Australia's Gun Problem

[jeremyp]

If you're dealing with "some nutter" that attacks people with guns while unarmed, I've got some bad news for you- he would probably tear your throat out with his teeth if you were unarmed. The overwhelming majority of criminals are not raving psychotics, and want to live to victimize another day.

Ah no. He might assume your bluffing because there is apparently no requirement that anybody dies when you get your gun out.

In my most humble of opinions, bad guys are more bark than bite. They dont want a gunfight or the attention that gunfire will draw, they want your cash. If they can't get it easily, they will retreat fast. Bluffing really is a thing.

Except when it doesn't work or the defender gets carried away and shoots anyway.

P.artially agreed. Not so much for legit self defense, but when people carry as a preferred method of conflict resolution, nothing but bad happens.

The statistics say it all really. The biggest cause of gun deaths in the USA is suicide, by quite a margin. If you have a gun for self defence, the person you are most likely to kill with it is yourself.

 

[Thermal]

Ah no. He might assume your bluffing because there is apparently no requirement that anybody dies when you get your gun out.

He might. He might also start singing showtunes. But what statistics there are seen to indicate more draw/no bang, than draw/bang.

Except when it doesn't work or the defender gets carried away and shoots anyway.

Again, ya cant really dismiss what happens most often in favor of kinda sorta might maybe happen sometimes. Majority is majority, if we are talking majority versus possibility.

The statistics say it all really. The biggest cause of gun deaths in the USA is suicide, by quite a margin. If you have a gun for self defence, the person you are most likely to kill with it is yourself.

How did you make the connection between having a gun for self defense and suicide? I would see them as two different reasons for owning, and two very differeny classes of owners. Like, a suicidal person may not have even owned a gun prior to his sad decision.

 

[theprestige]

I was replying to a post about NZ where The Atheist claimed there would be awkward questions asked of me if I applied for a license to have a gun for defense. I was not trying to address any legalities at all. I was asking which awkward questions would be asked of me.

I think "why are you asking for a gun license, for a blatantly illegal purpose, with the stated intent of being enabled to do illegal harm to someone else?" would be a pretty awkward question.

Do you normally feel comfortable asking the police to give you permission to use deadly force in an illegal manner?

 

[Ranb]

I think "why are you asking for a gun license, for a blatantly illegal purpose, with the stated intent of being enabled to do illegal harm to someone else?" would be a pretty awkward question.

Do you normally feel comfortable asking the police to give you permission to use deadly force in an illegal manner?

It is illegal to defend yourself with a firearm?

 

[theprestige]

It is illegal to defend yourself with a firearm?

It's illegal to possess or carry a firearm for the purposes of self-defense.

Asking the NZ police to issue you a firearm license for illegal purposes would make you look like a fool at best, and a mentally deficient sociopath at worst.

It's legal for you to defend yourself with a firearm, as long as you own the firearm for other reasons entirely, and as long as it's a complete coincidence that the firearm happens to be loaded and ready at the time your life is threatened.

Did you really think NZ cops would hear your request for a license to carry a firearm for self-defense, think "yeah, that sounds normal"?

 

[Andy_Ross]

It is illegal to defend yourself with a firearm?

It depends.
If you did it in the UK you would be charged with murder or manslaughter and you would go to trial.

 

[lionking]

It is illegal to defend yourself with a firearm?

It depends on the meaning of “defend” in Australia. There was a case of a homeowner who had reason to believe his home was going to be invaded waiting, armed and shooting (but not killing) the invader. He was convicted of causing grievous bodily harm.

Defence of property is not considered justification for shooting somebody.

https://www.ag.gov.au/crime/publications/commonwealth-criminal-code-guide-practitioners-draft/part-23-circumstances-which-there-no-criminal-responsibility/division-10-circumstances-involving-external-factors/104-self-defence

 

[arthwollipot]

It's illegal to possess or carry a firearm for the purposes of self-defense.

That's not what the law states. It states that self-defence is not a valid reason for possessing a gun license.

 

[theprestige]

That's not what the law states. It states that self-defence is not a valid reason for possessing a gun license.

Potato, potato.

 

[arthwollipot]

Potato, potato.

Details matter in law.

 

[theprestige]

Details matter in law.

Don't think it matters much at this level whether it's a sebago or a desiree.

 

[Thermal]

Not quite clear on self defense not being a justification to buy a firearm?

"I want to be able to stay alive if confronted with an intruder bent on doing me harm, as a last ditch effort."

"Nah, mate, you just gotta take what's coming to ya. Call the police if you have the luxury of plenty of time on your side and no imminent threat."

I mean, that doesn't sit quite right, somehow. You can collect guns, shoot targets and clays, kill animals, but protect yourself when in dire need? Nah, ◊◊◊◊ off and die.

 

[theprestige]

Not quite clear on self defense not being a justification to buy a firearm?

"I want to be able to stay alive if confronted with an intruder bent on doing me harm, as a last ditch effort."

"Nah, mate, you just gotta take what's coming to ya. Call the police if you have the luxury of plenty of time on your side and no imminent threat."

I mean, that doesn't sit quite right, somehow. You can collect guns, shoot targets and clays, kill animals, but protect yourself when in dire need? Nah, ◊◊◊◊ off and die.

Welcome to the Antipodes.

 

[The Atheist]

Not quite clear on self defense not being a justification to buy a firearm?

There are a few parts to it.

Firstly, as I've posted previously, they're worthless against intruders. The gun and ammo must be stored in separate locked containers, so you'd be dead before you opened them both.

The flip side of the coin is that home invasions are incredibly rare, so there's no need to have deadly force available.

Finally, the criminals are highly unlikely to be armed, so you'd end up facing manslaughter charges if you kill one.

I can see it's quite hard for Americans to parse all that, but long history has shown very few examples where a Glock in the bedside cabinet would have saved a life. I certainly can't think of a single instance where it would've been useful.

 

[theprestige]

There are a few parts to it.

Firstly, as I've posted previously, they're worthless against intruders. The gun and ammo must be stored in separate locked containers, so you'd be dead before you opened them both.

The flip side of the coin is that home invasions are incredibly rare, so there's no need to have deadly force available.

Finally, the criminals are highly unlikely to be armed, so you'd end up facing manslaughter charges if you kill one.

I can see it's quite hard for Americans to parse all that, but long history has shown very few examples where a Glock in the bedside cabinet would have saved a life. I certainly can't think of a single instance where it would've been useful.

The whole thing is easy enough to parse, except for that first part.

"A gun is useless against intruders because we won't let you set it up to be useful" is an entirely artificial restriction.

Everything else is just a difference of opinion over values and perceived risk, which is fine. It's just we don't let you have a gun because it would be useless because we won't let you use it anyway is a circular argument.

 

[arthwollipot]

Not quite clear on self defense not being a justification to buy a firearm?

The track record is very, very clear.


(13:18, American reacts to statistics comparing Australian and American police)

 

[arthwollipot]

Everything else is just a difference of opinion over values and perceived risk, which is fine. It's just we don't let you have a gun because it would be useless because we won't let you use it anyway is a circular argument.

Yes, but it's far from the only argument available to us, and it wasn't even the only argument @The Atheist presented.

 

[The Atheist]

"A gun is useless against intruders because we won't let you set it up to be useful" is an entirely artificial restriction.

A guy I worked with when I was still at school didn't have his guns locked up correctly.

His 11 year old son and his mate decided to play with a .22 and his son ended up dead.

Our lawmakers figured (correctly) that a lot more harm will be done by unlocked guns than will be saved by easy access.

I'm completely happy with that rule.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I had a locked steel gun safe with a locked, plastic covered steel cable through the trigger guards of the guns. Magazines were removed and locked in a separate drawer within the safe. Ammunition along with primers and powder for hand loading was locked in a separate, smaller gun safe.

 

[theprestige]

Yes, but it's far from the only argument available to us, and it wasn't even the only argument @The Atheist presented.

it's still a dumb argument, though