Gun Control, the Mexican Drug Cartels, Violence and the Black Market

Please provide the manifest where I exported anything.

You claim that the US is exporting a gun culture. I call on you to support that claim.

 

This is an international discussion board no? But I was using an universal pronoun to address all of America which exports its idiotic and logic free gun culture nearly every time it posts media to the rest of the world. We get your TV shows. Your news and magazines, your social media your movies

And you think this does NOT influence our youth -

I DO NOT WANT YOUR FIREARM MORTALITY AND MORBIDITY RATE HERE

Best way to accomplish that is to speak to average Americans and try to show the myths for what they are

 

Exporting the American gun culture ???

I don't think that possible to do.

Americans going back to Colonial America have always been known for their rifle marksmanship, second to none. No other people comes close. Ask the Germans who faced U.S. Marines at Belleau Wood during WW l or the Red Coats during the War of 1812 or the Mexicans at the Battle of the Alamo.

A culture can't be exported, but some may try to copy it but it's not their culture.

 

You want to talk about "idiotic and logic free", read your post.

TV Shows, News and Magazines imported to Australia from America is subverting your population into a gun culture. You know, since Australia has given the world such movies as the Mad Max series, Roadgames and Quigley Down Under, that's a little like the pot calling the kettle an aboriginal.

Maybe the myth is that you think that Australia does not already have a gun culture. Here is what is not a myth:

1. The US Constitution gives the citizens of the US the right to own firearms.

2. Gun violence in the US is not caused by legally owned firearms. They are caused by illegally possessed firearms.

3. Laws designed to limit legal ownership of firearms will do nothing to remove them from the hands of the criminal elements.

4. While the US and Australia might share some historical similarities, do not delude yourself into believing that your understanding of your country prepares you to understand the realities of this one.

Those are the facts, and they are indisputable.

 

So its just a coincidence that crime bloomed at the same time the gun bans went into effect? And the ABS is just as valid as AIC, the AUS govt publishes its annual crime summaries from ABS, they are on the ABS site.

Gun reform was never intended to reduce criminality? LOL Then what was it for?

 

Sorry but you have mentioned only three examples - let us not go there with all of the movie franchises pouring out of America - shows that are NOT science fiction such as the Mad Max series were (and thank you for making them famous pity you did not do the same for the multitude of Australian films NOT depicting gun violence)

And you bring up the war - Bloody hell I am sick and tired of hearing Yanks swagger about something that happened over 50 years ago - mind you you have not done so well since then - especially since WE have assisted YOU more often than you have helped us in the years since then
But the gun culture I am referring to is the very different outlook on guns that is uniquely American this includes illogical beliefs about

A) role of individual armament in "keeping the government honest"
b) guns are a right not a responsibility
c) one is helpless without a gun
D) guns can prevent crime
e) an armed society is a polite society
f) legal gun owners are all good guys

 

Actually some of the better debates I have seen on this forum centres around this and the conclusion is - not necessarily

Oops just snorted milk up my nose at this Furphy, Most of the illegal guns were originally sourced from legal owners

Actually they do - they drive up the price of illegal handguns

I won't if you will not make assumptions about my motivations and goals

 

So then where would you say the line is drawn? It's clear that if the government decides to complicate the process then it will be hard for someone to get a gun, then vice versa.

 

So that sounds reasonable, but what if the person needs it to defend themselves and can't get police protection?

 

If you look at how to make a good argument, just the basics of it, it's a good argument. There's a flow to it, sources, points to back up points, counter arguments, overall a very good argument.

1. No gun registration is not the Holy Grail for the "gun confiscation movement". Asking people to register their guns doesn't mean they're going to take them away.

2. As for US V. Haynes, so what? If you register the guns, then they're going to be traceable. The problem with criminals getting guns is that they're going to get rid of the evidence. If police have a way to track the evidence down, then that helps them in their investigation.

Why?

No you don't.

 

this is really silly. the only way to confiscate guns completely is to know who has them and put the burden of proof on someone who did not have one when the police show up to prove what happened to it

its also unconstitutional . Making things easier for the police at the rape of our rights is not acceptable.

your comment is as silly as saying making people register for the draft is not the same as conscripting them

 

The point is that movies, TV shows, news and magazines does not lead to a gun culture. They are products of an existing culture. Think of it this way. I would bet you don't watch Fox News, and I don't watch MSNBC. Why? Because people gravitate towards things the like, or that agrees with their personal views. If enough people share a specific like or view, then these things become popular. If you are importing movies, TV shows, news and magazines that depicts gun violence then obviously they are popular. You would not import something no one likes. Their popularity demonstrates that Australia already has a thriving gun culture. The fact that you simultaneously deny it's existence, and blame America for it, just shows how liberal you are.

Please provide a quote where I "bring up the war".

I maintain a firearm for home defense. That's it. But there are those in this country that views the attempt to outlaw guns as a precursor to rigid governmental control that goes far beyond an attempt to create a nanny state. In order to do this, they would have to invalidate the US Constitution. Many of us have served in the military, and took an oath. That oath calls for us to support the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. You will notice that the oath says "the Constitution", and not the government. Many of us believe that the oath is not set aside when we complete our military obligation. We believe that the oath binds us our entire life. Therefore, the liberal politicians are limited by how far they can push this agenda. Otherwise they would face armed rebellion. So, individual ownership of firearms do keep the government honest.

Only a liberal would believe that having a right relieves you of any responsibility. An individual has the right to procreate, but that does a responsibility to do so responsibly.

Against an armed individual, yes you are.

Actually Kennesaw, GA, proved that one to be a fact:

Excerpt from http://rense.com/general9/gunlaw.htm

Any society is made up of individuals. Some are good, and some are polite. Others are not. But the majority of legal gum owners that I have known are in fact polite good guys. All they want to do is protect their family, their home and themselves. Something our Constitution says they have the right to do.

 

It was to stop or reduce mass shootings and for that it was VERY successful

As for the AIC and the ABS data - I have been through this before with you - one is VICTIM SURVEYS where people are asked about their experiences - and it is ALWAYS taken with a grain of salt due to issues like telescoping. The other is recorded crime - ie what the police have recorded and successfully brought to trial

HUGE difference

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4522.0.55.001

 

Well, you would think that if they were totalitarian, that they would have won the ensuing legal battle (they didn't, and we can still have .338 Lapua).

I don't feel prevented in the slightest. I can still hunt, still be a part of a gun club and be a part of shooting associations. If anything, the prohibition of hunting on public lands has made it easier for me to use my firearms within the realms of the law, simply because it ensured I was part of hunting and shooting associations which actually look after their members and organised shoots for me. On my part, there is no worry that I might be doing something wrong specifically because I have veteran members looking out for me.

Really? That's funny, because my experience with gun storage laws was being told what they were, followed by my application for a licence asking where I was going to store my firearms, to which my response was 'gun safe' and that's it. No one from the Firearms Dept. has come to check thus far that I am securing my weapons correctly (I do, because it is the right thing to do). In fact, my father has been a gun owner since the early 90s, and in the entire time after the gun laws came in, he has also never been checked to ensure he was storing them correctly (he does, because he was the one who taught me that we do the right thing because it is the right thing to do, and not because we might get caught).

So, your answer to laws you disagree with is to break them, and encourage others to break them?

I neglected to mention it because I was talking about the incidence of firearm related gun statistics. Gun ownership has never been extremely high in Australia in the past 30 years or so, so saying that gun laws increased rape is correlation, not causation.

That's a slippery slope argument at best.

[SARCASM]Yes, because all men are rapists and Australia has levels of rape consistent with that of Genghis Khan's Mongol Horde.[/SARCASM] You are forgetting that in the past 15 or so years, the rate at which it has become acceptable to talk about rape in the public sphere, and education in regards to rape, has increased dramatically. It may not be that the incidence of rape has gone up, but more likely that rapes are now actually being reported.

 

Thanks for the Ad Hom - BTW "Liberal" in Australia means the opposite of what it does in America
And your "logic" is circular. We import TV because it is difficult to develop enough of our own - we also import UK TV which is probably why we do not have the same gun culture you do - but most of your current beliefs seem to be dictated by a political culture and a strong influence from the NRA

Previous post - you mentioned WWI - which was hilarious

Keep reading posts from your fellow gun lovers on this forum - I swear many have a secret belief that they will march en mass armed to Washington to demand greater freedoms They decry what Australia did and keep telling me I am living in a dictatorship because we enacted stricter gun legislation

More Ad Homs
Keep reading posts from your fellow right wingers - especially on this forum and read how many would arm EVERYONE in the USA regardless of ability, mental health, age, infirmity and or tendency to commit mass murder. They do not want ANY restrictions on guns - not for safety in the home (and please read the research in relation to increase in mortality correlated with availability of firearms in the home http://journals.lww.com/jtrauma/Abs...vailability_and_Unintentional_Firearm.11.aspx

.

Point proven - no you are not. It depends on whether or not the person holding the gun has the ability and temperament to aim fire and kill - it also depends on how close you are. But arming yourself because you fear others are armed is creating a society that is in an arms race against itself. Why is it only Americans feel this need to go armed? Lots of other countries the citizens do not feel this need

Correlation does not equal causation - especially when there is only one example

Any society is made up of individuals. Some are good, and some are polite. Others are not. But the majority of legal gum owners that I have known are in fact polite good guys. All they want to do is protect their family, their home and themselves. Something our Constitution says they have the right to do.[/QUOTE]

The ones you have known - right

And yet a household with a gun is more likely to have a gun injury than one without

 

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((sigh))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

You too? I mean there are so many Fuphies out there on the net in relation to Australian gun stats that I would think ANYONE wanting to quote them would do at least some basic checking

We do NOT have a high rape rate

That is because we do not actually know WHAT our rape rate is - BECAUSE WE DO NOT KEEP SEPARATE STATS FOR RAPE!!
The Australian statistics on sexual assault are exactly that - ANY assault that is even remotely sexual in nature is a sexual assault

So if you "Goose" a woman in a lift you might find yourself on a charge of sexual assault - if you kiss someone without their permission - ditto

Our stats also include assaults related to domestic violence and I would suggest a greater correlation with alcohol intake than gun ownership

 

Of all my arguments that I have managed to respond to thus far, only one respondent has actually brought back evidence (the Stratfor article). That article did not dispute that weapons were crossing the border, it merely argued that 90% of guns in Mexico did not come from America (which I agreed with, because I never held the position that that was true, I only quoted the initial findings in the preamble that it was occurring and the rate was rising). So, of the points I have made wherein my argument has actually been rebutted with evidence (and not circumstantial evidence, anecdotal evidence or paranoia based speculations), it did not disagree with my point at all, which was that weapons were crossing the border.

I never claimed that they were popular, I said that the gun owners I know have no real qualms with them, and that may be because the group of shooters I know is limited to club, association and family members. As well, whilst there was initial opposition to the gun laws, the rate of opposition has come down dramatically, because they were not as bad as initial fears originally played out. Don't get me wrong, there is still some frustration of elements of gun laws, but taken as a whole, not so much.

Yes, it did flat out ban a number of weapons, but only full automatic firearms, high calibre semi-automatic firearms, semi-auto shotguns, and some high calibre firearms are banned. There are circumstances under which one can legally obtain Category D weapons, that's why my licence lists it on the back (wouldn't be there if you couldn't get it. Normally requires a purpose of use, so membership of a club is essential). The process for getting that classification on your licence is difficult, but not impossible (membership of a club, regular attendance of shoots at the club, participation in competition shoots). And just to prove my point that you can buy Category D weapons, here's a link to my regular gun store's catalogue, listing fore sale category D weapons. Trust me when I say this, they are not supplying the military or government. There are other calibre handguns allowed, but I do believe that .38 is the highest you can legally go (not including black powder firearms).

Ok, but I am going to counter that with reports from the Australian Institute of Criminology. There findings demonstrate that, yes, there was a spike of homicides after the 1997 ban and and peak in 2002, followed by a dramatic decline post '02, followed by a return to, what I am going to call, normative levels (as there was a dramatic dip in 2004-05).



However, homicide statistics with guns shows that, after the '97 spike, a dramatic decrease in the percentage of homicides involving firearms.

View attachment 35147

So, basically whilst homicides may not have decreased dramatically (but are definitely on a downward trend), the rate of homicides involving firearms has declined.

Well, actually, we haven't had a massacre since, and they weren't rare pre-ban. 11 massacres (which, in Australia, is more than 4 people killed) in the preceding 18 years.

True, reported sexual assault has gone up, but I would attribute that to education in regards to rape and initiatives to help victims of rape come forward more than I would attribute that to an increased incidence of rape. Even in America, 68% of rapes actually go unreported. How did guns protect them?

And that is exactly what I pointed out. States which have strict gun control measures cannot control the movement of weapons from states with lax gun control measures. That was why I pressed for uniformity of gun laws across all states, because it will also curb cross-state arms trafficking.

No, it didn't. According to the AIC, whilst victims of violent crimes spiked initially after the ban between '97 and '02, rates have either dropped or remained stagnant (with the exception of sexual assault, but that has more to do with it now being reported).

Murder: There were 296 reported cases, and that number was trending upwards pre-ban anyway (314 by 1996) to 255 in 2012 (downward trend).

Manslaughter: remained roughly stagnant, but with a downward trend, with 37 reported cases in 1993, a spike in 1996 (pre-ban), followed by a sharp decline in 2007 (to 2 and remaining low until 2012 (in which there was a surge to 42). Overall, with the exception of the surge in 2012, a minor downward trend.

That makes total homicide on a downward trend, from 333 cased in 1993 to 297 by 2012 (and the lowest incidence being 261 in 2010).

Armed robbery has fluctuated, with a peak between 1998 and 2002, before declining and normalising afterwards. Even if the numbers are up, the overall result is a downward trend.

Unarmed robbery was on an upwards trend pre-ban (from 1993) before declining on '02, with the overall result being less incidences of unarmed robbery in 2012 compared to 1993).

Kidnapping has remained roughly stagnant, with a minor downward trend.

So, I don't see an overall trend of "emboldened" criminals nor an increase in crime. The data actually shows a decrease in the overall incidence of violent crime.

And has not been addressed by the anti-gun camp, Germany in the time of the Weimar Republic was NOT a country with a cultural history of freedom. Demonstrate to me where, in a country with a long-standing tradition of freedom, that gun control and registration lead to complete confiscation and subjugation.

Wow. One newspaper. That's all you have?

Technically, more guns are in fewer hands. It's hard to track in America, but whilst there are more guns in private hands than ever before, they are also in fewer hands, which could just as much contribute to that statistic.

We have a much lower incidence of gun crime. We have a 0.14% homicide rate by firearms per 100,000 people, compared to the US's 2.97% homicide rate by firearms per 100,000 people.

 

This is the internet. It remembers. There would be screenshots of the image in question and other related data. If you were looking, you would find it. Nothing can be deleted or lost entirely once it has made its way to the internet.

 

All the more reason then to support gun legislation, since licensing and registration of firearms would stop illegals from being able to obtain weapons with just a driver's licence.

 

Straw purchasers would be unable to buy them because they would be unable to produce a gun licence that demonstrates their legal right to purchase the weapons. People with gun licences would have no problem.

And they are that price in Australia because they have been banned and because the laws are enforced. Importing illegal firearms in Australia is difficult, not impossible, because Australia has stringent border protection laws, which is why, as three sources of information demonstrated, semi-automatic weapons are ridiculously expensive on the black market in Australia. Havocscope has the price of an AK47 in Australia on the black market at roughly $15,000, compared to the US's $400-500 price tag on the black market, and semi-automatic handguns have gone up in price as well, and the (at the time) Acting Deputy Police Commissioner Dave Hudson has pointed out that "an AR-15 assault rifle can fetch more than $25,000 on the black market [in Australia]".

Show me where I was being disingenuous.

No, the enforcement of the law and border protection policies is what has made the black market prices for these weapons increase. Legal weapons are not overly expensive. Here is the price for a Beretta 92FS in an Australian gun store (and my local). Here is the price of that same pistol in America. When you factor in low demand for pistols, the conversion of the American dollar to the Australian dollar, and import costs, that's not a huge mark up comparatively.

I have never said that they did. Now look who's argument is disingenuous. I was arguing for what should be done. Now, these laws could be administered by the state if need be, but they do need to be uniform.

Bring it up again, bold it if you must, and I will answer it.

Well, that's your opinion, and you're welcome to it.

 

I will happily do that when American policies do not affect the international stage. The American housing bubble burst and caused a Global Financial Crisis. So to, American gun control laws are lax and that affects arms trafficking into Mexico.

 

you demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of what a straw purchase is. so the rest of the nonsense in your post is dismissed for lack of knowledge

and we don't care about foreigners complaining about our laws, Don't come here if you don't like our laws. Trust me, I have no desire to go to Australia

 

I checked, it's been scrubbed from the internet. It's true, once it's on the internet it's there for life. But if Google images doesn't want you to see it, then there are other ways and it's not worth my time.

Have you ever wonder why Goodge reps are seen almost daily showing up at Obama's White House ? I really don't wonder, I already know.

There's the Wayback Machine. I ran the "Our Border" website URL and this came up. -> http://web.archive.org/web/20091216032302/http://ourborder.ning.com/

 

All that needs to be done, enforce the laws that are already are on the books.

As for gun laws, repeal all gun laws that were passed after 1960.

 

What garbage. Its the obama government that is supplying Mexican cartels. If cartels can import billions in cocaine from Columbia, why are they going to have a problem getting hold of the over 40 million now obsolete AK 47, Type 56 and other former soviet bloc weapons now on the world market?

How is Australia impacted by our gun laws? I smell Aesop fox in your postings

- - - Updated - - -

all federal gun control laws including the clearly unconstitutional 1934 NFA and its bastard spawn