School Shooting at Community College in Oregon

[ChumpDumper]

scattered like water bugs

How many semi-auto rifles?

Are you allowing for Australia's population growth in the same time?

[ChumpDumper]

Also:

Well, there were seven mass shootings in the ten years before the law change, and by your definition two mass shootings in the 19 years since.

Does that seem like a steady decline to you?

You gonna keep water bugging this question?

[Blizzardwizard]

Were you aware the amount of privately owned guns in Australia is back to the pre 1996 buy back yes or no?

WTF I don't care, how about defending some of your own points first for once instead of completely changing the argument every time someone presents you with facts.

"While the rates per 100,000 of total firearm deaths, firearm suicides and firearm homicides were already reducing by an average of 3 per cent each year until 1996, these average rates of decline doubled to 6 per centeach year (total gun death), and more than doubled to 7.4 per cent(gun suicide) and 7.5 per centeach year (gun homicide) following the introduction of new gun laws."

Does this not prove that gun laws have not only brought the number of gun homicides down, but also at a faster rate than before the laws were implemented?

[Blizzardwizard]

Oh, and you also seemingly have completely abandoned your claim that there was some sort of 'trade off' and link between increasing gun controls and the increase in assaults and robbery.

"firearm homicide rate fell by 59 percent, and the firearm suicide rate fell by 65 percent, in the decade after the law was introduced, without a parallel increase in non-firearm homicides and suicides."

[Blizzardwizard]

scattered like water bugs

at you, the king of dodging and avoiding questions calling anyone else out.

[Blizzardwizard]

Also:You gonna keep water bugging this question?

You ain't getting an answer, you know that right?

[TheSanityAnnex]

WTF I don't care, how about defending some of your own points first for once instead of completely changing the argument every time someone presents you with facts.

"While the rates per 100,000 of total firearm deaths, firearm suicides and firearm homicides were already reducing by an average of 3 per cent each year until 1996, these average rates of decline doubled to 6 per centeach year (total gun death), and more than doubled to 7.4 per cent(gun suicide) and 7.5 per centeach year (gun homicide) following the introduction of new gun laws."

Does this not prove that gun laws have not only brought the number of gun homicides down, but also at a faster rate than before the laws were implemented?

You should care about the number of guns on hand as you've been arguing that the reduction in numbers led to the reduction of gun homicides. Why were gun homicides trending steadily downward before 1996? Why do gun homicides continue to trend downward despite there now being as many guns as pre 1996?

And to your second part i already answered earlier:

"The paper also estimated that buying back 3,500 guns per 100,000 people resulted in a 35 to 50 percent decline in the homicide rate, but because of the low number of homicides in Australia normally, this finding wasn't statistically significant"

''Other studies are more hesitant to draw conclusions about homicides, but generally agree that the law did a lot to reduce suicides."

"It seems reasonably clear, then, that the gun buyback led to a large decline in suicides, and weaker but real evidence that it reduced homicides as well"

[TheSanityAnnex]

Oh, and you also seemingly have completely abandoned your claim that there was some sort of 'trade off' and link between increasing gun controls and the increase in assaults and robbery.

"firearm homicide rate fell by 59 percent, and the firearm suicide rate fell by 65 percent, in the decade after the law was introduced, without a parallel increase in non-firearm homicides and suicides."

You realize your quote has all to do with assaults and robberies correct?

[TheSanityAnnex]

Will someone post some data that proves the ban was statistically significant in reducing gun homicides in Australia this is getting boring.

[ChumpDumper]

Will someone post some data that proves the ban was statistically significant in reducing gun homicides in Australia this is getting boring.

Will you answer this question you have been water bugging since yesterday:

Well, there were seven mass shootings in the ten years before the law change, and by your definition two mass shootings in the 19 years since.

Does that seem like a steady decline to you?

[Th'Pusher]

...also, can you provide a definition of, per capita? I'm relatively confident you're unfamiliar with the very basic concept.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Will you answer this question you have been water bugging since yesterday:

Why have you asked me this fifteen times? Guns used in mass killings in Australia are down, seems like fire and blunt instruments are the way to go there these days, and arson looks to be pretty damn effective and the new method of choice.

Now back to gun homicides, do you have any data to present that shows a statistically significant reduction in gun homicides due to the ban? Blizzardwanker has failed time and time again.

[TheSanityAnnex]

...also, can you provide a definition of, per capita? I'm relatively confident you're unfamiliar with the very basic concept.

claim was more guns=more gun violence
Per capita need not apply. You were ignored the first time for a reason.

[ChumpDumper]

Why have you asked me this fifteen times?

Because you go full water bug and never answer.

Guns used in mass killings in Australia are down, seems like fire and blunt instruments are the way to go there these days, and arson looks to be pretty damn effective and the new method of choice.

You went full water bug again and didn't answer the question.

Well, there were seven mass shootings in the ten years before the law change, and by your definition two mass shootings in the 19 years since.

Does that seem like a steady decline to you?

[Th'Pusher]

claim was more guns=more gun violence
Per capita need not apply. You were ignored the first time for a reason.

Incorrect. Your question was, "Were you aware the amount of privately owned guns in Australia is back to the pre 1996 buy back yes or no?"

Per capita should absolutely be considered when answering this question. Now show me you know why.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Because you go full water bug and never answer.You went full water bug again and didn't answer the question.

Your question was answered.

[ChumpDumper]

Your question was answered.

No, little water bug -- it was not.

Well, there were seven mass shootings in the ten years before the law change, and by your definition two mass shootings in the 19 years since.

Does that seem like a steady decline to you?

[TheSanityAnnex]

Incorrect. Your question was, "Were you aware the amount of privately owned guns in Australia is back to the pre 1996 buy back yes or no?"

Per capita should absolutely be considered when answering this question. Now show me you know why.

You are confusing separate conversations with boutons and blizzard.

[TheSanityAnnex]

No, little water bug -- it was not.

How long is it going to take you to figure out you are the only one left talking about mass shootings?

[ChumpDumper]

How long is it going to take you to figure out you are the only one left talking about mass shootings?

I just want you to answer this question, little water bug:

Well, there were seven mass shootings in the ten years before the law change, and by your definition two mass shootings in the 19 years since.

Does that seem like a steady decline to you?

[Th'Pusher]

You are confusing separate conversations with boutons and blizzard.

Incorrect again.

http://sydney.edu.au/news/84.html?newsstoryid=1502

"While the rates per 100,000 of total firearm deaths, firearm suicides and firearm homicides were already reducing by an average of 3 per cent each year until 1996, these average rates of decline doubled to 6 per centeach year (total gun death), and more than doubled to 7.4 per cent(gun suicide) and 7.5 per centeach year (gun homicide) following the introduction of new gun laws."

Were you aware Australia is back to the same amount of guns owned before the 1996 buy back that destroyed 1 million guns? Following your logic gun homicides should be on the rise correct?

http://www.smh.com.au/national/austr...113-2cnnq.html

You're deviating like crazy.

Were you aware the amount of privately owned guns in Australia is back to the pre 1996 buy back yes or no?

You're not good at making arguments.

[TheSanityAnnex]

I just want you to answer this question, little water bug:

More entertained watching you grovel around begging for an answer to a question I've never disputed.

[ChumpDumper]

You're not good at making arguments.

He did link some non peer-reviewed papers that were almost scholarly.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Incorrect again.









You're not good at making arguments.

I see you are still confused and have left out boutons

[Th'Pusher]

He did link some non peer-reviewed papers that were almost scholarly.

He get's super emotional when discussing this particular subject...and Hillary Clinton...and Barak Obama...

He's a very emotional man.