Julie has a great post up about violent crime in Australia.
In 2009, a weapon was used in 77% of attempted murders, 66% of murders and 43% of robberies (Table 2.6).
A knife was the most common type of weapon used in committing these offences: 37% of attempted murder victims; 36% of murder victims; and 19% of robbery victims were subjected to an offence involving a knife.
A firearm was involved in 18% of attempted murders, 12% of murders and 7% of robbery offences.
A high proportion of sexual assault offences (98%), kidnapping/abduction offences (83%) and over half of robbery offences (57%) committed did not involve the use of a weapon.
Again this is the whole point to the series that is my “Gun Death?” collection. Getting rid of certain weapons in society without taking any steps to stem violent crime simply results in violent crime using other weapons…or no weapons at all.
Furthermore with a disarmed lawful population, criminals will still be able to acquire contraband weapons (I believe Australia has some pretty ridiculous knife laws too), but the people who wish to go about their days on the correct side of the law will not have tools for which to defend themselves. By banning or restricting guns, you do little to stop criminals from having guns, or other weapons, but you do supply an armed lawful populous. When you have an peaceful unarmed group, and a violent armed one, you create a might-equals-right society that favors the violent.
A state-side example will be that I often will go walking in the local parks that are near my home on a warm summer night, and in Maine I frequently took moonlit strolls on the beaches at any season. (Winter is the best because you’ll have the place to yourself). Now ask any New Yorker if they’ll walk their dog, or go for a stroll in Central Park after sundown…
Who really controls Central Park?
**UPDATE** Jay has a Defensive Gun use Post that illustrates this point VERY well from the other angle. Remember in a gun control world, people in wheelchairs and other physical handicaps have NO rights because anything can be stripped from them by stronger people with brute force.
ooh, thanks for the linke weerd 🙂
Thanks for the great post.
BTW do you have any numbers on the overall crime stats in Oz, specifically post Port Arthur?
I’m sure with the gun supply being cut, crushed, and smelted, the “Gun Death” did go down…but as you know, a dead body of any kind isn’t changed by a bullet hole…
Hi Weerd,
Have a read of the wiki article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia#Measuring_the_effects_of_firearms_laws_in_Australia
It’s quite well footnoted with source details.
Meanwhile I’ll see what else I can locate.
yeah that holds consistant with my observations on the effects of extreme gun control. “Gun Death” and “Gun Crime” goes down, but overall crime and death stay the same. Certainly things like suicide are more a question of society an climate (Places like Northern United State and Canada, as well as Scandinavia and Russia all have very high suicide rates linked to lack of sunlight and confining weather…and places like Japan that put huge pressure on young adolescents to get good college placement scores.
And of course with the “Gun Death?” files it shows that criminal intent is a solely human condition and not subject to tools.