If you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…

On December 15 2012 11:04 StreetWise wrote:
In a country of 350 million, a story like this, while tragic, is not enough to cause knee jerk reactions and shouldn't make people want to control guns. Why do you need a new law every time something bad happens. According to the National Weather Service 27 people died in the US from being struck by lightning, should we create laws making it illegal to go outside during a storm? The right to own weapons is a Constitutional right in the US. You can either have safety or freedom, you can't have both as one tends to take away from the other. I for one choose freedom.

On December 15 2012 16:23 Caphe wrote:
So within 24 hours there are 2 incidents at the world most powerful countries USA and China. The US one claim 27 lives from shooting, the Chinese one claims NONE because the criminal was using a KNIFE.

Still, I don't see how gun control will work in USA, because it is clearly as light that Americans LOVE guns. No Senator will want to risk his carrier to push something like that. Still even if there are steps toward gun control, there are countless amount of guns that already out there.

Crazy bastards are everywhere in the world, but a crazy bastards with guns are much more deadly when he was with only melee weapons.

On December 15 2012 14:38 BronzeKnee wrote:


Wait, what?

So gun control doesn't work? Let's check the facts.

The fact is, the United States has the highest murder rate of any first world country (higher than many third world countries too), and the highest gun related deaths of any first world country (again, higher than many third world countries too). Check the charts.

So when you combine these statistics:

Gun related Deaths by Country (per 100,000 population)
Japan 0.07
England 0.22
Ukraine 0.35
Spain 0.63
Germany 1.10
Israel 1.86

United States 9.00

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

With these:

UNODC murder rates most recent year:
Japan 0.3
Germany 0.8
China 1.0
United Kingdom 1.2
Greece 1.5
Iraq 2.0
Palestine 4.1

United States 4.2

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

You begin to see the issue.

There is no reason for a first world country to have third world murder rates, and access to guns plays a gigantic role in that. Our homicide rate should not be more than Palestine and double what Iraq has...

I'm not saying we should ban all guns, just saying that the United States is clearly doing a lot wrong with gun control, and the fact is, there are plenty of legal weapons to purchase a gun without any kind of background check, and that is wrong. The United States need some kind of real gun control, like every other first world country...

On December 15 2012 16:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:

Not really a fair comparison. The person with the knife could have just as easily killed. Thankfully, he didnt. Interesting to note that China requires you to register large knives with your chinese ID, so even their knives are regulated yet they still had the attack happen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_attacks_in_China_(2010–2011)

On December 15 2012 16:23 Caphe wrote:
So within 24 hours there are 2 incidents at the world most powerful countries USA and China. The US one claim 27 lives from shooting, the Chinese one claims NONE because the criminal was using a KNIFE.

Still, I don't see how gun control will work in USA, because it is clearly as light that Americans LOVE guns. No Senator will want to risk his carrier to push something like that. Still even if there are steps toward gun control, there are countless amount of guns that already out there.

Crazy bastards are everywhere in the world, but a crazy bastards with guns are much more deadly when he was with only melee weapons.

A Category firearms are those that do not fall into any other category, and are the vast majority of legally-owned firearms in New Zealand.
Registration is not required under the law but the police carry out a regime similar to registration for all but "A Category" firearms. Firearms in any other category require a "permit to procure" before they are transferred.
Except under supervision of a licence holder, owning or using firearms requires a firearms licence from the police. The licence is normally issued, under the conditions that the applicant has secure storage for firearms, attends a safety lecture and passes a written safety test. The police will also interview the applicant and two referees (one must be a close relative and the other not related) to determine whether the applicant is "fit and proper" to have a firearm. The applicant's residence is also visited to check that they have appropriate storage for firearms and ammunition. Having criminal associations or a history of domestic violence almost always leads to a licence being declined.

On December 15 2012 16:59 plogamer wrote:


People are arguing that gun control reduces the frequency of such attacks, and when it does occur, the severity.

The comparison was perfectly fair to highlight the argument.

On December 15 2012 17:08 TheRabidDeer wrote:

If you want to highlight that gun control reduces the frequency of such attacks, then it just proves it doesnt reduce the frequency of the attacks. If you want to look at severity of the attacks, it isnt entirely fair because a knife can kill really really easily if the person using the knife wants to kill. Throats are a pretty exposed part of the body and pretty effective at killing. Thankfully (as much as you can be thankful for such a horrible event) the person chose to slash at ears and heads rather than throats.

On December 15 2012 17:08 TheRabidDeer wrote:

If you want to highlight that gun control reduces the frequency of such attacks, then it just proves it doesnt reduce the frequency of the attacks. If you want to look at severity of the attacks, it isnt entirely fair because a knife can kill really really easily if the person using the knife wants to kill. Throats are a pretty exposed part of the body and pretty effective at killing. Thankfully (as much as you can be thankful for such a horrible event) the person chose to slash at ears and heads rather than throats.

On December 15 2012 15:52 Scarecrow wrote:
Wake up, you think Australia or any other country with strict gun control is in danger of being taken over by a tyrannical dictator? If your main argument for widespread gun ownership is to help protect against your own government, you're a complete nutjob. The post you quoted sums it up nicely, Americans just have their heads in the sand.

On December 15 2012 17:14 tomatriedes wrote:


With young children it might make little difference as they can't defend themselves, but would you really argue with a straight face that against adults it's just as easy to kill mass numbers with a knife as with a gun?

On December 15 2012 17:18 TheRabidDeer wrote:

Obviously it wont be as easy, though it can still be done. I am just saying though that it isnt a great comparison between the two.

On December 15 2012 17:31 Scarecrow wrote:
So I figured I would take one source from Crooked's 'Gun Facts' and look into it. I picked one from my home country (Aus). If it can't stand up to being looked into I doubt the rest of the 150 pages is water-tight.

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf, page 14.
"In 2001-2002, homicides were up another 20%"
Report #46: Homicide in Australia, 2001-2002, Australian Institute of Criminology, April 2003.

Finding the report wasn't that easy, as I had to wade through a bunch of gun lobbyists posting it as evidence on just about every forum on the net. Despite poor sourcing (no page numbers for quoting a direct statistic), I found the statistic quoted in the 48 page report. It's taken out of context. Here's the full text:

"There has been a 20 per cent increase in the number of homicides in 2001–2002 compared to the previous year. While the number of homicides is the highest since the inception of the NHMP in 1990, there has been a 25 per cent decrease in the number of firearms homicides." (p.12)

Looks like 'Gun facts' should've kept reading.

The report later clarified the 20% increase as a short term fluctuation:

"The fact that last year Australia recorded one of the lowest homicide victimisation rates since the inception of the NHMP in 1990, and this year recorded one of the highest, indicates that, due to the small numbers of homicides, there are bound to be fluctuations on a yearly basis." (p.13)

This is backed up by http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.html, a subsequent publication from the same institute that confirms 2002 as a fluctuation and shows general downwards trends in both gun homocides and homocides in general.

Following the 20% citing, Gun Facts has some uncited bullet point statistics (like a 19% increase in gun homocides since the confiscations) that are at odds with a Flinders University study (http://www.nisu.flinders.edu.au/briefs/firearm_deaths_2005.pdf) and the more recent AIC article cited above.

Now that's just the FIRST source I researched from Gun Facts and it's dodgy as fuck. Hiding behind 150 pages of cooked statistics is probably the most effective defense the gun lobby can muster at this point.

On December 15 2012 17:36 NotAPro wrote:
People who do shit like this will find a way to access guns despite the laws/regulations. Trying to stop gun crime by making guns illegal is the same as trying to stop people from doing drugs by making them illegal (that doesn't work). If you want to reduce the number of psychopaths going on killing sprees you have to reduce the number of psychopaths via improved mental health care systems. The people who do shit like this are sick and need help.

Georgia does not require a background check for the transfer of a firearm between private parties (such as a transaction at a gun show), according to the Law Center for the Prevention of Gun Violence (LCPGV) Ammunition sales are not regulated, nor is the number of firearms purchased at one time limited. According to a report by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, in 2006-2009, Georgia exported more guns used in crimes than any other state.

...

According to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Oklahoma has among the weakest gun laws in the nations, scoring a 2 of 100 on the organization's rating scale. Oklahoma does not require gun owners to obtain a license or register their firearms. No background check is required for purchase of a firearm between unlicensed individuals, and firearms dealers do not need a state license.

In addition, according to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, the state does not require its agencies to add the names of mentally ill individuals to the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).