Guns, Laws, and Panics: How Fear, Not Fact, Informs the Gun Rights Debate

**Roosveltrepub** · 19 Aug 11,, 22:41

Originally Posted by omon

oh, btw you said you had rifles in your house before, well you still alive, did anyone get killed with guns that were in your house???

hey i got a study for you too. lol
based on events recorded in various states, and collected by nra (available on american rifleman website, in section armed citizen), 100% of those used by this study, used weapons in defence, in places of their residense\buissnes, and in public places, survived, succeded in protection of residents\lives\bystanders.
in conclusion, an armed homeowner\ccw holder has much greater greater chance to protect his residence\live\bystanders, against invasion\attack as opposed to unarmed homeowner\non ccw holder.
this study is sound and can be used by anyone with confidence.

I'd love to see your study. I have a feeling if it exists it would be a survey. Of course if you are the 1 in 7000000 people to experience a home invasion and get the drop on an armed intruder you will fair better than one who doesnt have a gun or get the drop. in the other 6999999 homes that arent invaded having a gun increases the liklihood of homocide occurring by 2.7 times. I enjoyed my rifles i had an 1896 winchester which was my grand fathers originally, a breech loading 22 from the 30s and a pump shotgun. I only used the 22. target shooting meaning bottles was fun w/my friends in my 20s. We went to an old quarry and there was no risk of traveling bullets. I sold the lot to an old family friend who collected. there are lots of legitimate reasons to own guns beyond safety and imo the risk is probably a hell of a lot less than motocross or para sailing but for the purposes of keeping a home safe the numbers just say the opposite is true. I already said I have nothing but respect for licensed ccw permitees because of the grave responsibility it entails. I am not an anti gun nut but the premise of the original video was a call for unfettered ownership which would be a public safety issue and claims of increased safety vs non gun owners. i dont think anyone in the thread called for unfettered ownership and my response on that was to the video

**zraver** · 19 Aug 11,, 23:00

Originally Posted by Bigfella

Z,... about Australia, however, I'm in....

Welcome

First, unlike America, Australia actually has homicide rates around what you would expect for a prosperous, well run western democracy (slightly higher than comparable European nations, but still lower than almost any US state - even the largely rural ones)......

You also have overall crime rates comparable to Western Europe....

...Next time you talk about the impact of gun laws on homicide I not only look forward to you pointing out the dramatic drop in Australia, I expect it. You now have a much longer data set, not just the one the NRA likes. Ignorance is no longer an excuse.

no problem will do.

Additionally, in the 5 years after those laws were enacted firearms deaths from all causes in Australia almost halved. Be sure to bring that up too - looks like cause & effect (or perhaps causation & correlation only cut one way).

hrmm nationmaster isn't giving me YOY comparisons but perhaps that drop in deaths are robbers/beaters not being shot?

And finally, in the decade to 2010 the percentage of murders caused by firearms has ranged between 16% & 9%. In the preceding 6 years it ranged between 17% & 31%. The use of firearms in robbery & attempted murder have also dropped, in the case of robbery dramatically (the figures to 1998 were all between 15% & 9%, since then they have not gone above 7% & been as low as 4.5%. In other words, gun crime is lower, in some cases quite dramatically.

In a case of massaging numbers, what is the total number of robberies in 96 vs now? If as i suspect the number of gun crimes hasn't gone down, but non-gun crimes have gone up.

No doubt you can somehow spin this to prove that firearms restrictions in Australia have been a terrible mistake & that we should have followed the enlightened lead of our American cousins. By all means defend America's gun laws. If I lived there I'd probably want to be able to arm myself too. Not only has the horse bolted on sane firearms laws, it has died of old age. Just don't try to tell me that my nation's policies make me less safe - they don't. I have been walking around the streets of my ethnically heterogenous inner city neighbourhood in my LA - sized city at all hours of the night & day for almost 2 decades. I am cheek by jowl with drug dealers & prostitutes and in the shadow (literally) of housing projects. My mother worked in one of them for a decade. Neither of us have ever felt threatened. Murder is rare. I can't even remember any shootings here. If you want to trot Australia out as an example Z, use us as an example of the success of gun control.

Accordign to Nationmaster your nation ranks #1 for total number of crime vitims the US is 15th.... go figure

Chunder,

I can not support the contention that less guns has had a detrimental effect (Gun ownership was low in any case) in statistical analysis.

Your very own government admits that the crime rate is up, in some cases dramatically. The AIC states page shows assault is way up from around 600 victims per 100,000 (1996) to well over 800 (2007). Some crimes like robbery peaked and have since receeded. My guess is the peak was the gun using criminals now beign un-opposed and the declien is thier eventual arrest. But the overall rate remains high, same with sexual assault, your nation leads the US by 2.5x in rape rates....

Australian Institute of Criminology - Violent crime

Roosie, you did not prove crime rates where higher in the US, your source showed the opposite.

Per nationmaster the US is ranked 15th in number of crime victims behind
1. Austrailia
2. New Zealand
3. United Kingdom
4.Netherlands
5. Sweden
6. Italy
7. Canada
9. Malta
10. Denmark
11. Poland
12. France
13. Belgium
14. Slovenia

In the UK 26% of the [population is a crime victim. In the US its 21%

**FJV** · 19 Aug 11,, 23:27

Per nationmaster the US is ranked 15th in number of crime victims behind
1. Austrailia
2. New Zealand
3. United Kingdom
4.Netherlands
5. Sweden
6. Italy
7. Canada
9. Malta
10. Denmark
11. Poland
12. France
13. Belgium
14. Slovenia

For all I know these statistics put pissing in the canal while drunk in the same catagory as murder. Both are against the law in the Netherlands.

**zraver** · 19 Aug 11,, 23:47

Originally Posted by FJV

For all I know these statistics put pissing in the canal while drunk in the same catagory as murder. Both are against the law in the Netherlands.

Those states are for crime victims, not criminals.

**omon** · 20 Aug 11,, 00:23

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

I'd love to see your study.

lol, you already have, it is short and to the point.

**Roosveltrepub** · 20 Aug 11,, 00:28

Originally Posted by zraver

Welcome

You also have overall crime rates comparable to Western Europe....

no problem will do.

hrmm nationmaster isn't giving me YOY comparisons but perhaps that drop in deaths are robbers/beaters not being shot?

In a case of massaging numbers, what is the total number of robberies in 96 vs now? If as i suspect the number of gun crimes hasn't gone down, but non-gun crimes have gone up.

Accordign to Nationmaster your nation ranks #1 for total number of crime vitims the US is 15th.... go figure

Chunder,

Your very own government admits that the crime rate is up, in some cases dramatically. The AIC states page shows assault is way up from around 600 victims per 100,000 (1996) to well over 800 (2007). Some crimes like robbery peaked and have since receeded. My guess is the peak was the gun using criminals now beign un-opposed and the declien is thier eventual arrest. But the overall rate remains high, same with sexual assault, your nation leads the US by 2.5x in rape rates....

Australian Institute of Criminology - Violent crime

Roosie, you did not prove crime rates where higher in the US, your source showed the opposite.

Per nationmaster the US is ranked 15th in number of crime victims behind
1. Austrailia
2. New Zealand
3. United Kingdom
4.Netherlands
5. Sweden
6. Italy
7. Canada
9. Malta
10. Denmark
11. Poland
12. France
13. Belgium
14. Slovenia

In the UK 26% of the [population is a crime victim. In the US its 21%

Total crimes (per capita) statistics - countries compared - Crime data on NationMaster You pulled out violent crime when the claim was total crime rates. B&E, shoplifting, purse snatching, car theft, criminal vandalism are not violent. I dont think guns have much effect on the decison to commit most crimes. Most criminals are drug addicts or idiots who suck at weighing consequences. the bottom line is though a gun in a home in the usa increases the liklihood of homocide in the home by a factor of 2.7

**Chunder** · 20 Aug 11,, 00:48

Originally Posted by zraver

Chunder,

Your very own government admits that the crime rate is up, in some cases dramatically. The AIC states page shows assault is way up from around 600 victims per 100,000 (1996) to well over 800 (2007). Some crimes like robbery peaked and have since receeded. My guess is the peak was the gun using criminals now beign un-opposed and the declien is thier eventual arrest. But the overall rate remains high, same with sexual assault, your nation leads the US by 2.5x in rape rates....

Australian Institute of Criminology - Violent crime

1. Austrailia
2. New Zealand
3. United Kingdom
4.Netherlands
5. Sweden
6. Italy
7. Canada
9. Malta
10. Denmark
11. Poland
12. France
13. Belgium
14. Slovenia

In the UK 26% of the [population is a crime victim. In the US its 21%

5.2% of Australian Adults own a gun Z.
You can still get a gun if you so wish.

What does that tell you?

The storage requirements may have changed, the types of guns you can own may have changed and the background checks may have changed.

But absent a criminal record - you can still get a Gun. 0.06 % of licensed guns are stolen. of which 3% are later connected to an actual crime.
What does that tell you about how guns are acquired?

Perception is what it is all about - I think when it comes to that matter, firearm ownership is stigmatised instead of a welcome aspect. The culture is different.

Either way, securing a gun is the responsible thing to do. Amongst other opinions I have is the stigmatisation of ownership is a political hot potato which prevents reform of the act.

**Chunder** · 20 Aug 11,, 00:50

Originally Posted by FJV

For all I know these statistics put pissing in the canal while drunk in the same catagory as murder. Both are against the law in the Netherlands.

Last night the Star Force actually bothered to stop for a guy pissing on a wall in the alley. Found it somewhat amusing. They usually can't be bothered stopping except for something serious.

**omon** · 20 Aug 11,, 02:13

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

the bottom line is though a gun in a home in the usa increases the liklihood of homocide in the home by a factor of 2.7

yea, and renting appt\house increases by a factor of 4,4.

**Roosveltrepub** · 20 Aug 11,, 02:59

Originally Posted by omon

yea, and renting appt\house increases by a factor of 4,4.

yep it does so i would be on thin ice if I claimed renting makes me safer.

**omon** · 20 Aug 11,, 03:42

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

yep it does so i would be on thin ice if I claimed renting makes me safer.

well at least having gun in the house is about 1,5 times safer than renting a house.

**zraver** · 20 Aug 11,, 17:16

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

Total crimes (per capita) statistics - countries compared - Crime data on NationMaster You pulled out violent crime when the claim was total crime rates. B&E, shoplifting, purse snatching, car theft, criminal vandalism are not violent. I dont think guns have much effect on the decison to commit most crimes. Most criminals are drug addicts or idiots who suck at weighing consequences. the bottom line is though a gun in a home in the usa increases the liklihood of homocide in the home by a factor of 2.7

No I pulled up crime victims.

Purse SNATCHING isn't violent? So no old ladies robbed of thier SS check have fallen broken a hip and died? B&E isn't violent? Some burglars may not be violent but B&E is also a component of home invasion, stalking, domestic violence..... Car theft isn't violent.... so all those chases on COPS putting umpteen numbers of people in danger from a high speed chase isn't violent? Vandalism isn't violent...... someone needs to tell the KKK they are no longer a vilolent crimminal organization.

**Roosveltrepub** · 20 Aug 11,, 17:54

Originally Posted by zraver

No I pulled up crime victims.

Purse SNATCHING isn't violent? So no old ladies robbed of thier SS check have fallen broken a hip and died? B&E isn't violent? Some burglars may not be violent but B&E is also a component of home invasion, stalking, domestic violence..... Car theft isn't violent.... so all those chases on COPS putting umpteen numbers of people in danger from a high speed chase isn't violent? Vandalism isn't violent...... someone needs to tell the KKK they are no longer a vilolent crimminal organization.

The link i posted was my answer it speaks to total crime

**Bigfella** · 22 Aug 11,, 13:23

Originally Posted by zraver

hrmm nationmaster isn't giving me YOY comparisons but perhaps that drop in deaths are robbers/beaters not being shot?

Based on the remainder of this post Z I would suggest that nationmaster is worse than useless as a source. Oh, and while I am at it, whatever sources you have been using to inform you about firearms in Australia (I suspect that they originated with some sort of NRA propaganda, even if that isn't specifically where you plucked them from) are not much better.

As to your specific suggestion here, I suggest you stop thinking in the NRA bubble. Start with Chunder's post. He is a gun owner & is 'pro gun' by Australian standards. he pointed out that only about 5% of Australian adults actually own a gun. I'm sure he has figures, but I would be shocked if the number of criminals killed by a firearms owner in the commission of a crime in any 5 year period was even in double figures, let alone the 250 per year plus that would be required to account for this drop.

In a case of massaging numbers, what is the total number of robberies in 96 vs now? If as i suspect the number of gun crimes hasn't gone down, but non-gun crimes have gone up.

Massaging? The only person doing that here is you Z. You tried to 'prove' the failure of a policy based on a rise of 10 homicides in a single year. Having failed there you are now changing tack. In this case you are, once again, wrong. In relation to robberies both gun & non-gun crimes are down. Below is a table (sorry it didn't come out well) which shows YOY from 2001. Again, Z, it is crucial to understand that we have been adding population at about 100,000 per year during this period, so the absolute figures need to be read in that light.

Total 26 591 20 989 19 709 16 513 16 571 17 375 17 996 r16 513 15 238
No weapon used(e) 15 273 13 080 12 335 10 103 10 062 9 717 10 263 r9 732 8 685
Total weapon used 11 233 7 840 7 189 6 030 6 139 7 596 7 657 r6 725 6 510
Weapon n.f.d 1 107 969 755 736 817 522 685 584 543
Other weapon 1 504 1 293 1 227 1 097 915 1 094 1 310 923 1 058
Chemical na na — — 6 9 8 19 11
Bat/bar/club na na — — 178 610 407 503 522
Bottle/glass na na — — 60 206 267 246 226
Syringe 936 349 357 324 277 219 214 177 155
Knife 5 982 4 051 3 748 2 960 3 142 3 734 3 615 r3 225 2 914
Firearm 1 704 1 178 1 102 913 744 1 202 1 151 r1 048 1 081

Additionally, robberies on premises - break & enter - is down dramatically. Think about that for a moment Z. We have never been able to carry in Australia (or not in any relevant time period if at all). Thus, if guns are actually of any value in deterring crime it would be in deterring criminals from entering homes. Conversely, if 'disarming' Australians was to lead to a jump in any crime then logic would dictate that it would be the one crime on which guns should, theoretically, provide a deterrent.

In 1996 the number of B&Es was 402,079. It peaked in 2000 at 436,968, a rise of less than 10%. The following year they were similar, before dropping to 394,323. Since then there has been a steady fall to 222,664 in 2009. So, the 'disarming' of the population appears to have deterred criminals from breaking into homes - almost halving B&Es. Actually, since I'm not the one making odd corrrelation=causation claims I'm not actually going to claim that, but I know good & well that if the B&E numbers had doubled that is precisely what pro-gun folk would be doing.

So, just to reiterate. Not only are robberies down, but the percentage of robberies involving firearms is down overall - no 'substitution' & no jump in unarmed peope being terrorized by gun wielding criminals. This is in addition to the homicide figures I highlighted - a drop in absolute figures AND a drop in the percentage of homicides involving firearms. I'm not claiming that this is all due to the changes in firearms laws in 1996 & 2002, but I am claiming that those changes have saved lives & contributed to a generally safer Australia.

Australian Institute of Criminology - Chapter 1: Recorded crime

Accordign to Nationmaster your nation ranks #1 for total number of crime vitims the US is 15th.... go figure

What I figure is that the figures are worse than useless. Are you honestly going to tell me that Australia has more violent crime than any nation in Africa, Latin America or Asia? Really? You want to go with that?

Your very own government admits that the crime rate is up, in some cases dramatically.

Our Government doesn't 'admit', it tabulates & publishes. The only crime that is up 'dramatically' is assault. The others have either declined or risen by small amounts per 100,000.

My guess is the peak was the gun using criminals now beign un-opposed and the declien is thier eventual arrest.

So far your guesses haven't gone very well Z. I'd just stick to what you can clearly demonstrate.

But the overall rate remains high, same with sexual assault, your nation leads the US by 2.5x in rape rates....

Funny, it is like some Americans work off a shared crib sheet on this stuff. When I posted my stuff I said 'what money Z says something about rape'. Of course, you are not making a fair comparison. Our figures are for 'rape and sexual assault', which is everything from the most violent gang rape to someone copping a feel without invitation to statutory rape involving consensual sex. US figures are for 'forcible rape', a MUCH narrower crime. Additionally, rates of these crimes are notoriously hard to accurately calculate because reporting is such a factor.

US assault figures are similarly more narrowly calculated (though this doesn't relate to our rises). One of the reasons I try to stick to murder rates for comparisons is that other crimes can be murky. The UK & Australia tabluate these crimes very differently to the US - leading to misleading comparisons.

Now, can I suggest that you just stick to the US. If you think we are 'underarmed' I'm sure we will cope with the criticism. if, however, you want to use us as an example, make sure you use all the relevant data - which shows clear drops in gun crime at an even faster rate than overall crime in categories where firearms are most relevant in Australia - murder & robbery. The smart move would be just to leave us out. We don't prove your point & the harder you try to make it seem that we do the more tenuous your argument becomes.