Mass shooting in Australia

[One Bad Pig]

Source: 7 Are Killed in Australia’s Worst Mass Shooting Since 1996

PERTH, Australia — Seven people, including four children, were found dead from gunshot wounds at a rural property in Western Australia on Friday, the police said, in what appeared to be the country’s worst mass shooting in more than 20 years.

The police were called just after 5 a.m. on Friday to the home of Cynda and Peter Miles in Osmington, a village near the tourist town of Margaret River, 170 miles south of Perth. There they discovered the victims, three adults and four children.

The police have yet to publicly identify the victims. They said they were not pursuing a suspect, but would not confirm a murder-suicide.

Crime-scene and homicide detectives traveled from Perth to investigate.

South West Superintendent Mick Sutherland, the most senior police officer in the region, said on Friday that the property was a crime scene “and we’ve got to figure out what happened.” He said the police expected to be on the site for up to five days.

“The loss of any life is tragic, but the loss of four children and three adults — this is a significant tragedy,” Chris Dawson, commissioner of the Western Australia Police, said at a news conference. “Police are currently responding to what I can only describe as a horrific incident.”

The deaths represent the worst mass shooting in Australia since 1996, when a gunman killed 35 people in Port Arthur, Tasmania. That event was the catalyst for a significant strengthening of the country’s gun laws.

American proponents of gun control, including former President Barack Obama, often point to Australia’s strict regulations and few mass shootings as a guide to limiting such events in the United States. Experts typically define a mass shooting as the deaths of four people, excluding the gunman, in a single event.

Australia’s previous worst shooting since 1996 took place in 2014, when a farmer shot his wife and three children before killing himself.

According to neighbors and public records, Cynda Miles worked for a local community group. Her daughter Katrina Miles, and her four children, ages 8 to 13, lived on the property. The children were all home-schooled there. A friend of the family, who is in the same home-schooling network, said the children were on the Autism spectrum.

© Copyright Original Source

source

The grey lady's fibbing a bit:

Source: New York Magazine

President Obama and other gun-control advocates often say that Australia has had no mass shootings in the past 19 years.

© Copyright Original Source

Source 2

[Cow Poke]

[DesertBerean]

[seer]

Sad, just sad...

[rogue06]

Source: 7 Are Killed in Australia’s Worst Mass Shooting Since 1996

PERTH, Australia — Seven people, including four children, were found dead from gunshot wounds at a rural property in Western Australia on Friday, the police said, in what appeared to be the country’s worst mass shooting in more than 20 years.

The police were called just after 5 a.m. on Friday to the home of Cynda and Peter Miles in Osmington, a village near the tourist town of Margaret River, 170 miles south of Perth. There they discovered the victims, three adults and four children.

The police have yet to publicly identify the victims. They said they were not pursuing a suspect, but would not confirm a murder-suicide.

Crime-scene and homicide detectives traveled from Perth to investigate.

South West Superintendent Mick Sutherland, the most senior police officer in the region, said on Friday that the property was a crime scene “and we’ve got to figure out what happened.” He said the police expected to be on the site for up to five days.

“The loss of any life is tragic, but the loss of four children and three adults — this is a significant tragedy,” Chris Dawson, commissioner of the Western Australia Police, said at a news conference. “Police are currently responding to what I can only describe as a horrific incident.”

The deaths represent the worst mass shooting in Australia since 1996, when a gunman killed 35 people in Port Arthur, Tasmania. That event was the catalyst for a significant strengthening of the country’s gun laws.

American proponents of gun control, including former President Barack Obama, often point to Australia’s strict regulations and few mass shootings as a guide to limiting such events in the United States. Experts typically define a mass shooting as the deaths of four people, excluding the gunman, in a single event.

Australia’s previous worst shooting since 1996 took place in 2014, when a farmer shot his wife and three children before killing himself.

According to neighbors and public records, Cynda Miles worked for a local community group. Her daughter Katrina Miles, and her four children, ages 8 to 13, lived on the property. The children were all home-schooled there. A friend of the family, who is in the same home-schooling network, said the children were on the Autism spectrum.

© Copyright Original Source

source

The grey lady's fibbing a bit:

Source: New York Magazine

President Obama and other gun-control advocates often say that Australia has had no mass shootings in the past 19 years.

© Copyright Original Source

Source 2

And it's "Gray Lady"

[Teallaura]

[Sparko]

These killings don't count because guns are illegal in Australia.

[Mountain Man]

Depending on how you define "mass shooting", this isn't necessarily the first mass shooting in Australia since the gun ban, and it's certainly not the first mass killing in that same period of time. In fact, there were just as many mass killings in the 20-years prior to the gun ban as there were in the 20-years that followed, and while rates of gun suicide decreased, overall rates of suicide remained unchanged. Also, violent crime rates in Australia are higher now than they were prior to the gun ban.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/09/03/...n-ban-conceit/

A lot of what liberals believe about the effectiveness of strict gun regulation is largely fantasy.

[mossrose]

Depending on how you define "mass shooting", this isn't necessarily the first mass shooting in Australia since the gun ban, and it's certainly not the first mass killing in that same period of time. In fact, there were just as many mass killings in the 20-years prior to the gun ban as there were in the 20-years that followed, and while rates of gun suicide decreased, overall rates of suicide remained unchanged. Also, violent crime rates in Australia are higher now than they were prior to the gun ban.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/09/03/...n-ban-conceit/

A lot of what liberals believe about the effectiveness of strict gun regulation is largely fantasy.

Yes. Despite the gun ban in Canada, there was an episode here a few years ago where 7 or 8 people were shot and killed by a man, who then killed himself. All were in the same family or happened to be in the house at the time.

Gun control is not all the liberals think it is, for sure.

[EvoUK]

It seems both Australia and Canada (among other countries with sane gun control laws) are doing pretty well actually, given the rarity of these events compared to the US.

So I'm not entirely sure what you're so pleased about, it hardly proves your point.

[mossrose]

It seems both Australia and Canada (among other countries with sane gun control laws) are doing pretty well actually, given the rarity of these events compared to the US.

So I'm not entirely sure what you're so pleased about, it hardly proves your point.

Well, considering the population of Canada is only a tenth of that of the US, when you extrapolate that out, it might be closer to the numbers that the States has.



We've had 2 van attacks just since last September that have killed quite a few people. Everybody always seems to turn those around into gun control discussions, so I don't know what that's about.

[rogue06]

It seems both Australia and Canada (among other countries with sane gun control laws) are doing pretty well actually, given the rarity of these events compared to the US.

So I'm not entirely sure what you're so pleased about, it hardly proves your point.

If the removal of firearms has failed to lower the overall homicide and suicide rates then exactly what was accomplished? Is someone somehow less dead if they're beaten to death with a hammer or baseball bat, or hacked and stabbed to death with a machete or knife?

[Mountain Man]

It seems both Australia and Canada (among other countries with sane gun control laws) are doing pretty well actually, given the rarity of these events compared to the US.

So I'm not entirely sure what you're so pleased about, it hardly proves your point.

Why do liberals act like gun violence is the only thing that counts? Yes, mass killings by gun may decrease, but what does that signify if the overall incidents of mass killings through other means is unchanged? Or there's London with its knife crime epidemic and Mayor Kahn Man shrugging his shoulders and saying, What am I supposed to do about it?

[Littlejoe]

Australia is often hailed as an example to how effective the gun ban has been. And the facts bear out that mass SHOOTINGS have decreased by quite a lot. Using the figures from this Wikipedia article (I did not fact check all of it) 21 years prior to the ban there were 117 total mass killings (1975 - 1996). Of those, 112 were mass shootings.

In the 21 years (plus a couple of months) since the gun ban, (1996 - Present) there have been 113 mass killings, but only 27 were mass shootings. However, the mass killing rate is statistically flat. How is the gun ban supposed to have helped? As rogue said, are they any less dead because they were not killed with a gun? I would much rather die of a gun shot wound than to die in a fire, burning to death...

[Littlejoe]

Australia is often hailed as an example to how effective the gun ban has been. And the facts bear out that mass SHOOTINGS have decreased by quite a lot. Using the figures from this Wikipedia article (I did not fact check all of it) 21 years prior to the ban there were 117 total mass killings (1975 - 1996). Of those, 112 were mass shootings.

In the 21 years (plus a couple of months) since the gun ban, (1996 - Present) there have been 113 mass killings, but only 27 were mass shootings. However, the mass killing rate is statistically flat. How is the gun ban supposed to have helped? As rogue said, are they any less dead because they were not killed with a gun? I would much rather die of a gun shot wound than to die in a fire, burning to death...

To late to edit, but wanted to clarify the numbers in the above post are total people killed, not total incidents.