This is the problem with looking at statistics without taking other factors into account. International statistics show that the majority of firearms related offences are committed in urban areas, therefore an increase in urban population will naturally lead to an increase in armed robbery and related offences.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics shows a rate of urbanization within Australia of around 5%. The urban population went from 15.9m (1995) to 19.2m (1998). Australia also experienced national population growth of 2% during that period, this gives a population increase of 10% from 95 to 98. Population growth in urban areas alone would account for a 26% Increase in firearms related robberies.
This is but one variable of many hundreds. No credible statistician would calculate crime statistics based purely on their numerical value.
Levi86,
How can you say that something worked when it not only hasn’t done what the people who promoted it and managed to get it passed repeatedly said it was going to do, but has done the exact opposite?
Among the intervening variables you didn’t account for when you referred to the growth in Urban Population worldwide, one is very notable… Gun-Control Laws are almost always most strict and usually most strictly enforced in Urban Areas, meaning that Law-Abiding citizens in those areas have the least access to guns with which to fight back against criminals who are usually armed to the teeth.
At the same time, the Rate of Urbanization you cited could not begin to account for the increase in all types of Violent Crime in Australia. The fact that it’s begun to slow down is only proof that the criminals committing the crimes are going to jail and, if your interpretation of the statistics is correct, that the crime rate in Australia is beginning to reach a new equilibrium at dramatically much higher levels than ever before. Do you really want to call living with a much higher rate of violent crime “success”?
I wouldn’t - Not if people I loved and cared about had to live with the increased danger of getting mugged, raped, robbed or murdered.
And, How do you account for the increase in all types of Violent Crime in the U.K. since the U.K. passed it’s own Gun-Ban some 5 years ago? Or, the Fact that Switzerland, where all able bodied males have been issued Military Assault Rifles (the real things - fully automatic rifles), and the rest of the citizens have Sub-machine Guns and Pistols, has one of the lowest violent crime rates in the world (and the lowest in Europe outside of the Vatican)?
IOW, Gun Control and Gun Bans feel good and seem like caring and compassionate things to do, but they cause more harm than good. Since the old adage is, “First, do no harm,” Shouldn’t we reconsider whether those are such good ideas? Esp., If we are entrusted with the safety of others?
Your Brother in Christ, Michael
We have heard all sorts of arguments to the effect that a body of armed citizens would be powerless against a trained, professional force. We poor, underarmed farmers did a pretty good job against King George’s army of professionals and mercenaries. It took a long time and many of us died, but we beat all the odds to become a free nation. I and countless others have spilled our blood to preserve these rights that were won so hard. It pains me to know that there are those who would give any of them up without a fight. It is NOT all about guns, it IS all about not giving an inch on the Constitution. Thanks for your support.