Guns (in general)

[KG8]

Ok, my mistake there Tony. Thing is it's a common misconception that guns are used a lot in suicide but in fact they are rarely used. The preferred methods are-

hanging (including strangulation and suffocation) which was used in half (51%) of all suicide deaths. Poisoning by drugs was used in 12% and poisoning by other methods (including by motor vehicle exhaust) was used in 16% of suicide deaths. Methods using firearms accounted for 7% of suicide deaths. The remaining group (Other) comprised 14% of suicide deaths and included deaths from drowning, jumping from a high place, and other methods. Suicide deaths using firearms have more than halved over the last ten years, from 389 deaths in 1995, to 147 deaths in 2005. See Table 5 for data on broad groupings of method of suicide http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/3309.0/

It's true that shooting yourself in the head has dropped in favor from 14% to 7% over the last 10 years or so but it's obvious from the data that banning rope would have a much greater effect on lowering the suicide rate.


Another common missconception is that gun crime was lowered after Howard's regulations came into being, but the statistics show otherwise. Gun crime has gone way up. I guess it's because only the crims can get around with them now and that makes unarmed home owners easy prey. I think the worst aspect of it all though is the explosion of feral animals across the nation. Your 3 times more likely to hit a roo on your way out to the astro camp now, the feral cats are killing off all the little indigenous species and packs of feral dogs are breeding up and encroaching on the outer suburbs of capital cities. BTW, if you ever see a pack of feral dogs steer well clear. They are like a pack of wolves and will tear you to shreads.

[OneOfOne (Trevor)]

Just my quick few cents worth.

Personally I am against guns, however, I can see that some people have a real need for them (farmers are the obvious) and so I disagree with banning them. Some people have a valid use, target shooting etc. Most people have no need for them and so it should be VERY difficult for people to obtain them without good reason, those found with illegal guns or diagnosed with psychotic problems should have them removed and punished if necessary. As for the "sport" of shooting defenceless ducks, elephants, tigers etc for no reason other than the "pleasure", they should only be allowed to shoot animals if the animals are also allowed to carry weapons! I don't have a problem with shooting feral animals (cats, dogs, buffalo and also including feral horses).

However, the old argument that "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is one of the weakest arguments anyone could ever present. The logical extension of this argument is "nuclear weapons don't kill people" and therefore any country that wishes to have nuclear weapons should be allowed to do so! This is, of course, a rubbish argument. If you want to present an argument FOR guns, you need something better than this.

[Alchemy (Clive)]

It seems everyones afraid of other people having guns.that says a lot about our society.

[Odlaw]

The only thing the gun laws have done is take the higher power gun off of the honest law abiding citizens.

The illegal guns out there are still being held and used by the criminals.

[casstony]

KG8, I grabbed this from an American government website: "In 2001, 55% of suicides were committed with a firearm (Anderson and Smith 2003)." The ease of committing suicide with a gun makes it a prime candidate, if it is available.

With regard to wild dogs, my father worked alone in the bush for much of his life and occasionally saw dog packs, but they were always timid and would quickly disappear. I suppose they might be more aggressive bordering major cities if dumping of more aggressive breeds is common.

[GTB_an_Owl (Geoff)]

i half remember a story from the US that went along the lines that everyone in the town/county had at least one firearm registered to them in the house

the crime rate in the county was almost ZERO

was talking to my nephew the last time he was over to visit and he said that it used to be that if you shot someone over there you had to make sure they fell inside the house - now you can shoot them anywhere on the property and not worry about where they fall

geoff

[casstony]

In protecting ourselves from the enemy at the gates, we must not overlook the enemy from within. Perhaps something less lethal might be effective against an intruder while avoiding the risk of firearm assisted suicide. Capsicum spray would probably be a very unattractive method of suicide.

[KG8]

I saw those gun stats from america tony but in all fairness we can't compare America with australia. We could just as easily be like switzerland where the rate is 25%, and there every house has an automatic weapon in it. But were not swiss either, were aussies! http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvintl.html
The reality is we were doing fine with the old system and changing it has only made things worse. Those dogs for example, they kill 30% of all the sheep bred in Australia now. 30%! In the old days every dad and his son was out shooting and packs of dogs never had a chance. Now there are too many rules and no one bothers. It's a real problem Tony, discussed here in the palament.

http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/hans...ate=2005-09-14

I draw the attention of the house to the numerous press releases and articles about how wild dogs are causing damage to the sheep industry. That damage is quite severe in some places. Some farmers who had 24 000 or 25 000 head of sheep now have a flock of only 1 000 or 2 000. There is a natural attrition rate. I am the first to accept that an attrition rate of between two and three per cent a year is quite normal if a farmer is not replacing stock. However, there has been a massive attrition rate over the past 10 years.

[casstony]

Well, it's been a long stretch of serious thought for me, so in the interest of maintaining our mental health here's my next contribution to the thread: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgJNn...elated&search=

[Adrian-H]

I just have this to say, firearms dont kill, people kill.

though personally i believe firearm's are one of the most poor examples of human technology, ever created, product of the devil, just think about why they where created, and what for, and then youll know why i believe this.

[Neil]

g,day all, i,m new at this so go easy. i have nt read all the comments on guns but being a long time licenced shooter andover 50,i find the restraints put on legitimate hunters of feral pest to be a great contributor to are current problems of conservation of our native fauna. but whats all this got to do with astronomy?

[ving (David)]

Originally Posted by Odlaw

The only thing the gun laws have done is take the higher power gun off of the honest law abiding citizens.

The illegal guns out there are still being held and used by the criminals.

dont forget folks, this thread (although really old now) was never meant to be about gun laws, just guns.

Originally Posted by Neil

g,day all, i,m new at this so go easy. i have nt read all the comments on guns but being a long time licenced shooter andover 50,i find the restraints put on legitimate hunters of feral pest to be a great contributor to are current problems of conservation of our native fauna. but whats all this got to do with astronomy?

hiya neil the only post you need read in this thread is the first anyhow. I was just after people oppinions of guns
thanks for posting

[Ric]

And GRAVY !!!!!

[ving (David)]

oh yeah, and gravy. thanks for that

[wasyoungonce (Brendan)]

Ex Military...so I can say that gun control is paramount especially high powered weapons, hand guns and auto/semi-auto weapons...not withstanding munitions control.

I've seen the damage a high powered weapon can do..it's not pleasant..they are designed to kill (all weapons...although not low powered target rifles).

They have to be kept away from the general public..there are exceptions ..farmers etc but the laws are not tight enough.

We do not want to end up like American card carrying NRA clones where the well armed Militia has a right to bear arms...that just Bull &%it. In fact I believe the NRA is funding Australian gun lobbies...aka good old Smith & Wesson style.

[Sharnbrook (Mike)]

As an active competitive target shooter for over 50 years, a competitor at State, National and International level for 38 years, and a firearms owner for about 45 yrs, I can honestly say that I have NEVER witnessed a firearms related accident on or off a rifle range. I have known of 2 people killed in vehicle accidents on the way to a range, but then cars are not under consideration for banning are they?

I would think that there may probably be as many firearms in Qld as there are cars, (there certainly used to be anyway), but so far this year, just in Qld, there is a vehicle related death rate of approximately 1 per day. Smoking related deaths are almost certainly in excess of this, but buying cigarettes is still OK, and you can kill others too whilst enjoying a smoke. Is this logical?

Target shooting, as other Forum Members have pointed out, involves high precision, mental attitude and aptitude, concentration, skill and self control. Most sports are like this to some degree, but then most sports are in fact far more dangerous. Surfing, football of various codes, boxing, motor racing, even cricket. The papers are full of injuries being caused to team members, drowning, broken limbs, severe concussion, spinal injuries, etc etc. Did anyone ever hear of a shooter being seriously injured? There have been one or two that I can recall in the past 25 yrs, but these were generally freak accidents, rather than avoidable accidents. The reason for this is that shooting, because is potentially dangerous, it is very very strictly controlled. If anyone really believes that all firearms should be banned, because "they are dangerous", I would suggest they visit an NRAA rifle range, and see for themselves how strictly controlled it is, and why therefore it is one of the safest sports conducted in this and many other countries.

On a final note, I believe that firearms licensing is imperative, and I also believe that if anyone loses a firearm through negligence, they should be prosecuted, with a heavy fine, and/or a custodial sentence being imposed. Owning a firearm is a priviledge, not a right. Abusing a priviledge, is the best way of losing it.

[wasyoungonce (Brendan)]

But how can the general public safely secure weapons and ammunition at their homes? America has shown this to be impossible.

Sharnbrook, you mentioned that you have known 2 people involved with vehicle accidents and none with firearms. But that could be because the number of vehicle owners and drivers is vastly more in proportion wrt firearm users.

Consider if every driver had a weapon and carried it with them for a few hours a day..and of course practised safe weapons handling aka clearing of weapons on entry to buildings blah blah ....

I suspect the incidence of firearms accidents would multiply vastly..

Even the military has UD's..I had a UD by another airman (thankfully blanks but a full auto burst) 2 feet from my face in the dark once....scared the Be-jesus out of me

If the pro's cannot get it right the public should be restricted...remember guns are essentially designed to kill.

The exceptions are there but they are few.

[Sharnbrook (Mike)]

Sharnbrook, you mentioned that you have known 2 people involved with vehicle accidents and none with firearms. But that could be because the number of vehicle owners and drivers is vastly more in proportion wrt firearm users

What I actually said was that I have known of 2 people killed in vehicle accidents on the way to a range. Therefore there is a direct relationship to gun owners and drivers. I have known of dozens of people severely injured or killed on the roads, and that's not just a figure of speech.

If I may make another point. Whilst all right minded people are appalled and sickened by senseless killings such as Port Arthur, St Columbines, Dunblane etc etc, it never ceases to amaze me that for a very large section of our society, computer games that involve mass destruction and the death of all the "opposition" have become a way of life. So much of what is watched on tv is extreme violence, and all in the name of entertainment!! What is entertaining about killing? Is it any wonder that some people "lose it", and go off the rails? In my opinion, I can only believe that those who commit these atrocities have an uncontrolable latent mental condition, and are therefore clinically mad at the time of their actions. However, would they be tipped over the edge if the seeds had not been sown by such a mainstream source of what masquerades as entertainment? I suspect not, but then I'm not a psychologist.

[CoombellKid]

I dont have a problem with guns either, I do in the cities. But out here
in the bush you have a range of problems that need the use of a gun.

It's unfortunate but that the majority are generally stereo-typed by a
small minority

regards,CS

[wasyoungonce (Brendan)]

ahhh... I didn't want to be insensitive but what I was trying to purvey was that cars were supposedly designed for transport whilst guns were designed for ...well you know!

As for violence on TV..I totally agree..It de-sensitises people’s emotions and attitudes to violence.