• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Australia's suicide/murder rate after gun buybacks

Northern Light

Northern Light

The Light of Truth
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
8,723
Reaction score
5,345
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/92127...t=entry&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook

One of the most significant provisions of the NFA was a flat-out ban on certain kinds of guns, such as automatic and semi-automatic rifles and shotguns. But there were already a number of such guns in circulation in Australia, and the NFA required getting them off the streets.

Australia solved this problem by introducing a mandatory buyback: Australia's states would take away all guns that had just been declared illegal. In exchange, they'd pay the guns' owners a fair price, set by a national committee using market value as a benchmark, to compensate for the loss of their property. The NFA also offered legal amnesty for anyone who handed in illegally owned guns, though they weren't compensated.

...

What they found is a decline in both suicide and homicide rates after the NFA. The average firearm suicide rate in Australia in the seven years after the bill declined by 57 percent compared with the seven years prior. The average firearm homicide rate went down by about 42 percent.
Click to expand...

The U.S. is indeed a different country. Our Second Amendment would prevent a ban on some of the kinds of guns that Australia has banned. I do wonder though about introducing a mandatory buyback program for people who want to voluntarily turn in their arms? If we can't easily regulate arms in a way that doesn't infringe upon the Constitution, then perhaps we could at least reduce the number in circulation? Small favors, but it's just an idea. Kind of like how we don't stop people from smoking but we incentivize them like crazy to stop. As a result there are far fewer smokers now than ever before.

Australia's statistics are pretty impressive. 42% is nothing to scoff at.
 
Northern Light said:
https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/92127...t=entry&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook



The U.S. is indeed a different country. Our Second Amendment would prevent a ban on some of the kinds of guns that Australia has banned. I do wonder though about introducing a mandatory buyback program for people who want to voluntarily turn in their arms? If we can't easily regulate arms in a way that doesn't infringe upon the Constitution, then perhaps we could at least reduce the number in circulation? Small favors, but it's just an idea. Kind of like how we don't stop people from smoking but we incentivize them like crazy to stop. As a result there are far fewer smokers now than ever before.

Australia's statistics are pretty impressive. 42% is nothing to scoff at.
Click to expand...

From 1996 to 2012, the US homicide rate fell about the same rate.
 
Northern Light said:
https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/92127...t=entry&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook



The U.S. is indeed a different country. Our Second Amendment would prevent a ban on some of the kinds of guns that Australia has banned. I do wonder though about introducing a mandatory buyback program for people who want to voluntarily turn in their arms? If we can't easily regulate arms in a way that doesn't infringe upon the Constitution, then perhaps we could at least reduce the number in circulation? Small favors, but it's just an idea. Kind of like how we don't stop people from smoking but we incentivize them like crazy to stop. As a result there are far fewer smokers now than ever before.

Australia's statistics are pretty impressive. 42% is nothing to scoff at.
Click to expand...

Why are you comparing firearm homicide rate specifically?... you should compare general homicide/suicide rate, because there is an argument out there that people will find a way to kill people and themselves regardless.

Sounds like an intentional cherry picking of data.... Not that you can't have the same point otherwise... the tactic shows that this article is not being genuine.
 
celticwar17 said:
Why are you comparing firearm homicide rate specifically?... you should compare general homicide/suicide rate, because there is an argument out there that people will find a way to kill people and themselves regardless.

Sounds like an intentional cherry picking of data.... Not that you can't have the same point otherwise... the tactic shows that this article is not being genuine.
Click to expand...

My assumption is that the over all rate would have been positively impacted by the removal of guns (I don't have data for this) since it's easiest to kill someone with a gun vs. other means (this is a well established fact for homicide).
 
Northern Light said:
My assumption is that the over all rate would have been positively impacted by the removal of guns (I don't have data for this) since it's easiest to kill someone with a gun vs. other means (this is a well established fact for homicide).
Click to expand...

The data is useless without proper comparisons... all you have is assumptions.

At the very least the decrease is a dishonest application of the statistics.
 
Northern Light said:
https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/92127...t=entry&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook



The U.S. is indeed a different country. Our Second Amendment would prevent a ban on some of the kinds of guns that Australia has banned. I do wonder though about introducing a mandatory buyback program for people who want to voluntarily turn in their arms? If we can't easily regulate arms in a way that doesn't infringe upon the Constitution, then perhaps we could at least reduce the number in circulation? Small favors, but it's just an idea. Kind of like how we don't stop people from smoking but we incentivize them like crazy to stop. As a result there are far fewer smokers now than ever before.

Australia's statistics are pretty impressive. 42% is nothing to scoff at.
Click to expand...

I someone here wants to sell off guns they do not want it is simple, sell them, they will be all sold in less than a week.
Voluntary buybacks have all been total failures and a mandatory one would be Unconstitutional and the vast majority would Not Comply.
 
Northern Light said:
My assumption is that the over all rate would have been positively impacted by the removal of guns (I don't have data for this) since it's easiest to kill someone with a gun vs. other means (this is a well established fact for homicide).
Click to expand...

No, our crime rate was declining before the ban, and continued to decline after the ban. The ban prevented mass shooting, but had little impact on overall trends.
 
Northern Light said:
https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/92127...t=entry&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook



The U.S. is indeed a different country. Our Second Amendment would prevent a ban on some of the kinds of guns that Australia has banned. I do wonder though about introducing a mandatory buyback program for people who want to voluntarily turn in their arms? If we can't easily regulate arms in a way that doesn't infringe upon the Constitution, then perhaps we could at least reduce the number in circulation? Small favors, but it's just an idea. Kind of like how we don't stop people from smoking but we incentivize them like crazy to stop. As a result there are far fewer smokers now than ever before.

Australia's statistics are pretty impressive. 42% is nothing to scoff at.
Click to expand...

I would be willing to wager $1000 that if we RIGHT NOW....changed our policies on drugs and ended the war on drugs...we would see murder rates at the same levels of Europe and Australia. Right now we have a $150,000,000,000 a year illicit drug trade. Talk about a crazy price. You can ban all the guns you want. That is enough to buy them off police, military, and whoever else. And if we attacked their market and reduced their profits? We are talking about a major profit loss and making the drug trade not worth killing over. And severely reducing our rates.
 
spud_meister said:
No, our crime rate was declining before the ban, and continued to decline after the ban. The ban prevented mass shooting, but had little impact on overall trends.
Click to expand...

The Australian ban didn't really recent mass shootings. They've had shootings with 3 dead and with shot, which would be mass shootings in the US. They still allow handguns with 10 round magazines just like the killer used at VT to kill 33 people. They still allow 5 shot bolt action to rimfire rifles like the shooter in Cumbria UK used to kill 12 people. If the means are still there then the ban isn't to be credited.
 
Rucker61 said:
The Australian ban didn't really recent mass shootings. They've had shootings with 3 dead and with shot, which would be mass shootings in the US. They still allow handguns with 10 round magazines just like the killer used at VT to kill 33 people. They still allow 5 shot bolt action to rimfire rifles like the shooter in Cumbria UK used to kill 12 people. If the means are still there then the ban isn't to be credited.
Click to expand...

Have a look at the number of mass shootings by any definition pre and post-ban, there's been one, off the top of my head, since 1996, whereas there averaged one a year previously.
 
Australia and other countries are really not countries we want to model after. Sure they have reduced gun crimes, but they generally have increased rape, assault, and robbery victims as a result. When you can't even have pepper spray, it's too strict and what a lot of people are concerned about. The reality is things are not good there either. People have a right to self-defense, just not parading around with an armory like it's something to be proud of when it's killing innocent people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom