Australia admits US has lower violent crime rate

Firearms laws in Australia


http://theconversation.com/faking-w...-americans-abuse-australian-crime-stats-11678

I have extracted some of the material here - please read the original for the full story

Some links on the topic from various sides:

http://www.sportingshootermag.com.au/news/gun-related-deaths-what-has-really-happened-in-australia

https://theconversation.com/good-ne...-in-australia-nz-canada-and-even-the-us-39993

http://www.openforum.com.au/content/too-good-be-true

http://sydney.edu.au/news/84.html?newsstoryid=2240

http://www.class.org.au/Baker-McPhedran.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia

 

If you actually go to the source of the data you will note that the data does not reflect actual changes in crime but rather changes in the way crimes are classified and reported. Data is meaningless

 

McPhedran and Baker should have recused themselves from this study as they have obvious biases and affiliations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia

At best you can say that the evidence and research findings are mixed

 

LOL, you didn't read any of the thread or post #1, did you? You are completely incorrect.

 

http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/cfi-pdf/cfi115.pdf

thread started on false premises = thread fail

 

My reasoning for posting the research and articles was to make the point that in Australia the discussion is very different from that of the US. The NRA is putting forward rubbish about crime in Australia. They want to make a connection between firearms control and the rate of violent crime. For them it's firearms control causes a rise in violent crime and people can't defend themselves. That's not the debate in Australia. And it's not what happened. Not much happened to violent crime in the wake of the buybacks. We've had fairly stringent firearms control laws for as long as we've been settled (bar Tasmania). Our violent crime rate could be better but it's not like we live in daily fear of home invasion or being mugged. Different situations.

 

Ultimately the matter comes down to a question of whose statistics are correct, when the ones in question come from the nation of Australia. Which australian authority should be regarded as the valid one in this discussion? On top of that, specifically why should they be regarded as valid?

 

LOL, you have already tried that claim and failed. Repeating it won't work, nobody is fooled.

 

Follow the link and get back to me!

 

You mean the link I provided in post #1, and explained why it was wrong? LOL, you have nothing.

 

Or it the statistics have been taken from a reported crime base versus charged crimes versus convicted crime

 

And a different underpinning of belief system toward firearms. Saw a program the other night about some twonk who has set up a course teaching how to use semi automatic weapons for "personal defence". Nearly everyone they interviewed on this course had an overseas accent - and the presenter kept asking "Why are you teaching a course about guns that cannot be legally owned in Australia?"

 

Try reading your link and your post again. An actual reading of the link disproves all the claims you made in your post as it says the changes are due to rooting changes not actual changes in the number of actual incidents. Now if you have any actual proof this might be the time to post them but continuing to rely on a link that actually fails to support your post wastes all our time.

 

People from all over the world come to Orlando Florida on vacation. I can't count how many people from foreign countries that do not have legal access to firearms, come to our range to shoot firearms for the first time. It's part of their vacation plans.

 

This is more like learning how to wrestle 'Roos in America in case you are ever attacked by a rabid Kangaroo over there

Mate - this twonk was just cashing in on the Sydney siege and getting scant sympathy from the media about it. Incidents involving guns are thankfully relatively rare here and we LIKE it that way

 

Are you implying that people shouldn't experience things they can't do at home because you can't see the attraction to it? I find it funny that because you can't see the use and experience, you look down your long nose at people that do.

Here is a news flash honey, Australia isn't the big cuddle puddle you have said in the past. The OP said so.

 

Fuji america had a big factory in South Lebanon, Ohio near Cincinnati. we always knew when a new crew of executive were in town because they'd go right to "Targetworld" to shoot. Then to the Kings Island Golf course to play golf. one of the executives was on the 2-1 plan. Two years in America-back to Japan for a year and so forth. Due to his VISA he could buy pistols back in the 80s and he got a top of the line 38 Super race gun and got up to a high class B rating. When he went back to japan, he stored the gun at the range in its safe. he said he took the Job mainly so he could shoot in America after being a big time air soft shooter in Japan

 

No I am not implying that I just think it is idiocy in the extreme to learn to ride a turbo enhanced push bike if they are not allowed INTO your country

As for the OP it has been established by multiple posters that it is in the wrong because you cannot compare crime statistics between countries

 

Re read what you posted. What you say you are not implying, is exactly what you are implying.
I think you are quite the Mod edit: one word too many if you can't understand why someone might want to experience something that they can't ordinarily experience.

 

There is a difference between "having a go" and "being trained to use"

 

Not true, for some, training is the activity that the can't ordinarily experience. If that's what the want to do, who are you to look down on them.

 

Wow... I never thought I would see you be against proper firearm handling so they won't be a danger to themselves and those around them. Brava.

 

Point is - those types of guns are not available so why learn something you can never legally own or use? Because believe me if you are caught with one of those and a POTENTIAL crime has been committed - whether that is a claim of self defence or whatever the police owneth your arse

There is no such thing here as a self defence plea that would not end in court
There is no such thing as having possession of an unregistered firearm that would not result in, AT MINIMUM a large fine
So unless they leave the country this "self defence" course will be counter productive

 

Lol, BECAUSE THEY WANT TO. Your country restricts their ability to do so, so they go to a place where they can. What position are you in, and what judgement do you give yourself, to dictate what they spend their money on? More power to em!

 

Can think of nicer ways to spend time and WAAAAY more productive ways - ways that might teach them how to defend themselves with the weapons at hand rather than ones they cannot obtain legally