Re: "Gun buyback scheme halves firearm deaths"



On 23 Dec 2006 15:52:10 -0800, "Phil Smythe" <smytph@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


ozarkheart@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 21 Dec 2006 03:05:57 -0800, "Phil Smythe" <smytph@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


¿mÿ§t뮦@n? wrote:
In talk.politics.guns "Phil Smythe" <smytph@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


¿mÿ§t뮦@n? wrote:
In talk.politics.guns "Phil Smythe" <smytph@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Gun buyback scheme halves firearm deaths

14/12/2006 - Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) News (c) 2006

New research reveals the risk of being shot dead in Australia has
dropped dramatically since the gun buyback scheme was introduced a
decade ago.

Homicide trends in Australia have been virtually unchanged since 1989
http://www.aic.gov.au/stats/crime/homicide.html

Pity you didn't do a more in depth investigation.

I did. I went back to 1989. You cherry-picked your data only back to
1996.

That you "went back to 1989" is a bit of poetic licence. You looked up
a graph that gave no actual data, then determined it looked flat to
you, and promptly pronounced that "data provided by the Australian
government," proved the "the rate is relatively flat". Predicatably my
provision of ACTUAL DATA left you unmoved. No surprises there, it
destroyed your claim.The rate is NOT flat as the numbers prove.



Since the 1996 gun
laws the murder rate in
Australia has been;

1996 - 1.7
1997 - 1.7
1998 - 1.5
1999 - 1.8
2000 - 1.6
2001 - 1.6
2002 - 1.6
2003 - 1.5
2004 - 1.3
2005 - 1.3

Based on the reality of what's happened since the gun law changes the
trend is DOWN. If you doubt this just plug those numbers into an excel
spreadsheet, create a chart, then go Chart - Add trendline and what you
will see is a clearly declining line.

LOL As I demonstrated with data provided by the Australian government,
the rate is relatively flat, and it has been for well over ten years,
more like 17. Clearly, your precious gun ban has nothing to do with
your murder rate.

As pointed out above the "Australian government" does not prove the
rate isn't flat, only your viewing of the graph convinces you it's
flat.

At least I can now advise your boss how to reduce your pay without you
complaining. He only needs to show you a graph that appears relatively
flat, while meanwhile dropping your salary 25% over 10 years. He'll be
safe in that you're uninterested in the actual dollar amounts, just how
it is appears on a graph. And anyone knows how flat or not flat a line
on a graph is can be very handily affected simply by changing the scale
of the axis.


Nice try though.

Proving the rate is declining and it NOT relatively flat didn't require
much trying at all, just looked at the numbers which show that 2005 is
25% lower than 1996 when the gun laws changed. Only a statistical
nincompoop would call that rate "relatively flat".

LOL And only a nincompoop would claim gun control laws have any affect
since they were enacted in 96 and there was no significant decline
till 04.

I'd say a nincompoop is someone who expects crime to drop from day one
after a new law is introduced.

I'd say a nincompoop is someone who thinks it takes 7 years to see a
drop.



Mind you since "day one" there have been
no firearm mass murders in Australia which is WHY the laws were
changed. so maybe that gave you a slightly unrealistic view. Still,
we'll take the fact of declines in the crimes where guns are involved,
despite your reservations.

And we'll take that violent crime has remain unchanged.

So much for gun control......
.