Hmm. One of the cited sources is only a state body, and this "Australian Bureau of Criminology" doesn't actually exist (maybe they meant the Australian Institute of Criminology?). Some of those statistics are flawed or lack context.
There's some more discussion about these kinds of statistics here:
http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/...ontrol-in-australia/
Some background:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia
I went to the Australian government's Australian Institute of Criminology:
http://www.aic.gov.au/index.html
Unfortunately, they only started after 1996, the time of the Port Arthur massacre that triggered the gun buyback (not all guns, actually, just the worst ones with no claim to be defensive, such as semi-automatic rifles, and semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns). Another set of gun laws came in 2002, which is a little more recent and relevant.
Violent crime statistics:
http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violent%20crime.html
Most have remained about level. Robbery rose a while, then fell, starting from 2002. Armed and unarmed robbery had the same rates:
http://www.aic.gov.au/statisti...20crime/robbery.html
Assault has risen markedly, yes, but that includes a whole range of things, like brawls, threats, attempts, and includes road rage, angry drunks, and the nasty trend for surprise "king hits" from behind outside nightclubs. Having a weapon for self-defense is no good against a sneak attack from behind. But the rate also stopped rising and leveled out from 2002. Otherwise, these rises likely results from the population growth and increasing binge drinking. It's even seasonal, coming with hot weather and short tempers:
http://www.aic.gov.au/statisti...20crime/assault.html
This is interesting:
http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide/weapon.html
Gun deaths are going down, knife deaths are only going up a little. The peak was at the Port Arthur massacre, then they went down. They closely track one another. So, without a gun, a killer is more likely to use a knife, or maybe a club, star-picket or their fists, but these are less damaging and less likely to kill multiple people before they are stopped, either by police or a member of the public. It's also easier to stop and disarm a person of a knife or club than a gun. I don't know where one might find any real statistics about the chances of someone defending themselves from violent crime with a gun. Has it ever even happened? In all these shooting rampages, the killer usually shoots themselves, or police do.
In any case, in Australia, we had and have very low rates of gun ownership, so buying them back or limiting their power seems to have had negligible effect on crime statistics. But it did reduce gun thefts, illegal guns, suicide and accidental death by guns, homicide by guns, and shooting rampages.
There's just no reason to wage an arms race with the criminals, IMO. They'll always bring something worse, so we shouldn't encourage them. For defense, carry a shield.
This message was last edited by the GM at 09:33, Fri 21 Dec 2012.