Australian gun laws

[Nuc]

OK here we have the PM of Australia (fairly conservative) and the leader of the Greens (left wing) agreeing on how to approach the gun issue. Please explain to me why the American model is better and in what way the results are healthier. Because I don't get it.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/as....ap/index.html

SYDNEY, Australia (Reuters) -- Australian Prime Minister John Howard on Tuesday decried the negative "gun culture" in America after the deadly shooting spree at a U.S. university, holding up tough gun laws in his own country as the answer.

Howard introduced strict gun-ownership laws after the shooting massacre of 35 people in the southern island state of Tasmania in 1996.

"We had a terrible incident at Port Arthur, but it is the case that 11 years ago we took action to limit the availability of guns," said Howard, who extended his sympathies to the families of the 32 people killed at Virginia Tech university on Monday at the hands of what he described as "a crazed gunman."

"We showed a national resolve that the gun culture that is such a negative in the United States would never become a negative in our country."

In 1996 a gunman with a semi-automatic rifle killed 35 people at Port Arthur in Australia's worst modern-day shooting massacre.

The horror of that massacre prompted Howard to confront Australia's gun lobby and imposed laws banning almost all types of semi-automatic weapons.

The government spent A$300 million ($250 million) buying more than 600,000 weapons from farmers, hunters and other members of the public before the new laws took hold.

But Howard told reporters: "You can never guarantee these things won't happen again in our country."

More than 30,000 people die from gunshot wounds in the United States every year and there are more guns in private hands than in any other country. But a powerful gun lobby and support for gun-ownership rights have largely thwarted attempts to tighten controls.

Australia's small Greens party called on Tuesday for a further review of the nation's gun control laws, saying the latest U.S. shooting involved a multiple-shot pistol and there were an estimated 250,000 handguns in Australia.

"We really need to go back and look at the laws in Australia which permit handguns to be available, and that includes handguns with up to 10 bullets in the magazine," Greens Senator Bob Brown told reporters.

"We Greens are saying let's remove the potential, as far as we can, for a repeat massacre by somebody wielding a multiple-shot handgun," he said.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press

[Gunny]

OK here we have the PM of Australia (fairly conservative) and the leader of the Greens (left wing) agreeing on how to approach the gun issue. Please explain to me why the American model is better and in what way the results are healthier. Because I don't get it.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/as....ap/index.html

SYDNEY, Australia (Reuters) -- Australian Prime Minister John Howard on Tuesday decried the negative "gun culture" in America after the deadly shooting spree at a U.S. university, holding up tough gun laws in his own country as the answer.

Howard introduced strict gun-ownership laws after the shooting massacre of 35 people in the southern island state of Tasmania in 1996.

"We had a terrible incident at Port Arthur, but it is the case that 11 years ago we took action to limit the availability of guns," said Howard, who extended his sympathies to the families of the 32 people killed at Virginia Tech university on Monday at the hands of what he described as "a crazed gunman."

"We showed a national resolve that the gun culture that is such a negative in the United States would never become a negative in our country."

In 1996 a gunman with a semi-automatic rifle killed 35 people at Port Arthur in Australia's worst modern-day shooting massacre.

The horror of that massacre prompted Howard to confront Australia's gun lobby and imposed laws banning almost all types of semi-automatic weapons.

The government spent A$300 million ($250 million) buying more than 600,000 weapons from farmers, hunters and other members of the public before the new laws took hold.

But Howard told reporters: "You can never guarantee these things won't happen again in our country."

More than 30,000 people die from gunshot wounds in the United States every year and there are more guns in private hands than in any other country. But a powerful gun lobby and support for gun-ownership rights have largely thwarted attempts to tighten controls.

Australia's small Greens party called on Tuesday for a further review of the nation's gun control laws, saying the latest U.S. shooting involved a multiple-shot pistol and there were an estimated 250,000 handguns in Australia.

"We really need to go back and look at the laws in Australia which permit handguns to be available, and that includes handguns with up to 10 bullets in the magazine," Greens Senator Bob Brown told reporters.

"We Greens are saying let's remove the potential, as far as we can, for a repeat massacre by somebody wielding a multiple-shot handgun," he said.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press

It isn't the laws .... it's the people.

[Gaffer]

Lefties want complete and utter disarmament. Then for sure only criminals have guns and NO ONE can fight back.

[Nuc]

Lefties want complete and utter disarmament. Then for sure only criminals have guns and NO ONE can fight back.

You didn't answer the question I posed. Is the American system better or worse than the Australian system?

[Nuc]

It isn't the laws .... it's the people.

Considering that Australia consists of people descended from convicts, that's saying something about the American gene pool! LOL.

[Gunny]

Considering that Australia consists of people descended from convicts, that's saying something about the American gene pool! LOL.

LOL ... I'd say more a difference in cultures. We're rapidlylosing our cultural identity; which, oddly enough, was founded on civil disobedience to the King's Law, and nay other law the culture has chosen to ignore since. Disrepect for the law and/or violating it is even "cool" in some parts of our culture.

There's also the fact that our culture is violent. We're raised on it. It's glorified.

I don't recall seeing much of those things in Australia. People in general appear to respect the law. Australians turned in their guns. I guarnatee you I wouldn't. I'll take my chances alive in court if I ever had to use it rather than be victim to a law that disarmed me and not the criminal.

Then you can go to geography. It's much easier to enforce a law on an island some people want to go to than a nation with borders everyone seems to want to get to.

[5stringJeff]

You didn't answer the question I posed. Is the American system better or worse than the Australian system?

The American system is better, because it leads to more freedom.

I'm not sure if this has been said elsewhere (I've been off the boards for a few days while moving) but if Va Tech students had been allowed to carry arms to class, there may have been a student who could have stopped the tragedy when the body count was lower than 31.

[GW in Ohio]

The American system is better, because it leads to more freedom.

I'm not sure if this has been said elsewhere (I've been off the boards for a few days while moving) but if Va Tech students had been allowed to carry arms to class, there may have been a student who could have stopped the tragedy when the body count was lower than 31.

Jeff: That may be true, but do you really think it's a good idea for college students to be walking around with pistols strapped to their hips?

Have you ever been to a fraternity party? Are you aware of the amount of drugs and alcohol consumed by college students? Do you really want these kids wearing firearms?

[manu1959]

You didn't answer the question I posed. Is the American system better or worse than the Australian system?

per your post current austrailian law allows the type of gun that was used yesterday...so it is a tie

[Abbey Marie]

Many people argue that outlawing drugs is a waste of effort and money, because people will find a way to buy drugs anyway. What makes those people think that outlawing guns will be any different? Those who want to break the law will find a way, right?
Seems to me that will leave only the law-abiding folk unarmed.

[5stringJeff]

Jeff: That may be true, but do you really think it's a good idea for college students to be walking around with pistols strapped to their hips?

Have you ever been to a fraternity party? Are you aware of the amount of drugs and alcohol consumed by college students? Do you really want these kids wearing firearms?

Carrying to a frat party and carrying to class are two different things. IMO, guns and alcohol never mix. And if college students, who are of legal age to vote, join the military, enter into contractual agreements, etc. etc. make the free choice to carry concealed, then it ought to be their choice. Besides, you'd probably never know who's carrying and who's not - and that's what makes CCL's so dangerous for maverick shooters like the guy at VA Tech.

[theHawk]

OK here we have the PM of Australia (fairly conservative) and the leader of the Greens (left wing) agreeing on how to approach the gun issue. Please explain to me why the American model is better and in what way the results are healthier. Because I don't get it.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/as....ap/index.html

SYDNEY, Australia (Reuters) -- Australian Prime Minister John Howard on Tuesday decried the negative "gun culture" in America after the deadly shooting spree at a U.S. university, holding up tough gun laws in his own country as the answer.

Howard introduced strict gun-ownership laws after the shooting massacre of 35 people in the southern island state of Tasmania in 1996.

"We had a terrible incident at Port Arthur, but it is the case that 11 years ago we took action to limit the availability of guns," said Howard, who extended his sympathies to the families of the 32 people killed at Virginia Tech university on Monday at the hands of what he described as "a crazed gunman."

"We showed a national resolve that the gun culture that is such a negative in the United States would never become a negative in our country."

In 1996 a gunman with a semi-automatic rifle killed 35 people at Port Arthur in Australia's worst modern-day shooting massacre.

The horror of that massacre prompted Howard to confront Australia's gun lobby and imposed laws banning almost all types of semi-automatic weapons.

The government spent A$300 million ($250 million) buying more than 600,000 weapons from farmers, hunters and other members of the public before the new laws took hold.

But Howard told reporters: "You can never guarantee these things won't happen again in our country."

More than 30,000 people die from gunshot wounds in the United States every year and there are more guns in private hands than in any other country. But a powerful gun lobby and support for gun-ownership rights have largely thwarted attempts to tighten controls.

Australia's small Greens party called on Tuesday for a further review of the nation's gun control laws, saying the latest U.S. shooting involved a multiple-shot pistol and there were an estimated 250,000 handguns in Australia.

"We really need to go back and look at the laws in Australia which permit handguns to be available, and that includes handguns with up to 10 bullets in the magazine," Greens Senator Bob Brown told reporters.

"We Greens are saying let's remove the potential, as far as we can, for a repeat massacre by somebody wielding a multiple-shot handgun," he said.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press

I think its stupid to use such a rare and isolated incident such as VT's or the 35 people killed before in your country to change laws. Obviously this could of happened again in Australia since they didn't ban handguns. Its just so ridiculous for any country to say they have "better" gun control laws. The two countries are different, with different ethnic populations, different crime rates, different cultures. Australia may have reduced gun crime rates due to their laws, but that doesn't mean if the same laws were applied here that it would help. From what I've heard in most U.S. cities that have had high crime rates apply strict gun control laws, crime goes way up (like D.C.), and when concealed weapons laws are allowed the crime goes down.

Force is in many cases necessary to stop bad people from doing bad things. Its why cops carry guns, and in a broader sense its why we have a military. We're never going to be able to control people in order to prevent murder, period. So lets at least give people the power to defend themselves.