Marty,
I think Lewis' point is that for the most part, the only people affected by the gun laws are the law abiding gun owners - people who are already honest and unlikely to ever commit a real firearms offence.
That means that there was little change to real public safety - just a perception.
And Yes ! I agree as I am sure most do - the USA is a complete basket case with respect to their whole firearms scenario - something that is enshrined in their bill of rights and seemingly ingrained into their way of life and social attitudes - so unlikely to ever go away.
The trouble with our gun policies and law enforcement is that thay had and continue to have zero effect on gangs and criminals, who continue to freely own, trade, import and make illegal firearms.
These people are and always have been the real problem in the community and nothing that was done affects them to any great extent.
If anything it creates a lucrative black market business opportunity for them that might not otherwise exist.
They dont care about the rules, they dont care that the guns are illegal, they dont bother with licencing or firearm registration or proper storage and they certainly dont care who they sell them to or the mental state of the people who are using them.
That is the huge anomaly with the current firearms framework and the reason why most firearms owners are unhappy with the significant burdens and extra costs placed on them when its known and accepted by them (and every Police Commissioner in the country) that it doesnt stop the very people that it needs to stop.
Even if they outlawed all firearms tomorrow and stripped every gun from every law abiding gun owner tomorrow - it would actually have absolutely zero effect on them !
I have spoken to people I believed to be quite reliable that told me they could get an illegal weapon including a handgun within a couple of hours.
Many years ago I knew of a young guy who was being trained just out of the city using machine guns and he subsequently went to fight in Bosnia/Serbia,
This was an organised program and he was just one of many young guys.
He told me himself after he got back from his first visit when he was then enlisted by the Army Reserves to help train Reserves as they didnt have anyone with any combat experience !
The fact that the death rate by firearm was already decreasing in Australia and most other Western countries for many years before the buyback and that the same rate of reduction continued to occurr in Australia after the buyback and that the same rates of reduction also continued to fall at the same rate (as here) in NZ, Canada and other countries much like ours - that DID NOT implement a buyback nor impose similar firearms restrictions - indicates that the buyback had nothing to do with it whatsoever.
This is the finding of a number of papers produced for the government.
The buy back did not result in less firearms as many seem to think - there are more firearms in the public domain now than there was before - all it did is legalise the firearms and remove a couple of types of firearms from general legal use - noteably fully automatic, military style weapons and pump action shotguns.
It pushed illegal weapons deeper into criminal hands, has created a nightmarish situation full of restrictions, burdens of administrative red tape and ridiculous ambiguities and anomalies that vary from state to state and still costs state taxpayers $10-100M's per annum to maintain.
What it did was use a vast amount of taxpayer funds to pay top market prices for old guns (often not in working condition at all), that in most cases got converted into brand new "legal" guns !
However, the buyback did impose greater control on firearm storage and ammunition storage and its believed that is responsible for slight reduction in suicide rates due to firearms.
And for both those reasons its a good thing, but not for much else.
But it should be noted that the suicide rates overall didnt change and that the rates for other suicide methods increased.
So mental health and not firearms is the real cause of suicide by firearm just as criminal intent and criminal behaviour is the reason for criminal activity involving firearms - not the firearms themselves.
Canada did have non restrictive firearm licencing and registration laws - after years of operation they deemed it a waste financial resources with no gain and its been repealed - no increase in firearms crime or death rates occurred.
. . . and before anyone accuses me of being a gun toting nutter - I am not ! - I have shot less in my entire life than most target shooters do in one target practice session. But I do support ISSF Junior 10m Target Air Rifle Shooting - the Commonwealth and Olympic Games discipline.
I do not own a high powered or centrefire rifle and never have.
Its just a stupid state of affairs that seems to be continually twisted about for purely political reasons and thats prompted my comment.
Rally
Quote:
Originally Posted by bugeater
Is your point that we shouldn't have gun control laws? The simple reality is that you are vastly less likely to be killed by a firearm in Australia than you are in the USA. Is that due to the laws? Don't know, but it's hard to imagine that's not a factor.
When I was in the US in June, I was quite surprised by the amount of murders and gun related incidents that were reported on the news there. One was due to someone going to a wedding and accidentally discharging a handgun.  |
)
