Home Articles Forum Wiki Poll Garden Contact

 
 
 
  
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
 
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

  Australian Politics Forum › Member Run Boards › Hunting and Fishing › Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
(Moderator: Baronvonrort)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Pages: 1 
Send Topic Print
Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting (Read 10385 times)
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Jun 23rd, 2016 at 3:47pm  
Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shootings, saw decline in firearm killings: report  Good,
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #1 - Jun 23rd, 2016 at 4:13pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 3:47pm:
Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shootings, saw decline in firearm killings: report  Good,


Lockhart was a mass shooting the gun grabbers like to pretend never happened.
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 72271
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #2 - Jun 23rd, 2016 at 4:15pm  
In the United States over the past 1,266 days, there have been 1,000 mass shootings, with the most recent being the Pulse Nightclub shootings in Orlando.


from the link in the OP



I'm stunned .... and still they let the NRA dictate terms to the politicians.

The NRA should be declared a terrorist organisation.
Back to top
 
Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #3 - Jun 23rd, 2016 at 4:25pm  
John Smith wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 4:15pm:
In the United States over the past 1,266 days, there have been 1,000 mass shootings, with the most recent being the Pulse Nightclub shootings in Orlando.


from the link in the OP


I'm stunned .... and still they let the NRA dictate terms to the politicians.

The NRA should be declared a terrorist organisation.


Mother Jones is a leftist group who disagrees with the mass shooting count they say 14 not 1000 in the last 3 years.

Here is mass shooting tally from 1982-2016-
motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data

The first female mass shooter was the muslim female offender with the San Bernadino terrorist attack.

The Americans have the 2A to protect them from Hoplophobic gun grabbing leftists
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #4 - Jun 23rd, 2016 at 5:28pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 4:13pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 3:47pm:
Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shootings, saw decline in firearm killings: report  Good,


Lockhart was a mass shooting the gun grabbers like to pretend never happened.


I always understood that a "mass shooting" was classified as being "four or more victims".  The Lockhart shooting of the Hunt Family only just qualifies, being Kim Hunt, 41, and her children Fletcher, 10, Mia, 8, and Phoebe, 6.  As sad as the murder of the Hunt Family was, I think you'll find it falls outside the study period.
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 72271
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #5 - Jun 23rd, 2016 at 5:31pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 4:25pm:
John Smith wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 4:15pm:
In the United States over the past 1,266 days, there have been 1,000 mass shootings, with the most recent being the Pulse Nightclub shootings in Orlando.


from the link in the OP


I'm stunned .... and still they let the NRA dictate terms to the politicians.

The NRA should be declared a terrorist organisation.


Mother Jones is a leftist group who disagrees with the mass shooting count they say 14 not 1000 in the last 3 years.

Here is mass shooting tally from 1982-2016-
motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data

The first female mass shooter was the muslim female offender with the San Bernadino terrorist attack.

The Americans have the 2A to protect them from Hoplophobic gun grabbing leftists




how does mother jones define a 'mass shooting'?
Back to top
 
Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #6 - Jun 23rd, 2016 at 6:31pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 5:28pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 4:13pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 3:47pm:
Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shootings, saw decline in firearm killings: report  Good,


Lockhart was a mass shooting the gun grabbers like to pretend never happened.


The Lockhart shooting of the Hunt Family only just qualifies,  As sad as the murder of the Hunt Family was, I think you'll find it falls outside the study period.


From your link bwian-
Quote:
Conclusions and relevance
Following enactment of gun law reforms in 1996 there were no mass firearm killings through to May 2016


Lockhart happened in 2014 this published paper reported by the ABC claims no mass shootings from 1996 to may 2016 which is clearly bullshit.

When I saw the name of the author It's Philip Alpers who fled New Zealand after failing to impose gun laws on his fellow kiwis.
He claims to be a professor yet the Kiwis say he never enrolled in University he did drugs by day and partied at night.
examiner.com/article/does-gun-website-arm-with-facts-or-with-propaganda

The ABC lied , the gun grabbers have been caught again telling lies.
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #7 - Jun 23rd, 2016 at 6:35pm  
New Zealand had their last mass shooting in early 1997.

New Zealand allows semi auto rifles with silencers along with pump action -semi auto shotguns for recreational shooters.

New Zealand abolished long gun registration in the 1980's.

Why has NZ had no mass shootings since 1997 the gun grabbers say having a semi auto rifle will turn you into a mass murdering terrorist
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #8 - Jun 23rd, 2016 at 9:43pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 6:31pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 5:28pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 4:13pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 3:47pm:
Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shootings, saw decline in firearm killings: report  Good,


Lockhart was a mass shooting the gun grabbers like to pretend never happened.


The Lockhart shooting of the Hunt Family only just qualifies,  As sad as the murder of the Hunt Family was, I think you'll find it falls outside the study period.


From your link bwian-
Quote:
Conclusions and relevance
Following enactment of gun law reforms in 1996 there were no mass firearm killings through to May 2016


Lockhart happened in 2014 this published paper reported by the ABC claims no mass shootings from 1996 to may 2016 which is clearly bullshit.


Actually, the title of the paper in the American Medical Association Journal makes it clear it studied up to before the Lockhart killing, Baron, which you'd know if you'd clicked on the link in the ABC article.

The paper's title is, "Association Between Gun Law Reforms and Intentional Firearm Deaths in Australia, 1979-2013"[emphasis added].

Quote:
When I saw the name of the author It's Philip Alpers who fled New Zealand after failing to impose gun laws on his fellow kiwis.
He claims to be a professor yet the Kiwis say he never enrolled in University he did drugs by day and partied at night.
examiner.com/article/does-gun-website-arm-with-facts-or-with-propaganda


Ah, the old, "shoot the messenger" attack.  You are so predictable, Baron, just so predictable.

Alpers actually has the title of "Adjunct Associate Professor".   If you knew anything about what you're talking about the two adjectives before the term "professor" describe that he is an "adjunct" (ie, "connected with") "associated" (ie "associated with") academic.  It means he's an honorary professor.   It is a perfectly acceptable academic title within Australia academia.

Quote:
The ABC lied , the gun grabbers have been caught again telling lies.


The ABC has neither lied, nor have the "gun grabbers".  You've just made a fool of yourself.   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #9 - Jun 23rd, 2016 at 9:46pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 9:43pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 6:31pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 5:28pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 4:13pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 3:47pm:
Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shootings, saw decline in firearm killings: report  Good,


Lockhart was a mass shooting the gun grabbers like to pretend never happened.


The Lockhart shooting of the Hunt Family only just qualifies,  As sad as the murder of the Hunt Family was, I think you'll find it falls outside the study period.


From your link bwian-
Quote:
Conclusions and relevance
Following enactment of gun law reforms in 1996 there were no mass firearm killings through to May 2016


Lockhart happened in 2014 this published paper reported by the ABC claims no mass shootings from 1996 to may 2016 which is clearly bullshit.


Actually, the title of the paper in the American Medical Association Journal makes it clear it studied up to before the Lockhart killing, Baron, which you'd know if you'd clicked on the link in the ABC article.

The paper's title is, "Association Between Gun Law Reforms and Intentional Firearm Deaths in Australia, 1979-2013"[emphasis added].

Quote:
When I saw the name of the author It's Philip Alpers who fled New Zealand after failing to impose gun laws on his fellow kiwis.
He claims to be a professor yet the Kiwis say he never enrolled in University he did drugs by day and partied at night.
examiner.com/article/does-gun-website-arm-with-facts-or-with-propaganda


Ah, the old, "shoot the messenger" attack.  You are so predictable, Baron, just so predictable.

Alpers actually has the title of "Adjunct Associate Professor".   If you knew anything about what you're talking about the two adjectives before the term "professor" describe that he is an "adjunct" (ie, "connected with") "associated" (ie "associated with") academic.  It means he's an honorary professor.   It is a perfectly acceptable academic title within Australia academia.

Quote:
The ABC lied , the gun grabbers have been caught again telling lies.


The ABC has neither lied, nor have the "gun grabbers".  You've just made a fool of yourself.   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


If you go to the bit I highlighted bwian it's in the report you cite under conclusions, the gun grabbers have been caught red handed telling lies.

An adjunct associate professor is not the same as a honorary professor they are 2 different things, Alpers pretends to be a professor he has no academic qualifications.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jun 23rd, 2016 at 9:52pm by Baronvonrort »  
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #10 - Jun 23rd, 2016 at 10:27pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 9:46pm:
If you go to the bit I highlighted bwian it's in the report you cite under conclusions, the gun grabbers have been caught red handed telling lies.


How is using his academic title "telling lies", Baron?

If you look at his staff page at the University of Sydney, it makes it clear his title is "Adjunct Associate Protessor".

If you look up "Adjunct Associate Professor" it is clear it is a legal, Australian, Academic title, awarded as an honorary to a non-Academic qualified researcher.

If anybody is "telling lies" it is your gun nut attackers who don't appear to have bothered to figure that out, being American...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Quote:
An adjunct associate professor is not the same as a honorary professor they are 2 different things, Alpers pretends to be a professor he has no academic qualifications.


Sure of that, Baron?

Quote:
The system of academic titles and ranks in Australia is classified to a common five levels, A-E, although the titles of these levels may differ between insititutions. These are:

    Level A - Tutor/Associate Lecturer
    Level B - Lecturer
    Level C - Senior Lecturer
    Level D - Reader/Associate Professor
    Level E - Professor

These levels correspond to salary levels set by the Australian government's Higher education Academic Salaries Award (2002). There has been a significant increase in academics at level D and E (Associate professor and professor) in recent years. The number of academics at these levels increased by 70% from 1996 to 2008.

In order to receive the title of professor, the applicant must pass each university's minimum standards statements and promotion policies, which are derived from the Higher education Academic Salaries award. Three key attributes are examined: recognition, distinction and leadership. Leadership in research is arguably the most important. Some universities also expect leadership in developing the curriculum and in the teaching and management of staff and students.

The difference between professor and associate professor is that there is less of an imperative to demonstrate leadership qualities for the title of associate professor. Still, in order to receive the title, it is required that the applicant has made an 'outstanding contribution' and that the applicant is usually recognised at a national or international level.

In some universities, the title of professor and associate professor can also be conferred with appointment to a senior management position without the need for an extensive academic record or a research higher degree. This has been criticised. It has also been lauded.

Adjunct and conjoint professor is an honorary title bestowed upon a person to formally recognise that person's non-employment 'special relationship' with the university.


[Source]

So, basically Mr. Alpers has been given an honorific title.  He is correct to use that title on papers he has published.  He is not lying.    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jun 23rd, 2016 at 11:49pm by Brian Ross »  
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #11 - Jun 23rd, 2016 at 10:58pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 10:27pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 9:46pm:
If you go to the bit I highlighted bwian it's in the report you cite under conclusions, the gun grabbers have been caught red handed telling lies.


How is using his academic title "telling lies", Baron?



They were caught red handed telling lies about no mass shootings from 1996 to 2016.

Even you admit Lockhart was a mass shooting.

Do you think Philip Alpers and Simon Chapman should be telling lies about no mass shootings when we have had them.

They lose all credibility when caught telling lies, that lie was easy to debunk.
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #12 - Jun 23rd, 2016 at 11:52pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 10:58pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 10:27pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 9:46pm:
If you go to the bit I highlighted bwian it's in the report you cite under conclusions, the gun grabbers have been caught red handed telling lies.


How is using his academic title "telling lies", Baron?



They were caught red handed telling lies about no mass shootings from 1996 to 2016.


Yet the paper they are reporting on finished it's study in 2013, Baron.  So, how were the paper writers lying again?

Quote:
Even you admit Lockhart was a mass shooting.

Do you think Philip Alpers and Simon Chapman should be telling lies about no mass shootings when we have had them.

They lose all credibility when caught telling lies, that lie was easy to debunk.


The paper's study was until 2013, Baron, not 2014, so how were they lying again?

You really appear rather fixated on this for some obscure reason.  Do you always have problems facing reality?

Oh, and how was Adjunct Associate Professor Alpers lying about his honorific academic title again?

You mean he wasn't?  Amazing.    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #13 - Jun 24th, 2016 at 12:06am  
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 11:52pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 10:58pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 10:27pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 9:46pm:
If you go to the bit I highlighted bwian it's in the report you cite under conclusions, the gun grabbers have been caught red handed telling lies.


How is using his academic title "telling lies", Baron?



They were caught red handed telling lies about no mass shootings from 1996 to 2016.


Yet the paper they are reporting on finished it's study in 2013, Baron.  So, how were the paper writers lying again?

Quote:
Even you admit Lockhart was a mass shooting.

Do you think Philip Alpers and Simon Chapman should be telling lies about no mass shootings when we have had them.

They lose all credibility when caught telling lies, that lie was easy to debunk.


The paper's study was until 2013, Baron, not 2014, so how were they lying again?



You are the bullshit artist bwian, I see why people don't bother with your forum with a dopey dim wit like you running it.

Your link from JAMA under Conclusions says no mass shootings from 1996 to may 2016 which is a clear lie, do you even bother checking what is written in your links.
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #14 - Jun 24th, 2016 at 7:50am  
From Bwians link-

Quote:
Conclusions
Following the enactment of gun law reforms in Australia in 1996, there were no mass firearm killings throught May 2016.

There was a more rapid decline in firearm deaths between 1997 and 2013 compared with before 1997, but also a decline in total non firearm suicide and homicide deaths of a greater magnitude.
Because of this, it is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to gun law reforms



There you go this paper in the JAMA says it's not possible to determine whether gun laws had any effect on firearm homicides.

The homicide rate by any method was 1.9 per 100K in 1995, firearm homicide rate was 0.3 per 100K in 1995
The current homicide rate is around 1.0 per 100K.

There is no evidence our gun laws had any effect on the homicide rate.
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #15 - Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:16pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 12:06am:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 11:52pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 10:58pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 10:27pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 9:46pm:
If you go to the bit I highlighted bwian it's in the report you cite under conclusions, the gun grabbers have been caught red handed telling lies.


How is using his academic title "telling lies", Baron?



They were caught red handed telling lies about no mass shootings from 1996 to 2016.


Yet the paper they are reporting on finished it's study in 2013, Baron.  So, how were the paper writers lying again?

Quote:
Even you admit Lockhart was a mass shooting.

Do you think Philip Alpers and Simon Chapman should be telling lies about no mass shootings when we have had them.

They lose all credibility when caught telling lies, that lie was easy to debunk.


The paper's study was until 2013, Baron, not 2014, so how were they lying again?



You are the bullshit artist bwian, I see why people don't bother with your forum with a dopey dim wit like you running it.

Your link from JAMA under Conclusions says no mass shootings from 1996 to may 2016 which is a clear lie, do you even bother checking what is written in your links.


And yet the title and all the data claims the study only ran until 2013, Baron.

Face the facts, you are wrong.   Lockhart was excluded from the study because it fell outside the study's scope (2014 versus 2013).

Tough.  You lose out again.    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #16 - Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:23pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 7:50am:
From Bwians link-

Quote:
Conclusions
Following the enactment of gun law reforms in Australia in 1996, there were no mass firearm killings throught May 2016.

There was a more rapid decline in firearm deaths between 1997 and 2013 compared with before 1997, but also a decline in total non firearm suicide and homicide deaths of a greater magnitude.
Because of this, it is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to gun law reforms



There you go this paper in the JAMA says it's not possible to determine whether gun laws had any effect on firearm homicides.

The homicide rate by any method was 1.9 per 100K in 1995, firearm homicide rate was 0.3 per 100K in 1995
The current homicide rate is around 1.0 per 100K.

There is no evidence our gun laws had any effect on the homicide rate.


There is also no evidence that the gun laws had any effect on whether or not Mr. Hunt would have killed his wife and kids, before committing suicide.   He used a "a W Cashmore double-barrelled shotgun", according to the Sydney Morning Herald report, Baron.   I don't believe double-barrelled shotguns were declared unlawful after Port Arthur, were they?

Anyway, as the study did not include an event in 2014 in it's study of such events, which was only until 2013, I think you're barking up the wrong tree.  A not unusual state for a gun nut like yourself.   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #17 - Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:24pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:16pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 12:06am:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 11:52pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 10:58pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 10:27pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 9:46pm:
If you go to the bit I highlighted bwian it's in the report you cite under conclusions, the gun grabbers have been caught red handed telling lies.


How is using his academic title "telling lies", Baron?



They were caught red handed telling lies about no mass shootings from 1996 to 2016.


Yet the paper they are reporting on finished it's study in 2013, Baron.  So, how were the paper writers lying again?

Quote:
Even you admit Lockhart was a mass shooting.

Do you think Philip Alpers and Simon Chapman should be telling lies about no mass shootings when we have had them.

They lose all credibility when caught telling lies, that lie was easy to debunk.


The paper's study was until 2013, Baron, not 2014, so how were they lying again?



You are the bullshit artist bwian, I see why people don't bother with your forum with a dopey dim wit like you running it.

Your link from JAMA under Conclusions says no mass shootings from 1996 to may 2016 which is a clear lie, do you even bother checking what is written in your links.


And yet the title and all the data claims the study only ran until 2013, Baron.

Face the facts, you are wrong.   Lockhart was excluded from the study because it fell outside the study's scope (2014 versus 2013).

Tough.  You lose out again.    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


It says in the conclusion no mass shootings from 1996 to may 2016 did you read that bwian?

They redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed to exclude Lockhart, the gun grabbers move the goal posts to suit their bullshit.

Since they redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed are they going to hold the Americans to the same standard to qualify for mass shootings?

Must be quiet in your crappy forum if you are back trolling this forum
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #18 - Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:52pm  
They are making the study, Baron.  They get to define matters how they like.  There is no hard and fast rule as to what constitutes a "mass shooting event".

Time you started your own study.  Might be amusing to see you picked apart for a change by academics.    Grin Grin Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #19 - Jun 24th, 2016 at 6:33pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:23pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 7:50am:
From Bwians link-

Quote:
Conclusions
Following the enactment of gun law reforms in Australia in 1996, there were no mass firearm killings throught May 2016.

There was a more rapid decline in firearm deaths between 1997 and 2013 compared with before 1997, but also a decline in total non firearm suicide and homicide deaths of a greater magnitude.
Because of this, it is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to gun law reforms



There you go this paper in the JAMA says it's not possible to determine whether gun laws had any effect on firearm homicides.

The homicide rate by any method was 1.9 per 100K in 1995, firearm homicide rate was 0.3 per 100K in 1995
The current homicide rate is around 1.0 per 100K.

There is no evidence our gun laws had any effect on the homicide rate.


There is also no evidence that the gun laws had any effect on whether or not Mr. Hunt would have killed his wife and kids, before committing suicide.

Anyway, as the study did not include an event in 2014 in it's study of such events, which was only until 2013, I think you're barking up the wrong tree.  A not unusual state for a gun nut like yourself.   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


Under Table 1 the study mentions Lockhart bwian and how they redfined mass shootings to 5.

Did you miss that part?  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Cheesy Grin Cheesy Grin Cheesy Grin Cheesy Smiley
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #20 - Jun 24th, 2016 at 9:54pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 6:33pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:23pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 7:50am:
From Bwians link-

Quote:
Conclusions
Following the enactment of gun law reforms in Australia in 1996, there were no mass firearm killings throught May 2016.

There was a more rapid decline in firearm deaths between 1997 and 2013 compared with before 1997, but also a decline in total non firearm suicide and homicide deaths of a greater magnitude.
Because of this, it is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to gun law reforms



There you go this paper in the JAMA says it's not possible to determine whether gun laws had any effect on firearm homicides.

The homicide rate by any method was 1.9 per 100K in 1995, firearm homicide rate was 0.3 per 100K in 1995
The current homicide rate is around 1.0 per 100K.

There is no evidence our gun laws had any effect on the homicide rate.


There is also no evidence that the gun laws had any effect on whether or not Mr. Hunt would have killed his wife and kids, before committing suicide.

Anyway, as the study did not include an event in 2014 in it's study of such events, which was only until 2013, I think you're barking up the wrong tree.  A not unusual state for a gun nut like yourself.   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


Under Table 1 the study mentions Lockhart bwian and how they redfined mass shootings to 5.

Did you miss that part?  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Cheesy Grin Cheesy Grin Cheesy Grin Cheesy Smiley


Nope.  It is, as the study states, irrelevant to the study as it falls outside it's scope which ends in 2013, Baron.

I keep explaining that to you.   You won't accept it.  You are in denial it appears.   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #21 - Jun 24th, 2016 at 10:30pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 9:54pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 6:33pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:23pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 7:50am:
From Bwians link-

Quote:
Conclusions
Following the enactment of gun law reforms in Australia in 1996, there were no mass firearm killings throught May 2016.

There was a more rapid decline in firearm deaths between 1997 and 2013 compared with before 1997, but also a decline in total non firearm suicide and homicide deaths of a greater magnitude.
Because of this, it is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to gun law reforms



There you go this paper in the JAMA says it's not possible to determine whether gun laws had any effect on firearm homicides.

The homicide rate by any method was 1.9 per 100K in 1995, firearm homicide rate was 0.3 per 100K in 1995
The current homicide rate is around 1.0 per 100K.

There is no evidence our gun laws had any effect on the homicide rate.


There is also no evidence that the gun laws had any effect on whether or not Mr. Hunt would have killed his wife and kids, before committing suicide.

Anyway, as the study did not include an event in 2014 in it's study of such events, which was only until 2013, I think you're barking up the wrong tree.  A not unusual state for a gun nut like yourself.   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


Under Table 1 the study mentions Lockhart bwian and how they redfined mass shootings to 5.

Did you miss that part?  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Cheesy Grin Cheesy Grin Cheesy Grin Cheesy Smiley


Nope.  It is, as the study states, irrelevant to the study as it falls outside it's scope which ends in 2013, Baron.

I keep explaining that to you.   You won't accept it.  You are in denial it appears.   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


The data in Table 1 in that study is from January 1979 to may 2016 have a look bwian ya dopey dim wit it even mentions Lockhart and Logan in 2014 along with redefining mass shootings to 5 or more killed.

They have redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed to exclude Lockhart, when they say guns are a problem laws aren't working they might redefine it to 3 killed to boost their numbers. 

Did you miss this bit in Conclusions from your link to JAMA bwian?
Quote:
It is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to the gun law reforms
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Lionel Edriess
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1932
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #22 - Jun 24th, 2016 at 10:53pm  

What a jolly subject - and what crock of Shiite!

I'd bet money there's been more shootings since 1996. '96 to '16, 20 years! Every day there's gunshots.

It's just that there's been less people killed as a result.

When Chopper was in business, there was none of this drive-by shite - you never shot a fibro house. You simply shot who you meant to shoot.

Gang activity and firearms is a subject no-one wants to touch and Roger Rogerson has finally been caught.

If it weren't for farmers and ferals, the average Aussie bloke would be lucky to get a shot away at all.
Back to top
 
Toughen up, Australia!
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #23 - Jun 29th, 2016 at 9:54pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 3:47pm:
Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shootings, saw decline in firearm killings: report  Good,


Someone calling out bwian and all the other bullshit artists who lie in saying no mass shootings since Howard's gun laws.

mamamia.com.au/port-arthur-massacre-lie
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #24 - Jun 29th, 2016 at 10:26pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 3:47pm:
Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shootings, saw decline in firearm killings: report  Good,


Doctors for responsible gun ownership respond to JAMA article. Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

drgo.us/?p=3363
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Pho Huc
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 985
Victoria
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #25 - Jun 30th, 2016 at 1:13pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 7:50am:
From Bwians link-

Quote:
Conclusions
Following the enactment of gun law reforms in Australia in 1996, there were no mass firearm killings throught May 2016.

There was a more rapid decline in firearm deaths between 1997 and 2013 compared with before 1997, but also a decline in total non firearm suicide and homicide deaths of a greater magnitude.
Because of this, it is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to gun law reforms



There you go this paper in the JAMA says it's not possible to determine whether gun laws had any effect on firearm homicides.

The homicide rate by any method was 1.9 per 100K in 1995, firearm homicide rate was 0.3 per 100K in 1995
The current homicide rate is around 1.0 per 100K.

There is no evidence our gun laws had any effect on the homicide rate.


Other than it decreasing. Oh sure, you can find other factors to explain the drop in violence, but you cant just exclude gun law reform.
By the way im pretty sure that the rate of homicide by firearm has dropped signifigantly since 1995. It wouldnt be crazy to think there may a causal link between this legislation and crime rates.

Unless you were one of those enlightened people who understands that statistics are meaningless when they refute your preffered viewpoint. Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
The law locks up the man who steals the goose from the common, but leaves the greater criminal loose who steals the common from the goose (convict saying)
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #26 - Jun 30th, 2016 at 2:39pm  
Pho Huc wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 1:13pm:
Unless you were one of those enlightened people who understands that statistics are meaningless when they refute your preffered viewpoint. Roll Eyes


The statistics refute the gun grabbers claims.  Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #27 - Jun 30th, 2016 at 3:10pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 10:26pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jun 23rd, 2016 at 3:47pm:
Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shootings, saw decline in firearm killings: report  Good,


Doctors for responsible gun ownership respond to JAMA article. Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

drgo.us/?p=3363


Which, if you read it, is more a character assassination than a refutation.  Rather typical of gun nuts I fear, Baron.  Afterall, you engage in it all the time.    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #28 - Jun 30th, 2016 at 3:57pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 2:39pm:
Pho Huc wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 1:13pm:
Unless you were one of those enlightened people who understands that statistics are meaningless when they refute your preffered viewpoint. Roll Eyes


The statistics refute the gun grabbers claims.  Roll Eyes


Rreally?  Where, Baron?  Provide a link to these statistics of yours, 'cause all the statistics I've seen support the claims in that article...   Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pho Huc
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 985
Victoria
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #29 - Jul 1st, 2016 at 12:31pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 2:39pm:
Pho Huc wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 1:13pm:
Unless you were one of those enlightened people who understands that statistics are meaningless when they refute your preffered viewpoint. Roll Eyes


The statistics refute the gun grabbers claims.  Roll Eyes




I would also like to see these statistics.
Back to top
 
The law locks up the man who steals the goose from the common, but leaves the greater criminal loose who steals the common from the goose (convict saying)
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #30 - Jul 1st, 2016 at 1:45pm  
It's interesting that the previous, "hot-to-trot" gun nut appears to have disappeared from the scene after making such an outlandish claim.  What's wrong, Baron, unable to provide a link?  Tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Lionel Edriess
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1932
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #31 - Jul 2nd, 2016 at 1:54am  

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 1st, 2016 at 1:45pm:
It's interesting that the previous, "hot-to-trot" gun nut appears to have disappeared from the scene after making such an outlandish claim.  What's wrong, Baron, unable to provide a link?  Tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes


What's the point?

According to 'everyone', such things never happen:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-26/man-charged-with-two-sex-attacks-after-hig...

A 'gun nut', an 'Islamist', a 'P' plater and a 'rape accusation' are hate crime terminology. Such accusations immediately  invalidate criminal charges because they are hate based.

Shawn O'Shawnesy would have walked free, not because of the perceived religious bias possibly affecting the outcome of the trial, but because of his refusal to apologise to the victims, thus rendering little mercy from the assembled jury.

Ha, ha!

It's an Islamic inspired hate crime. Why is this not recognisable and called for what it is?

The question remains, what is the best to do with this animal?

Do we lock him up in his infectious condition? Or, for fear of his safety in jail, do we compassionately export him back to his family and country of origin?

He's no asset to this society, as has already been proven.

Best we give him a pat on the back and a kick in the arse on the way out.

Simple.
Back to top
 
Toughen up, Australia!
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #32 - Jul 2nd, 2016 at 12:41pm  
Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 2nd, 2016 at 1:54am:
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 1st, 2016 at 1:45pm:
It's interesting that the previous, "hot-to-trot" gun nut appears to have disappeared from the scene after making such an outlandish claim.  What's wrong, Baron, unable to provide a link?  Tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes


What's the point?


Exactly, Lionel, what is the point when you are chasing a dead cat?

The Baron likes to be aggressive and talk big.  Yet, when a pin is sued to prick his balloon, he deflates just as fast.

What a shame that you've chosen to change the subject.   What's wrong, cannot speak to the thread?  Have to introduce your Islamophobia?  Tsk, tsk.   Roll Eyes

So,  as you've stepped up to the plate, do you have a link which proves the Baron's contention that statistics don't support the original paper's premise?    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
BigOl64
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #33 - Jul 2nd, 2016 at 1:35pm  

There as many guns now as there were prior to '96, probably as many law abiding gun owners too; but some how the gun laws stopped mass shootings without any other influence having any input.

Sounds like a load of sh1t to me.


But never let the facts get in the way of a good bullsh1t story.  Grin Grin Grin Grin
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #34 - Jul 3rd, 2016 at 12:19am  
BigOl64 wrote on Jul 2nd, 2016 at 1:35pm:
There as many guns now as there were prior to '96, probably as many law abiding gun owners too; but some how the gun laws stopped mass shootings without any other influence having any input.

Sounds like a load of sh1t to me.


But never let the facts get in the way of a good bullsh1t story.  Grin Grin Grin Grin




We have over 1.9 million firearm license holders with over 5 million registered guns which is a significant increase in licenses and guns over 1996 numbers.
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #35 - Jul 3rd, 2016 at 12:21am  
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 1st, 2016 at 1:45pm:
It's interesting that the previous, "hot-to-trot" gun nut appears to have disappeared from the scene after making such an outlandish claim.  What's wrong, Baron, unable to provide a link?  Tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes


Some of us don't fritter away our lives on internet forums bwian, you have to troll this forum because nobody could be bothered with your forum.

The links are in this forum bwian do you need me to show them to you?
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #36 - Jul 3rd, 2016 at 5:09pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 3rd, 2016 at 12:21am:
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 1st, 2016 at 1:45pm:
It's interesting that the previous, "hot-to-trot" gun nut appears to have disappeared from the scene after making such an outlandish claim.  What's wrong, Baron, unable to provide a link?  Tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes


Some of us don't fritter away our lives on internet forums bwian, you have to troll this forum because nobody could be bothered with your forum.

The links are in this forum bwian do you need me to show them to you?


Yes, please, Baron.   I'd find them as amusing as I found your character assassination of one of the authors of the original paper was.   Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #37 - Jul 3rd, 2016 at 6:17pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 10:30pm:
Did you miss this bit in Conclusions from your link to JAMA bwian?
Quote:
It is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to the gun law reforms



What conclusions are you drawing from that study bwian? Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Cheesy Grin Cheesy Grin Cheesy Grin
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #38 - Jul 3rd, 2016 at 6:42pm  
Where are the statistics, Baron?   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #39 - Jul 3rd, 2016 at 7:16pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 3rd, 2016 at 6:42pm:
Where are the statistics, Baron?   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


They are in this forum bwian, are you too stupid to find them? Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Lets start from the beginning-

1980-
Firearm homicide rate 0.8 per 100K
Firearm suicide rate 3.7 per 100K
Accidental shooting deaths 0.4 per 100K

1995-
Firearm homicide rate 0.3 per 100K
Firearm suicide rate  2.1 per 100K
Accidental shooting deaths 0.2 per 100K

What caused this pre existing decline in firearm deaths before 1996 gun laws bwian?
Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/productsbytitle/9C85BD1298C075EACA2568A900139342?Op...

Does that link say the military style semi autos were responsible for 1.3 % of all firearm deaths from 1980-1995?
Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #40 - Jul 3rd, 2016 at 8:32pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 3rd, 2016 at 7:16pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 3rd, 2016 at 6:42pm:
Where are the statistics, Baron?   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


They are in this forum bwian, are you too stupid to find them? Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Lets start from the beginning-

1980-
Firearm homicide rate 0.8 per 100K
Firearm suicide rate 3.7 per 100K
Accidental shooting deaths 0.4 per 100K

1995-
Firearm homicide rate 0.3 per 100K
Firearm suicide rate  2.1 per 100K
Accidental shooting deaths 0.2 per 100K

What caused this pre existing decline in firearm deaths before 1996 gun laws bwian? Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/productsbytitle/9C85BD1298C075EACA2568A900139342?Op...

Does that link say the military style semi autos were responsible for 1.3 % of all firearm deaths from 1980-1995?  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes



That link only provides the raw statistics, Baron.   How they are interpreted is up to the researcher.   The researchers from the original paper, state that the decline was because of the ban on semi-automatic longarms.   As semi-automatic longarms and pump-action shotguns were the ones banned in 1996, I think they have a point.   Thus far, we have seen you twisting and turning, trying character assassination against the writers of the original paper and myself and others.   We have yet to see you, until now, actually start addressing the findings of the paper.   Have you finally run out of puff, Baron?  No where else to hide?  Roll Eyes

In 1996 we saw the banning of private ownership of semi-automatic longarms and pump-action shotguns.   We saw the banning of the private ownership of all firearms for the purpose of self-defence.    We saw a consummate drop in the number of homicides attributable to those events, coupled with the buyback scheme that the state governments operated.

Thus far you have not made any sense as to what could have caused that drop in the number of homicides that occurred after 1996.  To you, it is all just magic it seems.   Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 40673
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #41 - Jul 3rd, 2016 at 8:40pm  
Islam causes homicides.

Should be banned.
Back to top
 
Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #42 - Jul 3rd, 2016 at 8:44pm  
Christianity causes homicides.

Should be banned.

Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Lord Herbert
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 34441
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #43 - Jul 3rd, 2016 at 8:54pm  
It put an end to mass shooting, but not an end to fatal shootings.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pho Huc
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 985
Victoria
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #44 - Jul 4th, 2016 at 5:04pm  
Ok. I understand barons pov now.
Gun violence was declining prior to 1996. Therefore any changes to gun laws after these dates cannot influence gun violence after these dates...........

Baron is very happy to talk 86~96 statistics.
Baron is very very happy to ignore 96~2016, as it shows an acceleratiing decrease in gun violence.

Please correct me if i have misinterpreted your position baron.
Back to top
 
The law locks up the man who steals the goose from the common, but leaves the greater criminal loose who steals the common from the goose (convict saying)
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #45 - Jul 4th, 2016 at 5:39pm  
Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 3rd, 2016 at 8:54pm:
It put an end to mass shooting, but not an end to fatal shootings.


Lockhart was a mass shooting therefore it's bullshit to claim the 1996 gun laws ended mass shootings.

New Zealand has had no mass shootings since early 1997 despite allowing the guns we banned, if it was the type of gun why has NZ had no mass shootings?
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #46 - Jul 4th, 2016 at 5:51pm  
Pho Huc wrote on Jul 4th, 2016 at 5:04pm:
Ok. I understand barons pov now.
Gun violence was declining prior to 1996. Therefore any changes to gun laws after these dates cannot influence gun violence after these dates...........

Baron is very happy to talk 86~96 statistics.
Baron is very very happy to ignore 96~2016, as it shows an acceleratiing decrease in gun violence.

Please correct me if i have misinterpreted your position baron.


There was a fairly significant decline in all gun deaths for over a decade and a half before our 1996 gun laws.
This downward trend would have continued with or without the 1996 gun laws there are numerous studies that back this view.
Happy to see you agree there was a significant downward trend with all gun deaths before 1996.

Brians linked study said non firearm homicides declined at a far greater magnitude than firearm homicides after our 1996 gun laws.
What caused non firearm homicides to decline at a far greater magnitude compared to firearm homicides after 1996?
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #47 - Jul 4th, 2016 at 6:00pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 3rd, 2016 at 8:32pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 3rd, 2016 at 7:16pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 3rd, 2016 at 6:42pm:
Where are the statistics, Baron?   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


They are in this forum bwian, are you too stupid to find them? Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Lets start from the beginning-

1980-
Firearm homicide rate 0.8 per 100K
Firearm suicide rate 3.7 per 100K
Accidental shooting deaths 0.4 per 100K

1995-
Firearm homicide rate 0.3 per 100K
Firearm suicide rate  2.1 per 100K
Accidental shooting deaths 0.2 per 100K

What caused this pre existing decline in firearm deaths before 1996 gun laws bwian? Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/productsbytitle/9C85BD1298C075EACA2568A900139342?Op...

Does that link say the military style semi autos were responsible for 1.3 % of all firearm deaths from 1980-1995?  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes



That link only provides the raw statistics, Baron.   How they are interpreted is up to the researcher.   The researchers from the original paper, state that the decline was because of the ban on semi-automatic longarms. 


Only 27 of the 813 firearm homicides from 1980-1995 were done with semi autos that were banned in 1996.
If we add the 35 from Pt Arthur we only have 62 out of 916 homicides done with semi auto rifles from 1980-1996.

We banned the types of gun that caused the least deaths according to ABS data, hunting rifles caused the most deaths they are still available.

This type of gun caused the most deaths according to statistics, it's Category B which means maximum 10 round magazines.
The old sniper saying - If you hear it I wasn't aiming for you.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jul 4th, 2016 at 6:07pm by Baronvonrort »  
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #48 - Jul 4th, 2016 at 7:16pm  
Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 3rd, 2016 at 8:54pm:
It put an end to mass shooting, but not an end to fatal shootings.


It has significantly decreased those as well, Herbie.   Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 40673
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #49 - Jul 6th, 2016 at 9:13pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 3rd, 2016 at 8:44pm:
Christianity causes homicides.

Should be banned.

Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Liar.
Back to top
 
Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Lionel Edriess
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1932
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #50 - Jul 6th, 2016 at 9:44pm  

I'll hazard a few statements, based purely on observation and keeping abreast of the news.

1. There are now more registered guns in this county than in '96, and more illegal guns.

2. There have been more reported shooting incidences since '96 than the previous 20 years.

3. I would estimate that 90% of reported shootings since '96 involve illegal or stolen firearms, and are committed by unlicensed offenders.

4. That the laws enacted in '96 have done little to curb mass shootings, only that is has delayed the inevitable.

5. That the next mass shooting will be carried out by a 'disaffected immigrant' with an illegal, and/or unlicensed weapon.

We have more to worry about, in this country, than the number of licensed weapons, and/or owners.
Back to top
 
Toughen up, Australia!
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #51 - Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:43pm  
Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 9:44pm:
I'll hazard a few statements, based purely on observation and keeping abreast of the news.

1. There are now more registered guns in this county than in '96, and more illegal guns.


There are no semi-automatic longarms or pump-action shotguns in private hands legally, since 1996, Lionel. 

Quote:
2. There have been more reported shooting incidences since '96 than the previous 20 years.


Evidence, please.

Quote:
3. I would estimate that 90% of reported shootings since '96 involve illegal or stolen firearms, and are committed by unlicensed offenders.


Evidence, please.

Quote:
4. That the laws enacted in '96 have done little to curb mass shootings, only that is has delayed the inevitable.


It has stopped massed shootings (for the most part) since the 1996 gun laws were enacted.

All the mass shootings which have occurred since 1996 have occurred with legally available firearms.

Quote:
5. That the next mass shooting will be carried out by a 'disaffected immigrant' with an illegal, and/or unlicensed weapon.


Your Xenophobia is showing through, Lionel.  Tsk, tsk.  Considering that Martin Bryant was a native born Australian citizens must be hard for you to accept...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Quote:
We have more to worry about, in this country, than the number of licensed weapons, and/or owners.


Australia is actually pretty unique, Lionel.  We are a (generally) happy, cohesive, Multicultural nation, despite the best efforts of Xenophobes and Islamophobes to try and drive wedges into our community.    Tsk, tsk.    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Yadda
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 20979
A cat with a view
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #52 - Jul 16th, 2016 at 9:16am  
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:43pm:

Quote:
5. That the next mass shooting will be carried out by a 'disaffected immigrant' with an illegal, and/or unlicensed weapon.


Your Xenophobia is showing through, Lionel.  Tsk, tsk.  Considering that Martin Bryant was a native born Australian citizens must be hard for you to accept...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes





Weapons ?

The 'weapon', the only weapon required,      ...is in the hearts, of those assailants !

Quote:

French Lesson: Guns not Critical To Jihadi Violence

by A.J. Caschetta

July 15, 2016


France is about as close to a national gun-free zone as you can get.

Lesson number one from France is that gun laws will not stop jihad terror.
......
......
Banning firearms did not prevent the Nice, France attacker from finding and using firearms.

It did not prevent the Bataclan killers, or the killers at the Charlie Hebdo offices, or the killer at the Hyper Kasher Deli, or the killer at the Jewish school in Toulouse.

Nor did it prevent the Moroccan jihadi on the train in Paris, who would have done much more damage had it not been for the valiant efforts of three type-A, gung ho Americans with nerves of steel.

While the crew of the French train ran away from the shooter, Spencer Stone, Alek Skarlatos and Anthony Sadler ran towards the gunfire and subdued him.

Lesson number three from France is that only by fighting back can you survive.
http://www.meforum.org/6116/french-lessons





.





Brian Ross wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:43pm:

Quote:
We have more to worry about, in this country, than the number of licensed weapons, and/or owners.


Australia is actually pretty unique, Lionel.  We are a (generally) happy, cohesive, Multicultural nation, despite the best efforts of Xenophobes and Islamophobes to try and drive wedges into our community.    Tsk, tsk.    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes





Weapons ?

The 'weapon', the only weapon required,      ...is in the hearts, of those assailants !

Quote:

July 15, 2016

Whether you are pacifists or warmongers, gays or heterosexuals, atheists or Christians, blasphemers or devout, French or Iraqis, jihadi terrorism does not discriminate.


[i.e.
If you are not a moslem, you are deemed to be, 'an enemy of Allah'.     ...And mainstream ISLAM [ISLAMIC doctrine] says that you deserve to die! - Yadda]

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8409/jihadi-terrorism
Back to top
 
"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #53 - Jul 16th, 2016 at 12:53pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:43pm:
Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 9:44pm:
I'll hazard a few statements, based purely on observation and keeping abreast of the news.

1. There are now more registered guns in this county than in '96, and more illegal guns.


There are no semi-automatic longarms or pump-action shotguns in private hands legally, since 1996, Lionel. 


Quote:
3. I would estimate that 90% of reported shootings since '96 involve illegal or stolen firearms, and are committed by unlicensed offenders.


Evidence, please.



Bwian is bullshitting again.

Farmers are allowed semi auto rimfires and pump action shotguns under Category C firearm license, Professional shooters are allowed semi auto rifles and pump action shotguns under Category D license.

Crimtrac data shows just over 5 million registered gun in Australia, in 1996 there were just over 3 million registered guns

The NSW police minister Troy Grant has stated greater than 97% of all gun crime is done by criminals with unregistered firearms.

Bwian is a sad pathetic pissant who trolls this forum because nobody could be bothered with his forum, what a sad dickhead.
Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #54 - Jul 16th, 2016 at 3:25pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 12:53pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:43pm:
Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 9:44pm:
I'll hazard a few statements, based purely on observation and keeping abreast of the news.

1. There are now more registered guns in this county than in '96, and more illegal guns.


There are no semi-automatic longarms or pump-action shotguns in private hands legally, since 1996, Lionel. 


Quote:
3. I would estimate that 90% of reported shootings since '96 involve illegal or stolen firearms, and are committed by unlicensed offenders.


Evidence, please.



Bwian is bullshitting again.


No, I am speaking generally, Baron.  Something you appear to take exception to, simply because it points out the fallacies in your original comment.  Tsk, tsk.    Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 131562
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #55 - Jul 16th, 2016 at 4:39pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:24pm:
They redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed to exclude Lockhart, the gun grabbers move the goal posts to suit their bullshit.


Quite incorrect, actually.

They used the definition of '5 or more' to remain consistent with a previous report.

" ... verified reports of all mass shooting incidents in Australia (defined here, as in a previous analysis, 8 as ≥5 victims killed by gunshot, not including the perpetrator)."

You see that '8'? It links to a reference.

8
Chapman  S, Alpers  P, Agho  K, Jones  M.  Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings. Inj Prev. 2006;12(6):365-372.
PubMed   |  Link to Article

And when you click on 'Link to Article' it takes you to the 2006 report.

Note that date: 2006.

The Lockhart shooting happened after 2006, so what you claim is actually impossible.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jul 16th, 2016 at 4:49pm by greggerypeccary »  
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 131562
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #56 - Jul 16th, 2016 at 6:34pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:24pm:
Since they redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed are they going to hold the Americans to the same standard to qualify for mass shootings?


They didn't 'redefine' a thing.

"5 or more" comes from the 2006 investigation (long before Lockhart).

And, there is no universally accepted official definition of "mass shooting".
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Lionel Edriess
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1932
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #57 - Jul 16th, 2016 at 6:56pm  

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 3:25pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 12:53pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:43pm:
Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 9:44pm:
I'll hazard a few statements, based purely on observation and keeping abreast of the news.

1. There are now more registered guns in this county than in '96, and more illegal guns.


There are no semi-automatic longarms or pump-action shotguns in private hands legally, since 1996, Lionel. 


Quote:
3. I would estimate that 90% of reported shootings since '96 involve illegal or stolen firearms, and are committed by unlicensed offenders.


Evidence, please.



Bwian is bullshitting again.


No, I am speaking generally, Baron.  Something you appear to take exception to, simply because it points out the fallacies in your original comment.  Tsk, tsk.    Roll Eyes



You got nailed, though, Brian, didn't you?  Tsk, tsk.

Thank you, Baron.
Back to top
 
Toughen up, Australia!
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 131562
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #58 - Jul 17th, 2016 at 12:21am  
Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 6:56pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 3:25pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 12:53pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:43pm:
Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 9:44pm:
I'll hazard a few statements, based purely on observation and keeping abreast of the news.

1. There are now more registered guns in this county than in '96, and more illegal guns.


There are no semi-automatic longarms or pump-action shotguns in private hands legally, since 1996, Lionel. 


Quote:
3. I would estimate that 90% of reported shootings since '96 involve illegal or stolen firearms, and are committed by unlicensed offenders.


Evidence, please.



Bwian is bullshitting again.


No, I am speaking generally, Baron.  Something you appear to take exception to, simply because it points out the fallacies in your original comment.  Tsk, tsk.    Roll Eyes



You got nailed, though, Brian, didn't you?  Tsk, tsk.

Thank you, Baron.



Baron got well and truly nailed in my last two posts.

Thank you, greggerypeccary.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #59 - Jul 18th, 2016 at 4:26pm  
greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 17th, 2016 at 12:21am:
Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 6:56pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 3:25pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 12:53pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:43pm:
Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 9:44pm:
I'll hazard a few statements, based purely on observation and keeping abreast of the news.

1. There are now more registered guns in this county than in '96, and more illegal guns.


There are no semi-automatic longarms or pump-action shotguns in private hands legally, since 1996, Lionel. 


Quote:
3. I would estimate that 90% of reported shootings since '96 involve illegal or stolen firearms, and are committed by unlicensed offenders.


Evidence, please.



Bwian is bullshitting again.


No, I am speaking generally, Baron.  Something you appear to take exception to, simply because it points out the fallacies in your original comment.  Tsk, tsk.    Roll Eyes



You got nailed, though, Brian, didn't you?  Tsk, tsk.

Thank you, Baron.



Baron got well and truly nailed in my last two posts.

Thank you, greggerypeccary.


You did nothing of the sort little pecca, you went off half cocked.
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 131562
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #60 - Jul 18th, 2016 at 4:28pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 18th, 2016 at 4:26pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 17th, 2016 at 12:21am:
Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 6:56pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 3:25pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 12:53pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:43pm:
Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 9:44pm:
I'll hazard a few statements, based purely on observation and keeping abreast of the news.

1. There are now more registered guns in this county than in '96, and more illegal guns.


There are no semi-automatic longarms or pump-action shotguns in private hands legally, since 1996, Lionel. 


Quote:
3. I would estimate that 90% of reported shootings since '96 involve illegal or stolen firearms, and are committed by unlicensed offenders.


Evidence, please.



Bwian is bullshitting again.


No, I am speaking generally, Baron.  Something you appear to take exception to, simply because it points out the fallacies in your original comment.  Tsk, tsk.    Roll Eyes



You got nailed, though, Brian, didn't you?  Tsk, tsk.

Thank you, Baron.



Baron got well and truly nailed in my last two posts.

Thank you, greggerypeccary.


You did nothing of the sort little pecca, you went off half cocked.


Nope.

I nailed you good.

The '5 or more' comes from 2006.

Therefore, not "redefined" to exclude Lockhart.

Indisputable fact.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #61 - Jul 18th, 2016 at 4:30pm  
greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 6:34pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:24pm:
Since they redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed are they going to hold the Americans to the same standard to qualify for mass shootings?


They didn't 'redefine' a thing.

"5 or more" comes from the 2006 investigation (long before Lockhart).

And, there is no universally accepted official definition of "mass shooting".





They did redefine it they are the only people in the world who say mass shootings are 5 or more killed.

Of course when those so called academics talk about mass shootings in the USA they dn't use 5 or more killed they use 4 shot which means under their criteria Monash University was a mass shooting.

yes they redefined mass shootings-en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting_#Definition

Baron nailed that welfare bludging houso who fritters away his life in this internet forum in a futile attempt to change opinions, your white flag is accepted little pecca.
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #62 - Jul 18th, 2016 at 6:19pm  
Why must we follow the US's lead in a definition, Baron?

Oh, 'cause you say so?  Sorry, doesn't do it for me but most of what you say doesn't prove anything for me either...    Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 131562
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #63 - Jul 18th, 2016 at 6:34pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 18th, 2016 at 4:30pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 6:34pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:24pm:
Since they redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed are they going to hold the Americans to the same standard to qualify for mass shootings?


They didn't 'redefine' a thing.

"5 or more" comes from the 2006 investigation (long before Lockhart).

And, there is no universally accepted official definition of "mass shooting".





They did redefine it they are the only people in the world who say mass shootings are 5 or more killed.



Fact 1: you said they "redefined" it in order to exclude Lockhart.

Fact 2: the definition comes from 2006.

Fact 3: Lockhart was in 2014.

Fact 4: your claim is thus impossible.

Fact 5: there isn't one official, globally accepted definition of 'mass shooting'.

Would you like to debate me on each of these facts, one by one?

Please say 'yes', as I'd really like to do you slowly on this one.

So, Fact 1 - do you dispute it, or accept it?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 131562
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #64 - Jul 18th, 2016 at 6:50pm  
greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 18th, 2016 at 6:34pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 18th, 2016 at 4:30pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 6:34pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:24pm:
Since they redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed are they going to hold the Americans to the same standard to qualify for mass shootings?


They didn't 'redefine' a thing.

"5 or more" comes from the 2006 investigation (long before Lockhart).

And, there is no universally accepted official definition of "mass shooting".





They did redefine it they are the only people in the world who say mass shootings are 5 or more killed.



Fact 1: you said they "redefined" it in order to exclude Lockhart.

Fact 2: the definition comes from 2006.

Fact 3: Lockhart was in 2014.

Fact 4: your claim is thus impossible.

Fact 5: there isn't one official, globally accepted definition of 'mass shooting'.

Would you like to debate me on each of these facts, one by one?

Please say 'yes', as I'd really like to do you slowly on this one.

So, Fact 1 - do you dispute it, or accept it?



"They redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed to exclude Lockhart ... " Fact 1 Confirmed
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 131562
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #65 - Jul 18th, 2016 at 7:34pm  
greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 18th, 2016 at 6:50pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 18th, 2016 at 6:34pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 18th, 2016 at 4:30pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 6:34pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:24pm:
Since they redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed are they going to hold the Americans to the same standard to qualify for mass shootings?


They didn't 'redefine' a thing.

"5 or more" comes from the 2006 investigation (long before Lockhart).

And, there is no universally accepted official definition of "mass shooting".





They did redefine it they are the only people in the world who say mass shootings are 5 or more killed.



Fact 1: you said they "redefined" it in order to exclude Lockhart.

Fact 2: the definition comes from 2006.

Fact 3: Lockhart was in 2014.

Fact 4: your claim is thus impossible.

Fact 5: there isn't one official, globally accepted definition of 'mass shooting'.

Would you like to debate me on each of these facts, one by one?

Please say 'yes', as I'd really like to do you slowly on this one.

So, Fact 1 - do you dispute it, or accept it?



"They redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed to exclude Lockhart ... " Fact 1 Confirmed


Is there any need to continue, Baron?

I assume you concede defeat.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #66 - Jul 19th, 2016 at 2:10pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 18th, 2016 at 6:19pm:
Why must we follow the US's lead in a definition, Baron?

Oh, 'cause you say so?  Sorry, doesn't do it for me but most of what you say doesn't prove anything for me either...    Roll Eyes


Do you think these so called academics who redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed have a sensible definition when 4 people could be shot dead with 75 shot and wounded yet that would not count as a mass shooting?

Sorry bwian most of what you say doesn't do anything for anyone or you would have more than just yourself in your pitiful pathetic forum.

Those gun grabbing assclowns are the only people in the world who say a mass shooting is 5 or more killed for Australia yet they don't use the same definition for the USA with mass shootings.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting_#Definition

Howard used fear to sell the Tampa issue, fact
Howard used fear to sell WMD and Iraq war, fact
Howard used fear to sell gun laws, fact.
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 131562
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #67 - Jul 19th, 2016 at 3:19pm  
greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 18th, 2016 at 6:34pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 18th, 2016 at 4:30pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 6:34pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 3:24pm:
Since they redefined mass shootings to 5 or more killed are they going to hold the Americans to the same standard to qualify for mass shootings?


They didn't 'redefine' a thing.

"5 or more" comes from the 2006 investigation (long before Lockhart).

And, there is no universally accepted official definition of "mass shooting".





They did redefine it they are the only people in the world who say mass shootings are 5 or more killed.



Fact 1: you said they "redefined" it in order to exclude Lockhart.

Fact 2: the definition comes from 2006.

Fact 3: Lockhart was in 2014.

Fact 4: your claim is thus impossible.

Fact 5: there isn't one official, globally accepted definition of 'mass shooting'.

Would you like to debate me on each of these facts, one by one?

Please say 'yes', as I'd really like to do you slowly on this one.

So, Fact 1 - do you dispute it, or accept it?




Baron: have you conceded, or shall we go through these facts one by one?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #68 - Jul 19th, 2016 at 6:13pm  
Appears the Baron is AWOL...    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17513
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #69 - Jul 19th, 2016 at 6:28pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 10:30pm:
Did you miss this bit in Conclusions from your link to JAMA bwian?
Quote:
It is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to the gun law reforms



The part of the study cited by bwian  that he and little pecca ignore.   Cool Cool
Back to top
 
Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 131562
Gender: male
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #70 - Jul 19th, 2016 at 6:56pm  
Brian Ross wrote on Jul 19th, 2016 at 6:13pm:
Appears the Baron is AWOL...    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


You can't blame him.

Thy didn't "redefine" the term to exclude Lockhart, and I've proven that beyond all doubt.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39592
Re: Post-Port Arthur gun laws put end to mass shooting
Reply #71 - Jul 19th, 2016 at 7:41pm  
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 19th, 2016 at 6:28pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 24th, 2016 at 10:30pm:
Did you miss this bit in Conclusions from your link to JAMA bwian?
Quote:
It is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to the gun law reforms



The part of the study cited by bwian  that he and little pecca ignore.   Cool Cool


Correlation does not denote causation, Baron.  Something every statistics student learns in first year.   There is a strong correlation though, it is just impossible to prove one way or the t'other.     Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 
Send Topic Print
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
 
 

  « Forum ‹ Board Top of this page

Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge