• 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!

Gun Control

Would you support more restrictions on guns if they had the potential to save lives?

  • Yes

    Votes: 59 39.9%

  • No

    Votes: 74 50.0%

  • Others

    Votes: 15 10.1%
  • Total voters
    148
haymarket said:
What happened to events like this when they made the changes in Australia - a nation with a similar frontier culture as the USA?
Click to expand...

I have no clue, perhaps you will enlighten us all. What happened in Mexico, one of our nearest neighbors?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I have no clue, perhaps you will enlighten us all. What happened in Mexico, one of our nearest neighbors?
Click to expand...

Editorial: Australian gun control holds lessons for U.S.

So, when a gunman killed 35 people in 1996 with a semiautomatic rifle in the tourist town of Port Arthur, on the island of Tasmania, the Australian people decided it was time for a change. A new law, backed by a conservative prime minister, divided firearms into five categories. Some of the deadliest assault-style weapons and large ammunition clips are now all but impossible for individuals to lawfully own. Firearms are subject to a strict permitting process, and dealers are required to record sales, which are tracked by the national and territorial governments. What's more, the law encouraged people to sell their firearms back to the government, which purchased and destroyed about 700,000 of them.

The results are hard to argue with. According to a Harvard University study, 13 gun massacres (in which four or more people died) occurred in the 18 years before the law was enacted. In the 16 years since there has been none. Zero. The overall firearm homicide rate dropped from 0.43 per 100,000 in the seven years before the law to 0.25 in the seven years after. By 2009, the rate had dropped further, to just 0.1 per 100,000, or one per million.

In the USA, the 2009 firearm homicide rate was 3.3 per 100,000, some 33 times higher than Australia's.
Click to expand...

I hope that helps.

Australia is a nation a whole lot like the USA. Mexico is an impoverished third world state with a pretty much failing government.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Australia is an island with a very strict immigration policy and very few ethnic ghettos.

1301.0 - Year Book Australia, 1995

Australian Immigration - Multiculturalism
Click to expand...

Australia was created by much the same immigrant population which created the early USA.

I fail to grasp any point in the reference to ghettos. Could you elaborate on that please and tell us why it is significant?

I looked over the article you provided and I came to a very different conclusion that yours. Australia is indeed a multi-cultural nation composed of a variety of groups - both immigrant and indigenous and shares much of the American experience in that way and in the development of the nation as a frontier country.

This will help

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Australia
 
Last edited:
Re: Gun Control (Once again, both sides are wrong)



Once again, both sides are wrong....

The proposition of gun control is, and always has been, a danger to our liberties. The right to own a gun is an essential American freedom protected by the second amendment. Not to mention gun control simply does not stop violence. After all guns don't kill people, PEOPLE kill people!

However the NRA proposal to put armed guards in every school is equally repulsive. Putting big men with weapons around students does not cause a "safer learning environment", it simply causes a state of paranoia which may cause some students to lose the ability to concentrate on gaining knowledge for feeling that they are in some sort of prison.

Tragedies like Sandy Hook are sad but nothing can really be done without other consequences...
 
haymarket said:
Australia was created by much the same immigrant population which created the early USA.

I fail to grasp any point in the reference to ghettos. Could you elaborate on that please and tell us why it is significant?

I looked over the article you provided and I came to a very different conclusion that yours. Australia is indeed a multi-cultural nation composed of a variety of groups - both immigrant and indigenous and shares much of the American experience in that way and in the development of the nation as a frontier country.

This will help

Demographics of Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Note the majority of US crime, especially gun crime, where it occurs, and who commits the vast majority of it. It has little to do with "mass killings", but much to do with overall crime (gang/drug culture). Also note differences in geographic security (island) and immigration control policy. Also note our "open" border with a "third world" and "ungoverned" nation, that you mentioned earlier. Controlling guns, is much like controlling "recreational drugs", virtually impossible under our current scheme of things.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Note the majority of US crime, especially gun crime, where it occurs, and who commits the vast majority of it. It has little to do with "mass killings", but much to do with overall crime. Also note differences in geographic security (island) and immigration control policy. Also note our "open" border with a "third world" and "ungoverned" nation, that you mentioned earlier. Controlling guns, is much like controlling "recreational drugs", virtually impossible under our current scheme of things.
Click to expand...

Crime is crime is crime. Citizens are citizens are citizens.

I note that you have ignored the actual statistics given to about the Australia experience. Why is that? The fact is that what they experienced was nothing less than a sea change - especially in the one area we are talking about - mass killings with guns.

I do NOT want to put words into your mouth so please correct or clarify if this does not apply to you: I cannot help but notice that among many on the right a new meme has popped up as a subtext in these discussions. It is said subteley and often in code. It is said in politically correct phrases as you just did above. But in the end what that are saying is pretty much this:

Its those damn minorities and their degenerate sub culture that are the problem. Decent white folks have no problem with guns.

This comes across over and over again from many posters and many commentators in the right wing media.
 
haymarket said:
Crime is crime is crime. Citizens are citizens are citizens.

I note that you have ignored the actual statistics given to about the Australia experience. Why is that? The fact is that what they experienced was nothing less than a sea change - especially in the one area we are talking about - mass killings with guns.
Click to expand...

I see that you choose to "zoom in on" the recent rise in "mass killings", as that much better fits the current push for "gun control", while ignoring the real majority of gun crime, committed largely in urban areas, by young minority males involved in gang/drug culture and using handguns (not "assault weapons"). When you make "the rules" only to justify your policy desires, it is easy to ignore all that does not support your idea. Focusing on .2% (or less) of gun crime as justification for "doing something", while ignoring all else that does not "get fixed" by that change in rights is silly. How effective was the last AWB? Does/did Australia ever have a 2nd amendment, right of its people to be armed? You constantly assert that our 2nd amendment right exists, yet see it only as a "limitted" or "dated" right that simply needs more limits and that "common sense discussion" somehow trumps it.
 
haymarket said:
Australia was created by much the same immigrant population which created the early USA.

I fail to grasp any point in the reference to ghettos. Could you elaborate on that please and tell us why it is significant?

I looked over the article you provided and I came to a very different conclusion that yours. Australia is indeed a multi-cultural nation composed of a variety of groups - both immigrant and indigenous and shares much of the American experience in that way and in the development of the nation as a frontier country.

This will help

Demographics of Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Funny, by far the largest number of "cultural" immigrants and indeed the highest percentage of heritage is English. Other Portions of the British Empire and British Commonwealth have large representations. The total sum/percentage of non-English related cultures doesn't even come close to the percentage of "African Americans". To call the very small percentage from outside the British Empire/Commonwealth a "multi-cultural" influence is stretching things just a bit far. No, it is by far an British based mono-culture.

While we do share some cultural aspects with Australia, there are many we do not. Our history is quite different also. Perhaps the biggest Cultural difference between the US and Canada and Australia is the fact that the US was created by Revolution against England, while Canada and Australia both remained under British rule much longer and still swear loyalty to the British Crown. The very nature of our Founding as an independent Nation was the basis of our "gun culture", much more so than being a Frontier society.
 
from the article I presented

60.2% of Australia's population declared European ancestry in the 2011 census
Click to expand...

Which leaves 40% non European.

As I stated - they are a multicultural nation.

But again, is there a subtext being attempted here that this is some sort of American unuque problem because of 'colored folks and their degenerate culture which is ruining it for all those decent white folks'?

And if that is denied as a subtext here - why is it important to even make race an issue?
 
haymarket said:
Crime is crime is crime. Citizens are citizens are citizens.

I note that you have ignored the actual statistics given to about the Australia experience. Why is that? The fact is that what they experienced was nothing less than a sea change - especially in the one area we are talking about - mass killings with guns.
Click to expand...

While assault and rape went up 40% and 20%. Sorry that does not float. I mean a woman being 3 times more likely to be raped in Australia vs the US is just sad.

haymarket said:
I do NOT want to put words into your mouth so please correct or clarify if this does not apply to you: I cannot help but notice that among many on the right a new meme has popped up as a subtext in these discussions. It is said subteley and often in code. It is said in politically correct phrases as you just did above. But in the end what that are saying is pretty much this:

Its those damn minorities and their degenerate sub culture that are the problem. Decent white folks have no problem with guns.

This comes across over and over again from many posters and many commentators in the right wing media.
Click to expand...

Well how about I say it....

The majority of gun crime comes from minority inner city communities. I know the truth hurts, but that is the problem. Minority on minority crime fueled by the drug trade. I mean when 75%+ of your gun crime comes from that alone, you need to stand up and take notice.

PS That number is a conservative estimate.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I see that you choose to "zoom in on" the recent rise in "mass killings", as that much better fits the current push for "gun control", while ignoring the real majority of gun crime, committed largely in urban areas, by young minority males involved in gang/drug culture and using handguns (not "assault weapons"). When you make "the rules" only to justify your policy desires, it is easy to ignore all that does not support your idea. Focusing on .2% (or less) of gun crime as justification for "doing something", while ignoring all else that does not "get fixed" by that change in rights is silly. How effective was the last AWB? Does/did Australia ever have a 2nd amendment, right of its people to be armed? You constantly assert that our 2nd amendment right exists, yet see it only as a "limitted" or "dated" right that simply needs more limits and that "common sense discussion" somehow trumps it.
Click to expand...

One problem at a time is a conservative approach on the road to hoped for perfection. I would also expect that possible solutions and reforms can impact many different areas of the crime problem.
 
Blackdog said:
While assault and rape went up 40% and 20%. Sorry that does not float. I mean a woman being 3 times more likely to be raped in Australia vs the US is just sad.



Well how about I say it....

The majority of gun crime comes from minority inner city communities. I know the truth hurts, but that is the problem. Minority on minority crime fueled by the drug trade. I mean when 75%+ of your gun crime comes from that alone, you need to stand up and take notice.
Click to expand...

When I made assertions of fact, I did what is normally expected in debate and provided the statistics. Could you please do the same?
 
haymarket said:
One problem at a time is a conservative approach on the road to hoped for perfection. I would also expect that possible solutions and reforms can impact many different areas of the crime problem.
Click to expand...

The "conservative" approach is to first amend the Constitution; not to simply pretend "shall not be infringed" really means "may be limitted as desired".
 
haymarket said:
When I made assertions of fact, I did what is normally expected in debate and provided the statistics. Could you please do the same?
Click to expand...

NYPD statistics show 96 percent of shooting victims are black or Hispanic and that minority groups represent 89 percent of all murder victims

The latest NYPD statistics show that crime is centered overwhelmingly in minority-group neighborhoods - NYPD statistics show 96 percent of shooting victims are black or Hispanic and that minority groups represent 89 percent of all murder victims - NY Daily News

would you like stats from Chicago, Detroit and Michigan etc?
 
haymarket said:
When I made assertions of fact, I did what is normally expected in debate and provided the statistics. Could you please do the same?
Click to expand...

More of the statistics you wanted to see...

Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
Moreover, Australia and the United States -- where no gun-ban exists -- both experienced similar decreases in murder rates:

Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a gun ban, America's rate dropped 31.7 percent.
During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.
Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women. - AUSTRALIA: MORE VIOLENT CRIME DESPITE GUN BAN

The public's perception is that violence is increasing, but trends in violent crime reported to police since the early 1990s reveal a mixed story. Homicide has decreased by nine percent since 1990 and armed robbery by one-third since 2001, but recorded assaults and sexual assaults have both increased steadily in the past 10 years by over 40 percent and 20 percent respectively. - Australian Institute of Criminology - Trends in violent crime

Nuff said.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The "conservative" approach is to first amend the Constitution; not to simply pretend "shall not be infringed" really means "may be limitted as desired".
Click to expand...

Actually the most conservative path is that of the Constitutional originalist who wants to know what the words meant at the time of its adoption. And that is the path I have pursued.
 
Blackdog said:
More of the statistics you wanted to see...

Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
Click to expand...


I thought we were talking about gun crimes?

Assault could be almost anything. Rapes are generally committed with a penis - not a gun.

And remember - the law was passed to stop mass murders with guns. And that it did as cited by the previous stats where NONE occurred. They achieved their goal and achieved it rather excellently.

The results are hard to argue with. According to a Harvard University study, 13 gun massacres (in which four or more people died) occurred in the 18 years before the law was enacted. In the 16 years since there has been none. Zero. The overall firearm homicide rate dropped from 0.43 per 100,000 in the seven years before the law to 0.25 in the seven years after. By 2009, the rate had dropped further, to just 0.1 per 100,000, or one per million.

In the USA, the 2009 firearm homicide rate was 3.3 per 100,000, some 33 times higher than Australia's.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Blackdog said:
NYPD statistics show 96 percent of shooting victims are black or Hispanic and that minority groups represent 89 percent of all murder victims

The latest NYPD statistics show that crime is centered overwhelmingly in minority-group neighborhoods - NYPD statistics show 96 percent of shooting victims are black or Hispanic and that minority groups represent 89 percent of all murder victims - NY Daily News

would you like stats from Chicago, Detroit and Michigan etc?
Click to expand...

Do you exist in a nation composed only of New York City?

Since you offered......... What I would like is statistics for the entire nation and not simply cherry picked by you to custom fit your own personal narrative.
 
haymarket said:
from the article I presented



Which leaves 40% non European.

As I stated - they are a multicultural nation.

But again, is there a subtext being attempted here that this is some sort of American unuque problem because of 'colored folks and their degenerate culture which is ruining it for all those decent white folks'?

And if that is denied as a subtext here - why is it important to even make race an issue?
Click to expand...

Ok, I accept that they are multi ethnic. That does not mean multi-cultural.

Also, where did you pull that number from? Under Ancestry of Australian population, from your own link, English (36.1%) (2011), Australian (35.4%) (2011), Irish (10.4%) (2011), Scottish (8.9%), Welsh (0.57%) (2011), and New Zealand (0.81%). All, at one time, were part of the British Empire/Commonwealth. You apparently left off those who only identify themselves as Australian. Perhaps you think they are the Aboriginal Australians, but the listing lists them Australian Aboriginal (0.58%). Kind of hard to prove the level of mutli-ethnicity, much less multi-culturalism when 35.4% claim Australia. We have no idea of their true ethnicity. However, it does go a ways in disproving broad claims of multi-culturalism.

You can have mono-culturalism and still have multi-ethnicity. The minority ethnics adopt and assimilate into the existing culture. This happened in the US, prior to the adoption of a "multi-cultural" stance by some in the US.
 
DVSentinel said:
Ok, I accept that they are multi ethnic. That does not mean multi-cultural.

Also, where did you pull that number from?
Click to expand...

That number was taken from the wikpedia article I linked to and reprinted. please see post 904.

I suspect you are confusing skin color with what is considered as multicultural. I suspect you would get a huge donnybrook from the Irish when you claim that their culture is the same as the British. ;)
 
Catawba said:
470_2560104.jpg
Click to expand...

So reactionary BS with 0 practical hands on experience? The only time the thought or discussion occurs to you is when the media gets a story of dead innocent people. Not when people defend themselves. So basically your opinion is worthless is because you have el zilcho experience discussing this topic when the media isn't blabbering on about it.
 
haymarket said:
That number was taken from the wikpedia article I linked to and reprinted. please see post 904.

I suspect you are confusing skin color with what is considered as multicultural. I suspect you would get a huge donnybrook from the Irish when you claim that their culture is the same as the British. ;)
Click to expand...

That is the link I used. As I pointed out, you apparently left of those claiming Australian, who's ethnicity is undetermined because there is already a classification for Australian Aborigine.

You also do not address my point about multi-ethnic not being the same as multi-culture.
 
Catawba said:
How about shotguns, do they count?
Click to expand...

Single shot break open? Over under? Side by side? You do know that if you own a pump...that isn't far down the line on bans. Ask Australia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom