How do we prevent these mass shootings?

They are not mine, they are OURS.

The ULTIMATE purpose of free speech is to enable the unity required to effectively alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights.

If you do not agree, then define what serves the purpose of enabling that unity if it is NOT free speech.

Evasion or failure indicates you feel or believe that the framers did NOT intend for us to alter or abolish because there is no way provided to get it done.

Accepting the provided definition of purpose indicates you can understand how free speech can enable unity adequate to create the social power to effectively alter or abolish,

 

You're right I went back and looked at my earlier reading, it was the UK that added 20,000 officers in 2006...You all sound the same I get ya'll confused.

However, according to your own government's website: http://aic.gov.au/publications/current series/facts/1-20/2012/1_recorded.html

from 1996 to 2011:

Assault rose from 114,156 to 176,011 in 2007 from there it declined to 117,873 in 2011.
Sexual Assault rose from 14,452 to 19,992 in 2008 from there it declined to 17,238 in 2011.
kidnapping rose from 478 to 788 in 2008 from there it declined to 670 in 2011.

Those are from your own governments website.

 

Hmm - yes stats go up and down

I bet your statistics go up and down too

THAT IS WHAT STATISTICS DO

Remember correlation does not equal causation

So what are you trying to "prove" here - that crime rose after 1996? Well no-one EVER expected all crime to cease if we removed the guns

That crime "rose" because there were no "good guys with guns" to stop it? That was never our myth to start with and here in Australia our laws do not support ANYONE doing that. You could shoot a bloke aiming a Bazooka at the Prime Minister and you would STILL have to go through court and prove your action was appropriate

So - what are you trying to prove

The gun reform was to do one thing and one thing only - stop another Port Arthur massacre

In that it has been overwhelmingly successful

 

the problem itself does not lie in the guns themselves but with the people who use the guns. It's possible to have every citizen in the nation to be carrying around high powered rifles and still have zero gun deaths. The problem is when the people in possession of these firearms take it upon themselves to use them for harm. Thus it is largely the blame of the people which requires a great emphasis on mental health. I believe mental health begins in the family unit, to lower causes of ANY violence we can begin by having healthy supportive families. It is here were kids learn their values, ideas and morals. The ownership of a firearm should be the right of any individual for safety and emergency use, it would be wrong to deny innocent people protection because of the wrongs others have committed. My basic principle is we must strengthen the family unit so we can raise responsible people.

 

Gee I wonder why your pretty chart excludes Estonia and Mexico from the list of OECD countries. Wouldn't be so pretty then I guess.

You're welcome to allow the 70% of our population that commits crime after crime into your country. Maybe we could call them Syrian refugees and get Germany to let them immigrate.

 

Would installing a tracking device on firearms be reasonable? Would it infringe on individual rights?

 

Tell that to (*)(*)(*)(*)ing Paris.

 

Very possibly because they are NOT OECD countries

And I think you might still be in a bad way when the only places with worse gun deaths are Mexico and Estonia

 

Statistics - just a word then? Even with the mass shootings that have recently happened there - what is the mass shooting rate compared to America?

 

Murder is not the only violent crime and per capita there are European countries that have higher murder rates than the US.

 

Simple, disarm the people. And then tackle the problems that caused it in the first place. Remove the mentally ill and disabled from the gene pool so they cant infect us, ban racism (make it a criminal offence to express racist remarks), and make bullying a criminal offence with a harsh punishment. Our leniency and idolatry has let the mentally plague us with their inherent problems, and allowed violent sentiments to just slide by with no consequence.

- - - Updated - - -

as far as Americans are concerned, everything infringes with rights.

 

That graph shows only OECD countries. By almost any standard, the U.S. is an outlier among the OECD, in terms of living standards, racial diversity, etc. I would say the U.S. might be closer towards Argentina or Brazil if you want to look at standards of living and crime.

 

Based on my experience with my late son, I wouldn't trust the lot of them ...big pharma owns way too many of them.

- - - Updated - - -

If ya'll feel froggy....jump. Nuff said.

 

The federal government already tried that with a number of the some two thousand firearms trafficked to the nation of Mexico in their operation fast and furious. Despite the presence of tracking devices, none of the firearms could actually be tracked back to anyone, and were only found after they were left at the scene of a crime, with all the suspects gone.

 

With one or more only being found recently in the possession of "el chapo".

To those who think tracking devices are "reasonable"...I invite them to lead by example and have one implanted in their okole.

 

Do you even spend the 2 minutes required to verify your claim they're not OECD countries?

I'll answer for you. No, you did not spend the 2 minutes necessary to find out if they're in OECD, because BOTH ARE OECD COUNTRIES.

The hint is in the bottom right hand corner of your own linked chart.

 

Disarming the people is wrong, you want them disciplined instead. How would you remove the mentally ill and and disabled from the gene pool? Prevent them from spreading their genes? I don't know how genetics work but that's another topic altogether.

You should not be banning any racist remarks because a back lash might happen, people will use it as an excuse and it will be another PC problem where people cannot talk about important issues because race will be used to divert attention from the real issue.

You cannot make bullying a criminal offence, the laws don't work that way. All you can do for bullying is ostracize the bully and hope they he/she wises up.

 

Logically I don't see why tracking devices on firearms shouldn't be viable. With everything working as it should, it should show where the firearms are, if they see a firearm that's being moved from one location to another in a suspicious manner then that firearm owner should be investigated. The firearms should be left locked in a safe when not in use. People with open carry would only be known by police. The police wouldn't bother with them anyways since they should be registered.

 

I hear ya, curse their oily hides.

 

There is nothing logical about your comment.

Perhaps you don't live in this country or are not familiar with the principles this country was founded upon? In free societies...as we allegedly are...all citizens are considered responsible, sane and law-abiding until their ACTIONS prove otherwise. We are also endowed with unalienable rights that predate governments and constitutions, including the right to life, liberty, property, PRIVACY, and the right to bear arms.

You, on the other hand, seem to believe that all citizens are potential criminals, terrorists and nutcases unless certified otherwise by government...and must be tracked when engaging in legal activity. As an American I reject such nonsense...but if that is the kind of society you wish, you are free to find one that more closely resembles what you desire...but it ain't here, pal. Why? Because while you indeed have a right to live in a society that reflects your totalitarian values, you do NOT have the right to infringe on the rights of your fellow Americans to turn America into your totalitarian utopia.

But hey, if you don't mind being tracked, I am sure some alphabet agency would be perfectly willing to embed a chip in your butt for that purpose...so before you go advocating for others to be tracked, how about you practice what you preach and lead by example?

 

Ignoring the obvious fact that any tracking device installed on a firearm could easily be removed by the owner and discarded, the united states supreme court has ruled that long-term monitoring of a potential suspect, even in a public venue, requires obtaining a warrant beforehand. What you propose under established precedent would require authorities to obtain hundreds of millions of warrants for the monitoring of every firearm currently in circulation.

Such an operation would also require government to mandate that every firearm owner present their firearms for implantation of a tracking device, which would ultimately be stalled in the courts for years.

Even if government could mandate the inclusion of tracking devices in all new firearms sold, and incorporated in a way that makes them impossible to remove, and designed in a way that does not render the tracking device useless upon depletion of the onboard battery, it would all be a moot point if such technology does not readily exist, or is not economically feasible.

 

Yes, of course. Why, here is a picture from one of those European countries.

 

Yes of course. Where have I heard of such a society before?

I'm sure it will come to me.