• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

And the contradictions start.

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,785
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
I don't see any contradictions.It seems clear that their strict gun control did work to achieve their goals. The same thing would probably happen here if we did the same thing. That doesn't mean we should.I'm quite happy to trade safety for freedom. Why won't more people admit that?
 

slapmonkay

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
1,281
Location
Montana
Interesting... Gunfacts.info shows that Australia has the highest contact crime rates out of all other first class countries (Page 2)... Wonder who's correct :confused:

Many of the countries with the strictest gun control have the highest rates of violent crime.
Australia and England, which have virtually banned gun ownership, have the highest rates of
robbery, sexual assault, and assault with force of the top 17 industrialized countries. (Criminal Victimization in Seventeen Industrialized Countries, Dutch Ministry of Justice, 2001.)
Myth: Gun control in Australia is curbing crime
Fact: Crime has been rising since enacting a sweeping ban on private gun ownership. In the first two years after Australian gun-owners were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms, government statistics showed a dramatic increase in criminal activity.31 In 2001-2002, homicides were up another 20%. 32

From the inception of firearm confiscation to March 27, 2000, the numbers are:
• Firearm-related murders were up 19%
• Armed robberies were up 69%
• Home invasions were up 21%

The sad part is that in the 15 years before the national gun confiscation:
• Firearm-related homicides dropped nearly 66%
• Firearm-related deaths fell 50%
Fact: Gun crimes have been rising throughout Australia since guns were banned. In Sydney alone, robbery rates with guns rose 160% in 2001, more in the previous year. 33

Fact: A ten year Australian study has concluded that firearm confiscation had no effect on crime rates.34
A separate report also concluded that Australia’s 1996 gun control laws “found [no] evidence for an impact of the laws on the pre-existing decline in firearm homicides” 35 and yet another report from Australia for a similar time period indicates the same lack of decline in firearm homicides 36

Fact: Despite having much stricter gun control than New Zealand (including a near ban on
handguns) firearm homicides in both countries track one another over 25 years, indicating that
gun control is not a control variable.
37
 

Alpine

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
669
Location
Mercer Island
In a way I can understand why Australia is this way, they were basically a penal colony for a long time so it's embedded in their culture to submit their freedoms. Eh, ok, maybe that was a bit harsh but IMO it's deserved.

Good thing their are blatant counter-examples like Switzerland and Israel that the anti-gun ostriches can't ignore. I know this picture has been going around facebook like wildfire:

546826_10151348399136967_2033025554_n.jpg
 

xxx.jakk.xxx

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
Messages
504
Location
Port Orchard, Washington, United States
You would be ok if I locked you up in a cell for the rest of your life if you were safe and taken care of?

I will never trade safety for freedom.

We are not a small island nation, we do not have the historical perspective of Australia....
I think in that trade, he meant he'd be receiving the freedom, not the safety.
 
Last edited:

amzbrady

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
3,522
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
"I'm quite happy to trade safety for freedom. Why won't more people admit that? "

+1 and many more...
If I were a betting man, I'd bet every prisoner in prison would admit the same thing.

actually thinking about it, some prisoners feel safer in prison and dont want freedom. The government already owns them.
 
Last edited:

rapgood

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
594
Location
Stanwood, WA
I think in that trade, he meant he'd be receiving the freedom, not the safety.
That's how I read it after thinking about it for a bit. But, you're right Nick, it can be read either way. However, considering the forum where the comment was made, I concluded that he meant giving up some safety in order to ensure freedom. And here it comes, folks.... (drum roll), "Me too!"
 
Top