XPost: aus.politics.guns, can.talk.guns, uk.politics.guns   
   From: haggisz@hotmail.com   
      
   Trevor Wilson wrote:   
   > "John - Melb"  wrote in message   
   > news:69b6a278-c699-4771-a502-9a3afb04da83@v1g2000prd.googlegroups.com...   
   > On Mar 24, 2:36 pm, "Trevor Wilson"   
   >  wrote:   
   >> "F Murtz"  wrote in message   
   >>   
   >> news:49c85128@dnews.tpgi.com.au...   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>> Trevor Wilson wrote:   
   >>>> "10x" <10x@teluös.net> wrote in message   
   >>>> news:3hvfs4hv83larbqrrb51tk75qmr35larnr@4ax.com...   
   >>>>> On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:42:23 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"   
   >>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>> "10x" <10x@teluös.net> wrote in message   
   >>>>>> news:b6i9s4lsaf6so7lq3ks9ctb9crg16drjiq@4ax.com...   
   >>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 23:02:15 +1100, "Blinky Bill"   
   >>>>>>>    
   >>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> The exisiting laws are entirely adequate.   
   >>>>>>>> What is your evidence for that? The US gun homicide rate certainly   
   >>>>>>>> suggests   
   >>>>>>>> otherwise.   
   >>>>>>> Murder is against the law in the U.S.A.   
   >>>>>> **Well that law doesn't work. Perhaps it should be removed from the   
   >>>>>> law   
   >>>>>> books. Is that your inference? Or are you trying to say something   
   >>>>>> else?   
   >>>>>> Perhaps you could elaborate.   
   >>>>> My point is that folks willing to break the law and taboo against   
   >>>>> murder are not going to care about a gun law or method of murdering   
   >>>>> others. Firearms do not cause the intent to murder.   
   >>>> **No. Your point was clear. [To paraphrase] You claim that "20,000" gun   
   >>>> control laws don't work, so they should be dispensed with. I used your   
   >>>> specious claim to suggest that you should treat the laws surrounding   
   >>>> homicide the same way. People commit homicide. Therefore (in your mind)   
   >>>> laws which make homicide illegal are useless.   
   >>>> You now see the error of your suggestion.   
   >>>>>>> Folks who have the intent to commit murder don't really care what   
   >>>>>>> method they use.   
   >>>>>> **Perhaps. In the US, however, they prefer to use a gun.   
   >>>>> You are quite correct they do perfer to use a gun in the U.S.   
   >>>>> However they also use other methods when firearms are not available.   
   >>>> **Do they? In EVERY case? Prove it.   
   >>>>> Canada has strict controls on firearms.   
   >>>>> Jamaica has a complete ban on firearms.   
   >>>>> Folks still get murdered in both countries.   
   >>>> **They do, indeed. Australia has strict controls on firearms and around   
   >>>> 10% the gun related homicide rate that the US has. The UK has strict   
   >>>> controls on firearms and around 5% the gun related homicide rate that   
   >>>> the   
   >>>> US has. See a pattern here?   
   >>> YES they use other methods for homicide. The homicide rate in australia   
   >>> has remained almost constant per 100000 people for 100 years   
   >> **No, it has not. It has, however, remained lower than the US figure for a   
   >> long time.   
   >   
   > Actually, the homicide rate in this country has remained relatively   
   > stable over the past century or so.   
   >   
   > AIC "Trends and Issues No 61" "Violent Crime in Australia;   
   > Interpreting the Trends"   
   >   
   > I guess Trevor will tell us he can't find that too..............   
   >   
   > **I take it then, that if your wages were cut by 50%, you'd regard that is   
   > insignificant? Australian homicides have varied by more than that.   
   >   
   >   
   50% of 4/5 of SFA   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)