Bell Campaign has different perspective on Australia facts

Here ya go, ya gotta read the fine print:


""Those who claim that Australia suffered a "crime wave" as a result of new gun laws often cite as evidence unrelated figures for common assault or sexual assault (no weapon) and armed robbery (any weapon). In fact less than one in five Australian armed robberies involve a firearm.

"Although armed robberies increased by nearly 20%, the number of armed robberies involving a firearm decreased to a six-year low." -- Recorded Crime, Australia, 1998. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Jun 1999""



So, they don't care if rape goes UP. They don't care if robberires skyrocket. They don't care that all these people are being victimized by violence because they have no way to fight back, being disarmed. All they care is that firearms use, in their biased study, has gone down.

Just like we predict: crime goes UP when people are disarmed, and criminals will still get guns, and also criminals do not need guns, they use other tools. Criminals in America don't often use guns for armed robbery either, they use superior numbers, and improvised weapons like sharpened screwdrivers, kitchen knives etc.
 
Would someone who thwarted an armed robbery with a gun also be considered "an armed robbery involving a gun" if the perp got away with the cash, but didn't injure the victim? It's all in the details.
 
How disgusting is that? The most disgusting thing is that they say it as if they're exposing a flaw in OUR argument--the flaw being that we count a rape as a rape even if the thug doesn't use a gun!!!

There is a huge logic gap here.
 
http://www.aic.gov.au/stats/statsbrochure.html
http://www.statistics.gov.au/websitedbs/c311215.NSF/20564c23f3183fdaca25672100813ef1/663820088f872143ca2567220072e976?OpenDocument

Table 11.15 and graph 11.16 show that a weapon was used in 71% of recorded murders in 1998, a slight decrease over 1997.
Firearms were used in 19% of both murders and attempted murders in 1998, falls of 4% and 9% respectively over 1997. While the
use of firearms decreased or remained steady for most offences in 1998, the use of other weapons in the commission of offences
increased for all offences listed below with the exception of murder. The use of firearms in assaults and sexual assaults remained
low (less than 1%).
 
There's a thread running in General about the NRA ads and Australian statistics.

You might also want to check this link:
http://www.ssaa.org.au/nraweb.html

I nearly choked when I saw who had written the article on Bell.

Phillip Alpers is categorically NOT, despite what it says, a "gun policy researcher". He is a lying, supercilious sack of sh*t who twists and distorts the truth to further his agenda of total disarmament.

He has even presented papers to the UN demanding that your rights to own guns be removed .........

B
 
I got this from I guy I correspond with and I'm not sure if he wants me to use his name,
so I'll just call him Lars:

has anyone figured in the effect of the tasmania shooting...that shooting along would have spiked the data one year and make the next year look "lower" when in fact it was only lower than an unnaturally large year.

Anyone know the year this happened? This does make a lot of sense if it's in the time
frame.

------------------
"Gun Control is Only to Protect Those in Power"
 
My signature says it all.

------------------
Gun Control: The proposition that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own panty hose, is more acceptable than allowing that same woman to defend herself with a firearm.
 
Here's an update ("kangaroo court" -- I love it!): http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_dougherty/20000326_xnjdo_kangaroo_c.shtml


Kangaroo court condemns gun ads

Australian government's own stats
on crime confirm NRA charges

By Jon E. Dougherty
© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com

The controversy over whether or not the National Rifle Association used misleading crime statistics in an advertisement decrying Australia's restrictive gun laws has largely been settled by figures provided by the Australian government itself.

It appears the government officials in the island continent who charged the NRA with distorting the country's crime figures for political gain owe the gun-rights group an apology.

The government has based its refutation of the NRA ads -- which say crime has increased Down Under since Australia's major gun ban took effect in 1996 -- mainly on the drop in the murder rate. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics website, murders have fallen from 312 in 1996 to 284 murders in 1998, after experiencing a slight increase in 1997, from 312 to 321.

However, almost every other form of crime in Australia has increased, sometimes dramatically, in the same time period:

For instance, since the introduction of Australia's sweeping gun bans, armed robberies rose a whopping 70 percent, from 6,256 in 1996 to 10,850 just two years later.

Unarmed robberies also rose by about 20 percent, from just over 10,100 to nearly 13,000 incidents.

In addition:

Attempted murders rose from 335 in 1996 to 382 in 1998

Manslaughter rose from 38 to 49

Assaults were up from 114,156 to 132,967

Sexual assaults rose slightly, from 14,542 to 14,568

Kidnapping and abductions climbed dramatically, from 480 in 1996 to 662 in 1998

Some other highlights from the 1998 Australian government crime statistics report:

Blackmail and extortion went from 268 cases a year to 298

"Unlawful entry with intent (breaking into a home or business) involving the taking of property" rose by 30,000 cases, from 313,902 shortly after the ban was passed to 343,256 cases in 1998

Other "unlawful entry" cases increased during the two-year period from 88,177 to 92,414

"Motor vehicle theft" increased by 8,658 reported cases, and "other theft" rose to 565,214 from 521,762

On Friday, the Sydney Morning Herald said Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who helped usher in the country's restrictive gun laws, leapt into the fray against the NRA, calling the gun rights group's advertisement a collection of "lies" and "distortions."
"I think it disturbs me in the sense that it is beyond belief that an organization can get it so wrong," Howard said.

Howard added that "Australia introduced tough gun laws after the Port Arthur massacre because it did not want to end up with a gun culture like the U.S.," said the Herald, which also quoted the prime minister as saying that the "appalling" U.S. homicide rate was because America is "awash in guns."

"The NRA said wrongly that armed robbery in Australia had risen 69 per cent, assaults involving guns were up 28 per cent, gun murders 19 per cent and home invasions 21 per cent," the paper said.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics site was last updated on Jan. 1, 2000, according to a notice posted there.

According to the bureau, crimes involving firearms fell between 1997 and 1998, but critics have said that is meaningless when compared to the overall increases in violent crime, noting that the overall increases might in fact be due to the lack of availability of firearms for protection.

Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, pointedly said it was "apparent" that many Australians were "obviously more at risk" since the gun ban took effect.

Brian Puckett, founder of Citizens of America, agreed, and said Australian officials were "fooling themselves if they think this ban is going to be good for their people in the long run."

Jon E. Dougherty is a staff reporter for WorldNetDaily.




------------------
The New World Order has a Third Reich odor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top