Monday, December 17, 2012
Australia proves - Gun bans equals increased crime
Cheers
armed robberies rose significantly and home invasions rose as well.
Moreover, assaults involving guns rose more than a 25% and murders with a gun rose nearly 20%.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/15/The-Aussie-Lesson-Less-Guns-More-Crime
And it will be MUCH WORSE in the US
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This topic is misleading in the extreme. I suspect the reference is a well known NRA publication taken from an un attributed ten year old letter to a minor news outlet in the US.
ReplyDeletePlease refer to Wicki "Gun politics in Australia" which will show official statistics for gun related deaths.
Please note however that despite my opposition to unlimited gun ownership, I acknowledge the increase in the use of knives in criminal attacks since the inception of the new gun laws. I do not claim Australia to be a less violent place following the new laws, it is however obvious that there are far less fatal attacks and a much higher survival rate. I believe suicide rates have fallen overall and suicide by firearm is now one of the lowest causes rather than the highest.
Cheers from Aussie.
At least you guys are being fiscally responsible and don't have to worry about an economic collapse.
ReplyDeleteYou know what will happen if the dollar collapses in the US? Our cities will burn, millions will die. Martial law will be declared, people will starve, it will be every man and woman for themselves.
Oh but the military will be just fine as it confiscates farms and food production
It's not a pretty thought, but that's the path we are headed down.
"You know what will happen if the dollar collapses in the US? Our cities will burn, millions will die. Martial law will be declared, people will starve, it will be every man and woman for themselves."
DeleteIF the dollar collapses? Have you ever looked at a long term chart of the dollar index? So far, the country is living off of digesting itself. The dollar is a piece of crap. BUT!, we can still go to giant box stores and buy cheap shit stocked by fellow Americans who work just enough hours to not get full time benefits.
The massive printing done by the Fed to prop up stock indexes and other asset classes has stayed sequestered. IE, it has not gone into the hands of those who will spend it. The days when we could predict an outcome based on economic thought a hundred years old are gone. I get that the zombie apocalypse is coming, but the martial law cry is getting a little long in the tooth.
Max you just have to get past the idea that people with wealth store it in a can in the back yard. Excess wealth is invested in places that will give a reasonable return. That investment provides capital for jobs to be created and new ideas to turn into industry.
DeleteYes stocks and bonds are important to savers at every level. Pensions are invested in all sorts of endeavors which will provide a future return.
You just have to get over your zero sum mindset.
William, you are finally starting to understand what I am saying even if you disagree with it. Excess wealth IS invested in places where it will get a return, and frequently on assets like stocks and bonds that rally no matter what when the Fed cuts rates. When I buy a stock hoping to sell it higher, I am not investing in the economy and I don't care what drives the price of my stock higher so long as it goes higher. If I own GE or some other company that slashes thousands of jobs, I'm happy because my stock will go up. If the Fed devalues the dollar further with rate cuts, I'm happy because it will fuel a rally that takes my stock up and I care nothing about the poor slob who wont' get a raise but will lose buying power and take a step backwards.
DeleteReal world capitalism does not work like Galt's Gulch capitalism. The wealthy in the real world are not Midas Muligan's looking for a Hank Reardon to invest in. They want to buy low and sell high and could, by and large, care less about what it takes to move their asset higher.
Max, one question. If a CEO continues to pay higher and higher wages, those not competitive in his industry, how do you figure that his company will succeed?
DeleteAfter all, except for the bail outs of selective industries, what happens when the balance sheet hits the fan?
It does no one, labor or executive, any good to run a company into the ground.
Open the stock page of the wall street journal. Look at the thousands of companies listed. You cannot tell me that every CEO of every company is only interested in greed. The overwhelming majority of them want to run a thriving company for the good of themselves, their shareholders, and their workers.
"Max, one question. If a CEO continues to pay higher and higher wages, those not competitive in his industry, how do you figure that his company will succeed?"
DeleteThat's a bullshit question that allows CEO's to continue screwing the working class. IF CEO salaries had not skyrocketed, IF working class wages had not been freaking stagnant, IF profits were getting crushed, IF productivity of workers had not gone up drastically while their wages didn't, that question might be relevant.
Your second para offers something for discussion. NO, I don't believe every CEO out there is a greedy piece of crap. But, the market is not kind to the ones who do not show a willingness to to keep labor crushed. Slash thousands of jobs, your stock will rally. Prove you can keep a lid on labor costs, your stock will rally. Fatten your bottom line in a shitty economy by keeping labor costs low, your stock will rally. It's far beyond greed of just CEO's, it's a societal shift that has occurred. We want to consume gobs of cheap shit and we want to believe that unchecked capitalism will bring prosperity to all. It's not working.
On the other side of the world, just a month after the 1996 Dunblane attack, a shooter in the town of Port Arthur, Tasmania, went on a rampage, killing 35 people in what is the worst single episode of such slaughter in Australian history. The then months-old old government of conservative Prime Minister John Howard — who would go on to rule for over a decade — initiated a sweeping set of reforms, even in the face of opposition from allies in Australia’s right wing. The new measures banned the sale and possession of all automatic and semiautomatic rifles and shotguns. Moreover, the government instituted a mandatory buyback scheme that compensated owners of newly illegal weapons. Between 1996 and ’98, some 700,000 guns were retrieved by the government and destroyed. The results have been tangible: A widely cited 2010 study in the American Journal of Law & Economics showed that gun-related homicides in Australia dropped 59% between 1995 and 2006. The firearm-suicide rate dropped 65%. There has been no mass shooting in Australia since the Port Arthur attack.
ReplyDeleteMick ... Of note in that comment is two words repeated twice. 'gun-related'. What the statement does not say is that while murder and suicide rates have dropped in recent years, neither can be directly linked to gun regulation. For instance the amount of new funds put into welfare services had gone up significantly and more aggressive suicide prevention programs. If your looking for a silver bullet to fix what ails a society, guns are a symptom, not a cause.
DeleteTheScott,
DeleteI agree with your last sentence.
I just wish we could prevent such horror as was inflicted on those poor children and the brave teachers and staff. I had a hard time getting over that.
Jean
A LITTLE GUN HISTORY
ReplyDeleteIn 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. >From 19...
29 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
The sun also rose and set during those times, and it continues to rise and set now. I see a link. Martial law is coming to the US soon!
DeleteThose who defend your "rights" under the second are no doubt content that your view is supportive of the "American Way”. Now we have the Pres and Joe Biden taking action, the NRA offering meaningful assistance (for that read obstruction) and the usual suspects clamoring for their rights to be protected.
ReplyDeleteSo, I ask you, what would those innocent children say if we could somehow bring them back? I think through the tears of pain and frustration at the actions of the adults in America, they would cry with one voice "take away the guns and take away the pain". As with the events a few miles from my home here in Tasmania, you may just have the catalyst to do something good for the generations to come. Please do not let the opportunity slip by.
Cheers from Aussie
"As with the events a few miles from my home here in Tasmania, you may just have the catalyst to do something good for the generations to come. Please do not let the opportunity slip by."
DeleteKingston, something I have long appreciated in your comments is a tone of what I would call, common sense. You are clearly no liberal, yet, your comments frequently contain a premise that there is such a thing as a greater good. I'm trying hard at this time to not be jaded. This IS a rare opportunity to do something that only a minority number of people would vehemently oppose. Yet, as I mentioned about our previous assault weapons ban in another thread, I seriously doubt our will to really do something about it.
In 1963, several years before I was born, some white supremacists dynamited a church in Alabama that killed four young black girls. Bombings weren't a rare occurrence in that state at that time, but it angered enough people that it did make a difference. Flash to today, I'd like to think this even was horrific enough, but, we've now had multiple events of grisly murder and all I am really hearing is a minutely focused discussion on whether we can finally put in place laws that at best, will put only a teensy bit of obstacle between a would be slaughterer and their weapons.
For vastly different reasons, I have to agree (largely) with the crowd that absolves weapons of most responsibility. That we focus so tightly on the weapons suggests to me we simply do not want to look any closer at what attitudes breed such a violent society. We can't legislate away intolerance and mindless hatred and we won't legislate funding to help create resources for those with mental illness. When I hear some politician of either party step up say, "I'm part of the problem", I might start to get optimistic we won't let this senseless slaughter be just another event we forget about as we move on.
"That we focus so tightly on the weapons suggests to me we simply do not want to look any closer at what attitudes breed such a violent society. We can't legislate away intolerance and mindless hatred and we won't legislate funding to help create resources for those with mental illness. When I hear some politician of either party step up say, "I'm part of the problem", I might start to get optimistic we won't let this senseless slaughter be just another event we forget about as we move on."
DeleteYes. I can agree with that.
Jean
The Daily pointed out in a Friday column that more Chicago residents -- 228 -- have been killed so far this year in the city than the number of U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan - 144 -- over the same period.
DeleteThe war zone-like statistics are not new. As WBEZ reports, while some 2,000 U.S. troops have been killed in Afghanistan since 2001, more than 5,000 people have been killed by gun fire in Chicago during that time, based on Department of Defense and FBI data.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/16/chicago-homicide-rate-wor_n_1602692.html
Gary Slutkin, founder of Cure Violence and a professor of Epidemiology and International Health at the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health, likened the trauma of gun violence to an infectious disease.
“We have to stop thinking about this entirely as a moral issue of good and bad, and more as a contagious process that requires an approach the same as we look at other infectious illnesses,” Slutkin said. “That means we have to look at who has been exposed, who is likely to do events, and offer them something that changes their thinking and the norms about violence.”
In Illinois, the debate over guns and gun laws have been simmering for decades, when in the early 1980s the city essentially banned handguns within the city limits. The move pitted city politicians, community activists, and anti-gun groups—all of whom had grown weary of city violence—against downstate hunters, Second-amendment ideologues and pro-gun groups.
Chicago continued to take a national lead in enacting some of the strictest gun laws in the country. In 1981, Morton Grove, a Chicago suburb, became the first municipality in the country to pass an outright ban on the possession, sale or transport of handguns. The National Rifle Association then went on a preemptive campaign across the country to push legislation that would stymie similar laws in other states.
In 1982, in the wake of assassination attempts on President Reagan and Pope John Paull II, Chicago introduced and passed an ordinance freezing handgun sales. The ban did little to slow gun violence in Chicago, as the crack-era of the mid-1980s fueled never-seen-before violence across the nation.
http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/12/20/in-newtowns-shadow-chicagos-bleak-gun-toll-goes-on/
And tonight our time in Tasmania, the Gun Lobby state that the Principal of the school should have had an MK 47 or some such automatic large cal weapon in her office " and this would have prevented the tragedy" I heard this from the man himself on PBS which we get here every afternoon.
ReplyDeleteWhat an absolute "crock of shite". Excuse please the American expression. This condemns the nation to becoming, not a defensive nation but an offensive one. Mr. Smith has a .25 cal rifle with a magazine holding 10 shells. Mr. Jones now has to get a .30 cal with 20 shells to make himself "safer".
Here is the solution, take away the guns from both of the above and your problem is solved. Can you not see the simple truth or has it all become too political?
Max. My thanks for the compliment but did the teachers or the children think of Elephants or Donkeys as the killer took their lives? I hope not, because both sides have nothing to feel good about at present.
Cheers from Aussie
Again cheers from a very sad Aussie
Kingston,
Delete"Here is the solution, take away the guns from both of the above and your problem is solved."
That might be easier said than done, yes? Taking away ALL guns would make it more difficult for these sickos, but it would also mean that for those who hunt (I could care less about hunting), they wouldn't be able to. Or, if hunting firearms were still allowed, it would still provide an avenue for the sickos to arm themselves. Assault weapons though? I have not been able to see the logic of allowing them.
Jean
Kingston,
Delete"both sides have nothing to feel good about at present."
Sorry, I left out a resounding "I AGREE", sir.
Jean
On another thread yesterday, I made a statement I thought might be over the top, but today, Lapierre has fully embraced it. His solution, To have GOOD guys with guns kill BAD guys with guns. What a freaking whack job.
ReplyDeleteAnd this morning our Australian news broadcasts were on about a further four fatalities in yet another shooting rampage. As appears the norm in recent events, the perpetrator was one of the dead. It seems to follow a pattern and is becoming so regular that I wonder is a sub set of characteristics developing within American society which threatens to lead to anarchy in the not too distant future. All the while of course the group I think of as the second amendment bullies will loudly proclaim that guns don’t kill.Well, they certainly cannot kill if they are not available.
ReplyDeleteCheers from Aussie
" It seems to follow a pattern and is becoming so regular that I wonder is a sub set of characteristics developing within American society which threatens to lead to anarchy in the not too distant future."
DeleteKingston,
I would be interested to hear you expand on this further. What characteristics do you mean?
Max
ReplyDeleteI am not a psychiatrist, an analyst a psychologist or any other kind of generally overpriced "ist" I am perhaps a "realist" and I watch the youth of the last decade grow into adults having in many cases been brought up as "latch key" kids. Their parents both work and the kids arrive home from school to an empty house and a computer. Immediately they enter the make believe world of computer games. Without parental supervision they are free to live out their fantasy and then to expand those fantasies until they become real.
We all know young adults who look to the computer rather than the family for support and entertainment and who have phantom friends on the computer but lack the interpersonal skills to interact with their peers in real life.
I am beginning to believe that it is the group I describe above which has the potential to expand exponentially. They will do so as the lure of these acts of barbarity are increasingly seen as a final demonstration of "Power" as they understand the concept in their computer games.
Cheers from Aussie
In the mid 70's, my parents got divorced and I became one of those latchkey kids, maybe this explains some things LOL. Just kidding. Anyway, I did not have the make believe world of computers to turn to, though I did gravitate towards many bad things in the real world. Things I would not have gotten into had their been supervision at home. In many ways, I feel lucky. The neighborhood I came from was very solid working class, tradesmen and cops and what not, and most families, aside from mine, were not train wrecks of dysfunction.
DeleteI don't think you need to be an overpriced "ist" to draw simple conclusions. I have come to many of the same conclusions you have. But I suppose I go further down the rabbit hole of blaming economics, or at least blaming American style economics. I feel like America has gone from a great nation of ideals to a nation of bullies that believes it doesn't owe a bit of gratitude to generations before us and don't owe an ounce of consideration for generations to come. This attitude, I believe, is becoming imprinted on nearly every child growing up today.
But it's more then that. While I thought this attitude was well under way prior to 9/11, it has only grown exponentially since then. Deep down, I believe many people in this country remain absolutely shocked that anyone would have the audacity to attack us. Our police departments are becoming para-military like groups. We have taken away enormous freedom with the patriot act and Obama has just signed off on continuing the spying that started under George Bush. Anger here, to me, feels palpable almost everywhere I go.
Life experience tells me that children will emulate the behavior of their parents and authority figures. Sadly, I think we have many more events like this to come.