here are your stats on how well Australia gun ban is doing
Myth: Gun control in Australia is curbing crime
Fact: Crime has been rising since enacting a sweeping ban on private gun ownership. In the first
two years after Australian gun-owners were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms,
government statistics showed a dramatic increase in criminal activity.
31
In 2001-2002, homicides
were up another 20%.
32
From the inception of firearm confiscation to March 27, 2000, the numbers are:
• Firearm-related murders were up 19%
• Armed robberies were up 69%
• Home invasions were up 21%
The sad part is that in the 15 years before the national gun confiscation:
• Firearm-related homicides dropped nearly 66%
• Firearm-related deaths fell 50%
Fact: Gun crimes have been rising throughout Australia since guns were banned. In Sydney
alone, robbery rates with guns rose
160% in 2001, more in the previous
year.
33
Fact: A ten year Australian study has
concluded that firearm confiscation
had no effect on crime rates.
34
A
separate report also concluded that
Australia’s 1996 gun control laws
“found [no] evidence for an impact of
the laws on the pre-existing decline in
firearm homicides”
35
and yet another
report from Australia for a similar time
period indicates the same lack of
decline in firearm homicides
Myth: Gun registration works
Fact: Not in California. California has had handgun registration since 1909
92
and it has not any
impact of violent crime rate.
93
Fact: Not in New Zealand. They repealed their gun registration law in the 1980s after police
acknowledged its worthlessness.
94
Fact: Not in Australia. One report states, “It seems just to be an elaborate system of arithmetic
with no tangible aim. Probably, and with the best of intentions, it may have been thought, that if
it were known what firearms each individual in Victoria owned, some form of control may be
exercised, and those who were guilty of criminal misuse could be readily identified. This is a
fallacy, and has been proven not to be the case.”
95
In addition, cost to Australian taxpayers
exceeded $200 million annually.
96
I think you’d need to read every states laws to compile a list. I’m still Googling, I’ll be back if I find a comprehensive lists of states that ban .223 for deer.
Why should all the huge number of law-abiding, constitutionally protected gun owners be penalized because a very very small number of bad/mentally ill people used guns to commit murder?
He doesn’t. In theory, the premise is that by making the large magazines (or “assault weapons”) illegal, they become less available. First, they can’t be bought or sold legally, can’t be manufactured. Then the existing supply are collected through a process of amnesty/buy back. The remaining items after the amnesty are subject to confiscation when authorities find them.
How well that pans out in practice is a different story.
I don’t know what your earlier post was or the reply to it and I ain’t picking a dog in this particular fight. But ------ I think what was being described was the Puckle
Some civilian made versions played with after the army (British) turned it down had cylinders with higher capacities. Mine (made circa 1977) carried 15 rounds. Call it anything you want but the durn thing really is the first machine gun.
Believe it or not, it’s because that round doesn’t have reliable enough killing power. The military actually prefers wounding enemy soldiers over killing them, because it removes more combatants from the battlefield 9the wounded guy plus at least two other to carry the litter). Hunters, on the other hand want a clean kill with one shot.
I said aimed, not “well-aimed”. And the last time I was in the US, I visted one of those ranges in Las Vegas and was able to empty a 30-round magazine from both a semi-auto AK-47 (7.62x39mm) and a Steyr AUG (.223) into the centre area of the target (not all in the 10-ring obviously, but all in what would be considered the “centre mass”) in about 15 seconds. So yes, in my experience, you can accurately empty the magazine on a military-style semi-auto rifle in a few seconds.
Personally, I’d say it’s closer to “… but not Porsches that have fancy rims and chrome tailpipes because those are disproprotionately likely to attract and be used by people who behave in an unsafe manner with them”.
I don’t think the people who do use them responsibly and safely should be denied the ability to own them - but I do think it should be harder than putting their money or credit card on the counter and asking for a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range, so to speak.
Deer can be and are killed with .22LR. That doesn’t mean it’s a proper round for deer hunting. More often it will result in a wounded deer running off to suffer.
A .223 is obviously a much more powerful round than a 22LR. While searching for a list of states that ban .223 for deer I stumbled across several debates on hunting message boards about whether .223 is appropriate for deer. It’s a contentious issue even within the hunting community. I don’t hunt but I’ve shot a lot of .223 and read a lot about it and I wouldn’t use it on deer.
.223 will certainly penetrate but can zip through without transfering enough energy to the target.