This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Russell E (talk | contribs) at 19:02, 28 August 2005 (Olympics). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 19:02, 28 August 2005 by Russell E (talk | contribs) (Olympics)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Okay, so I was reading an argument that within the first year homicides went up 3.2%,(& homicides with firearms went up 300%), Australia-wide, assaults went up 8.6%; Australia-wide, armed robberies went up 44% (Victoria only). I'm aware that the robbery number was cherry-picked as the biggest increase, because the Australian number wasn't as distinctive/large.
It's been almost a decade, and I've not seen any re-caps (along with comparisions of the newer pistol laws - before and after)
I also haven't seen any data from before (ie: were the trends going up, staying stable, or going down previous to this legislation), I haven't seen any numbers per capita (are there simply more homicides because there are more people?), or data from economic strata (are more people becoming poor?)
I know that in the U.S. the crime trends were already headed down, and advocates tend to claim those decreases for gun control. What's the status here?
-- ~ender 2005-02-26 08:04:MST
I think you have it backwards. The biggest change to gun laws in the U.S. recently is that many states have allowed the right to carry a concealed weapon. This has been accompanied by a decrease in the crime rate, and it's gun-rights activists, not gun-control ones, that seem more likely to cite crime-rate figures lately. Funnyhat 05:53, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
"moral panic" stuff - not specific to Austraila
Removed:
The attitudes towards law-abiding firearm owners and the opponents of the 1996 gun laws by the politicians of Australia, the media, the anti-gun movement and the community in aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre and the rapid introduction of the 1996 gun laws were an example of moral panic on a large scale with many people using law-abiding firearm owners and those who opposed the 1996 gun laws (both gun owning and non-gun owning) as scapegoats for what happened at Port Arthur. Also, the rapid introduction of the 1996 gun laws highlights serious flaws in Australian democracy with the parliament rapidly passing these laws without proper, rational debate and scrutiny of these laws as well as threatening politicians who are members of political parties that back the bans but hold pro-gun sentiments and objected to the bans with removal from the party if they didn't support the political party's line and stance on the gun laws.
- To claim this is specific to Australian democracy is just nonsense; politicians *always* respond to public outcries on a specific issue, and the response is often ill-considered legislation that advances other agendas that couldn't get passed in more normal times. Hence the PATRIOT Act in the United States, to pick one very well known example. Or witness the belting the left of the Democratic Party was given by the hawkish centrist wing on their opposition to the Iraq War in 2003, despite being proven completely right by history. --Robert Merkel 06:49, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
Olympics
The last sentence is not a sentence. Perhaps someone who can divine its intent can complete it. --Rkundalini 19:02, 28 August 2005 (UTC)