Tags

, , , , ,


Coming soon, an update on life and more native American facts as well as a multipart history of genocide.

Let’s look at the statement made by our president after the shooting in Oregon.

“When Australia had a mass killing, it was do shocking to the system, the entire country said, “Well we’re going to completely change our gun laws”, and they did. And it hasn’t happened since.”

First let’s look at the mass shooting in question. The year was 1996 in Tasmania that left 35 people dead and leaving 23 others wounded.  This is certainly in the top five worst mass killings to date by a single shooter.

What was the response by Australia? A mandatory gun buyback program. Effectively since it was mandatory it was not a buyback program at all, it was a gun confiscation program parading as a voluntary buyback program. 640,000 guns were confiscated at a cost of 500 million tax payer dollars.

These “buyback” confiscation programs happened in 1996 and 2003 and resulted in about a 20% reduction in firearms in Australia. But did it make Australia safer? Did it reduce crime as intended? Or will criminals always break the law and buy guns even if they are illegal?

While you think about those questions. Let’s look at the results now shall we?

Prior to 1996 violent crimes in Australia were on a ten year decline. Slow and steady. Since the gun buyback program has crime continued to fall?

The answer is simply no.

It has risen year upon year. In the past year homicide by fire arms has risen 3.2%, armed robbery has risen 44% and home invasion with fire arms has risen 40%. Gun related assaults are up 8.6% and rape and other violent crimes are up as well.

As a note, statistics do not prove the cause of the continued increase alone. I understand statistics never lie but liars use statistics. So I am not saying all the increase is due to gun confiscation alone.

Another note is it simply isn’t true that it “hasn’t happened since”. Does 2011 Hectorville siege ring a bell? It should and while only 3 deaths and one child wounded it was indeed a mass shooting in Australia. There are others too.

Some mass deaths moved from firearms to knives and fires in Australia. So have mass killings stopped? I call bullshit on that statement because it’s 100% factually incorrect. Look up Quackerhill fire 2011 that killed 10 and the Cairns stabbings of 2014. Just two examples.

One last note would be the Australian gun buyback program was not compulsory, it was mandatory. That’s why I only tongue in cheek call it a buyback program. In reality it was a confiscation of firearms and the government was nice enough to pay you for the metal.

It is obvious by the reversal of crime trends that disarmament of the Australian people has been part of this reversal. It certainly can’t be overlooked as some piece to the puzzle. After all the culture, the people and the country remained the same. The laws changed and firearms were confiscated by law. That was the only major change in this case. So it most certainly played a part.

I believe trampling on legal citizens’ rights to own firearms is tranny. To force a law abiding citizen to submit to laws making it harder to protect themselves is tranny.

Is it possible some country might get lucky when they ban guns that crime goes down? Well I’ve never seen a single success story but I won’t deny it could happen. The evidence however in time after time states it doesn’t happen. So don’t buy into it here in the US either.

Will there always be bad guys with guns? Yes. Criminals will ALWAYS break the law. They don’t care about gun bans except that they will be the only one with a gun. This would certainly embolden the average criminal.  I maintain that your best defense against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. I stand by that statement.

To think this government will protect you when you give up your guns to them…. Well look at its history.

I give you Wounded Knee on December 29, 1890 when the well-armed US cavalry gunned down 350+ unarmed people in cold blood. These same people who voluntarily gave up their guns and ability to defend themselves.

I learned my lesson more than 100 years ago not to be disarmed. My gun has NEVER killed or wounded another person but it HAS protected me. That claim is not a statistic or made up, it’s a fact.

We’ve tried disarming populations before. Countries have tried banning guns. Every time it’s been an abysmal failure. Every time it hasn’t reduced violent crime and instead increases in crime were seen. While statistics alone do not prove cause and effect. These statistics should make you pause and ask are the two related?

I believe they are not only related. I believe they are kissing cousins and statistics in any one nation are not an indicator of success in another, but the preponderance of evidence when combining these statistics with other nations that have done the same thing is indeed a reliable barometer that the two are connected.

Michelle

For clarification. I was told point blank “I’m Australian blah blah this isn’t true. Well this is straight from the Australian government. Murder per 100,000 still hasn’t passed 2 but it hasn’t returned to .6 that it was in 1996 when they first took some guns away. There is another uptick in 2003 and today it hasn’t fallen below twice what the 1996 number was. Robbery is the ONLY crime noted that is falling. Every other crime is higher than 1996. Is that a direct result of gun control again it’s part of it but perhaps not all of it. Go argue with your own government and come back another time.

figure_03

Second note. The US is basically 50 countries united like the EU.

So let’s take one country the country of Texas. 669 gun murders and 25.3 million people. an effective rate of 2.6 per 100,000 and guns in Texas are everywhere though gun ownership in Texas is only 10th in the nation.

Now take Chicago only 2.719 million people and 452 gun murders that same year. or 16.6 per 100,000. Vast difference. Even taking all of Illinois which does lower there number. 12.5 million people 982 gun murders or 7.8 per 199,999 still 3x Texas.

So taking state by state the Easiest conceal carry is in New Hampshire with a Murder rate by gun of .51 yes (point)51 and maine is the Third easiest state with a rate of .91 (point)91.

Both these states are less than ANY European nation, Canada and Australia. The five easiest states have rates less than 1 per 100,000 and the 5 hardest have rates greater than 7 to 100,000.

I hope this ends the debate because I am now done. Anyone unable to see and understand this I’m done wasting my breath.