Australian gun buyback explained.

[TripleR]

Great to see the posts from Australian TBN members. I don't really think one can draw links to what works/doesn't work one place or the other, but I know much more after reading this and the articles posted than I did before and that's always a good thing.

 

[charlz]

This video might explain it pretty well:

Gun Control in Australia

 

[clemsonfor]

The most common deaths now are probably suicides, and bikies shooting each other. Neither are a threat to me or my family. Frankly the more bikies and drug runners who kill each other the better as far as I'm concerned. I dont mix with them or care about them. For the average person Australia IS a safer place than it otherwise would have been. .

The problem with "bikies" which i guess equates to our gangs/meth head types is that yea i dont mix with them either. Dont live in an area like they do or go around them. But they do go looking in area's like most of us here live in for the next plact to rob. They do home invasions as a source of revenue, looking for cash and taking anything they can turn into a buck to fund thier operations or get thier next fix. this includes stealing our guns when they brteak in. Not sayin your not a safer country than the US. Our crime stats clearly show where the crime is. Metro areas with Population of over 250K have a 2x greater violent crime rate than the rest of the US. Also areas in our country with the worst rate of gunvolence and historical violence also have the nations strickest gun laws. Look at New York City, wahington DC and Chicago (the murder capital of the world), atlanta and many california cities on the coast. All these areas either have a Pistol ban or a magazine restriction!!!

 

[dave1949]

The problem with "bikies" which i guess equates to our gangs/meth head types is that yea i dont mix with them either. Dont live in an area like they do or go around them. But they do go looking in area's like most of us here live in for the next plact to rob. They do home invasions as a source of revenue, looking for cash and taking anything they can turn into a buck to fund thier operations or get thier next fix. this includes stealing our guns when they brteak in. Not sayin your not a safer country than the US. Our crime stats clearly show where the crime is. Metro areas with Population of over 250K have a 2x greater violent crime rate than the rest of the US. Also areas in our country with the worst rate of gunvolence and historical violence also have the nations strickest gun laws. Look at New York City, wahington DC and Chicago (the murder capital of the world), atlanta and many california cities on the coast. All these areas either have a Pistol ban or a magazine restriction!!!

We don't know what the murder or gun-related crime rates would be without those bans. A simple pistol ban allows LEO's to remove the gun from circulation, at least. I think the reality is that guns are more likely to be confiscated from those who draw LE attention to themselves through gang activity, domestic violence, etc. I wonder how many illegal/unregistered guns are owned by law-abiding citizens where those bans exist?

The crime environment in our large metro areas is probably as different from our rural areas, as it is between the US and Australia. If different cultures (US/Australia) require different approaches, then the same would be true of needing different approaches in metro and rural areas within the US.

 

[GolfAddict]

We don't know what the murder or gun-related crime rates would be without those bans. A simple pistol ban allows LEO's to remove the gun from circulation, at least. I think the reality is that guns are more likely to be confiscated from those who draw LE attention to themselves through gang activity, domestic violence, etc. I wonder how many illegal/unregistered guns are owned by law-abiding citizens where those bans exist?

The crime environment in our large metro areas is probably as different from our rural areas, as it is between the US and Australia. If different cultures (US/Australia) require different approaches, then the same would be true of needing different approaches in metro and rural areas within the US.

True enough. And we also don't know what murder or gun-related crime rates would be in current non-ban areas if bans were to be put in place.

Wonder what history might tell us? Does anyone know where there may be historical stats of gun crime rates in Chicago, NY, etc., pre-ban vs now? Similar stats for areas that have loosened their laws, such as allowing concealed carry? Not sure how definitive it would be, but would be an interesting comparison.

 

[hosspuller]

The crime environment in our large metro areas is probably as different from our rural areas, as it is between the US and Australia. If different cultures (US/Australia) require different approaches, then the same would be true of needing different approaches in metro and rural areas within the US.

This argument favors a state and local approach to gun laws. This would pass constitutional review since the limit is on Federal Gov't action. Not state action. Although some states have 2nd amendment rights written into their constitution.

Very glad I don't live in NY or CA. (I once did... years ago)

 

[Don87]

This argument favors a state and local approach to gun laws. This would pass constitutional review since the limit is on Federal Gov't action. Not state action. Although some states have 2nd amendment rights written into their constitution.

Very glad I don't live in NY or CA. (I once did... years ago)

Some states also have the 'Castle Doctrine", Thank you Governor Corbett!

 

[Don87]

Politics & general individual perception don't necessarily equate to reality.....we've allowed the Australian "nanny" government to create/lead false presumptions post our "gun buy back" - the facts indicate we now have greater legal & illegal gun pwnership, gun crime with illegal automatic/assault type weapons has escalated, crime overall has increased & the population feels less safe/secure.............

Sure the article presents the how & the political/media induced "why", but fails entirely to address/support the outcome with any resilent facts: -

Interestingly the first so called "statistic" John Howard relies upon to support the 1996 reforms is the so called "wide consensus" of reduction in suicide, cutting firearm suicides by 74% - what he fails to mention is that the suicide in Australia remains significantly higher than the USA, (per 100,000 people) +7% in ages 15-24 & +22% in ages 25-34......so using Johnny's flawed logic one could also argue more liberal gun ownership prevents suicide (?) .....

John Howard also attributes to the 1996 reforms that there has not been a subsequent single massacre (of more than 4 victims) in Australia; again a flawed logic in that comparatively New Zealand ( a country that continues with legal ownership of semi/auto weapons & statistical historically similar mass shootings/gun owership to Australia prior to 1997) hasn't suffered any tragic event post 1996 either ......???

Despite John Howard's view & self praise of his initiative, most reseach/statistics would support if the amount our government allocated to the gun buy back was diverted for example to mental health/welfare far greater long term tangible socio/economic benefits would have been produced (with less risk of another massacre).

I think you'll find many more views/facts of Australians & others in the thread - http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/rural-living/267124-could-aussie-tell-us-how-9.html

Unfortunately, IMO gun control is not as simple, nor with the perceived outcomes as our politicians & the media would like to have us all believe - what may or may not work in Australia is (again IMHO) largely irrelevant to the gun debate in the USA, this is an issue your citizens & government need to work through for appropriate resolution in a different culture/society.

I'm neither pro nor anti gun control, we need to hold government accountable for informing/acting upon all the facts/anticipated outcomes in a balanced approach to all socio/economic issues, benefits & costs - Australia at great socio/economic cost instituted gun reforms/buy backs in 1996 (& with arguably zero/neglible positive benefit/outcomes) directly from the tragic massacre in the same year of 35 innocent victims by a single deranged maniac at Port Arthur.
As tragic & confronting as gun massacres are, historically they are sporadic/extremly infrequent in Australia.....And yet interestingly, the Australian Federal/State Government & society remains correspondingly complacent in creating similar levels of all encompassing reforms/financial commitments & funding to address issues where there's signifcantly greater risk to life.............. such as bushfire mitigation/defence , a seasonally regular catastrophic event/threat with associated much more gross loss of life/property -in 2009 we tragically lost 173 people in the Victorian bushfires - with the majority of fires caused by clashing or fallen power lines or deliberately lit, already in 2013 upwards of 100+houses have been lost & many lives risked......concerningly of all the "firebugs" charged with lighting current fires let out on bail so their civil liberties are not infringed........and the power companies are not tasked with securing power lines more adequately above or better still below ground in fire prone areas......

This is one of the 'best written posts' I've seen here on TBN.

Thank you

 

[westcliffe01]

Sir, are you aware that any conviction for domestic violence makes you a prohibited person for life ? And that local law enforcement will come to your home to seize all your firearms to dispose of as they wish ? Did you notice question i on the ATF form 4473 (and it is a FELONY to lie on that form = no guns forever)

"i. Have you ever been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence? (See Instructions for Question 11.i.) "

Our problem is not that there are not enough laws, but that they are not enforced and liberal judges do not charge perpetrators with the crimes they committed. Over 90% of police fatalities are from felons with multiple arrest records and those on parole. Over 2/3 of gunshot VICTIMS have over 11 arrest records and know the shooter. But Piers does not want to talk about WHO is getting shot or WHY.

We don't know what the murder or gun-related crime rates would be without those bans. A simple pistol ban allows LEO's to remove the gun from circulation, at least. I think the reality is that guns are more likely to be confiscated from those who draw LE attention to themselves through gang activity, domestic violence, etc. I wonder how many illegal/unregistered guns are owned by law-abiding citizens where those bans exist?

The crime environment in our large metro areas is probably as different from our rural areas, as it is between the US and Australia. If different cultures (US/Australia) require different approaches, then the same would be true of needing different approaches in metro and rural areas within the US.

 

[dave1949]

Sir, are you aware that any conviction for domestic violence makes you a prohibited person for life ? And that local law enforcement will come to your home to seize all your firearms to dispose of as they wish ? Did you notice question i on the ATF form 4473 (and it is a FELONY to lie on that form = no guns forever)

"i. Have you ever been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence? (See Instructions for Question 11.i.) "

Our problem is not that there are not enough laws, but that they are not enforced and liberal judges do not charge perpetrators with the crimes they committed. Over 90% of police fatalities are from felons with multiple arrest records and those on parole. Over 2/3 of gunshot VICTIMS have over 11 arrest records and know the shooter. But Piers does not want to talk about WHO is getting shot or WHY.

I guess I should ask if you know you are not in the thread about Piers Morgan?
The question of enforcing gun laws is complex, but not one-sided. The NRA and GOP's Fast and Furious Lies | The Nation

I think if you opened your perspective, you would find that the NRA actively limits the potential effectiveness of guns laws. One, by weakening proposed legislation, and two, by campaigning against anyone who might favor better gun laws. It reeks to then say our gun laws are useless. Now, I don't know how effective better gun laws would be, but the NRA doesn't want you to find out.

Our LEO's shouldn't have to worry that their lives are endangered by some punk with a gun every time they pull over a car. If you have a solution to that problem, please speak up.