Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Tut ;I see plenty of proposed solutions on this very posting that are not backed up by any serious empircal data . So why zero in on my comments except that they disagree with your preconceived perceptions?

---

Hi Tom,

Yes, I think you are right I am not being very fair to you. In the interests of fairness I should go through every other post as well. I am glad you have pointed this out. Yes,I think I was zeroing in mainly on your comments.

Believe it or not I was going to post a reply to J_9 saying that I was understanding of her position and that Australia is a very different culture. In fact, so different in certain areas we may as well be on different planets. Incredible as it seems from your point of view Australia legislation in this area is something most Australians are happy with.

One thing in my favour is that all of my comments were not aimed at specific domestic situations. There were of a general nature centred on studies and various types of arguments that can be employed.

Tut

Hello again,

I just read this and found it to be very profound:

Speaking of us,

Quote:

---

We have a generally more violent mindset, based on many years of conditioning and some distorted ideas about manhood, nationalism, group identity, and assertiveness. Thus all the guns, the extreme violence in films, video games, etc.

Basically, it's a cultural difference that's pretty deeply rooted.

---

Excon

Agree with the above.

I'm sorry. I can't go with the violent movies or video games. Anyone of sound mind and body knows that these are fictitious. Those that act out due to multimedia are NOT of sound mind. Now we are back to mental health.

Clete, why do you think that the mother was a "survivalist" simply because she owned guns?

Hello J:

They guy was saying that violent video's are a SYMPTOM - not a cause.

excon

I could go with that. Maybe for a disturbed individual.

BTW there are 2 Aspy's in my town, brothers, they can be VERY violent at times and have had to be restrained in public on numerous occasions, one of which I have witnessed in our local grocery store.

They are well known to our police department.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

I could go with that. Maybe for a disturbed individual.

BTW there are 2 Aspy's in my town, brothers, they can be VERY violent at times and have had to be restrained in public on numerous occasions, one of which I have witnessed in our local grocery store.

They are well known to our police department.

---

Probably also has other issues.

Quote:

---

The hypothesis that individuals with AS are predisposed to violent or criminal behavior has been investigated but is not supported by data.[1][30] More evidence suggests children with AS are victims rather than victimizers.[31] A 2008 review found that an overwhelming number of reported violent criminals with AS had coexisting psychiatric disorders such as schizoaffective disorder.[32]

---

(from the hated Wiki )
Asperger syndrome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

I can tell there is a solution it is very costly, try the Australian solution an amnesty and buy back where every surrendered weapon is valued and paid for and destroyed and no questions asked, and from that point on no military weapons, no semi automatics allowed, all weapons licensed, and secure, no carry permits except for cops and licenced security and no concealed weapons and just maybe you need a change to the constitution rewording the second amendment

You could even have a gun buy back led recovery with a lot of cash flowing from disused and surrendered weapons. just think 280,000,000 weapons at say $500.

How about you start with this solution
Adelaide mum Sam Paior plans toy gun 'buy-back' after Sandy Hook shootings in Connecticut | News.com.au

---

Yes, because surely the criminals will surrender their guns... no doubt.

No the criminlas won't surrender their guns, that is what you have a police force for, in fact, a police force that will have the power to seize illegal weapons once the amnesty has passed. However you may get a few nutcases to surrender their weapons or at least have reduced access to them. The statistics speak for themselves all over the world

Do I think years after our amnesty there are no illegal weapons in our society, no I don't, Just the other day a licenced gun dealer was found with 1,400 illegal weapons, but oddly enough there have been no massacres either. Look when I was young I enjoyed gun ownership, even carried a rifle in my golf bag. But I am no longer young and stupid. That gun wasn't obtained by legal means, but it wasn't illegal for me to own it. Today it would be, and I no longer own a gun or feel the need of a gun to feel safe.

I must chime in as I see a lot of all or nothing thinking. I don't think this is a one size fits all bandaid. For example when doing mindfulness there are lots of ways to practice it. Why? Because not every way works for every person. Same as this issue. I don't think it is get rid of all guns versus keep all guns. It is not all or nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

No the criminlas won't surrender their guns, that is what you have a police force for, in fact, a police force that will have the power to seize illegal weapons once the amnesty has passed.

---

They already have the "power" to seize illegal weapons... how would you suggest that they find these illegal weapons?

And I do know of areas that do gun buys. Philadelphia does it. The high crime area of Philadelphia... they do buybacks... know what wonderful results they're getting? They get garbage. They get junk. Bolt action rifles, rusted handguns, single shot, ww2 relics that people had no idea of value... Never have I seen a gun that would actually be used in a crime in these piles. No AR's, no AK's, no semi-auto handguns of any significance. Big deal. What a great job they're doing getting all those killer guns off the streets. Guns like that are guns that someone had laying around and figured they could cash in on them.

Buybacks don't work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mogrann

I must chime in as I see a lot of all or nothing thinking. I don't think this is a one size fits all bandaid. For example when doing mindfulness there are lots of ways to practice it. Why? Because not every way works for every person. Same as this issue. I don't think it is get rid of all guns versus keep all guns. It is not all or nothing.

---

I agree. It also involves the home and parenting, education and improved outlook for one's future, how our society deals with mental health issues, gun safety training, crime and gang prevention in our cities and towns, and so much more. The problems that need to be addressed are mind boggling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

I agree. It also involves the home and parenting, education and improved outlook for one's future, how our society deals with mental health issues, gun safety training, crime and gang prevention in our cities and towns, and so much more. The problems that need to be addressed are mind boggling.

---

That's some good thought and you are right. There is so much more to all of this other than simply pointing the finger at guns only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by odinn7

They already have the "power" to seize illegal weapons... how would you suggest that they find these illegal weapons?

---

I hear there is such a thing as probable cause which allows police to enter and search and I have no doubt they do seize weapons under such circumstances

Quote:

---

And I do know of areas that do gun buys. Philadelphia does it. The high crime area of Philadelphia... they do buybacks... know what wonderful results they're getting? They get garbage. They get junk. Bolt action rifles, rusted handguns, single shot, ww2 relics that people had no idea of value... Never have I seen a gun that would actually be used in a crime in these piles. No AR's, no AK's, no semi-auto handguns of any significance. Big deal. What a great job they're doing getting all those killer guns off the streets. Guns like that are guns that someone had laying around and figured they could cash in on them.

Buybacks don't work.

---

You missed the point of general amnesty and buyback, no examination of the weapon to see if it was used in a crime and yes you might get some junk but you will also get some not so junk. If it is done when there is a time of high public feeling and the making of certain weapons illegal you will get a better result. You see the problem is also the high level of criminality associated with drugs, etc. This isn't a panecea for all the ills of society, just a way of dealing with one of them

The street gangs will not be in any hurry to hand over their guns for a buyback.

Buybacks happen right now but again I say, it is 95% junk that wouldn't be used by criminals anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

I hear there is such a thing as probable cause which allows police to enter and search and I have no doubt they do sieze weapons under such circumstances



You missed the point of general amnesty and buyback, no examination of the weapon to see if it was used in a crime and yes you might get some junk but you will also get some not so junk. If it is done when there is a time of high public feeling and the making of certain weapons illegal you will get a better result. You see the problem is also the high level of criminality associated with drugs, etc. This isn't a panecea for all the ills of society, just a way of dealing with one of them

---

Probable cause to enter a home is only used if there is a crime in progress. Otherwise it takes a search warrant to enter a private premisis.

As far as your buy back amnesty goes. What if someone turns in a stolen gun? It should be returned to the original owner and not destroyed unless that owner can no long have guns. Also if that gun was used in a murder why would you throw out a key piece of evidence?

Dad if you have a large response you will not have the investigative teams to pursue such investigations, you could check seriel numbers, but if the gun was stolen it was probably used in a crime anyway and in the logical conclusion to your argument kept as evidence, not returned. The point of the amnesty is to get guns off the streets and out of the cupboards and not to chase every litte lead that might or might not be there, but the reward could be paid to the owner, not the person who handed it in. You have 280,000,000 guns in your nation, the logistics of chasing even a small proportion of them all down is staggering. It may even mean more would be stolen just to hand them in and get the reward

What was gun ownership in Aussie ? Less that 7% of the population ? Here you try taking people's guns away you better bring an army with you.

It's not like we didn't try an assault weapon ban before. The ban was ineffective for a decade before it expired . And yes I have a study to back that statement .
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf

Quote:

---

Should it be renewed, the ban's effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement. AWs were rarely used in gun crimes even before the ban.

---

Yes our gun ownership is less for a number of reasons, both cultural and historical. The amnesty after the Port Arthur Massacre reduced the incidence of gun ownship considerablyand the most telling statistic is the reduction in crime generally, it is as though the nation came of age

One reason is we are not subject to the same level of lawlessness you are, a true catch 22 situation. As far as an assault weapon ban is concerned action has to be more than just a ban, there has to be conscious and deliberate enforcement. I doubt a real reduction would have been achieved without the buyback, we had had various amnesties previously. You see reduction in weapon ownership as taking your guns away, we see reduction in weapon ownership as an improvement in civic safety and making the task of law enforcement easier. We have a low incidence of death by firearm and a low incidence of firearms being used in suicide, Sorry, but we don't generally regard shooting someone as a manly act.

I have no doubt we harbour groups who think as you do, mainly recent immigrants from the middle east and Yugoslavia. It is surprising and instructive to observe the backgrounds of those engaged in violence of various forms

I see reduction in gun ownership as taking my civil rights away.