How a civilized nation handled a mass shooting...

[Photographer]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html

As America grapples with the fallout of yet another mass shooting—Wednesday’s massacre of at least 14 at a holiday party in San Bernardino, California—the long and bitter debate over gun control in America has once again been reopened. After Sandy Hook, Will Oremus highlighted the lessons of Australia’s strict gun laws and the resulting success in preventing subsequent mass shootings there. The post is reprinted below.

On April 28, 1996, a gunman opened fire on tourists in a seaside resort in Port Arthur, Tasmania. By the time he was finished, he had killed 35 people and wounded 23 more. It was the worst mass murder in Australia’s history.

Twelve days later, Australia’s government did something remarkable. Led by newly elected conservative Prime Minister John Howard, it announced a bipartisan deal with state and local governments to enact sweeping gun-control measures. A decade and a half hence, the results of these policy changes are clear: They worked really, really well.

At the heart of the push was a massive buyback of more than 600,000 semi-automatic shotguns and rifles, or about one-fifth of all firearms in circulation in Australia. The country’s new gun laws prohibited private sales, required that all weapons be individually registered to their owners, and required that gun buyers present a “genuine reason” for needing each weapon at the time of the purchase. (Self-defense did not count.) In the wake of the tragedy, polls showed public support for these measures at upwards of 90 percent.

....



What happened next has been the subject of several academic studies. Violent crime and gun-related deaths did not come to an end in Australia, of course. But as the Washington Post’s Wonkblog pointed out in August, homicides by firearm plunged 59 percent between 1995 and 2006, with no corresponding increase in non-firearm-related homicides. The drop in suicides by gun was even steeper: 65 percent. Studies found a close correlation between the sharp declines and the gun buybacks. Robberies involving a firearm also dropped significantly. Meanwhile, home invasions did not increase, contrary to fears that firearm ownership is needed to deter such crimes. But here’s the most stunning statistic. In the decade before the Port Arthur massacre, there had been 11 mass shootings in the country. There hasn’t been a single one in Australia since.

There have been some contrarian studies about the decrease in gun violence in Australia, including a 2006 paper that argued the decline in gun-related homicides after Port Arthur was simply a continuation of trends already under way. But that paper’s methodology has been discredited, which is not surprising when you consider that its authors were affiliated with pro-gun groups. Other reports from gun advocates have similarly cherry-picked anecdotal evidence or presented outright fabrications in attempting to make the case that Australia’s more-restrictive laws didn’t work. Those are effectively refuted by findings from peer-reviewed papers, which note that the rate of decrease in gun-related deaths more than doubled following the gun buyback, and that states with the highest buyback rates showed the steepest declines. A 2011 Harvard summary of the research concluded that, at the time the laws were passed in 1996, “it would have been difficult to imagine more compelling future evidence of a beneficial effect.”

...


More at above link.

[valerief]

1. That civilized country also has universal healthcare.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Australia

[Enthusiast]

21. Huge +1!

[jpak]

2. kick

n/t

[hedgehog]

3. K&R

[951-Riverside]

4. "You aint takin muh guns", "this means war", "80% of americans have guns...", "Molon Labe"

"Australia is totalitarian", "Americans aint gonna turn in them their ferarms", "1776 will commence!", "More people die in car accidents than gun violence", "The British are coming! The British are coming!"



...just wait for it.

[TeddyR]

22. Project much?

At least you are being reasonable so we can get something done.

[Photographer]

36. I think he's pretty spot on.

[hifiguy]

5. Oz is a pretty sane place.

I had some friends from Down Undah who loved coming to the US for the Consumer Electronics Show every year but said they wouldn't live here for all the tea in China. Too many nuts.

[Waldorf]

6. Good thing that we have an Amendment that prevents the government from "confiscating", I mean

buyback of my firearms.

[Photographer]

8. There are workarounds and people are ready for them.

[TeddyR]

25. How would a buyback work here?

Setting aside the Second Amendment problems that didn't exist in Australia, if we make it mandatory then the US needs to come up with the funds to buy about 300 million guns (assuming everyone will turn in their guns), not the 600k that were at issue in Australia. Probably take $150 billion minimum.

[Hoyt]

27. Pay market value, which won't be much when they can't be transfered and are illegal.

Gun Yahoos sure won't do anything voluntarily that improves society.

[TeddyR]

33. Pretty sure that doesn't work under the

5th Amendment. Criminals might not understand that you don't take someone else's property without just compensation.

[Hoyt]

37. You see your investments in lethal weapons shrinking?

[passiveporcupine]

30. I think first we need to amend the second amendment

And clarify that it is not a constitutional right for anyone to own any kind of damn weapon they want.

[maxsolomon]

7. key word: Bipartisan

that word is nonsense here.

[etherealtruth]

9. Civilized people are able to identify a problem and want to fix it

Sociopaths and narcisists don't

[Photographer]

13. You hit a rather significant nail on the head here.

[LibDemAlways]

10. This is not a civilized country. It's become a

goddamned shooting gallery and we're all ducks. Politicians in a civilized country use tax dollars for the benefit of the citizenry, providing healthcare, efficient mass transit, solid infrastructure, top notch education that leads to good jobs, etc. Our corrupt self-serving politicians consistently vote against everything that creates a civilzed society and waste our money on war toys. We might as well be in the stone age.

[MisterP]

17. and pants-pooping racism from people who get more scared the safer they are

down in OC people say they have guns for when the Big One hits and "those people" start pillaging their little houses (it's like 40 miles)

I shit you not

on edit: also I was gonna point out that the article was from 2012; our country is in a shameful state

[AZ Progressive]

11. But...America must have its freedom! Freedom at all costs!!!

And then when the terrorist boogeymen strike: "Quick! We must get rid of all civil liberties!!!"

[jmg257]

12. "In the wake of the tragedy, polls showed public support for these measures at upwards of 90 percent

There's the problem - what do you think a poll would show here, even today or after Sandy Hook, for support of such measures?

"At the heart of the push was a massive buyback of more than 600,000 semi-automatic shotguns and rifles, or about one-fifth of all firearms in circulation in Australia. The country’s new gun laws prohibited private sales, required that all weapons be individually registered to their owners, and required that gun buyers present a “genuine reason” for needing each weapon at the time of the purchase. (Self-defense did not count.) In the wake of the tragedy, polls showed public support for these measures at upwards of 90 percent. "

[passiveporcupine]

31. I think polls would show a much higher level of support than yo imagine

It's not the people's will that is preventing us from changing the system. It's our politicians and money.

[AZ Progressive]

14. America is a semi-civilized nation, not a civilized nation

[Captain Stern]

15. The most important line in the article....

....polls showed public support for these measures at upwards of 90 percent.

We could easily pass those kinds of measures here if 90% of our population supported them. But the bottom line is that nowhere near that many people in this country are supportive of the measures that Australia took. In October, only a little over 50% of us support any additional gun control. (http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/21/politics/gun-control-poll-americans/), so I'd be surprised if even 20% of us would support gun confiscations.

That's the problem that the folks that are pushing for gun confiscation need to face, and deal with. It's not that they've got the majority on their side, and the powerful NRA is blocking the will of the people. The people that want to confiscate guns are in the tiny majority in this country. What they want is currently against the will of the people. If they want to get anything done, they need to convince a lot of the rest of the country to agree with them. That's where they should be directing their efforts.

[Photographer]

16. Hense... "civilized." n/t

[TeddyR]

26. Good point

Though I think there are some here who don't care what the majority wants - they think they know best and that confiscation should start tomorrow. Those absolutists scare me much more than someone who is a NRA member. Thinking you know best and everyone else should bow to your whim is what led to the reeducation camps implemented by Stalin or the Khmer Rouge.

[Captain Stern]

39. I think you're right.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[retrowire]

18. Hmmm a buy back?

I hadn't heard of that.

Pay people for their guns? Hmmm... That might actually help.

[mrmpa]

19. My niece living in Perth, Australia is safer.......

in that "foreign" country, than her family is in the States.

[niyad]

20. k and r. isn't it sad that all of us knew that the civilized nation was NOT the united states?

[ileus]

23. That's how they handled it....don't let this happen to us.

Let's remain progressive on the 2A.

[Hoyt]

28. "Progressive on gunz" -- LMAO.

[SunSeeker]

24. K & R

[deathrind]

29. Notice how this incident...

Took place in a "seaside resort" and tourists lost their lives...this not only was a tragedy but if something was not done and quick dollars would be lost by tourists deciding to be tourists somewhere else...

Unless and until one of these tragedies takes place that could have an economic impact here it will continue to be an uphill battle to get common sense legislation in place.

Sad that this is a reality of this type of event but as is the case with most laws and regulations in this country it is not so much about the saving of life that brings about the change needed it is more about the money that could be lost if change is not enacted.

[spanone]

32. K&R...

[smirkymonkey]

34. K&R

[Spitfire of ATJ]

35. "(Self-defense did not count.)"

[ThoughtCriminal]

38. Don't need a gun when you have Donk

[IcyPeas]

40. Scotland did similar after Dunblane

DUNBLANE, Scotland — It is a simple plaque for the 16 children gunned down that day in March 1996, set on a small, stone column outside the primary school that continues to educate this town’s young. Built on a slope between trees and overgrown shrubs, it is easy to miss.

But the impact of the loss the memorial reflects endures, nearly 20 years after a 43-year-old man with four handguns stormed the schoolhouse gym in a three-minute shooting spree that seared abhorrence for gun violence into Britain’s national psyche.

The following year, the public outcry over the killings, distant though it was from the halls of power, spurred political action: The British government banned the private ownership of automatic weapons and handguns on Britain’s mainland.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/07/nyregion/in-scotland-unlike-america-mass-shooting-led-to-stricter-gun-laws.html