GUN HISTORY
-----------------------------
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:
List of 7 items:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent.
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort, and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.
Does anyone have citations about the Australia numbers? I think this is THE most compelling argument, given how recent it is. I'd like to be able to show people the newspaper articles or studies that report these numbers...they are very compelling!
Thanks
JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Kalifornia Ammunition Bill Signed into Law
- Thread Starter Chee-to
- Start date
- Messages
- 686
- Reactions
- 33
Hi unionguy: I read your post about the massive increase in various types of violent crime that occurs after a government gun-ban. But, as I have written before, those who want to steal your Rights do not care how much crime does increase. They always exempt themselves from any gun ban plus they have government employees for their security. So this old "crime will increase if guns are outlawed" doesn't even faze the grabbers. They aren't concerned about YOUR saftey. It's not "gun control", it's "people control"!
I understand the point. However, lots of voters do get swung over to support this stuff using the "it will make us safe line". So, I think it is an effective organizing tool to use the Australia example and show that taking away guns has made everyone LESS safe. It will swing more voters to support us. In the end, politicians care about getting elected...so the fight is over getting voters to support our cause. (BTW, I'm not saying its our ONLY fight...just an important one).
- Messages
- 389
- Reactions
- 25
I think we should ban federal funding from states that are fiscally irresponsible or broke and attempt to pass this much legislation (685 bills?
)How many millions did it take to get this bill to the governors desk? How many millions will be lost in revenue from sales tax? How many millions will be spent enforcing this law?
Lather, rinse, repeat. How many billions/trillions were spent getting 685 bills to the governors desk.......how much will be spent enforcing them?
CA is just digging themselves into a bigger hole.
- Messages
- 5,834
- Reactions
- 2,176
I think we should ban federal funding from states that are fiscally irresponsible or broke and attempt to pass this much legislation (685 bills?
How many millions did it take to get this bill to the governors desk? How many millions will be lost in revenue from sales tax? How many millions will be spent enforcing this law?
Lather, rinse, repeat. How many billions/trillions were spent getting 685 bills to the governors desk.......how much will be spent enforcing them?
CA is just digging themselves into a bigger hole.
Well said. Every time the government passes a law it takes away a freedom and costs money to enforce it. It may well also negatively affect the economy.
- Messages
- 686
- Reactions
- 33
As far as I'm concerned, if I could get my family members out of the People's Republik of Kalifornia, the entire state could break away from the rest of Amerika and slide into the ocean! I would want there to be a clean break between the Kalifornia SSR and Oregon, tho! I like it here!
- Messages
- 1,254
- Reactions
- 187
17. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.
not quite so: the reality is, an attempt by the Brits to enact gun control is what precipitated the war. Read up on what the Boston Port Bill was about (google it?) Parliament issued laws to close the port, remove ALL citizens from their homes anywhere near it, AFTER disarming them, and forced all businesses located at the port to close as well. A few rusty and ineffective arms were "confiscated", most were secreted away. The Boston Massacre was the Brits response (shooting eight Colonists) for protesting their removal from their own homes and businesses. Some time later, the Brits had learned of a cache of powder and shot at Concord (I believe.. perhaps Lexington...) and went to confiscate it and arrest those responsible for it. Seems the Yankees got on to their "raid", and were ready for them. As the Brits approached to do them harm, one of the Yanks (against orders, it seems..... or at least, ahead of orders) let go his shot. The "shot heard round the world". Seems the Yanks were adamant about preserving their right to keep and bear arms, despite British orders to the contrary. SO-- it was an attempt at gun control that led directly to the cached munitions, and Brits' putative raid, and the Yanks' armed response to the British intrusion. Gun control was the immediate issue that precipitated the war. Once that first shot was fired from a Yankee's gun, there was no turning back.
not quite so: the reality is, an attempt by the Brits to enact gun control is what precipitated the war. Read up on what the Boston Port Bill was about (google it?) Parliament issued laws to close the port, remove ALL citizens from their homes anywhere near it, AFTER disarming them, and forced all businesses located at the port to close as well. A few rusty and ineffective arms were "confiscated", most were secreted away. The Boston Massacre was the Brits response (shooting eight Colonists) for protesting their removal from their own homes and businesses. Some time later, the Brits had learned of a cache of powder and shot at Concord (I believe.. perhaps Lexington...) and went to confiscate it and arrest those responsible for it. Seems the Yankees got on to their "raid", and were ready for them. As the Brits approached to do them harm, one of the Yanks (against orders, it seems..... or at least, ahead of orders) let go his shot. The "shot heard round the world". Seems the Yanks were adamant about preserving their right to keep and bear arms, despite British orders to the contrary. SO-- it was an attempt at gun control that led directly to the cached munitions, and Brits' putative raid, and the Yanks' armed response to the British intrusion. Gun control was the immediate issue that precipitated the war. Once that first shot was fired from a Yankee's gun, there was no turning back.
- Messages
- 1,254
- Reactions
- 187
A recent visit from a good friend living in California reveals that their prices for ammunition in that state are already very high.. half again to twice what we have here.. comparing WalMart to WalMart. He bought .22 WRM and LR for about half what his local WalMart charge for them. He's working on getting some more serious weapons than his deringer, has visited several local shops... and about died of shock when we went to Cabelas. He was AMAZED to see so many firearms there... ALL available, but not to him. I could have bought and walked out of there with anything in the store. He could buy nothing.... many of what he wanted (Ruger LCP, for one, Ruger 10/22 with tactical stock, for another) are not on the DOJ "mother may I" list. Thus he cannot own them down there, unless he can find a face to face sale, in state (now illegal, I believe) for a gun manufactured before all the crasy restrictions. He's even trying to figure out a way to "convert" his undeveloped property in another county in Washington to qualify as a legal residence, without putting a mobile home on it. Then he can buy arms here..... he's thinking of bailing California, but realises its very unlikely in the next two years,
- Messages
- 686
- Reactions
- 33
I have family members and friends living in the People's Republik of Kalifornia. I think they would like to move to a FREE state, but they feel that their jobs are more important right now. I tell them that it would be better to leave 5 years too early than 1 minute too late, but they are afraid of making a move right now. I hope they survive!
- Messages
- 438
- Reactions
- 190
I wish Cali would have an 13.4 earthquake and finally become a bubbleguming island
Similar threads
