You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Good point why dont the army carry shit loads of revolvers instead of one assault rifle 🙄Let's hope that they don't think to take more than one revolver.
As I said I buy the cultural aspect of your argument but gun control is needed. I was in a Cabelas www.cabelas.com last week. An amazing store amongst all the other stuff was the gun section, approx 400 hand guns on display, shot guns, hunting rifles and then you have the military stuff, AR15, AK47 about 5 varieties etc etc.
Why are guns like that available to the public, you don't hunt with an AK47? If guns are your hobby then great but you don't need military semi automatic weapons, Sandy Hook, Columbine, Aurora all done with semi automatic weapons.
Michael Ryan caused all types of guns to be banned in the UK, we haven't had a mass shooting of that type since, see the connection?
[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/omar-mateen-orlando-gay-club-shooter-identified-by-police-us-media-a7077936.html ]Independent news[/url]
Mateen's father, Mir Seddique, told NBC News his son had become angry a couple of months ago when he saw[b] two men kissing in Miami[/b], and he believed that could be related to the shooting.He said the incident "has nothing to do with religion".
Anything to do with Ramadan - shootings started at 2am, just after he probably had stuffed his face for his final meal before matrydom.
As classy as your comments on the Ramadan thread. Look, we know - you're not keen on Muslims.
As far as I'm concerned, anybody who shoots 50 people dead is a bloody terrorist. This is as much a hate crime as an (possible, still being investigated AFAIK) act of terrorism.
You're up there with your mate Trump for opportunistic trolling. (To be fair, you probably aren't mates, although I imagine you'd get on well together over a pint.)
He said the incident "has nothing to do with religion".
why else would he be that angry about some gay men kissing in the street?
Michael Ryan caused all types of guns to be banned in the UK, we haven't had a mass shooting of that type since, see the connection?
Ermmmm! Sadly we have which lead to even stricter rules.
its true only the religious hate gay people and only the Muslim ones 🙄
Your every utterance makes you look EVEN more stupid
Look, we know - you're not keen on Muslims
I am fine with any religion as long as they don't try to impose their views on anyone else, or abuse young children/choirboys.
He could have done the same thing with a shotgun (as could any mass shooting). Saying one gun is scarier than another is simply stupid.
For starters, your average shotgun has, at most, two barrels, with a cartridge in each, and the gun has to be broken to eject the cartridges before two more can be loaded, the gun closed and fired again.
English and Welsh archers at Agincourt and Crêcy could have eight or nine arrows in the air in that time.
An AR15 can carry 30-40-round mil-spec 5.56mm magazines, a MagPul PMag 40-round magazine for an AR/M4 costs $19.95, 60 bucks buys you the means to easily carry 120 rounds of high-velocity ammunition.
Plus the AR15 can be very easily modified, often legally; a company called Slide Fire Solutions produce a replacement stock called the SSAR-15 that allows bump-fire from the shoulder with complete control of aim at all times, at a firing rate of 100 rounds in 7 seconds.
What was that about using a shotgun again?
Of course, there are milspec s/a shotguns that can fire solid shot shells, and can be fitted with tactical magazines, but those are still 10-shot maximum, and are bulky.
Most tactical shotguns are 5+1 capacity.
To repeat, what was your point about using a shotgun again?
Ah Dunblane was after Hungerford, apologies but I think the principle still stands.
The problem is if guns were not available some pathetic idiot could drive a bus into a crowd of people,drive a petrol tanker into a hospital entrance and blow it up, crash a plane into the sea, commit suicide on a main line railway derail a train and kill and injure lots of people.The last 3 have happened in the last 10 years .
You just dont know what evil is in peoples minds and how they plan to use that evil.
The thing is those pathetic lowlifes have taken someones life, destroyed families, freindships etc all for what they believed at the time was right.
its true only the religious hate gay people and only the Muslim ones
well I never said anything about only muslims, so there you go making up stuff again - do you work for the press?
Whereas some people may feel uncomfortable about homosexuality, there's a long way to go to reach the rage that would cause you do do something like this, and probably feel justified in doing it as well.
Not sure how that chart shoeing the number of mass shootings year on year can be offered up as evidence the US hasn't always had a problem. It basically says the US has suffered mass shootings almost every year for the last 50 years. There was a lull in the late 60's which I guess was because all the nutters were over in Vietnam, but after that it's been a constant feature in the US. I wonder how many mass shootings is deemed acceptable?
It's quite ironic that G.W.Bush knew that when there is a risk that WMD's could be used to murder thousands of innocent individuals the answer is to take away the WMD's, and indeed he invaded a country to do just that. Strange that he and his like-minded friends don't hold the same view on how to approach the issue of WMD's on their own doorstep and are quite happy to sit back and do sweet FA as the number of dead bodies in his own country piles up, and even argue to allow more people and more nutters get their hands on WMD's.
TurnerGuy - Member
He said the incident "has nothing to do with religion".
why else would he be that angry about some gay men kissing in the street?
Let's look at other possibilities?
1. Split up with gay lover?
2. Secretly gay jealousy?
3. Abused by gay people?
4. Taught to hate gay people?
5. A mental health?
6. A combination of all the above?
For starters, your average shotgun has, at most, two barrels, with a cartridge in each, and the gun has to be broken to eject the cartridges before two more can be loaded, the gun closed and fired again.
English and Welsh archers at Agincourt and Crêcy could have eight or nine arrows in the air in that time.
An AR15 can carry 30-40-round mil-spec 5.56mm magazines, a MagPul PMag 40-round magazine for an AR/M4 costs $19.95, 60 bucks buys you the means to easily carry 120 rounds of high-velocity ammunition.
Plus the AR15 can be very easily modified, often legally; a company called Slide Fire Solutions produce a replacement stock called the SSAR-15 that allows bump-fire from the shoulder with complete control of aim at all times, at a firing rate of 100 rounds in 7 seconds.
What was that about using a shotgun again?
Of course, there are milspec s/a shotguns that can fire solid shot shells, and can be fitted with tactical magazines, but those are still 10-shot maximum, and are bulky.
Most tactical shotguns are 5+1 capacity.
To repeat, what was your point about using a shotgun again?
Your point is 100% valid & I am in NO way advocating gun ownership......but you knowledge on shotguns is a little....old 😉
This was an act of terrorism. We have gun control in Europe and the French police are routinely armed but we still have 130 people shot dead at a concert.
This shooting has little to do with gun control and much to do with extremism
Ah Dunblane was after Hungerford, apologies but I think the principle still stands
It does. Sadly I've had to be 'educated' on these incidents at work.
The problem is if guns were not available some pathetic idiot could drive a bus into a crowd of people,drive a petrol tanker into a hospital entrance and blow it up, crash a plane into the sea, commit suicide on a main line railway derail a train and kill and injure lots of people.The last 3 have happened in the last 10 years .
Where has this happened?
well I never said anything about only muslims, so there you go making up stuff again
Where did i say you said that ?
Do i need to explain what mockery is or who is making things up?
[b]Your every utterance makes you look EVEN more stupid[/b]
1. Split up with gay lover?
2. Secretly gay jealousy?
3. Abused by gay people?
4. Taught to hate gay people?
5. A mental health?
6. A combination of all the above?
Think I suggested 2 already, made worse by him being religious.
4 could be covered easily by his religeous educaton, and a degree of 5 goes without saying because he was religious.
He had been married but what does that mean? He apparently used to beat his wife, but as long as he didn't leave any marks that was fine according to his religion.
[img] 
?uuid=ULwzRDC9EearnR2isPJPkw[/img]
This was an act of terrorism
well that should speed up the investigation now we know for certain eh
A knowledgeable US official, however, told the Guardian that while an unfolding federal investigation was in the earliest stages, an initial hypothesis regarding the shooter’s motive leaned closer to a hate crime than an act of terrorism.
“The idea of it being terrorism is not off the table, but it’s probably not the principal approach,” said the official, who would not be identified by name or agency in discussing a fast-moving investigation.
“There are other reasons to believe it was motivated toward a very specific kind of community, obviously.”
That investigation was still determining if the shooting was “terrorism or a massive, massive hate crime”, the official said.
Shall we you know let them investigate and reach an informed conclusion rather than just decide based on your strongly held views on Islamic threat to our way of life ?
Where did i say you said that ?
by inference from your statement :
"its true only the religious hate gay people and only the Muslim one"
Yeap, Merican President Obama just said on the news " ... an act of terror and hate ...".
Yeap, Merican President Obama just said on the news " ... an act of terror and hate ...".
Not "shits and giggles" then. I'm glad he's cleared that up.
This shooting has little to do with gun control and much to do with extremism
& as I've said many times before, If a nutjob/extremist want's to kill someone, he/she will kill someone. Having access to guns just makes it easier/quicker.
Ban guns as much as you like but it won't stop the nutters killing people.
by inference
No I would be implying[ and its not true that i Implied that] the listener would do the inference
your every post etc
He is the Merican President.Drac - Moderator
Not "shits and giggles" then. I'm glad he's cleared that up.Yeap, Merican President Obama just said on the news " ... an act of terror and hate ...".
Ban guns as much as you like but it won't stop the nutters killing people
No one has claimed banning guns leads to an end to murder[ by nutters] the point is it will lead to this sort of mass murder
Would your prison be safer if they all had guns or less safe. Not The Hardest question- same applies to knifes or well any weapon really
ufton nervet, train crash, suicide 7 dead
the pilot who locked crew out of cabin and crashed into mountain and the recent egypt air flight that disapeared,
and a petrol tanker crashed into a hospital last year deliberately in Syria if i remember correctly,killing many
and lets not forget shipman who deliberately injected patients
and lets not forget all those killed in the name of a war or terrorist attacks
To repeat, what was your point about using a shotgun again?
That when you have 3 hours to execute unarmed hostages they'll do just fine.
& as I've said many times before, If a nutjob/extremist want's to kill someone, he/she will kill someone. Having access to guns just makes it easier/quicker.
Ban guns as much as you like but it won't stop the nutters killing people.
And yet in a little corner of the Atlantic there is an island with just as many insane/mentally ill/extremists per head of population where the random killing rate (per head of population) is dramatically lower. Who would have thought it! Our nutjobs/extremists must just be lacking imagination or gumption or something. OR GUNS!
edit - To be clear, I'm not convinced a gun ban would solve the issue for the states now - the horse has probably bolted. Trump will get into power and we can close the doors, let them either shoot each other to death or eat themselves to death and we can go back in 50 years and see what's left.
There are some seriously ****ed up redneck crackers posting on this thread!!
The usual suspects..
If I ever caught you stalking around my town with your twisted hateful views, I'd own you with bombers (probably)
Would your prison be safer if they all had guns or less safe. Not The Hardest question- same applies to knifes or well any weapon really
Our prisons would be safer if we had enough staff but that's another thread.
Convert, you do have a point but my 'opinion' still stands & as I said, having access to guns makes it easier. If a crank wants to kill someone they'll do it, simples.
Ya, but they are not the ones shooting people aren't they?yunki - Member
There are some seriously **** up redneck crackers posting on this thread!The usual suspects..
Now ... calm down you need to control your emotion.If I ever caught you stalking around my town with your twisted hateful views, I'd own you with bombers (probably)
So you hate them ... what else do you hate?
Imagine if you have something stronger than a bombers you might cause severe harm is it not?
I am sorry to say but you are[b] Definitely Not the type to put in the position of responsibility [/b]because [b]you Cannot control your emotion.[/b]
No one has claimed banning guns leads to an end to murder[ by nutters] the point is it will lead to this sort of mass murder
A point which has sailed quite happily over some heads JY..
Ban guns as much as you like but it won't stop the nutters killing people.
No but it makes it much much more difficult to kill that many people in that short a space of time in that kind of closed environment.
Assuming for a moment that it was a gay hate crime - how on earth are you going to kill that many gay people that quickly?
Derailing a train or crashing a plane (examples that 'project' used above) doesn't work as that's indiscriminate and unfocused as well as extremely difficult so you're restricted to guns (cheap, easy to get hold of in America) or something like a nail bomb as used at the Admiral Duncan in 1999 which killed 3 people. Not 50. Effective bombs are difficult to make. Any idiot can fire a gun though and in a closed environment like that, you're going to do a lot of damage very quickly.
So banning guns (or at least, banning military spec assault rifles) seems like a pretty effective solution to me.
The problem is that the usual nutjobs in America will already be coming out with the standard line of "oh but if everyone in the nightclub had guns, they could all have fired back..."
There's still people fighting for their lives, victims waiting to be identified, family members waiting for news, is there any chance all you arseholes could stop using it as an opportunity to have a who's the biggest stw ****er contest til at least that's done? It's the same ****ing thread you have about everything after all so why not go and do it about the european cup or something that isn't destroying lives as you type. FFS.
That when you have 3 hours to execute unarmed hostages they'll do just fine.
I'd hazard a guess here that most were killed in the first few minutes not the proceeding hours.
Take the guns away, those batshit mentalists will find other means to efficiently destroy thier 'enemies' in the name of God/America.
Quite simply, NO THEY WONT. There is absolutely no good reason why it should be possible for people in ordinary society to be able to obtain the sort of weaponry only available to armies in times of warfare. I almost laughed at the graph showing how mass shootings are fairly modern. The graph should flatline at zero. The UK has seen a few mass shootings in the last few decades, however no measure is strong enough to attempt to reduce this. I said last night Obama could have been a great president if only he did not lead a nation of moronic idiots. I stand by this.
Here's an idea NW if you don't like what's being discussed, don't read the thread. Who appointed you as the STW moral compass?
Heh chewkw.. 🙂
Thanks for the advice
yunki - MemberHeh chewkw.. 🙂
Thanks for the advice
True innit! 😀
Gun ownership is a big responsibility..
I nearly bought a sawn-off when I was 18, but decided against it for exactly that reason..
I think that people that believe they are responsible enough to own guns, probably aren't awake enough to make that judgement
There's still people fighting for their lives, victims waiting to be identified, family members waiting for news, is there any chance all you arseholes could stop using it as an opportunity to have a who's the biggest stw * contest til at least that's done? It's the same * thread you have about everything after all so why not go and do it about the european cup or something that isn't destroying lives as you type. FFS.
You may find the thread responses distasteful and in some respects they are. I would hazard a guess few are thinking of the victims because the bulk of the population are entirely desensitised to Americans carrying out mass shootings. Which in itself says volumes about the issue.
An awful situation for people who are out to have a fun night. It never ceases to amaze me that in the 21st Century you can be persecuted or murdered because you kiss or love someone of the same sex. Let's hope all the injured make a full physical and mental recovery. Big hugs and kisses to them all.
gun laws will have no effect on criminals, they can get guns whenever they want. If large quantities of drugs can be smuggled into a country then firearms can be smuggled in. In addition anyone with access to a mill n lathe can easily make a gun. Only honest people will obey the law.
You may find the thread responses distasteful and in some respects they are. I would hazard a guess few are thinking of the victims because the bulk of the population are entirely desensitised to Americans carrying out mass shootings. Which in itself says volumes about the issue.
It's perfectly normal for people to discuss disasters and tragedies after an event, there's no set time limit.
As above 50 people where killed for no reason, and we are discussing the deaths, while showing both intrest in what happens and showing respect to those poor people who died.
nice rebuttal of the "Good guy with a gun"
It's perfectly normal for people to discuss disasters and tragedies after an event, there's no seat time limit.
My point is most of the comments (inc mine) have no shock element. It's straight to the usual debate about guns one way or another. It's mostly clinical, little empathy. I have no problem with that but it does say something out our mindset to these shootings now, sadly. I'd like to say that I'm surprised when I hear these stories now, but they just wash over me and make me angry at the stupid Americans and the moronic NRA.
Saw this for the first time about a week ago, Carey got a lot of abuse from the NRA supporters about it, some one had to explain the significance of the band to me, way to subtle.
follow up from a previous mass shooting
[url= http://www.stonekettle.com/2012/07/the-seven-stages-of-gun-violence.html ]the seven stages of gun violence[/url]
Great article grahamh.
I'm all for the Americans having proper gun laws, but how long will it take for all those weapons already out there to be removed, and how many more deaths will there be in the meantime?
Gun control, I fear, is not going to be a quick fix solution, and I suspect that there actually might not be one.
Confused people Americans
That when you have 3 hours to execute unarmed hostages they'll do just fine.
I'd hazard a guess here that most were killed in the first few minutes not the proceeding hours.
And to reiterate my first point, a regular shotgun takes a significant amount of time to reload after two shots, in which time it would be perfectly feasible for several people to jump the perp and disarm him.
Even using a tactical shotgun, or a pump-action shotgun, there is a considerable amount of time needed to reload, again allowing the shooter to be disarmed, it doesn't take long to eject a magazine from a semi-auto carbine and insert a second, it's often the case that two mags are duct-taped together upside down, allowing the mag to be ejected, turned around and re-inserted very quickly, a tactical shotgun is handy for close-quarters use backup, but I wouldn't rely on it.
Terrible news. Feel sorry for them and all the other people around the world suffering.
Violence sucks.
It seems another guy was arrested in Santa Monica, who was planning to attack the Gay Pride Parade. He had three assault rifles, high capacity magazines and [i]"a 5 gallon bucket with chemicals capable of forming an improvised explosive device"[/i].
[img] 
:large[/img]
https://twitter.com/PattersonNBC/status/742107750012882944
a tactical shotgun is handy for close-quarters use backup, but I wouldn't rely on it.
you sound like a "good guy with a gun"...
There are 360 million guns in America, you will never remove them from circulation even if you could deal with the Constitutional Right to bear arms. You can make it a bit more difficult to buy one but a terrorist can always make a bomb and the number of illegally held weapons will only increase.
Some interesting background to Florida gun ownership I've just come across on Flipboard:
http://qz.com/704939/the-ar-15-is-the-gun-of-choice-for-mass-shootings-and-its-easier-to-buy-in-florida-than-a-pistol/
And this, well, for all her faults, I'm really hoping Hillary gets in because reading this has made me just a little bit sick in my mouth:
http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/12/11913614/donald-trump-orlando-shooting
There are 360 million guns in America, you will never remove them from circulation... the number of illegally held weapons will only increase.
Isn't that part of how you deal with it though?
People often trot out the [i]"bad guys will always get guns"[/i] line and it is a fair point, especially in a society where guns are everywhere.
But if you make (for example) AR-15s illegal, then you know that (after a suitable amnesty period) anyone with an AR-15 is "a bad guy" - they can be arrested and questioned and the weapon can be destroyed.
The bad guys aren't daft. They will move onto something else that they can legally carry without risking arrest. So the number of AR-15s in circulation slowly decreases over time.
It will never be a quick fix - but the only other alternative seems to be more guns.
I worked in Georgia, Alabama, Arkansa with blue collar individuals who 100% believed the following-
1. Guns are good (lots of guns better)
2. The UK health care system is crap (because it's free for all members of society)
3. God supports America
4. All minorities are un American
They have no external influence (few have ever travelled outside the state they live in) hence mass shootings are normal.
One good old boy from Arkansa said to me we all get what we deserve in life - just try and get your head around that statement
The best explanation I've heard for why guns are so widespread in US society goes something like this. You need guns in order to overthrow the government if they overstep the mark. Civilians can rise up and join forces. Of course, when you're against the US army, assault rifles are more effective than pistols. This is the way of things, it's just how it is. Guns are everywhere and acceptable.
If you accept that this is deeply entrenched in the psyche of many Americans, then attempts to remove them are an affront to your way of life. Imagine someone in the UK tells you that you don't need your car. Cars are dangerous, they kill, pollute and cause traffic. Wouldn't we all be better off on bikes / public transport / taxis? To an extent I think that's a fair analogy. The thought of me losing my car (and as a consequence my independence) fills me with a nausea that's entirely irrational.
From the cross-channel view it seems like madness but I guess when you're living it, you lose that perspective.
Which is all fine apart from when you start with the phrase:-
You need guns in order to overthrow the government if they overstep the mark
Which sounds so preposterous that everything after it is drivel. Weird how in every other nation in the civilised democratic world we all seem to sleep at night without 'knowing' we could storm the government (that we elected) with the pee shooter (in weaponry trump trumps terms) under our beds. And that's before you get on to the fact that the ones with the assault rifles are the inbred hicks without the intelligence to coordinate anything sophisticated enough like bringing down the one of the most well armed governments in the world. I guess until they get a grip on that concept they have no hope.
Apologies if already mentioned - That's 176 times this year that more than 4 people have lost their lives at a time in shootings in the US.
Deplorable.
Indeed - the slightly trite sound bite is that the UK has had 7 mass shootings in the last 150 years, the US has had 7 in the last week.
Which sounds so preposterous that everything after it is drivel
Hmm, perhaps less preposterous if your entire family and social collective memory, the tales you hear from your childhood, involve your direct ancestors fleeing from state persecution.
And I don't just mean the Jews
The fear of government tyranny utterly pervades American society, from the 'Irish' to the post war immigration from Germany and Poland, those fleeing The expanding Eastern Bloc (failed Hungarian revolution, East Germany, etc.) Korea, Cambodia, Vietnam, Cuba, Africa, the list goes on.
And let's not forget those with their own more domestic history of state oppression:
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
I'm not one to say 'check your privilege' but you and I come from a society and culture where hundreds of years of stable and democratic government is a given, many Americans don't.
"Parents against gun violence" does one of these every month:
[img] 
[/img]
What strikes me is they're the kind of things where if there wasn't a gun you'd throw something at the other person or leave a passive aggressive note, or let down the tyres on their car. But the impulsive "of
The best explanation I've heard for why guns are so widespread in US society goes something like this. You need guns in order to overthrow the government if they overstep the mark.
But try to find exactly where the constitution says that...
bails"Parents against gun violence" does one of these every month:
So I guess next month's one will say, "I saw two gay guys kissing so I decided to murder 50 of them".
But try to find exactly where the constitution says that...
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
The thing is, the second amendment is shit. Just change it.
America is increasingly becoming an international laughing stock.
I understand this attack might start a discussion here about gun control but as a terrorist incident its not going to lead to much of a similar call in the US.
Hmm, perhaps less preposterous if your entire family and social collective memory, the tales you hear from your childhood, involve your direct ancestors fleeing from state persecution.
And I don't just mean the Jews
Like the population of Europe? Or Australia? Or the rest of the world?
All the reasons are bull shit. It's not a normal way to live and deal with things.
Have these advocates seen the guns their Government has got though? That argument is nonsense, a hill of AR15s wont last long against a fleet of drones.
So sad, the victims, their families friends and the community will be in my thoughts this week. 😥
I get the argument that bad guys will always find the means to get guns from somewhere (as they did for the Paris attacks) or will find another means to wreak their destruction. It's an inevitability of the world nowadays.
What surprises me in this case is he was interviewed 3 times by the FBI. They must have had suspicions. Yet he was then free to buy an assault rifle a week ago without it somehow flagging up. Surely gun ownership matched against people of interest to the FBI has to be being done?
Or is it that the privacy laws / campaigners think that's too Big Brothery, because weapons are legal and they didn't find anything against him?
To my simple mind if someone said "Hey, you know that guy we interviewed on a tip off but didn't find anything against; he's just bought an assault rifle, and 4 magazines of bullets....." - I'd be checking that out PDQ.
And this, well, for all her faults, I'm really hoping Hillary gets in because reading this has made me just a little bit sick in my mouth:
http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/12/11913614/donald-trump-orlando-shooting
Completely agree with you on this one CountZero, it made my stomach turn............ 🙁
[quote
http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/12/11913614/donald-trump-orlando-shooting
I've said this before: it astounds me that people treat the Second Amendment as an unalterable truth that cannot even be questioned.
Yet many of those same people are vocal supporters of Trump's [i]"let's just ban all muslims"[/i] plan which is a massive violation of the [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution ]First Amendment[/url].
And this, well, for all her faults, I'm really hoping Hillary gets in because reading this has made me just a little bit sick in my mouth:
I agree, but remember one of her faults was being fiercely opposed to gay marriage. Definitely Hobsons choice.
The right to bear arms? I thought it was this:
[img] 
[/img]
The sooner American 2nd Amendment-ists understand the world has changed the better. As others have said it's insane if they think they can overthrow the government. Even those militias who declare their own countries must know they're only still there because the government doesn't care enough to storm their compounds or bomb them from the air.
The first step in lowering the number of deaths by shooting is to make guns hard to own. Australia managed it. From Wikipedia:
Following the National Agreement on Firearms, the number of deaths by firearms in Australia, initially declined slowly. Overall homicides immediately after, saw a decrease of less than one per 100,000 persons. Over the medium term homicide by firearm dropped from 1/200,000 to 1/670,000.[26]Between 2010-2014, gun related homicides across all of Australia had dropped to 30-40 per year. Firearms in 2014 were used in less than 15% of homicides, less than 0.1% of sexual assaults, less than 6% of kidnapping/abductions and 8% of robberies.[27]
Since the 1996 legislation the risk of dying by gunshots was reduced by 50% in the following years and stayed on that lower level since then. The rate of gun related suicide was greatly reduced as well.[25]
Suicides by firearm were already declining; however they fell significantly after controls, dropping around 50% in two years.[28] Overall suicide rates remained steady until a slight drop in 2003, followed by stable rates since then.[26]
The government spent 500M buying back guns from people and it SEEMS to have had the desired effect. In 6 months, the US has had almost 1000 murders with a firearm per month. The Australian numbers scaled for the population would be around 43 per month.
I agree, but remember one of her faults was being fiercely opposed to gay marriage. Definitely Hobsons choice.
There's a slight difference though between being against same-sex marriage and wanting all the gay people and brown people rounded up and shot / deported.
Ie, she might be the lesser of two evils, but she's [i]significantly[/i] the lesser of two evils.