The NRA Reckons Australia’s Anti-Gun Laws Are “A Mistake”; Australia Tells NRA To Go Fuck Itself

[kpete]

The NRA Reckons Australia’s Anti-Gun Laws Are “A Mistake”; Australia Tells NRA To Go Fuck Itself
By Alex McKinnon, 13/7/2015

.......................



Gun control advocates in the US regularly bring up Australia as an example of a country where gun restrictions can work; in his WTF podcast interview with Marc Maron, Barack Obama pointed out that after the infamous 1996 Port Arthur massacre, “the entire country said, ‘Well, we’re going to completely change our gun laws,’ and they did. And it hasn’t happened since.”

In an effort to debunk this crazy idea that fewer guns equals less gun violence, the NRA have published an article on one of its many websites claiming that Australia’s anti-gun laws were imposed against the will of most Australians and are actually making the country less safe. Tastefully titled ‘Australia: There Will Be Blood’, the article — which has been brought to people’s attention by the Herald‘s Nick O’Malley — claims John Howard’s anti-gun laws “robbed Australians of their right to self-defense and empowered criminals,” and that “there is now a growing consensus among impartial researchers that disarming Australia’s citizens did not make them safer”.



As you may have gleaned, that is a big ol’ pile of cowshit and the NRA are talking out of their arses. There have been a grand total of zero (0) mass shootings in Australia since those laws were passed, compared to the dozens that have transpired in America in the same time period.

More prosaically, gun-related deaths in Australia have fallen by around 7.5 percent every year since the laws were passed, and America’s gun homicide rate was 370 times higher than Australia’s in 2010-11. Somewhat miffed at the NRA’s inexplicable omission of these facts, people have begun raising them on social media using even more swear words than I have.


Read more at http://junkee.com/the-nra-reckons-australias-anti-gun-laws-are-a-mistake-australia-tells-nra-to-go-fuck-itself/61143#BbJ2si8Kawc7oDsk.99

[spanone]

1. K&R...

[Baadger]

41. I live in Australia

My friend owns a gun, and he owns it legally.

His rifle is licensed, and is for the purpose of shooting foxes on his small 10 acre farm. The foxes are a pest and they attack his chickens.

He is required to have 2x safes, one for the gun and a seperate safe for the ammo.

Sensible gun laws work well

[spanone]

42. thanks. i admire it when people see a problem and solve it.

[CoffeeCat]

64. We will most likely never solve it here...

I feel as if they've all ready won. They are so many (too many) guns.

These right-wing-nut-jobs are a bunch of adolescents who have listened to too much Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity and now they're doped up on fear and faux outrage. They've been convinced that they need more guns, and they blindly purchase more. Fox News keeps their paranoia stoked. They really are all a bunch of immature assholes. And they dictate gun policies in this nation that are killing innocents.

It's revolting and sickening.

How do the decent, intelligent and compassionate people take back our country? That is the question I have.

[Baadger]

77. Don't lose faith. It can and will be fixed one day

If Bernie gets his "political revolution" that he keeps talking about, he will fix it and will have the power to do so

I'm guessing that he will follow the Australian model and do a Compulsary Gun Buyback.

Here is a plan that I have worked out would cost a bit over a billion dollars, at a cost of about $40k per life saved and would fix the problem

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027221712

[valerief]

43. You're so lucky to not have the fog of religion clouding over this issue

the way we do here in America. "God-given right blah-blah-blah." If we didn't have so much religion here, we could cultivate some reason. But that's why the billionaires make damn sure we have religion up the wazoo.

[whereisjustice]

68. I believe that if someone uses your gun to commit a crime, that you be charged with felony

the gun nutters came out of the woodwork crying about being the real victim.

Unbelievable. NRA is like babies with guns. They won't even agree to take responsibility for the gun in their possession.

Instead, they want the rest of America to pay for the mess they create.

Right now that mess is estimated to be over $200 billion a year to tax payers.

[SwissTony]

2. I didn't agree with John Howard much, but he got this one right.

Yes, there was initial opposition to the gun buyback. But it was more a question of confusion than substance. A colleague of mine at the time was the wife of a farmer and she thought that they would have no means of protecting their livestock from dogs. I pointed out that the law would allow them to have a gun (and one with a bit of oomph), just not an Uzi.

[Fred Sanders]

3. The NRA is very scared these days....very...the public is getting angry as they should.

P.S. Whoever alerted on my anti-NRA OP post yesterday and got it hidden....did you really not understand the satire?

[ryan_cats]

6. They are incredibly scared.

They are incredibly scared.

Which reminds me that a comic once said, the meek shall inherit the Earth, then we can take it away from them after all, what can they do? They're a bunch of meeks.



ETA for punctuation.

[Kablooie]

13. I don't think so.

The public has been angry before but the public doesn't make decisions.
As long as congress is sitting in their pockets they are perfectly safe.
And with SCOTUS decisions coming up soon they may be able to get even more entrenched because the court has an opportunity to push the country much farther to the right permanently by rejiggering how congressional districts are decided.

[Cosmocat]

69. Right, Sandy Hook was the final stand

IMO. I was skeptical, and my NRA loving in laws were going out and buying up these 1,000 dollar assault rifles after it because they were all ginned up thinking Obama was going to take their guns and I told them, and my liberal friends who were SURE that was the game changer, that nothing would happen.

And, nothing did, at least federally.

If Sandy Hook didn't get ANYTHING done, we are lost on the issue.

[JDPriestly]

21. Fear is the real problem. 60% of gun owners say they have them for personal safety.

If we banned guns nearly altogether, a lot of people woule at first be more afraid, and would cheat on the laws. We have so many guns already in circulation that those that could be sold would become very expensive, very valuable.

But the fear behind the guns could be addressed, the absurd fear that makes Americans feel they need so many guns. And the anger.

My father used to say, "If someone wants to kill me, they will have to bring their own gun."

Maybe if we could convince people that the fact that they own a gun makes them LESS SAFE rather than more safe (statistically probably true but I would have to do the math), then maybe we could make progress on decreasing the numbers of guns in our country.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/165605/personal-safety-top-reason-americans-own-guns-today.aspx

Or do gun-owners lie to Gallup? Do they manufacture their fear and their stress and convince themselves they need guns for safety because in reality there lives are very boring and the guns fool them into thinking their lives are exciting?

Are guns in reality a reason to socialize with others and just something to think about and do in parts of the country in which there is going to church or to a bar and watching TV and not really a whole lot else to do besides work and raise your family if you have one?

[cascadiance]

27. Perhaps still have gun clubs or shooting ranges...

Where people wanting to shoot for sport, or perhaps keep old collectors' items as far as guns go could do so without them being in an unsafe unsecured place where they could be used against humans casually.

Switzerland has more of a gun culture closer to ours, but has been moving to more centralized locations for people keeping guns there too. Maybe that would be a good first step here.

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21379912

They still haven't passed legislation to move guns from ex-military owned home resident guns to gun ranges, but there have been votes to do so.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

37. Does gun ownership increase personal safety?

The answer, according to peer reviewed research published in medical journals, is NO. Having a gun in a household increases the risk of homicide threefold. See the OP snippet at http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141225979 and its links.

[Bettie]

51. But...but....but....

insert anecdote where armed person held off 50 crazed attackers to save his (wife, mother, baby) from being raped and killed.

insert second anecdote about how the cousin of a guy my brother knows held off fifteen gang members trying to invade his home and he got them all with his trusty handgun.

We know the drill. They don't like the truth, so they make up their own.

[Stonepounder]

62. I have grandkids in and out of my house all the time.

So, (if I were a gun owner) as a responsible gun owner, I would keep my gun(s) in a gun safe, right? So, when the crazed home-invaders came storming into my home, I would simply and politely ask them to hold off doing anything until I could find my glasses, check the combination, go into the other room, open my gun safe, take out my gun(s), make sure they were loaded and the safety off, walk back into the room filled with crazed home-intruders, and shoot them, right?

[Cosmocat]

70. Of course it doesn't, however

this country does not deal in sober reality.

It deals in hyperbolic bullshit.

And, the king of hyperbolic bullshit is the breathless horse shit pro gun shillers shift out.

To them, it is the old west ...

[branford]

23. The NRA must be terrified...

After all the gun rights victories in the courts and ever increasing support for firearms among the public and legislators, they just might become redundant.


http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2015/oct/02/mass-shootings-have-no-impact-on-support-for-gun-rights-in-the-us

http://www.gallup.com/poll/179213/six-americans-say-guns-homes-safer.aspx

http://www.gallup.com/poll/179045/less-half-americans-support-stricter-gun-laws.aspx

http://www.people-press.org/2014/12/10/growing-public-support-for-gun-rights/

[GoneFishin]

4. Facts scare the shit out of right wing bullshit artists.

[Lorien]

65. Which is why they rarely use them

and when they do they leave out critical information that would alter their conclusion. These days you can look up data on topics dear to the Right Wing and find one Google page after another of bullshit "facts" and graphs. The facts don't support their agenda, so they simply make shit up and their fellow Teapublicans believe it.

[GoneFishin]

71. Agreed. Like a dishonest car salesperson trying to sell you a piece of shit, they are going to lie

because if you knew the truth you would never buy their load of shit.

[stonecutter357]

5. K&R!

[DrBulldog]

7. We need to keep reminding ourselves that the gun-related death rate in the UK is . . .

. . . one-fortieth of ours. So our "greatness" of a people could be rightfully construed to be one-fortieth of that of the British because, after all, THEY SOLVED THE PROBLEM FOR THE COMMON GOOD. In America, the common good has apparently died and problems are not solved anymore.

[shenmue]

10. Does the NRA want more people to get shot?

Do they think that is a sign of a healthier country?

[Kablooie]

11. Yes,they do because it will sell more guns.

[hack89]

20. Then they are failing miserably

we have cut our murder rate in half over the pass 20 years. Every year there are fewer people being killed by guns.

[d_legendary1]

12. To the NRA the more guns a nation has on the streets

The healthier the country is as a whole. Always remember that up is down and wrong is right with these people.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

44. That's a double edge sword.

depending who's in the sights.

[whathehell]

15. I understand that the UK's gun laws are strict, even by European standards..

so it's unlikely we'll ever reach their status. That being said, we need, at very least, universal background checks

and an AWB. Then we can, if possible, take it further.

[branford]

24. Why exactly do we need an AWB?

ALL long-arms, not just "assault weapons," represent a staggeringly small percentage (and total number) of all firearm crime and accidents. AWB's are a solution looking for a problem.

Moreover, the research of the Department of Justice and Obama's National Institute of Justice found that the 1994 AWB, and AWB's generally, to have no measurable effect on crime or anything else.

Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf


Summary of Select Firearm Violence Prevention Strategies

https://archive.org/stream/NijGunPolicyMemo/nij-gun-policy-memo_djvu.txt

[whathehell]

29. Um, as I told you in another thread on gun control..

I'm no longer talking to anti-gun controllers. Buh bye.

[branford]

30. Well, that's certainly a convincing and well thought-out defense of AWB's.

It will take me hours to review the voluminous data...

[whathehell]

46. LOL. Obviously, it wasn't intended to be..

What part of "I don't talk to ant-guntrollers" do you not understand?

[hack89]

47. Real facts are awkward to fit into your world view

Smart to protect your self by ignoring them.

[whathehell]

50. Is that right?

The fact is, you haven't the slightest idea of what my "world view" is

You are now free to move to my ignore list with all the other gun nuts.

[hack89]

8. Australians own as many guns as in 1996

A study has found Australians now own as many guns as they did at the time of the Port Arthur shootings in 1996.

More than 1 million guns were destroyed in the aftermath of the massacre, but research shows Australians have restocked over the past 10 years, importing more than 1 million firearms.

Mick Matheson from Sporting Shooter Magazine says more people are licensed shooters than in the past, which has made a big difference to the number of guns in Australia. "The interesting thing is that at the same time gun crimes have still gone down," he said. We've got more shooters, we've got more firearms, but we've got fewer crimes.

"Suicide by firearm had been dropping for more than 10 years before that period, and it continued to drop immediately afterwards, which counts for the biggest fall in firearms deaths. That corresponds with a massive public campaign about suicide and suicide prevention.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-14/australians-own-as-many-guns-as-in-1996/4463150

One overlooked aspect of Australia's campaign to reduce gun deaths is their focus on suicide. Regardless of one's views on gun control, I think an anti-suicide campaign is desperately needed in America.

[americannightmare]

17. I can think of only one way to prevent suicides...

create an economy that works for everyone, and shrink income inequality. Which of course is the overarching solution to a lot of problems. Anything else is pissing in the wind in this insane country. Also, as long as we continue to project violence all over the world, with military bases in over one hundred countries and leaders who want to keep the world on fire with war, violence in general at home is not likely to decrease. Of course, getting rid of automatic and semi-automatic weapons would help tremendously, as they serve no purpose in civilized society.

[TBF]

22. ^^^ This. K&R nt

[louis-t]

26. Funny, you didn't make one mention of 'mass murder' which was

the point of the OP.

[hack89]

28. "fewer guns equals less gun violence"

that was what I was addressing. Turns out more guns do not equal more gun violence.

Also turns out that suicide prevention was a key part of reducing gun deaths.

[AlbertCat]

63. Turns out more guns do not equal more gun violence.

Just more mass murders.

[hack89]

66. Which were exceedingly rare to start with.

But reducing the number of deaths is not really what this is all about, is it? It's all about bashing gun owners and their "gunz".

[AlbertCat]

72. It's all about bashing gun owners and their "gunz".

No it's not that at all.


It about a cavalier attitude towards guns. Like they are some kitchen tool. OR even worse, some talisman that will protect you and your family from everything. The more you have, the safer you are!

[hack89]

73. Which is why I have two safes - one for the guns and one for the ammo

which is why I routinely take refresher safety classes with my family.

I don't own guns for security - I live in a safe area. My guns are so secure I couldn't shot an intruder in a timely manner if I wanted to.

[AlbertCat]

74. Then, sir....

..... you are NOT part of the problem.


Thank you for not being part of the problem. Sincerely.

[Darb]

32. Number of guns perhaps, but what type of guns? Category D?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia

"Firearms in Australia are grouped into categories set out in the National Firearm Agreement, with different levels of control. The categories are:

Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles including semi automatic, and paintball gun. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm.

Category B: Centrefire rifles including pump action (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. A category B license also covers category A but not vice versa

Category C: Self-loading rimfire rifles holding 10 or fewer rounds and pump-action or self-loading shotguns holding 5 or fewer rounds. Primary producers, occupational shooters[clarification needed], firearm dealers, firearm safety officers, collectors and some clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.

Category D: Self-loading centrefire rifles, pump-action or self-loading shotguns holding more than 5 rounds. Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies and occupational shooters. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.

Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. Neither South Australia nor Western Australia require deactivated handguns to be regarded as handguns after deactivation. This situation[when?] prompted the deactivation and diversion of thousands of handguns to the black market in Queensland[vague] – the loophole[which?] shut since 2001) This class is available to target shooters and certain security guards whose job requires possession of a firearm. To be eligible for a Category H firearm, a target shooter must serve a probationary period of 6 months using club handguns, after which they may apply for a permit. A minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun and be a paid-up member of an approved pistol club.[3]

These categories – A,B,C,D and H were those determined by the NFA. The others listed here are determined by the states that have implement them at their own discretion.

Target shooters are limited to handguns of .38 or 9mm calibre or less and magazines may hold a maximum of 10 rounds. Participants in certain "approved" pistol competitions may acquire handguns up to .45", currently Single Action Shooting and Metallic Silhouette. IPSC shooting is approved for 9mm/.38/.357 sig, handguns that meet the IPSC rules, but larger calibres are not approved for IPSC handgun shooting contests in Australia.[4] Category H barrels must be at least 100mm (3.94&quot long for revolvers, and 120mm (4.72&quot for semi-automatic pistols unless the pistols are clearly ISSF target pistols; magazines are restricted to 10 rounds. Handguns held as part of a collection were exempted from these limits.

Category R/E: Restricted weapons, such as machine guns, rocket launchers, full automatic self loading rifles, flame-throwers, anti-tank guns, Howitzers and other artillery weapons can be owned by collectors in some states provided that these weapons have been rendered permanently inoperable. They are subject to the same storage and licensing requirements as fully functioning firearms."

[NickB79]

34. Same thing has been happening in the US (falling murder rates with increasing guns in circulation)

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/05/07/181998015/rate-of-u-s-gun-violence-has-fallen-since-1993-study-says

Since 1993, the United States has seen a drop in the rate of homicides and other violence involving guns, according to two new studies released Tuesday. Using government data, analysts saw a steep drop for violence in the 1990s, they saw more modest drops in crime rates since 2000.

"Firearm-related homicides dropped from 18,253 homicides in 1993 to 11,101 in 2011," according to a report by the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics, "and nonfatal firearm crimes dropped from 1.5 million victimizations in 1993 to 467,300 in 2011.

There were seven gun homicides per 100,000 people in 1993, the Pew Research Center study says, which dropped to 3.6 gun deaths in 2010. The study relied in part on data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

A 50% drop in gun-related deaths is a massive shift in just 25 years, as big if not bigger than what Australia has seen. The difference is that, in the US, we haven't seen a corresponding drop in gun-facilitated suicides, as the NPR article makes clear later on.

Since 20,000 of the 30,000 gun deaths each year are suicides, we need to emulate Australia's suicide prevention campaign far more urgently than anything else.

[Duval]

9. K&R eom

[ananda]

14. Yep.

I am not surprised.

[whathehell]

16. Good for Australia! n/t

[pscot]

18. K&R

[Jack Rabbit]

19. K/R: Hey, NRA -- go fuck yourselves

[Paladin]

25. K&R.

[SoapBox]

31. K & R!

[ileus]

33. They willing gave up their rights....let's not follow their crappy lead.

This is America, we need to remain progressive on the 2A.

[Electric Monk]

38. Does the cognitive dissonance ever cause you actual physical pain?

"we need to remain progressive"

[ileus]

39. Limiting / removing rights isn't progressive.

[truebluegreen]

45. Depends on whose rights you are concerned about, I guess.

[hack89]

48. Progressives can be authoritarian for sure. Nt

[Logical]

60. Lol, you are nuts! Nt

[hack89]

49. Because restricting civil rights is so progressive. Nt

[Skittles]

55. no, it does not

if you want to cause them distress, make some phallic analogies

[Skittles]

54. ugh

[Logical]

59. Ok, now that proves you are not a reasonable gun owner. Nt

[Beartracks]

35. Guns don't kill people...

... Crazy, unstable, despondent, or drunk people *with easy access to guns* do.

================

[workinclasszero]

36. You mean...restricted access to military assault weapons of mass death

results in...GASP!...less massacres of innocent people!?!?!?

Logic, who knew?

The NRA is a terrorist enabling organization!

[beevul]

52. We already do that. N/T

[etherealtruth]

40. K&R

[beevul]

53. Not so much a country as a people...

Gun control advocates in the US regularly bring up Australia as an example of a country where gun restrictions can work

Not so much a country where gun restrictions can work, as a people who will tolerate them at the levels that were enacted in that country.


The American people would not.

[Logical]

61. So your claim is they didn't work? Nt

[beevul]

75. My claim is, that which the people will not allow can not work. N/T

[Dawson Leery]

56. This is one of those things America does not need to export to the world.

Gun violence is not something for America to be proud of.

[LW1977]

57. k&rto Australia

[SunSeeker]

58. K & R

[whereisjustice]

67. We all need to tell the NRA Fuck You. Hey NRA - Fuck You.

[bumprstickr]

76. but gunz make me feel manly!!!!!!!!!!

Just like the movies.