Gun control in Australia

[Spínola]

What do you mean the problem wasn't the laws?

The laws that allowed his mother to have the guns are at least part of the problem.

[Logan Hutchins]

His mother was a teacher and I'm assuming had a clean slate and a background check (which is required to become a teacher and most places to get a gun) She can have guns for protection. The fact that her son got to the guns that she has a right to own is a different issue. Not a state issue either, its a matter of keeping your guns locked up.

[Greg W]

She should have had one on her, then he would have only had one to use for evil.

Great post I just read:
Virginia Tech, Aurora, Columbine, Appalachian School of Law, Pearl Mississippi, Salt Lake City mall, Luby's Cafeteria, etc, etc, were all places either by law or policy, that prohibited the carrying of firearms.

The Appalachian school of law shooter was stopped by 2 students who ran out to their cars to get their guns.

The Pearl Mississippi shooter was stopped by the principal who ran out to his car to get his gun.

The SLC mall shooter was stopped by an off duty officer who had a gun (despite the "no guns" signs").

It's mind boggling that we continue to prohibit people from carrying guns as a means to self defense.

Gun free Zones= death traps for the law abiding.

[Joe Friday]

It's mind boggling that we continue to prohibit people from carrying guns as a means to self defense.

Gun free Zones= death traps for the law abiding.

I 100% agree.

[JAMESsmith]

She should have had one on her, then he would have only had one to use for evil.

Great post I just read:
Virginia Tech, Aurora, Columbine, Appalachian School of Law, Pearl Mississippi, Salt Lake City mall, Luby's Cafeteria, etc, etc, were all places either by law or policy, that prohibited the carrying of firearms.

The Appalachian school of law shooter was stopped by 2 students who ran out to their cars to get their guns.

The Pearl Mississippi shooter was stopped by the principal who ran out to his car to get his gun.

The SLC mall shooter was stopped by an off duty officer who had a gun (despite the "no guns" signs").

It's mind boggling that we continue to prohibit people from carrying guns as a means to self defense.

Gun free Zones= death traps for the law abiding.

I'm a big fan of John Lott (more guns less crime) who claims 25% of "multi victim public shootings" are stopped by a citizen with a gun, in many cases just the threat of it stops it without firing. I like your list. I wish there was a list of all cases ever. They're pretty hard to find. Also all "multi victim public shootings" except for the politician in Az in 2011 were done in gun free zones.

[David Rosado]

But in Australia, unless you can prove a legitimate reason for needing a semi automatic weapon you cannot legally purchase one. Hence, for law abiding citizens it is almost impossible to own. The Port Arthur massacre (as the Martin Bryant shootings mentioned in the original post are known) changed Australian society and attitudes towards gun control. I understand (please correct me if I am wrong) that the right to own a gun is ingrained in the American constitution. Australia's law change doesn't stop people owning a gun it makes it more difficult to own a gun and it makes it near impossible to own the type of gun typically used in a mass shooting.

Touch wood, since 1996 we have not had another mass shooting in Australia since the law changes. We still have homicides and murders committed with firearms but nothing to that scale. Obviously my thoughts are with all the people impacted by this recent shooting. The Port Arthur massacre hit home for me as a member of my old golf club was one of the 35 killed. I did not know him personally but it was scary knowing that a regular everyday person could be one of the innocent victims.

If guns exist, but mass shootings don't, why aren't there mass shootings? It's not a gun issue. It's a mental health issue. If we're supposed to believe that more legal guns equal more shootings, the US should have a LOT more. But we don't. What we do have is a mental health issue and/or irresponsible gun owners.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/guns-...ng-to-reports/

The guns were not registered to the shooter they were his moms. Connecticut doesn't allow people under 21 to purchase hand guns. The problem here wasn't the laws.

Exactly.

She should have had one on her, then he would have only had one to use for evil.

Great post I just read:
Virginia Tech, Aurora, Columbine, Appalachian School of Law, Pearl Mississippi, Salt Lake City mall, Luby's Cafeteria, etc, etc, were all places either by law or policy, that prohibited the carrying of firearms.

The Appalachian school of law shooter was stopped by 2 students who ran out to their cars to get their guns.

The Pearl Mississippi shooter was stopped by the principal who ran out to his car to get his gun.

The SLC mall shooter was stopped by an off duty officer who had a gun (despite the "no guns" signs").

It's mind boggling that we continue to prohibit people from carrying guns as a means to self defense.

Gun free Zones= death traps for the law abiding.

Thanks.

[David Rosado]

What do you mean the problem wasn't the laws?

The laws that allowed his mother to have the guns are at least part of the problem.

The laws that allowed Timothy McVeigh to buy fertilizer and so forth is a part of the problem.

Killers will find a way to kill. You can't blame a tool. You blame the person. We don't blame cars, we blame drunk drivers. It's simple logic.

[Spínola]

Cars are a tool for transportation, guns are a tool for killing. They are not equivalent, you must see this. It's not a fair comparison. Cars are essential to our daily life's, guns are not.

[Aaron Gustaveson]

In Australia you guys say "touch wood"? In the states we say "knock on wood"

I find those little differences hilarious.

[Aaron Gustaveson]

The laws that allowed Timothy McVeigh to buy fertilizer and so forth is a part of the problem.

Killers will find a way to kill. You can't blame a tool. You blame the person. We don't blame cars, we blame drunk drivers. It's simple logic.

Do you think we should be allowed to have RPGs and stuff? If you think of the original intent of the amendment we should be able to have whatever we need to stay on par with the government.