Las vegas shooting: Why didn't it happen in Sydney?

they never had much of them before either

 

They had enough to demand gun control

 

which for gun haters is one incident

 

I Suppose for the victims families that was enough....but not for you of course

 

its idiotic to oppress thousands over one incident. but since gun control is about harassing the thousands, not preventing the isolated massacres, it makes sense you would support such a stupid law

 

Yes. Not near enough dead to meet your standard.

 

what a stupid comment. To argue that every time there is a shooting, the government should confiscate thousands of guns and ban dozens of types of guns is moronic. What Australia did was a collective bed wetting.

 

Yes. Not near enough dead to make gun control appealing to you. Many many many more would have to die before that. They just need to toughen up and get over it.....right?

 

I don't believe in punishing honest people for the actions of criminals-even if the laws might slightly cut down on crime


I don't believe in passing feel good stupid laws so the pimps in office can pander to the slow witted sheeple who WANT SOMETHING DONE RIGHT AWAY.

we have seen many gun restrictionists who hope for massacres so they can use the blood of innocents to smear our rights. and most gun restrictionists are more about harassing the NRA and lawful gun owners than they are about deterring criminals

 

I understand. You have made your case. You don't feel the dozens dead and wounded in a mass shooting warrant any action at all. Certainly not anything that might inconvenience you even slightly. Your position is quite clear

 

Who cares what brought it on, if it reduces the incidence of mass shootings. I'll take a wet bed over our young people being murdered, any day.

 

How is it a 'punishment' to lose your guns? They're inanimate appliances, not your grandmother.

 

How did your confiscation of about only 70% of those most dangerous guns and leaving handguns in the hands of citizens reduce the incidence of mass shootings? Most of our mass shootings are with 9mm handguns - are those still legal to own in Australia?

 

We have a Bill of Rights. Anytime those rights are infringed it is a punishment.

 

70% is a significant reduction. the less guns there are in the community, the less they can be used.

 

is that 'bill of rights' a principle worth dying for?

 

I'm not trying to be difficult about this, but if it does happen in Australia tomorrow -- or in India or Japan instead -- would that change things?

 

Perhaps, but that still left 250k illegal "assault weapons" and all of the handguns still in the hands of Australians. How does that reduce an exceedingly rare event?

 

No one can deny it did

 

Yes, it is. Every military service member takes an oath to protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic, knowing that the oath may cost them their lives.

 

Do you think starving children in Africa would defend an idea to the death? I offer this apparently absurd question by way of perspective.

 

I don't know, but it did.

 

In the 20 years prior to Port Arthur, there were 60 people killed in various massacres in Oz; post Port Arthur, there were 76 people killed in the 20 years afterward in various massacres.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia

"I don't know, but it did" doesn't really qualify as a causal effect.

 

The Australians seem quite happy with their results

 

It's not my job (or field of interest) to know the mechanics of it. Sorry.