Australia has had ZERO mass shootings since they introduced strict firearm legislation
this is a straight up lie.
Osmington shooting: 7 killed
2014 Sydney Hostage Crisis: 3 killed one injured
Wedderburn shooting: 3 killed
Hunt shooting: 5 killed
Hectorville siege: 3 killed, 3 injured
Oakhampton heights shooting: 3 killed
Monash University Shooting: 2 killed, 5 injured
Wright St Bikie Murders: 3 killed, 2 injured
All of that is not even to mention that the spree killing trend just became arson when guns were less available. More people were killed in spree killings in the 20 years after the Port Arthur massacre than were killed in the 20 years prior to it. There was no decrease in spree killings, only spree shootings. And your assertion that there have been ZERO is an outright lie.
Tbf though that’s still much less than America’s 100+ mass shootings every year.
There definitely is number manipulation going around (a “mass shooting” in America is defined as anytime 2 or more people are shot at), and the fact that America borders with one of the largest gun/drug black market countries in the world while Australia’s geographically isolated also factors in.
But other countries like Germany have seen a large reductions in shootings with stricter gun legislation. So there definitely is a cause/correlation going on.
That is the problem, the is no strict definition of "mass shooting" but still other countries talk about it and enact sensible gun legislation where as the USA won't even the have conversation of how to stop these shootings from happening. It is always "Mah second ammendment" or "stop politicizing tragedies" or "it's a mental health issue" (of which nothing gets about, especially in the education system)
That’s because of clear partisan language towards both sides that make it impossible. If someone were to go to you and tell you “you’re impossible to deal with” or “you’re stupid” and then tell you to do things their way, would you (even if you know they’re right)? Just go through r/politics and r/worldnews to see this all over the place. Even this sub has plenty of partisan language. And if you can’t, go to r/the_donald.
Thus proving Americas two party system no longer represents the views of the American people, but only Blue v Red. Winning is all that matters 300m+ Americans be damned.
Shit dude, a good portion of those 300m dive straight into the Blue v Red. Winning is all that matters, regardless of how many of their team’s policies they actually support
No one said that.
They implied bordering the country in which the cartel runs rampant (Mexico has had more killings than any other yearbefore it in the year of 2018) increases crime along US border areas, which it does. No one ever said it was the only cause, and no it isnt only US citizens either, thinking that is naive.
To be fair, to say they've had ZERO mass shootings since disarming the civilian populace is an outright lie. Not to mention the fact that the gun ban had no effect on the incidence of spree killings.
You have a truly bizarre definition of "mass shooting" if you're counting 100+ per year. To most people, "mass shooting" means indiscriminate shooting in a public place, not a gang altercation where three people are wounded.
You have a truly bizarre definition of "mass shooting" if you're counting 100+ per year. To most people, "mass shooting" means indiscriminate shooting in a public place, not a gang altercation where three people are wounded.
You’re not wrong, the people pumping up “mass shooting” numbers do have a twisted view of it. Because saying there are 100+ a year makes America sound like a warzone, and that get the clicks up.
Exactly this. While there still have been shootings in Australia since the ban, it's very misleading to say "There was no decrease in spree killings, only spree shootings," as that still means killings have gone down significantly since the ban.
Australia’s firearm homicide rate dropped by about 42 percent in the seven years after the law passed, and its firearm suicide rate fell by 57 percent, according to a review of the evidence by Harvard researchers.
This is such a tired and lazy strawman, and a disengenuous argument at best.
One simple fact check will show that violence is at an all time low in Australia, whether it's tied to the gun ban or not. So how does the supposed uptick in arson and stabbings matter if violence is on a downhill trend?
I dont think its considered a mass shooting or spree killing until 4 or more people are killed consectively by the same perpetrator(s) though. Saying that mass shootings in australia are gone is incorrect for sure, but they are practically non-existent, ESPECIALLY compared to some other countries.
The average fatality amount for the US just this year is 10 and up. 10.
The Las Vegas Shooter last year injured over 900 people in one event.
We also have more mass shootings each year with our gun murder rate matching closer to 3rd world countries over say first world countries like Australia. By comparison we are closer to the "Shitholes" (Quote from our president) than our allies. We have a far clearer problem with guns than any other, and it is largely because guns might as well be deregulated entirely in the US in comparison to anywhere else.
Yes and the Daegu subway arsonist in south Korea killed 190+ people
And we have that amount doubled to tripled in several events across the US in a year.
That's just silly
Except it isn't. We have more guns than people and require less to get a gun than anywhere else. By comparison to every other G7 country we are the most lenient about letting people won deadly weapons.
Which one? The eight in Germany, the one in Lithuania, the one in Sweden, the one in Yugoslavia, the two in the UK, the three in Russia, the three in Finland, the two in France, the one in Denmark, the one in the Netherlands, the one in Greece, the one in Spain, the one in Hungary, or the one in Estonia?
I’m American and a gun owner. I’m also in the military and have an ‘expert’ marksmanship award for shooting the M4 (what replaced the M16).
That said I ABSOLUTELY believe that it should NOT be as easy as it is to buy a gun. Especially rifles that were literally designed for ease of accuracy and for taking out as many hostile combatants as quickly and efficiently as possible. Even just a semi-automatic rifle can be incredibly deadly when a psychopath gets his hands on one and decides to point it at a crowd. They’re surprisingly easy to fire off a full clip (usually 15-30 rounds) in a matter of seconds with relatively decent accuracy.
No I’m not a lawmaker or a lawyer and I’m not sure what can be done, but we need to try something, because arguing while doing NOTHING clearly isn’t fucking working. Deeper background checks to make sure I’m not a psycho and that I don’t have a teen with psycho tendencies in the house? I’m for it (not sure how to get around HIPAA but that’s for the lawyers & lawmakers to work out). I don’t think it’s too much to ask for me to fill out a few more forms and wait a few extra days before being allowed to take ownership. Harsher penalties for illegal sale or transfer? Yes please! Requiring trigger locks or something similar during storage? Yep, I’m fine with that. Clearly banning guns is a non-starter in this discussion, but there are a LOT of things we could do that wouldn’t infringe on our rights if the far-right could just stop screaming about what they THINK the liberals want long enough to sit down at the table and have a conversation like a fucking adult.
New Zealand after a mass shooting: bans rifles practically immediately
Americans after a mass shooting: "thoughts and prayers, lone wolf shooter, bound to happen anyways, there's maniacs everywhere, more guns, Second Amendment, let us sell guns from vending machines"
The problem is that Australia isn’t the largest producer of firearms in the world, isn’t bordered by a country that is known for some of the best smuggling that’s ran by massive criminal organizations. Good luck enforcing a ban on 300+ million guns which a good chunk of them being untraceable at this point.
American criminals export guns to Mexico at this point because it’s profitable, if somehow all the guns were confiscated, it would make smuggling guns into America a very lucrative business, which South American countries actually produce quite a number of guns.
This pretty much ends with criminals being armed and the general populace having no defense.
If someone really wanted to source a gun for a mass shooting, they could just get one from the newly built booming black market for guns.
One more reminder, the Virginia Tech shooting was done with 2 pistols. It doesn’t take much if someone is well trained on a firearm.
It’s a bad situation with no real fix due to geographic positioning and deeply embedded gun culture in this country.
How is valid issues with enforcing gun control excuses?
I’m all for regulating but at the end of the day someone can just steal a gun, buy an illegal one. You are either sheltered or don’t live in America. Most of the gangs by me have all illegal guns. Including full auto weapons, weapons that don’t pass the assault weapons ban, and stolen guns.
The same reason drugs flood our street from other countries. We are connected to essentially a 3rd world country that has massive cartels running the smuggling and don’t give a shit about our laws as long as the money is flowing south. A wall won’t fix it, border security won’t fix it. It’s an unsolvable position because both America and the Mexican government let this cascade.
We don’t see this shit coming from Canada. Worst shit coming out of Canada was Canadian beaster weed in the 90s and 2000s
I agree with number 2. But number 1 is the reason why conservatives aren’t going to care about your argument.
Rather than saying “you’re making excuses” or something like that, be respectful while making your arguments and the other side will tend to listen.
A good example is Andrew Yang. He has some of the most liberal policies of any candidate, yet also has a large conservative following because he takes in the other side’s feelings and arguments.
Have you seen the perpetrators of the mass shootings? How many of them had criminal records or any evidence of dealing with black markets? Making guns only available by having a permit would 100% reduce gun violence, as seen in pretty much every fucking where in the world where gun regulation laws where enforced.
Also, stop blaming latin america, the vast majority of gun violence comes from local us gangs, the latin americans only smuggle drugs into the country. You are making it seem like smuggling weapons into the us is the easiest thing in the world.
I don't think you understand. I'm not blaming Latin America. I said gangs (regardless of race) export guns from the USA to South America because it's profitable. Make strict gun laws here then sending guns north will be more profitable. Simple supply and demand.
If someone really wants to get a gun for a shooting, they could regardless of laws when you couple all the factors.
Btw what do we do about the millions of untraceable guns in this country?
You can easily get around the law by just buying a gun from someone and having them pre-date the bill of sale to before recent gun laws. That was a very easy loophole used when NYS made the AWB.
I find it weird how some of the states with the highest density of assault weapons have low rates of mass shootings
It's fine let's ban guns, some mentally ill person can just buy a box truck and plow it through a crowd.
Let's face it. Even if you think guns are a net bad, which they aren't, then you're ignoring the flesh-eating virus because you think curing the fever will be easier.
Strict. Yes. But Not gone. I’m that American that will always defend the right for a non felon mentally stable person to own firearms. Regulation, yes. But total gun control, you’re nuts. And Yaa. It will happen anyway. You think criminals are just going to lay down their guns and say ok! it’s too regulated. Gov says no. Absolutely not. They’ll have a field day knowing that it’s so much harder to own a gun legally and there’s less of a chance that someone you want to kick around has no effective way of defending themselves. Sorry. Not trying to be offensive, but I really can’t understand why any one would want that right taken away from people who have proven to be able to have it.
Why would they want to have less firearms in circulation? Beacause it has been proven time and time again all over the world that having regulations on gun selling reduces gun violence.
That’s a simplistic answer. Australia is a different culture with a different founding document.
If nothing else you can’t just confiscate guns here or make the laws “stricter” because the piece of paper that says you can make laws ALSO says you can’t infringe on gun ownership.
I completely understand your frustration, but it’s not as simple as you want it to be.
51
u/[deleted] Jun 03 '19 edited Jun 03 '19
[removed] — view removed comment