For Americans tired of NRA bullying.

[CapnAwesome]

This is where there is a disconnect for me. I mean if someone intends to kill a bunch of people are they going to stop because they don't have guns? I mean the number of massacre victims are pretty similar, there are just more Arson attacks and less shootings. That does tell you something, maybe the guy who burned a bunch of children to death would have shot them up with guns buy choose a different method. I mean nobody denies that less guns=less shootings. It seems like it just changes people's method of committing mass murder, considering that other types of massacres went up. It's all pretty hard to tell when you restrict the conversation to mass shootings and massacres in a low violence society like Australia. That's why I think the per capita murder rate is really the most important stat when discussion gun violence or any other type of violence. I mean would you much rather live in a society with a high rate of murder, but the murders weren't committed by guns?

If people intend to kill a bunch of people, then sure, they will likely find a way to do it, either by arson or more likely via bombs. However both methods are somewhat harder to execute than killing with a gun. Arson requires that all the people be in an enclosed area with little to no chance of escape, and also requires that the arsonist be able to set a fire big enough to spread and kill people before it is put out. Bomb making comes with it's own set of complexities such as acquiring materials, safely transporting the bomb, etc.

The three arson attacks in the last 20 years in Australia, were all strikingly different as well. One was a bush fire, one was set in a hostel whilst the victims slept, and the other was in a home for the elderly. In all but the first attack, the victims were somehow incapacitated in some way which prevented them from escaping in time.

Guns can be easily bought, are easily transported, and can easily murder people, in large numbers, even if the victims are in open areas with the ability to escape, because bullets travel fast.

You might be interested in a recent study which was released yesterday, which might cover your inquiries about murder rates and substituting some other method of murder for guns: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx...id=2530362

The key parts from the conclusion:

From 1979-1996, the mean annual rate of total nonfirearm suicide and homicide deaths was 10.6 (95% CI, 10.0-11.2) per 100 000 population (average increase of 2.1% per year; annual trend, 1.021; 95% CI, 1.016-1.026), whereas from 1997-2013, the mean annual rate was 11.8 (95% CI, 11.3-12.3) per 100 000 (average decline of 1.4% per year; annual trend, 0.986; 95% CI, 0.980-0.993), with a ratio of trends of 0.966 (95% CI, 0.958-0.973). There was no evidence of substitution of other lethal methods for suicides or homicides.

In other words, the rate of non-firearm related deaths has remained about the same, but has actually been decreasing since the gun control laws were introduced. They didn't find any evidence that people were substituting things for guns either.

I actually read that study, probably in another Atheist forum thread. What's also interesting is the articles that link to it will say something like the last line there, that there is no evidence for substitution, but when you unclump suicide and homicide (as they obviously should be, because they are totally different things.) what you get is that there isn't a total substitution for murders. Also important to note that guns are still used in murders there as well. So all it really amounts to is a slight drop in the murder rate, the same drop that happened in the United States and across the whole first world at the same time. Which is likely to do with an aging populace more then anything. So that study really just doesn't do it for me, especially since the same thing didn't happen in Britain when they passed their gun control laws.