Hello TheBear. I was expecting these statistics. It's good to see that they don't support your argument.
I am sure that unlike the NRA, Gun Control Australia is completely honest, forthright, and unbiased, with absolutely no political agenda, right?
Well, yes. All of their information comes from government and independent sources. Unlike the NRA, they haven't simply sat down with one of their sympathisers and asked him to tell a pack of lies. They have taken their arguments from the statistical evidence, as compiled by the ABS and other organisations. You know - the same sources that you've used in your rebuttal...
I'll get to the stats in a moment. First, let's address the rhetoric.
So far, it looks like crime rate has sky-rocketed all over the place since 1995.
Well, no, not really. And in any case, this has absolutely nothing to do with the debate. Remember,
1997 is the first year after the new gun laws became operative. In 1996-7 the laws were changed. 1998 is the first year statistics can be tested. So any statistics
before 1998 are
totally irrelevant. All you've shown is that crime was generally on the rise between 1993-2001. And hey, we knew that already.
Now, just how do you propose to demonstate that gun control legislation is responsible for a rise in crime which began
five years before the results of the new legislation could be tested? 
It appears to me that homicide still occurs at about the same rate as in 1995 in Australia.
Yep. But the gun legislation was not expected to reduce the rate of homicide, and that was not the purpose for which it was put in place. Like so many pro-gun ppl, you have missed the point.
It also appears that the RATE of homicide, has little to do with what type of weapon was used.
It was never alleged that guns were most responsible for homicide, so that's a straw man.
What's more, violent crime in Australia has gone through the roof since 1995.
No, that's just not true. There has been an increase in some types of crime, and a decrease in other types of crime. Predictably, gun-related crime has fallen. And guess what?
A reduction in gun-related crime is exactly what the government was aiming for. I have tried to remind the pro-gun ppl here, that
general crime reduction was NOT the purpose of the new legislation. The purpose of the new legislation was
to reduce gun-related crime. And yes, gun-related crime
has been reduced. None of the pro-gun ppl have addressed this simple point.
So, to the statistics...
- while the number of victims of murder has increased slightly from 296 to 306, as a rate per 100,000 population there has been a slight decrease from 1.7 to 1.6 victims;
During this alleged "crime wave" from 1993-2001 (purportedly the result of gun control legislation which began in late 1997), we have seen a reduction in the number of victims. Very interesting.
- there has been an 11% decrease in murders where a weapon was used over this period, while during the same period there has been a 19% increase in attempted murders where a weapon was used.
During this alleged "crime wave" from 1993-2001 (purportedly the result of gun control legislation which began in late 1997), we have seen an
11% reduction in murders where a weapon was used. Very interesting.
- there has been a 37% increase in the actual number of victims of sexual assault, with the victimisation rate increasing from 69 to 86 per 100,000 population;
Yes, there has been a substantial increase in the number of sexual assault victims between 1993-2001. It is not uncommon for the crime rate to rise within an 8-year period.
But remind me - just what does this have to do with gun control legislation which began in late 1997?
- victims of robbery have more than doubled from 12,765 to 26,565 (108%), with the victimisation rate per 100,000 population increasing by 90%. Both armed and unarmed robberies have increased at similar rates;
See above.
I am waiting to see how this is related to gun control legislation which began in late 1997.
- while the proportion of robberies where a weapon was used in 1993 and 2001 was similar (42%), the use of firearms has declined both in actual numbers (from 1,983 down to 1,686) and as a proportion of all robberies (from 16% to 6%);
During this alleged "crime wave" from 1993-2001 (purportedly the result of gun control legislation which began in late 1997), we have seen an
10% reduction in the use of firearms
as a proportion for all robberies, and
drop in acual numbers by 300. Very interesting.
- there has been an increase of 53,741 (14%) in the number of premises unlawfully entered with intent, although as a rate per 100,000 persons the increase was 4%; and
Yes, over an 8-year period, there has been a 14% increase in the number of premises unlawfully entered with intent.
And just how is this relevant to gun control legislation which began in late 1997?
- the number of motor vehicle thefts increased by 24%. Two years experienced a decline in an otherwise increasing trend: in 1996 (a decrease of 3%) and 1999 (a decrease of 2%).
Yep, a 24% increase over 8 years, with a 3% decrease in 1996, and a 2% decrease in 1999. Of course, car theft is not a violent crime, and when you steal a car, you usually don't need to threaten it with a weapon. In most cases, it tends to come along quietly, without any fuss.
Just what, exactly, does any of this have to do with gun control legislation which began in late 1997?
Between 1995 and 2001 (the period for which data are available for assault and other theft):
- the number of victims of assault increased by 50,043 (49%) with an increase in the victimisation rate from 563 to 783 per 100,000 population; and
- the number of victims of other theft increased by 208,744 (43%), with the victimisation rate increasing from 2,715 to 3,608 victims per 100,000 population
And the relevance to gun control legislation which began in late 1997, is... what?
- Assault was the most commonly recorded violent crime in 2001, accounting for 78% of recorded violent crimes. Between 1995 and 2001, the number of assaults increased by 49%.
- The number of robbery offences increased by 82% from 1995 to 2001, whereas the number of sexual assaults increased by 28%. The number of homicides has remained relatively stable over this period, peaking at 386 in 1999.
Are you blaming this on the gun control legislation which began in late 1997? If so, why? How do you propose to demonstrate a causal connexion?
Something else from the Australian Bureau of Statistics:
A weapon was most likely to have been used in an attempted murder (81%) and murder (59%), and least likely in sexual assaults (2%).
Oh, so the statistics present us with the startling revelation that when they want to kill somebody, most people prefer to use a weapon! Surprise, surprise!
A knife was the most common type of weapon used in attempted murder (33%), murder (29%) and robbery (23%).
A knife, eh? Well, well, well. Not a firearm? No?
Excellent.
The largest number of victims where a syringe was used as a weapon was for the offences of robbery (936 victims) and assault (204 victims). However a syringe was less likely to be used as a weapon than firearms and knives. A firearm used as a weapon in committing an offence was most prevalent in kidnapping/abductions (9%).
Most prevalent in kidnappings and abductions (as you would expect), but still... a paltry 9%.
So far, I have seen nothing which proves that the gun control legislation of late 1997 is responsible for this alleged "crime wave" which began in 1993. In fact, I have not seen anything which is even comes close to suggesting it. The majority of these statistics are totally irrelevant.
Now let's return to the statistics which I had presented in my previous posts.
- "There was a decrease of almost 30% in the number of homicides by firearms from 1997 to 1998." -- Australian Crime - Facts and Figures 1999. Australian Institute of Criminology. (Canberra, Oct 1999.)
This report shows that as gun ownership has been progressively restricted since 1915, Australia's firearm homicide rate per 100,000 population has declined to almost half its 85-year average.
- The Institute of Criminology report entitled Australian Crime - Facts and Figures 1999 includes 1998 homicide data showing "a 9% decrease from the rate in 1997." This is the period in which most of the country's new gun laws came into force.
- The Australian Bureau of Statistics counts all injury deaths, whether or not they are crime-related. The most recently available ABS figures show a total of 437 firearm-related deaths (homicide, suicide and unintentional) for 1997. This is the lowest number for 18 years.
- "We have observed a decline in firearm-related death rates (essentially in firearm-related suicides) in most jurisdictions in Australia. We have also seen a declining trend in the percentage of robberies involving the use of firearms in Australia." -- Mouzos, J. Firearm-related Violence: The Impact of the Nationwide Agreement on Firearms, as printed in Trends & Issues in Crime & Criminal Justice No. 116, Australian Institute of Criminology. (Canberra, May 1999.)
- Less than one in five Australian armed robberies involve a firearm.
- "Although armed robberies increased by nearly 20%, the number of armed robberies involving a firearm decreased to a six-year low." -- Recorded Crime, Australia, 1998. (Australian Bureau of Statistics, June 1999.)
- "A declining firearm suicide rate, a declining firearm assault rate, a stable firearm robbery rate with a declining proportion of robberies committed with a firearm and a declining proportion of damage to property offences committed with a firearm suggest that firearm regulation has been successful in Tasmania."
-- Warner, Prof K. Firearm Deaths and Firearm Crime After Gun Licensing in Tasmania. Australian Institute of Criminology, 3rd National Outlook Symposium on Crime in Australia. (Canberra, 22-23 Mar 1999.)
- "According to the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics figures for 1998, Australian gun deaths decreased by 110 (26%) between '97-and '98; 194 (38%) between '96 and '98; and 369 (more than 55%) between '88 and '98. Within these figures, gun homicides are down proportionately.
