't say all the firearms handed in where rubbish), but it was already on a downward trend, again that doesn't surprise me. Society changed a lot from 1968 to 2003. People became increasingly more willing to report crime and attitudes and what was accepted changed as well, that's my opinion anyway.

[Big Shed]

I believe I heard (ABC) - but can't back it up - that the national gun homicide rate halved after the gun buy-back.

It would be more interesting to know what happened to the total homicide rate?

Were fewer people killed because there were fewer guns around, or were the same number killed but by different means?

Just as a casual observation, there appear to a lot more knifes around and a lot more people prepared to use them.

[ozhunter]

It would be more interesting to know what happened to the total homicide rate?

Were fewer people killed because there were fewer guns around, or were the same number killed but by different means?

Just as a casual observation, there appear to a lot more knifes around and a lot more people prepared to use them.

From the same website

"The Australian Institute of Criminology has been monitoring homicides in Australia since 1989. Homicide includes murder, manslaughter and infanticide, but excludes driving-related fatalities unless these occur in the course of a criminal event. In 2005-06 there were 283 homicide incidents in Australia, resulting in 301 victims, committed by 336 offenders. This represents an increase from the previous year, although overall it appears that homicide incidents are in decline. The figure below shows the number of homicide incidents in Australia from 1989-90 to 2005-06. There has been a statistically significant downward trend in the incidence of homicide in Australia over this 17 year period (Kendall's tau = -0.42; p=.02)."

I agree on knives Fred.

[Bushmiller]

Regardless of statistics, a gun is a gun. From my point of view the only people who should have a gun are the Police and Army, full stop. There should be absolutely no reason why a civilian should own a gun. All the stats in the world doesn't temper the fact that children were killed.

Scott

I understand your sentiment, but I would suggest that ownership of guns should be restricted to people with a legitimate reason. To give you some idea, a farmer is a civilian but he may also need a gun for feral animal control. He may also need a gun to humanely put down sick or injured domestic animals. I am just pointing out that we have to be careful how we delineate.

I would also state for the record I have never owned a gun and when I had sick animals I used to ask a neighbour to come over and shoot them for me. Sounds callous I know, but the choice is lingering and painful death or quick and merciful death.

It is quite difficult to obtain a gun in Oz and a protracted process. I don't believe it is difficult in the US and there is a vast array of weapons available. We are talking about a hugely different culture and very different legislation.

Regards
Paul

[jimbur]

i see in today's news that the NRA have come out in favour of the status quo. They suggest that armed guards should be patrolling the schools! I don't know how that fits in with the mantra of small government and lower taxes.

[FenceFurniture]

Yes I did see that Jim. As we know, the solution to the gun problem is more guns.

Ozhunter, I've been wondering when you might drop in here. I think a debate such as this is quite incomplete without the veiws of someone such as yourself (i.e. a responsible gun owner/user).

Btw, has anyone noticed the distinct lack of hysteria in this thread so far? Wonder how long that will last....

[jimbur]

Btw, has anyone noticed the distinct lack of hysteria in this thread so far? Wonder how long that will last....

I, and I suppose many others, own or have owned guns. I needed them for vermin and the occasionally putting down of a sick animal but when I moved into a township I didn't see the point in having them anymore.
We do have a different attitude and, I feel, are more likely to trust the next bloke than to see him as a threat. Perhaps I'm getting old but I can't see that happening when you see guns as a solution.

[A Duke]

i see in today's news that the NRA have come out in favour of the status quo. They suggest that armed guards should be patrolling the schools! I don't know how that fits in with the mantra of small government and lower taxes.

An interesting point, reading farther on this is that one third of the schools already have armed guards.
Regards

[Vernonv]

I must agree whole heartedly with Ozhunter's comments. I also have no issue with the restrictions on semi-auto weapons, however I think the general firearm restrictions are overly restrictive, while the punishments for illegal use are too low.

To me, those that call for a ban on all firearms are either ignorant or possible just arrogant (or maybe a bit of both). Ignorant of the benefits firearms have in society and the low risk they actually pose, or arrogant to the needs/wants of those who use firearms in their work, sport or hobby.

Life is full of risk and it is near impossible to eliminate it. Are firearms in society are risk? ... certainly, but I believe the risks are far outweighed by the benefits. Plus in the grand scheme of things there are a lot greater risks out there ... take alcohol for instance - it has a huge impact/cost on society (for both adults and children) yet there is no real benefit to society (note that I do enjoy a drink ). Maybe those wanting a full ban on firearms need to refocus where there efforts can pay the biggest dividend in reducing risk.

[FenceFurniture]

Just to be clear on my position - it's the assault rifles that can do so much damage, and serve no civilian need that I would like to see banned.

Vernon, I think that alcohol does serve a social function, to some extent anyway. Bit of a loosener etc. To go a little further (and it might be a bit silly, but...) one of my best mates and I forged a frienship because we used to go out on the balcony at work for a smoke, and subsequently got to more relaxed chatting etc (i.e. more social conversation rather than work).

[ozhunter]

i see in today's news that the NRA have come out in favour of the status quo. They suggest that armed guards should be patrolling the schools! I don't know how that fits in with the mantra of small government and lower taxes.

In the current climate there, this might go some way toward reducing the occurrence of these shootings. I cannot see an easy fix for them though. If they try and restrict firearm ownership too much, it might trigger groups like local militia (of which there are plenty) to think they have had their rights impinged and take action. That doesn't bear thinking about, but given the attitude toward maintaining freedom, you never know. Once again, the opinions I have formed about the militia and the thinking of the American people have been formed from the outside. Maybe some of our US friends could chime in.

Ozhunter, I've been wondering when you might drop in here. I think a debate such as this is quite incomplete without the veiws of someone such as yourself (i.e. a responsible gun owner/user).

I have stayed away until I saw the tone that things would take. Often this subject sends people from 37° to 110° instantly, and the conversation serves no purpose.

Btw, has anyone noticed the distinct lack of hysteria in this thread so far? Wonder how long that will last....

It will stay that way, at least from my stand point anyway.


And lets give a hooray to auto save. I've had three goes at posting this, our internet is pretending to be second hand chainsaw ATM

[Vernonv]

FF you could have substituted a coffee or a tea for that cigarette - same "social" effect, not nearly as risky.

I guess my point is that there are a lot of things we "accept" in society that are "risky". As far as I'm concerned (and statistically speaking in Australia) firearms are no where near the top.

[FenceFurniture]

FF you could have substituted a coffee or a tea for that cigarette - same "social" effect, not nearly as risky.

Vernon, the (minor) point was that we had to go to a designated area, and were therefore thrown together. C & T can still be consumed wherever your desk is.

We were working in Sales at the time (investment properties) and it was a useful technique to excuse one's self from the clients..."Well, I'm just going out for a durrie, so you might like to have a chat while I'm gone" coz they really needed to have a chat by this time.