Australian gun laws - should they be reviewed?

Thy Will be done.

Answer: Yes, of course they should be. People have the right to protect themselves and their loved ones from any and all threats. What happens if someone breaks into your home, are you going to get them out with a stern talking to? No; we all should have the right to stick a gun in said person's face and give them a sum total of three seconds to get out or take a one way trip to the morgue.

Fact: the tighter the gun laws, the higher the murder rate.

 

No.
Don't compare our gun laws to the states.

If you have never touched a gun or looked into Australia's gun license process your comments are likely based on gossip or Facebook facts

 

I lived in the USA for 3 years - Californai specifically. L.A for 2 years, Santa Rosa for 12 months.

I can't recall too many house invasion shootings on their daily news over there...lots of things such as kids finding Dad's guns and shooting the brother/sister by accident, shootings of passion with a spouse/relative, murder suicides, or Gang related shootings, or shop robberies gone wrong, and of course; the usual High School and random nutbag on the street mass-murder shootings which are almost weekly.

Are there any stats on how many folks get killed during a random house break-in by strangers?

From my understanding; most folks get shot by someone they know as per above.

This would negate the reason of having a gun to ward off the burglar breaking in, I would suspect.

A ripper clip to see is the interview with Charlton Heston by Michael Moore in the movie/docco: "Bowling for Columbine".

 

Hi bob shovel, I used to be in Army Cadets, so I have been shooting. Many times, actually.

 

No, Gun law is good as is. No review needed.
Let us live in peace!

 

Are those numbers based on incidents, or incidents per head of population, because the red areas have a much lower population density than the blue areas.

And no, the Australian gun laws as they currently stand are perfectly acceptable. The rates of firearm related deaths are 0.86 per 100,000 population in Australia. 10.5 per 100,000 population in the US. Of this, 0.11 per 100,000 population are homicide related deaths. 3.5 per 100,000 population in the US.

They are currently some of the lowest in the world. This is something to be proud of. Not something that needs changing.

 

I can see this thread going no where fast.

I have seen some 'research' by gun lobby groups in regards to Australias statistics - esspecially following our tighter controls after the Tasmania masacre. Basically indicating that tighter controls did nothing to prevent murders.

I work with a lot of Amercians and their gun culture is ingrained.

If Australia relaxed its gun laws I dare say it will be all the people who you dont want owning a gun who will go and get one. Our culture in relation to guns is vastly different to the Amercians.

 

People in Paris insisted 'let us live in peace' too and look what happened.

This isn't Wonderland. The real world is a violent place. With our current gun laws, when that sort of thing happens here (and it's going to happen here), what happens then?

How many lives may have been saved if people had the right to carry?

 

so you want every tom, you and harry to carry guns everywhere.. on the trains, in the cinemas, in the stadium, in a restaurant??

None. They would have come with even worse way to attack. Do you remember 9/11??

 

Slow day today, a good trolling is just what's needed.

 

Probably 50 at the expense of an additional 450 over the rest of the year. Each and every year. Plus at least 20 more killed by friendly fire as panicked people shot blindly in an enclosed space in the dark.

 

People are usually not killed randomly as a part of a home invasion... So this self defence argument is really weak. I agree with the above... guns are far more likely to accidentally kill a child or the like than be needed for self defence.

I also agree that it is not reasonable to compare US and AU

 

Really? I like how 'trolling' has degenerated from "a deliberate attack with the intention of causing upset" to "Any topic that an individual doesn't like or agree with".

Fierce, open debate and freedom of expression are a dwindling right in our society today. In our bid to save people from being offended or having their feels hurt, lest they think they are being 'bullied', questioning the status quo is becoming increasingly scarce. If you don't wish to discuss the topic, don't post anything that doesn't add to the discussion.

If you do have something to say, then by all means, join in.

 

Please do not use Paris as an example to suit your agenda. It is a tragedy and if anything it teaches the importance of togetherness and tolerance...

 

The way the current gun laws in various States are written and enforced are incredibly poor and misinformed, targeting the wrong areas and 'punishing' the wrong people.

Unfortunately Australian society has grown to use gun laws as a scaremonger trigger, instead of having rational debate and clear policy outlines to ensure effective policy outcomes. It's disappointing that Australia cannot have a rational discourse like is held in other culturally comparable countries (New Zealand, Canada etc).

 

Exactly.

Especially when do gooders try and get involved with uneducated nonsense! The rspca WA have gone on an uneducated attack recently. Absolutely disgusting that an organisation like that can go ahead with scaremongering campaigns
RSPCA bloodied rabbit photo 'disgraceful': WA Shooters Association | watoday.com.au

 

But there's no mention of guns or gun control in that article. It's purely an animal welfare argument.

I'm sure if they were hunting them with sticks, they would still be complaining. It's about the death of the animals. Not the way in which they were killed.

Not taking sides as to the ethics of the argument. But it has zero to do with guns.

 

I like our gun laws as is. I like tightly controlled ownership of guns.
I don't give a flying rats arse about statistics or whatever in Australia or overseas. I won't read them and I don't care if that makes me uneducated about gun ownership. I don't think there is a need for guns except for farmers etc.
If a zombie apocalypse comes to town then I won't be able to 'double tap' but I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. Literally - I'm installing a moat around my house now with drawbridge so baddies and zombies can't invade my peace.

 

Hi legallyblonde, I'm not using it to suit my agenda, I'm using it as a rational example of what can (and will continue to - and I am absolutely convinced it is going to happen here at some point) happen when the public has no avenue to defend themselves from psychopaths. Could you imagine this happening in, say, Texas? Serious question.

Togetherness and tolerance are nice and all, but reality is very very different. We can't continue to keep our heads in the sand. As I stated earlier, the world and nature are violent. That is reality.

 

What about target shooting as a sport?