Four killed in mass shooting in northern Australia

Silence from the anti-gun Aussies?

 

In tightly packed city strongholds, usually in poor areas between gang members, isolated from the massive country at large. Its not like I'm worried that I'll be shot while walking through my neighborhood or at the store. It doesn't even cross my mind nor most people. I have a greater chance of getting hit by lightning.

 

I'd agree, especially if they ever prove the crime gene, that place was a penal colony after all...

 

And yet, with few exceptions, when you look at the cases of mass shootings in the US, they would have been prevented if government had done it's job.

 

It is a little strange that they don't have his pic plastered all over the internet and MSM, especially since he was white. I couldn't find much on Hoffy, the shooter, on the net except that Hoffy is short for Hoffman. The MSM though never mentions his real name which is Ben Hoffman.

 

What it is, you see the number of shootings of 4 or more in relation to it's gun regulations. Hence why it's once in a blue moon in countries such as Australia and the UK and a daily event in the US.

No amount of gun regulation will eliminate all gun offences, no sane person has said it would. Gun regulation is there is reduce the chance of incidents. Reality and figures prove this. Regulations to drive vehicles, own knives, fly planes, store chemicals etc.. are there to reduce incidents, accidents and reduce deaths. As incidents happen, further actions are normally undertaken.

Why have plane safety regulations if planes still crash; let's scrap plane regulations. That's the bizarre logic of American gun owners have with guns.

I can only assume the supporters of full blown gun ownership argue in a daft way on purpose because the subject on safety is such a simple subject.

 

Please demonstrate this difference is a function of the gun laws.

 

It's a bit obvious it's nothing to do with the range of sweets (candy) that each country sells from it's shops.

Part quoting is a crap way of debating just because it pulls ya pants down on the subject. I think my posting on this thread will be short if cherry picking continues.

 

You said:
What it is, you see the number of shootings of 4 or more in relation to it's gun regulations. Hence why it's once in a blue moon in countries such as Australia and the UK and a daily event in the US.

I'll ask again:
Please demonstrate this difference is a function of the gun laws.

 

How many people can buy an AR-15?

How many people can buy pistol? BB revolvers or can semithey be semi-automatic?

 

Well it proves that it can happen even if you have more gun laws than we do.

I think it's probably more thing issue of having a greater population why it happens more frequently in the US.

 

I think it's entirely possible that a country who's population is equal to 7% of the US population, also has a far lower number of people who want to commit mass murders.

Compared to the United States Australia is tiny. New York City alone this is one city not a state has a population of almost half of what the entire country of Australia has.

so anytime you compare Australia to the US you're not comparing things that are congruent or in any way shape or form congruent.

That also is not how science works.

 

So if someone can't get an AR-15 then their country has strict gun laws?

 

The UK has more densely populated areas than the US and we don't have regular mass shootings like there are in the US. I have seen the attempts to compare England's most violent city to one of the US's most safest cities and think that is a valid comparison and still Egland's city turned out to be safer over a full year

 

1982-present, on average, yearly deaths in mass shootings:
USA: 23.74
AUS: 3.34 (14.07%)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia
By population, Australia has twice as many mass shootings deaths per year than the US.

I guess that settles that.

 

Now do the same calculation before 29 April 1996 and after 29 April 1996

 

Why?

 

You don't know what happened in Australia on 28th April 1996 and the consequences of that day?

 

Or pistol or anything like an Ar 15 from the American perspective yes.

 

Ah. You can't answer the question,.
Thanks.

 

You can buy these in Australia:

 

But you do have other mass killings. Is someone who is killed by being run over by a truck less dead than someone who is killed by being shot? How about someone being stabbed to death? Are they less dead?

 

I don't see how it's relevant. If the argument is this massive multi cultural country within a continent enacted the same laws as some puny isolated island problems would be solved.

I grew up in a city who's population is one eighth of the population of the entire country of Australia. These isolated people living on a mostly empty continent have no idea the culture they are talking about.

Neither do people in the UK.

 

Egg in their face.

That's what happens when country mouse tries to lecture City mouse on the nuance of living in the city.

 

Again and again you are making this about politics. Anyone who performs mass killings is deeply disturbed. I do not speak for other people's laws.