Did Gun Bans In The U.K. And Australia Work?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by pspr, Dec 28, 2012.

  1. pspr


    The facts don't support the bans:

    ....Australia banned many guns following a 1996 mass murder of 35 people by a madman with assault rifles. The country tightened registration laws, banned assault rifles, pump-action shotguns, and also forced a buy back of more than 600,000 guns. What effect did this have on crime?

    “A 2003 study published by the Brookings Institution, found homicides “continued a modest decline” since 1997. They concluded that the impact of the National Firearms Agreement was “relatively small,” with the daily rate of firearms homicides declining 3.2%.”

    During the same period in America, deaths attributed to firearms dropped by nearly ten times the decline seen in Australia. Restricting or confiscating handguns seems to have had almost no effect on homicides in Australia and the stats also show that the law had no real effect on suicides.

    “Suicides with firearms went down but suicides by other means went up,” Malcom notes.

    And what about the oft-cited British gun laws? Have they done the job?

    Restrictive gun laws have been around for almost 100 years in England, and Malcolm reports that getting a permit requires proving to police that you have a “good reason” for needing a gun. Self defense is not considered to be a good reason in England. Following a 1987 shooting in the British town of Hungerford, the Brits enacted stricter controls. And in 1998, a near-total ban on gun ownership followed another mass shooting. Were these moves a success?

    Within a decade of the handgun ban and the confiscation of handguns from registered owners, crime with handguns had doubled according to British government crime reports. Gun crime, not a serious problem in the past, now is. Armed street gangs have some British police carrying guns for the first time.

    There is little doubt that the Senate will soon put forth new legislation regarding gun ownership, especially as it relates to so-called assault weapons. However, those making the argument that banning guns has worked in places like Australia and England might be advised to check the statistics or risk looking foolish if they encounter someone armed with the facts.

  2. Lucrum


    NO, neither is working and if anything made things worse. All the facts in the world though won't stop the anti gun girly men from wanting to adopt the same failed policies.
  3. pspr


    Yeah, they want to talk about rocket launchers and violent criminals trying to blame guns for the violence. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's just an agenda they have. Nothing more nothing less.
  4. Humpy


    Oh great some nut is advocating guns for teachers in the USA.
    Will they give mini pistols to school children too ?

    They can have their very own shoot-outs in the classroom soon.
  5. BSAM


    I'm one of those nuts.
  6. Since when do facts or logic ever have anything to do with liberal policies?

    When you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them.
  7. Lucrum


    Oh great, an anti gun nut throwing out absurd unrealistic nonsense as if it's relevant to the debate.
  8. pspr


    But, we could arm members of Congress durring debates. :D
  9. They used to fight duels.

    It might be a good way to dispense with those idiotic presidential debates too.
  10. =================

    Too bad for the gun banners:D Now we have women-girls getting into the fight.
    Smith & Wesson started a new trend years ago-the power of pink gun grips.LOL:D
    #10     Dec 28, 2012