How gun law changed Australia and could make the USA safer
AFTER the Sandy Hook massacre, a look at Australia and guns:
A 2006 paper that appeared in Injury Prevention analyzed the possible results of the 1996 gun law reforms in Australia:
Results: In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm homicides (p = 0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased. No evidence of substitution effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws.
Conclusions: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms were followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides. Total homicide rates followed the same pattern. Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides and firearm suicides.
Tim Blair argues:
Many in Australia have pointed to the gun control legislation introduced by John Howard as a template for Barack Obama to follow. Instead, Obama might find his guidance in the way Howard’s legislation went against the conservative Prime Minister’s political base. Rather than push for Democrat-friendly gun control laws that will do little to constrain killers seeking soft targets, Obama could go counter-intuitive and propose to fund armed security for all schools.
As the President himself asked: “Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage?”
Whop has the power?
Posted: 18th, December 2012 | In: Reviews Comment | TrackBack | Permalink
