How Gun Control Affects Populations!!
|
Submitted by: liberty4us  Subscribe to this Author Paste this code into your site to promote this story! |
http://www.fdrs.org/government_for_gun_control.html
Type of Content: Article How Gun Control Affects Populations!! (ACTUALLY DECIMATES THEM!!) Remember when you go to vote in November who would like to get rid of all your guns. Is the Australia example a little frightening?? Sen. Obama has a problem with those who would "cling to their guns and their religion...", Folks! Better wake up and realize what's happening. A Little Gun History Lesson In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about In the state of Victoria alone,homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns! It will never happen here? I bet the Aussies said that too! While figures over the previous 25 years s howed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it. You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens. Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind him of this history lesson. With Guns....... .. ...We Are 'Citizens'. Without Them........ We Are 'Subjects'. During W.W.II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED! Note: Admiral Yamamoto who crafted the attack on Pearl Harbor had attended Harvard U 1919-1921 & was Naval AttachĂ© to the U. S. 1925-28. Most of our Navy was destroyed at Pearl Harbor & our Army had been deprived of funding & was ill prepared to defend the country. It was reported that when asked why Japan did not follow up the Pearl Harbor attack with an invasion of the U. S. Mainland, his reply was that he had lived in the U. S. & knew that almost all households had guns. If you value your freedom, Please spread this anti-gun control message to all your friends! AND NEVER, NEVER, NEVER SURRENDER YOUR GUNS!!! Read »
Created 22 weeks 4 days ago
Made popular 22 weeks 3 days ago |
- Flag as offensive
- Login or register to post comments
- 308 reads
That's my point. THOSE are gun laws, silly. They are gun CONTROL laws.
You can't stand on the side of the road and point a shotgun at all the traffic going by, for example.
Why? There is a menacing law...
Without the law, the police would be unable to do anything about gun "menacing"...
As I said, common sense laws that protect society from individuals with guns. I didn't say "oppressive" laws. I didn't say "banishment". I said mild, simple, common sense laws.
As a citizen, I have just as much "right" to be protected from knuckleheads carrying guns around, as I do from pure criminal behavior. Laws are created to enable law enforcement to "keep the peace".
If you don't like the law makers, elect different ones...
The following information was retrieved from the Australian Government's Australian Institute of Criminology Website:
In a forum like this, it's difficult to discuss the trends and whatnot, but there is pretty good data at the site that goes from 1996 through 2006).
# Reported Homicides:
1996 354
1997 364 (+2.8%)
1998 332 (-8.8%)
1999 386 (+16.2%)
2000 363 (-6%)
2001 346 (-4.7%)
2002 365 (+5.5%)
2003 341 (-6.6%)
2004 293 (-14.1%)
2005 295 (+.7%)
2006 319 (+8.1%)
The median of the change is 346, or -8. This reflects an overall median decrease in homicides by -2.2%
The annual average number of homidcides is 341, or -13 from the initial statistic. This reflects an average decrease in homicides by 3.7%.
I'm not going to break downn all of the charts for Assaults, Armed Robberies, or details in Victoria (don't have access to it) - and these numbers don't differentiate the difference between violent crimes where guns were used versus those where guns weren't used (but neither does your statistics - so it's fair).
I will give you the median and average change from 1996 to 2006 though for Assault:
The median of the data set is 152,283, which represents a mean increase of +38,127, or +32.5%.
The average of the data set is 146,043, which reresents an average increase of +31,887, or +27.9%.
The only other thing I would interject with is tha these numbers are raw data, and are not reflective of the % of the total population. In other words is a 10 homicide increase in a population of 10 million all that significant compared to a 10 homicide increase in a population of 100?
Now interestingly, unlawful entry property crimes, and motor vehicle thefts have significantly dcreased, but in my opinion, I don't think this is a reflection of gun ownership (or lack thereof) since many motor vehicle thefts and house break-in attempts occur outside of the presence of the owner, so gun statistics wouldn't be accounted for.
Here are some more interestig bits of information taken from the site:
"In 2005-06 the most common weapon used in homicide was a knife (33%). A further 18% of homicides were committed using physical force (hands/feet), and 14% each with firearms or with blunt instruments."
"On average, 21% of homicide victims were killed with a firearm between 1989-90 and 2005-06.
However, the use of firearms in homicide has decreased over the past 16 years, dropping below 20% from 2001-02 onwards.
14% of homicide victims in 2006 were killed with a firearm."
This was all compiled from the following site:
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/facts/2007/index.html
The site has a full list of references tat breaks down specific crime statistics.
In any respect, Liberty4US, I like most of what you post, but this is kind of "propaganda-ish". I'm not saying there's no truth to what you posted, but I don't think the information and stats you presented are the full truth either - at least not in the propaganda way it was presented...
Oh, for the record, I'm a licensed CWP and I value my rights to keep and bear arms... Just want to make sure you all understood that I am 100% ANTI-gun legislature. ;-)
Now see? Honest numbers.
Another consideration is the influx of immigrants (Oz has a strong draw from poorer Asain nations) population growth (the more people, the higher the numbers, but not per capita) and so on. To make the very absurd claim that the gun ban in Australia caused the crime to skyrocket is dishonest and absurd.
Americans look like crazy gun nutters to other nations partly because of the nutty arguments made FOR keeping guns.
Guns are an American heritage much more than they are a statistical necessity.
There should be mild and consistent gun control laws in place, replacing all of the complicated nonsense we have now.
"gun control" does not mean "gun banishment". Just a reasonable set of laws that allow police some means to act when society is being harmed by someone with a gun.
"Just a reasonable set of laws that allow police some means to act when society is being harmed by someone with a gun"
Do you think that the police are not currently empowered to do something when society is being harmed by someone with a gun? Can you show me a place that exists in this country where the police are NOT empowered to act when someone is harming society with a gun?
Just one will do.
Thank you,
On the Australia stats: I'm not sure how accurate they are. I've seen various versions, graphs and articles that all say the gun ban there has had different effects. It's hard to know when different folks present statistics so wildly different.
How does the old saying go? There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Anyway, my support of gun ownership rights comes from a non-statistic based position. I want to be able to defend myself and my family. Hunting would be nice, too, but that's not a part of my current lifestyle. I undergo the necessary training and I practice regularly. I make sure my wife has the same training and practice. As my 3 year old gets older, she'll be just as well instructed to the dangers and proper use of firearms. I take responsibility for my actions, my firearms, and my own safety.
BTW, I'm currently applying for my concealed carry permit. When I went to the police department to get my fingerprints taken, the officer who was fingerprinting me (and my wife...) basically told us we really needed to go out and by an assault rifle and lots of ammo, and do it soon. Several other officers in my area have voiced similar opinions. So at least in my area, the police want an informed and armed populace.
-Bryce
http://www.storyhack.com
I received this awhile back and put it to video, but I wanted to make sure the facts were 100% accurate before doing anything with it.
You could get the power hungry local police and the pencil pushing local bureaucrats to understand the Constitution and specifically the second ammendment you would have won half of the battle. Many if not most states and counties require a permit to carry a gun, some a permit to even own one.
for the enjoyment of having a "permit" like for example in Chicago. Where all the thugs have guns (police thugs included) and nobody else does. You have to have a f-ing foid card to carry a "stun" gun in IL. I am deadly serious.
I represent a 18 yr old hispanic kid, who lives in a bad neighborhood and is not in a gang, charged with Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon: To Wit, A firearm, uncased and loaded and without a valid FOID card. His felony offense: he had a stun gun on him while riding his bike at night in his neighborhood.
There is no indication from the police reports that he threatened anybody, nor did anyone call the police to report him - the cops were on routine patrol and thought the kid was suspicious so stopped and frisked him and found the stun gun. $100,000 bail, first offense, no criminal background.
This is fucking ridiculous. I believe the nanny state wants us to be dependent on them as our only source of protection since they are making it a FELONY offense to even attempt to protect ourselves with non-lethal weapons.
I will be filing a motion to dismiss these charges. My chances of success are not better than 50/50. Welcome to America circa 2008.
Gun Owners Of America gave Obama an F rating. But they gave McCain an F- rating. So who is the pro-gun choice? http://www.gunowners.org/110srat.htm
Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin are not rated there. But I think either of them would be an improvement.
Dave
They certainly would be an improvement over what we have now!! Not sure on this one, But
word has it that Ron Paul is holding onto his Delegates for a suprise at the convention.
Remember the Words you say keep them soft and sweet You never know from day to day which one's you'll have to eat! www.tiptopwebsite.com/liberty4us
Ummmm, so in 97 the ban is enacted and the only available data is from the year directly AFTER?
Show me the study that goes from 97 to 08, with actually numbers and not percentages. (When crime numbers are low to begin with, saying that something tripled can mean it went from two to six. Or one to three. Or ten to thirty.
I was in the NRA for five years so I am well aware of how they cook the books. Pro gun nuts tend to lie and exaggerate to make their claims. Whatever suits them, regardless of the actual truth.
I am not anti-guns, I have a .22 rifle loaded as a way to protect our house, but I am anti-dishonest debate.
In other words, if you are making claims that are either false or intentionally very misleading, you are lying. It is immoral to lie and it makes you look bad as a representative of America.
NO, Monkey Mouth,
It's up to you to Prove what you are spewing!!
People like you make me mad!!
YOU tell me what is you're Proof that my statement is false!
So you have a .22 So! You give me you're data that makes you
so smart!
Ummm, no. I am not the one making the assertion that the gun ban in Australia was deleterious. That would be you.
I've asked many of my Aussie friends who live there what the deal is, and they all say the same thing, they like things better now. That is what is known as "anecdotal" evidence and is not "proof" of anything.
Your facts, however, are so biased to the extreme-- and evidently so-- it makes you look like an outright nutter for trying to use them.
Again, why use only the one year? Surely the numbers are available through 07? Methinks a little selective numerical display is occuring here, what we like to call "cherry picking", something most super-pro-gun organizations are known for.
Large groups of dishonest folks with guns...
Great. Just what we need...
I took my first training course when I was 14 with my dad. He didn't
need the course, but he went through it with me. I do believe that
every one that owns a gun (and all Americans should) take a basic
course to protect you and the ones you love!
http://www.nrahq.org/education/training/find.asp
Wake Up America
http://www.tiptopwebsite.com/websites/index2.php?username=liberty4us&pag...
.. later
I don't own a gun, but my other half has guns. I have read what a mess it is now
in Australia since their Law abiding citizens lost there right to own one! I fully believe
in the second ammendment. Our family doctor and his wife go to Pahrump Nevada twice
a year to participate in there gun training program. They love it!
www.frontsight.com
Its better to remain silent and thought a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt!
Ummm.. you really should ask an Aussie what a mess it is... I wouldn't take what you read for granted...
Not sure which school you went to scott, but I think you
need a little more education on "Gun Control"!
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/australia.html
hope this helps
I think you should include sources and post this in blogs all over the internet
Maria,
I'm going to post an article on my website in the next couple of days.
You're right it needs to be out there everywhere.
Remember the Words you say keep them soft and sweet You never know from day to day which one's you'll have to eat! www.tiptopwebsite.com/liberty4us