XPost: uk.politics.guns, aus.politics.guns, aus.politics   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
   From: trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au   
      
   On 4/24/2013 10:32 PM, SaPeIsMa wrote:   
   > "F Murtz"  wrote in message   
   > news:kl8if8$kb6$1@dont-email.me...   
   >> Trevor Wilson wrote:   
   >>> On 4/24/2013 11:44 AM, F Murtz wrote:   
   >>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   Just because you have results doesn't make the law good and sane.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> **We have good results. Gun related crimes are down. Gun thefts are   
   >>>>> dramatically down. Mass murders, via the use of firearms have   
   >>>>> completely   
   >>>>> ceased.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Too bad It has not had the same effect on total murders.   
   >>>   
   >>> **It has, but since Australians rarely use firearms to commit murder,   
   >>> the total change will always be much smaller. In any case the 1996 gun   
   >>> control laws were desiged to deal with the crime of mass murder, via the   
   >>> use of guns. In that respect the 1996 gun control laws, introduced by   
   >>> the Howard government, can be judged as a tremendous success.   
   >>>   
   >>> The US is very different. More than 60% of US homicides involve the use   
   >>> of firearms. As a consequence, any reduction in the availability of   
   >>> firearms to undesirables, is likely to cause a far greater reduction in   
   >>> total homicides. Of course, as long as the NRA controls the Republicans   
   >>> and remains unanswerable to the US people, the killing will continue   
   >>> unabated.   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   Therefore, a reasonable person will accept that the 1996 gun   
   >>>>> control laws were a good change.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Has not changed the status quo discernibly.   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> **You need to prove that. In your proof, you should care to note that in   
   >>> the 18 years prior to the Howard gun control law changes, there were 13   
   >>> mass murders, comitted via the use of firearms. Since 1996, there have   
   >>> been none, nada, zip, zero incidences.   
   >>>   
   >>> Seems like a good thing to me.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >> You keep on and on inexorably about mass gun  murders which play so   
   >> little part in the great scheme of things  as to be almost non existent   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > And he continues to ignore to NEGATIVE effect in the huge increase of   
   > crimes against people BECAUSE they are now defenseless against thugs who   
   > have no problems using other means since guns are less available.   
   >   
      
   **What negative effect? Prove that there is one. Use Australia as your   
   example to prove your point.   
      
   --   
   Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)