Pedestrians run down, shots fired in Melbourne (developing story)

[Unhinged]

Considering legal firearms are the only ones that should be considered based on this discussion you're having, because illegal firearms are just that....illegal. Whether illegally bought, owned, used, etc. You can't count illegal firearms into the discussion you're having with Noogai because those firearms are illegal....no matter how strict or lax the gun laws are or what country we're talking about. Criminals with guns will still have said guns and use them illegally, regardless of the fucking laws in place or what country they live in.

America could ban all guns tomorrow and it wouldn't make a difference because criminals would still own and use them illegally. Because it's already illegal for most of them to own them already or use them in the way they intend to use them. So stricter laws won't do dick to stop that. Even Australia still has gun issues, even if they are on a smaller scale than the US, because there's a thing called the black market and people who use said black market to acquire guns in any way they can.

Of course, based on what you've been saying up to this point, I don't expect you to understand any of it. Your head's in the sand on this one.

Taking illegal fire arms out of the discussion just makes it an easy win for me, it just makes the stats so lopsided it's a pointless discussion. Americans gun issues is precisely due to thier violent culture and easy access to guns.

- - - Updated - - -

No. You are using statistics in a way that is irredeemably stupid. 112 incidents in a year is literally nothing. It's a statistical irrelevancy. You're looking at it form an emotional lens and not an intellectual one. These are automatic weapons. Machine guns, not semi-automatic rifles. When you compare 112 incidents to the ten THOUSAND, it's irrelevant.




I'm Australian, what's your point?



Because you are dense. You made points, and I refuted them. What are your points? You haven't made any. You literally just said that if he had an automatic weapon, there'd be more deaths. Sad thing is, automatic weapons count for less than 1% of all deaths in the US, so your point is moot.

112 is a lot, 11k is a fucking shit ton so a giant you are making arguments that don't even come close to refuting anything, in fact it just proves what I said.

If he had an automatic weapon their would be more deaths, of course there would be because it is fucking easy to shoot and kill with them, it has nothing to do with been used in 1% of shootings in USA, it was a statement that automatic weapons are good killing random people in crowded areas. Do you know what if means?

[Ilir]

People lived tens of thousands of years without cars just fine. It wouldn't just help with things such as this but also help with nature preservation efforts and global warming. Why do you hate nature?

Meh no one cares about nature except those who want you to buy overly expensive stuff just to make you feel good about yourself.

I always like those arguments but each year you see the price of anything "eco-friendly" increasing.

Also you can't compare apples to rocks.

[Murderdoll]

There is definitely a different culture, that no doubt goes hand in hand with gun proliferation.

But Australia had 13 mass shootings from 1979-1996, then the gun buyback happened and we haven't had one since. I think it's undeniable that the laws were effective at limiting that kind of shooting.

And of course, Australia has never had a Second Amendment.

So, less than 1 a year. So whilst yes, it happened, it wasnt a pandemic.

Since 1996, id argue that weve still had a fair amount of gun crime. The Gangland War as well as the Kings Cross territory fights. Weve definitely still had lots of gun crime, just none of the "Crazy guy snaps" type crime and I spose thats what the gun laws were aimed at doing. Slowing down the process to restrict heat of the moment crimes.

...now they just bottle them.

[Mormolyce]

So, less than 1 a year. So whilst yes, it happened, it wasnt a pandemic.

Since 1996, id argue that weve still had a fair amount of gun crime. The Gangland War as well as the Kings Cross territory fights. Weve definitely still had lots of gun crime, just none of the "Crazy guy snaps" type crime and I spose thats what the gun laws were aimed at doing. Slowing down the process to restrict heat of the moment crimes.

...now they just bottle them.

You can argue it, but it won't be particularly true.



Whether or not the gun buyback was causative, homicide is down. Mass shootings are literally zero so far. Knock on wood.

[Noogai131]

You can argue it, but it won't be particularly true.



Whether or not the gun buyback was causative, homicide is down. Mass shootings are literally zero so far. Knock on wood.

Incorrect. Monash university shooting. Google it.

[Murderdoll]

You can argue it, but it won't be particularly true.



Whether or not the gun buyback was causative, homicide is down. Mass shootings are literally zero so far. Knock on wood.

My point was that there was still gun crime. You posted a picture showing it took 3 years for there to be a dip in homicides and then it spiked in 1999 (oh shit look, the height of the Gangland Wars).

Then you say "Whether or not the gun buyback was causative, homicide is down". Well if you aren't asserting this is the case with your picture, why are you posting it? Its not even a gun crime graph.

Monash University Shooting - 2 Dead 5 Injured. 2002.

Hectorville Shooting - 3 Dead 3 Injured with a gun. 2011

Hunt Family Shooting - 3 Dead - 2014.

Sydney Siege - 3 Dead 4 Injured - 2014.

Then there has been a couple with two dead such as Curtis Cheng by a 15 year old Middle Eastern teen.

Ingleburn, shot 3 killed 2 in 2016.

If were using simply homicide.

Lin Family Murders - 5 killed with a hammer.

[Mormolyce]

Incorrect. Monash university shooting. Google it.

I don't need to google it, I was on campus when it happened.

And it doesn't meet the definition of a mass shooting. He only killed two people.

Then you say "Whether or not the gun buyback was causative, homicide is down". Well if you aren't asserting this is the case with your picture, why are you posting it? Its not even a gun crime graph.

Because you said we'd had "a fair amount of gun crime". I posted that to put that in context. And I showed total homicides to illustrate that even if you include substitution of weapons, homicide is down.

None of those shootings meet the definition of mass shooting, which depending on the agency means more than 4-5 victims not including the shooter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting#Definition

[Noogai131]

I don't need to google it, I was on campus when it happened.

And it doesn't meet the definition of a mass shooting. He only killed two people.



Because you said we'd had "a fair amount of gun crime". I posted that to put that in context. And I showed total homicides to illustrate that even if you include substitution of weapons, homicide is down.

None of those shootings meet the definition of mass shooting, which depending on the agency means more than 4-5 victims not including the shooter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting#Definition

But it sticks to the same method of operation. Still a deranged gunman, and there's still victims. I would think that would be more important to people that believe the sorts of things you do than the amount of people shot? I mean, he only KILLED 2 people, but he shot a hell of a lot more. A mass shooting is now based on how much better a person is at putting bullets into another person?

[Mormolyce]

But it sticks to the same method of operation. Still a deranged gunman, and there's still victims. I would think that would be more important to people that believe the sorts of things you do than the amount of people shot? I mean, he only KILLED 2 people, but he shot a hell of a lot more. A mass shooting is now based on how much better a person is at putting bullets into another person?

There has to be a consistent definition of "mass shooting" to differentiate it from regular homicide, which is captured in the graph I posted above. And frankly, 4 people counting as "mass" is pretty generous. It's pretty simple, there's two separate issues:

1) Mass shootings - haven't had one since the gun buyback.
2) Regular homicides - have been declining and sit at about a quarter of the US's rate.

[Murderdoll]

None of those shootings meet the definition of mass shooting, which depending on the agency means more than 4-5 victims not including the shooter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting#Definition

I dont disagree with the definition. Id also agree that 4 is probably pretty generous.

If were going by this definition, Australia has had how many before the buyback?

Off the top of my head it was maybe three or four. Further reducing the seriousness of the gun problem in Australia.

We just didnt have a problem that warranted such a response and and it was an emotional knee jerk. Much like the current knee jerk over the Adler Shotgun.

Do I agree with the current laws around licensing etc, absolutely.

However, these laws are an excuse for inaccurate targeting of licensed shooters when the black market still supplies idiots with firearms.

[ramjb]

The mass murderer was a pro-BLM activist

[Radio]

The mass murderer was a pro-BLM activist

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/...4909789448.jpg

BLM isn't a thing down here, the cloest thing we have is campaigns against Aboriginal incarceration/poverty rates.

He's just speaking how every bogan in Australia does. You'll find that Australia is very anti-authoritarian by nature but not by legislation.

[Mormolyce]

I dont disagree with the definition. Id also agree that 4 is probably pretty generous.

If were going by this definition, Australia has had how many before the buyback?

Off the top of my head it was maybe three or four. Further reducing the seriousness of the gun problem in Australia.

You don't have to go off the top of your head, that information is available to you on google. I posted it earlier - 13 in the 18 years before the ban.

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health...hey-do-n597091

We certainly never had a problem on the scale of America's, no developed Western country does.

[Deleted]

Nice looking character too.