This is personal. New NRA President lies about Aussie gun laws

[canetoad]

snip..

Ms Meadows said that she travelled across Australia and visited small towns and cities as well as Sydney, Port Arthur and Canberra where she says she met with MPs whose pro-regulation views were at odds with people who lived outside cities, who she said were "very pro-gun".

Former prime minister Mr Howard dismissed Ms Meadows' claims.

"There is no denying that there has been a reduction in firearm deaths and mass shootings since the National Firearm Agreement," he told The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.

"A 2011 study found that the average firearm homicide rate went down by 42 per cent in Australia in the seven years after the agreement compared with the seven prior.

"Following the agreement and until 2018, Australia had experienced no mass shootings, while in the 18 years prior it had experienced 13.

https://www.theage.com.au/world/north-america/john-howard-rejects-us-gun-lobby-s-criticism-of-australian-gun-laws-20190730-p52c41.html

It's worth reading the whole article; we had an outbreak of mass shootings in the 80s and 90s - still, they were nowhere near the carnage that regularly happens in the US.

The NRA has long used Australia’s gun laws as an example to its members of what might happen in America if they did not maintain their support and donations for the lobbyist.

All I can suggest is the NRA members visit and see for themselves what a non-oppressed society we are. I live in a rural area, where farmers have firearms for legitimate reasons. I never thought I'd be applauding a conservative politician, but John Howard did the right thing with the gun buy-back and most Aussie agree.

[uponit7771]

1. NRA is one group that is for openly displaying darkness

[safeinOhio]

2. NRAs love for trump could bring us

the same gun laws they have in Russia and North Korea. Sleep with dogs and wake up with fleas.

[Skittles]

3. NRA uses fear and ignorance, just like their bosses at the GOP

fuck all those cowards

[Aussie105]

4. Take away my guns?

Oh No! I will get mugged, raped in my sleep, my testosterone levels will drop to girlie level, and anyway . . . the Constitution says I should own guns - many of them, the louder the better!

Yes, joking.

I live in Australia, we got rid of guns decades ago, nothing bad has happened since then. Try it, you may like a safer society.
NRA needs to crawl back under it's rock and die.

[barbtries]

5. it's not about oppression

it's about the money. NRA is the lobbying arm of the gun industry.

I wish to hell they didn't exist and we could show some common sense and concern for human life in this country.

[modrepub]

6. NRA just a front for gun industry

to increase sales. That’s all they are interested in is selling more guns mainly to the same people who already own them.

And I bet LaPierre has well manicured hands and feet, owns lots of Varvatos clothing and travels first class at all times

[gordianot]

7. The NRA will eventually make gun ownership almost impossible.

They are irresponsible about the one principal they were founded, “gun safety” and exist today totally as a manufacturers political lobby.

[jimmy the one]

8. nra has been truth twisting aussie positions for years

canetoad: I live in a rural area, where farmers have firearms for legitimate reasons. I never thought I'd be applauding a conservative politician, but John Howard did the right thing with the gun buy-back and most Aussie agree.

I remember admiring & defending former PM Howard decades ago, for his position supporting gun control. I believe he once said, paraphrasing - we can learn many things from the united states, but firearm policy is not one of them. So true, for just about anywhere.

There was so much truth twisting nra and pro gun propaganda back in the 90's, it was actually pretty easy to refute.

anti aussie propaganda: It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2%.
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6%.
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44% (yes, 44%)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300%. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!
https://www.factcheck.org/2009/05/gun-control-in-australia/

I don't have time to get the exact figures, but the 44% figure I distinctly remember as being high, maybe double what it was, if not pertaining to just one territory rather than australia wide. And this was cherry picked on the crime increasing side, disregarding the bulk of aussie crime which remained either static or decreasing. Truth matters little when you're a gunnut.
The Victoria 300% increase stat is the real kicker to 'lying with statistics'. Homicide in victoria for that year was 19, due to a spike, up from 6 the previous year. These are figures that occur over a weekend in some american cities. (not sure if 19 was total homicide or gun related, wouldn't matter much for the argument).
So the gun lobby had its maths wrong, since 19 is just over 200% higher than 6, not 300% - (100% higher than 6 would be 12, ergo 200% would be 18). And by omitting actual figures, the spike took on sinister & misleading support that the buyback was a failure. I bet the following year homicides 'dropped by 50%' or so back to normal, something the gun lobby wouldn't want us to know.
I also recall an aussie atty general (?) Dale something, objecting to an nra tv ad which stated 'blood running in the streets' in australia after the buyback, complete with houses burning in the background & terrified people running about, asking nra's charlton heston to cease & desist with the flapdoodle.

Another note. I tentatively presume aussie conservatives (are they called tories too?) to be similar to british tories in that they are not as far to the right as american far right wing politicians. IE far right american conservatives have no problem with assault rifles being legal, but british tories in parliament would by & large not agree assault rifles to be legal. I perceive parliamentary tories would equate to more centrist american conservatives.
Cheers.