"Australia gun laws work duuh"

As an Aus socialist I oppose strict gun laws as ineffectual and support ideas that aim to the root of problems. However time and time again being in Australia I am reminded of when gun laws were implemented since the Port Arthur massacre, and because of that we haven't had a situation like that since. Therefore if it has worked in Australia, it should work in the U.S.
It's hard to deny that indeed we have not faced such massacres equivalent to the U.S. but at the same time can it really be argued that it will work just the same? What are some arguments I can use to say that its more complicated in the U.S.?

A) Australia is a fascist hellhole, that works without the overproduction of fear. (Not sure how Australia works.

B) US has all these problems, because overfixation with guns and violence. Blame Hollywood and the demonization of sex.

C) … Why can't people just have shotguns and hunting rifles?

Our rate of violent crimes hasn't changed much. Yes it means there hasn't been as high profile a massacre as port arthur but that's largely down to luck and the way the media presents things. The sydney siege could well have turned into a massacre, any gang fight could turn into one and anyone entering a school with a knife could probably kill or injure many children before being stopped.

The United States has over 200 million guns. And those are just the legal ones, AFAIK.

How many guns were in Australia at the time those gun laws were passed?

I wouldn't mind buying a semi-auto rifle myself, but I live in Canada. I have to settle for the SKS.

And wasn't the Muslim who shot up that gay bar on a terror watch list? How is the government supposed to deter mass shootings if they can't even bar a Muslim on the terror list from buying an AR-15? And liberals think the government should have MORE POWER in the issue. It's clear that the government is pretty inefficient in these matters.

I'm not one of those autistic conservative Constitutionalists who think "any gun law is an infringement" on the right to bear arms. Obviously mentally ill people and people with a history of violent crimes shouldn't be allowed to walk into a gun shop and buy a semi-auto willy nilly. But I don't want the government to have more power in deciding who gets to own a weapon. What constitutes a "terrorist," or "at-risk person" with regard to purchasing guns? First it's the Muslims, then it's the conservatives, then the leftists, etc., etc.

Liberals just think guns are yucky. They think the world's issues will be solved by pacifist torture chambering. It won't.

Is the entire continent of Australia so static that you can attribute everyone's behaviour to one law?

Not "because" of an increased awareness of public mental health?

Not "because" of greater vigilance, or other public safety measures taken by ordinary citizens everywhere?

That verbiage sounds an awful lot like self-congratulatory legislators stroking themselves for their brilliant action.

Most of our mental health care facilities have been shut down, however many more ad campaigns we have to make people "aware" the ability to get actual treatment has regressed in favor of once every month-three months visits to doctors to be prescribed SSRIs.

Not really that related to the topic at hand but fuck our mental health system.

How come Europa has no "guns" and no mass shootings?

Bombs are not guns…

Our gun laws work, but it's not really fair to compare. The U.S has a history of gun culture that we don't and the amount of guns either smuggled in or owned illegally would genuinely make it dangerous to disarm people who are not a danger to others.
The reforms in the U.S would be better off as a "war or drugs" style crack down on illegal gun ownership. I think the culture is already shifting with the majority of Americans supporting gun reform, so it's something.

So ruining more peoples lives then saving them?

The war on drugs was a problem because small time narcotics like marijuana was grounds to imprison people. I don't see how it's comparable to illegally owning a firearm.

That's what Shillary forgets when she's trying to grab guns.


Pick one and only one. If you give the power the "right" to take away guns from people labeled crazy, the state will categorize all dissidents as deranged terrorists.
Did you change your mind when you wrote your post? That is raw common sense.


Do you have a problem with illegal ownership of firearms.

I wasn't necessarily comparing, but it was a massive failure that denied going after the root causes. It only created more laws and thus created more crime.

Well most of U.S. gun problems are due the Mafia and Mexican cartel trade, as well as private sales

You might be able to stop the occasional white psychopath, but that seems unlikely.

What I find interesting is how easily and quickly America can generate the kind of mindset needed to massacre dozens of innocent people. Suicide bombers go through a strict education program in their teens or young adult hood to create the marytr personality.

But an American born Afghani is just like "lol, fuck guys" and shoots up a nightclub, a virgin goes crazy and shoots up a uni and a white supremacist at the age of 20 holds up a black church.

Like, what gives guys? Gun control might not work by the sheer dedication of your psychos.

Pretty much, yeah. The media and the government are constantly claiming all kinds of shit like increased awareness for mental illness or public safety, but really we are laziest mother fuckers. All we care about is getting to our job, to our pub, to home and watch Netflix (although at the time of the Port Arthur massacre, we would have been watching Home and Away).

If there's some problem that can be logically solved through the efforts of someone else, we'll just do it. That's why we had a conservative party for over 40 years, and people we're willing to just let people die rather than get decent health-care. On the flip side, its the same reason we now have pretty slick healthcare because we're like "fine you bloody hippies" and passed Medicare.

...

...

The Orlando shooting is so irritating because it means the US government is so incompetent that when authoritarianism becomes formal, we won't even have the few bright sides to it.

I see so more murder is needed to produce less murder.

In Venezuela, Chávez made guns illegal, put restrictions on what was shown on TV and banned violent games/toys. Those laws didn't make a dent in the homicide/crime statistics. The only people that have guns now are people that use them for mugging, killing, and other illegal activities, so normal citizens are defenseless. The gun ban only gave criminals more power here.

How many niggers does your country have, op?

Get a fucking job.