Haz.
Regular Member
imported post
CHECK THIS OUT. The party that banned guns in Australia's Web Site? The public's comments are well worth a read also.
http://www.liberal.org.au/Issues/Community/Government-Democracy/Ideas/2010/04/21/It-is-time-for-evidencebased-gun-controls.aspx
It is time for evidence-based gun controls.
The 1996 National Agreement on Firearms was based on 1980s ideas from academics, activists and senior police of the National Committee on Violence. Rhetoric about 'America' blamed ordinary people for problems that have little to do with Australian reality. The emotional climate of 1996 resulted in laws that show 'moral superiority', but place very unfair burdens on innocent Australians that use firearms in daily life.
Recent research has shown that the high cost and regulatory burdens were not particularly beneficial in terms of lives saved or reduced violence. Social contagion theory best accounts for the massacres not as functions of 'availability' but of imitation, triggered by activism and sensationalist media reporting. The cessation of massacres is likely because media stopped framing stories that such crimes were 'easy' because of then gun laws.
A new Agreement on firearms should keep the helpful parts while dropping the parts that are based in elite contempt.
What helped:
- The national framework to prevent leakage to the black market;
- Shooter licences with background checks;
- Safe storage standards.
What is excessive and should be removed:
- Long waiting periods drawn out further by bureaucratic delays.
- Way excessive restriction on ordinary sporting guns like semi-auto .22s and repeating shotguns.
- Excessive restrictions on air rifles, air pistols and replicas;
- Viciously excessive requirements on pistol club probation and attendance.
- Denial of the human right of self-defense.
- Obstructive police policy and abuse of police discretion.
- Waste of the public's time and money through bad process design and failure to use technology.
Fourteen years is enough. Its time these offensive laws were fixed to balance the protection of the community with the legitimate conduct of these sports and rural working life.
__________________________________________________________________
Here's my 2 comments.
Haz. 15/05/10 12:28 PM Report Abuse
I read the papers every day and all I see is a daily sustaned attack on innocent law abiding citizens going about their business by criminals. Fact is, criminals never handed in ONE Friearm during the buyback and never will because as we all know they do not obey any laws. Criminals are having a field day knowing full well the average person on the street cannot properly defend themselves if attacked. A firearm is a tool just as a hammer, band saw, knife, or an axe is a tool. None are dangerous unless used with the intent to harm. Australias gun laws have done nothing to prevent crime, in fact the crime rate has gradually increased since the laws were passed.
CHECK THIS OUT. The party that banned guns in Australia's Web Site? The public's comments are well worth a read also.
http://www.liberal.org.au/Issues/Community/Government-Democracy/Ideas/2010/04/21/It-is-time-for-evidencebased-gun-controls.aspx
It is time for evidence-based gun controls.
The 1996 National Agreement on Firearms was based on 1980s ideas from academics, activists and senior police of the National Committee on Violence. Rhetoric about 'America' blamed ordinary people for problems that have little to do with Australian reality. The emotional climate of 1996 resulted in laws that show 'moral superiority', but place very unfair burdens on innocent Australians that use firearms in daily life.
Recent research has shown that the high cost and regulatory burdens were not particularly beneficial in terms of lives saved or reduced violence. Social contagion theory best accounts for the massacres not as functions of 'availability' but of imitation, triggered by activism and sensationalist media reporting. The cessation of massacres is likely because media stopped framing stories that such crimes were 'easy' because of then gun laws.
A new Agreement on firearms should keep the helpful parts while dropping the parts that are based in elite contempt.
What helped:
- The national framework to prevent leakage to the black market;
- Shooter licences with background checks;
- Safe storage standards.
What is excessive and should be removed:
- Long waiting periods drawn out further by bureaucratic delays.
- Way excessive restriction on ordinary sporting guns like semi-auto .22s and repeating shotguns.
- Excessive restrictions on air rifles, air pistols and replicas;
- Viciously excessive requirements on pistol club probation and attendance.
- Denial of the human right of self-defense.
- Obstructive police policy and abuse of police discretion.
- Waste of the public's time and money through bad process design and failure to use technology.
Fourteen years is enough. Its time these offensive laws were fixed to balance the protection of the community with the legitimate conduct of these sports and rural working life.
__________________________________________________________________
Here's my 2 comments.
Haz. 15/05/10 12:28 PM Report Abuse
I read the papers every day and all I see is a daily sustaned attack on innocent law abiding citizens going about their business by criminals. Fact is, criminals never handed in ONE Friearm during the buyback and never will because as we all know they do not obey any laws. Criminals are having a field day knowing full well the average person on the street cannot properly defend themselves if attacked. A firearm is a tool just as a hammer, band saw, knife, or an axe is a tool. None are dangerous unless used with the intent to harm. Australias gun laws have done nothing to prevent crime, in fact the crime rate has gradually increased since the laws were passed.
- Report Abuse
700 people 'like' the idea of re-visiting gun c ontrols and basing them on evidence. This is not a free vote collector for either major party, but its high time that seething moral indignation be checked for rationality when we are writing laws - not just in gun law, but many other 'hot button' issues.
- Report Abuse
Wow! Logic being (almost) considered by a political party.
A commitment to review the current oppresive gun laws would be enough to win my vote, and I have not voted Liberal in my life.
- Report Abuse
200 registered supporters and 711 'like' the idea, but now the toxic people against evidence-based revision of the gun laws are increasing their 'dislike' count.
- Report Abuse
I read the papers every day and all I see is a daily sustaned attack on innocent law abiding citizens going about their business by criminals. For example. Daily Telegraph this morning. A teenager, just out of juvenile detention goes into Woolworths, steals a 30cm kitchen knife, and stabs a fellow student, despite a ban on carrying knives in public. Banning knives has not stopped criminals from getting a knife and using it on an innocent member of the public, just as the firearms ban has not stopped criminals using firearms in their crimes. Why, because criminals do not obey the law. I carried a pocket knife for 40 years untill the knife ban. I now leave it at home in a draw. So what has the knife ban done. Nothing but stop law abiding citizens from carrying a knife in their pocket. Luckily the young victim lives.