The Daily Show - John Oliver's Australia & Gun Control's Aftermath
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2024
- John Oliver learns that it's pointless for America to study the Australian gun control experience because the situations are just too similar.
Watch full episodes of The Daily Show now: on.cc.com/1zI8VsE
About The Daily Show with Jon Stewart:
The Daily Show with Jon Stewart was an Emmy and Peabody Award-winning program that looked at politics, pop culture, sports and entertainment through a sharp, reality-based lens. Stewart and The Best F#@king News Team Ever covered the day's top stories like no one, using footage, field reports and guest interviews to deliver fake news that was even better than the real thing.
Subscribe to Comedy Central: / @comedycentral
Watch more Comedy Central: / comedycentral
Follow The Daily Show:
Facebook: / thedailyshow
Watch full episodes of The Daily Show: www.cc.com/show...
Follow Comedy Central:
Twitter: / comedycentral
Facebook: / comedycentral
Instagram: / comedycentral
"Australia is a former British colony with a wild frontier that was tamed by brave men who also wiped out almost an entire indigenous population, and we are... not similar to that."
Weird...
I have the strangest deja vu
b
+Level 58 Death Knight It's completely different! Nobody in America is afraid of Indonesians!
+JaytleBee von Miraus but americans are afraid of muslims and mexicans and indonesia was a former spanish colony wich houses the majority of the world's muslim population.
"If guns aren't the issue Phillip? What is the Problem?'
"- People"
"People are the Problem".
"-Yes"
"Do you know what, after spending this amount of time with you Phillip, I'm starting to believe thats partially true".
*JOHN OLIVER* - *WINS*
Kieran Loves You JOHN AND PHILLIP WIN! THEY REALIZE FRIENDSHIP'S MORE IMPORTANT!
"People are the problem... which is why we should let those people have guns!"
qwert
Brutality, Flawless Victory
@bdidbw As Murphy's law says - You can't argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
"Ninja police." Ninja police! He actually said ninja police!!! God help us.
I’m confused as to why he said that. At first he said it in a way that he’d be describing uncover cops but he ended up describing SWAT officers. I mean, sure, SWATs are more armed and masked but they aren’t really invisible. If anything, seeing military style soldiers would probably alarm more people in the process than make them think everything is alright.
After seeing what 2020 brought, I now feel like the fear of ninja police might be justifiable.
Matt S Not going to lie, I forgot all about this but now, I couldn’t agree more.
Matt S Not going to lie, I forgot all about this but now, I couldn’t agree more.
@@Mad_S The problem is that this is the kind of people now supporting the ninja police.
"People are the problem, im glad you understand that finally". And yet, doesn't want background checks? Okay, mate.
beautifully delivered slam dunk on himself
I just want a video of someone pointing all these ironic statements out to him lol and then watch him try to defend it haha
We have already had background checks. Ok mate. I don’t know where in the world any propaganda has emerged that we don’t already have background checks... actually I do, and it’s the politicians that fear monger about that.
Background checks already exist, they unilaterally already exist for any internet’s purchase as well.
"Нет человек, нет проблем" Сталин
"No man, no problem " Stalin
Background checks won't solve gun crime.
"It took less than three and a half months... "
"WHAT???? WHAT???? "
kills me everytime 😂
"When the guns are taken away, tyrany inevitably follows."
American 2020: We got tyranny and guns!
Isn't that the made up quote by Thomas Jefferson? Maybe that was a different one
That quote is something a tyrant says because, you know, tyranny is already here.
School massacre was ordered by east dictators club
They don't want these guns leak to their country
And the best part is that those who yell the loudest about why they need their guns sit by and cheer on the Tyranny.
And a police state.
This John Oliver guy seems nice... He might get his own show one day
lol
Well friend..... do I have some good news for you!!!!!
Eh, I don’t know....
Maybe if he finds a decent barber.
I hope he wins Emmys and sings a song telling some guy named Bob to eat shit
I hope he would get an HBO show someday...
Indonesia is actually the country with the biggest muslim population in the world. But since those muslims aren't hunted down by american drones, the aren't even close as radical, so nobody in America seems to know.
+Hubert Beck Not even close to radical?? You gotta come here and see for yourself... the batshit crazy fundamentalists is multiplying geometrically.
+lolipedofin I think you mean exponentially, geometry is math about shapes and shit.
Kevin McD Discreet Exponential Growth = Geometric Growth.
But yea, should have said exponential... it is a more common term.
+lolipedofin nope. the last election in 2014 have fundamentalist islamic party PKS with meager 7% vote. Which is actually less than 2009. The society hates them. Majority of Indonesia are moderate moslem. The fundamentalist are in Minority.
Xamido I.P First of all, 7% is not a small number. Minority yes, but the number is not small, and people are disenchanted with PKS not because of their fundamentalism, but more because of their lack of political direction and their reputation of being corrupt.
In the first place gauging the state of Islam in Indonesia through political party preference will be inaccurate.
We only need to compare today's Indonesia to how it was in the mid 90's. I'm not saying that Indonesia is now full of fundamentalist, but it indeed has shifted more to fundamentalism than moderate.
Also, let's not forget that even a moderate stance in islamic belief, can sometimes yield scary ideas.
This series of videos with John is genuinely one of the most succinct, effective arguments for gun control available in any medium. I think it's even better than the Last Week Tonight segment after the Orlando shooting.
Three of the best videos on TH-cam. Excellent work John Oliver :)
+fallyhag exactly
THE FACT THAT ANY OF YOU USE THIS LATE NIGHT HOST'S SHOW AS A REFERENCE POINT ON ANYTHING POLITICAL IS A JOKE. THAT IS WHY YOU ARE SOOOOOOOO STUPID.
musicsuxnowadays give a serious argument. also, nothing political was mentioned in this comment. that is why you are so stupid.
+fallyhag - He had some nifty adventures even before the Last Week Tonight days, I see!
+The Friendly Bot - But but but... they typed in all-caps! That must mean their argument is convincing! Unless perhaps you counter it with... *BOLD CAPS!!*
I agree
Does anyone else find his tantrum jumping hilarious...
yes most deff 😂😂😂😂
ofc didnt you hear the people laughing in the video? ;)
I'm still waiting for a good and reasonable argument that proves Americans need to have guns.
+Batman It would be very convenient to you, wouldn't it Batman?
+Dms T01 Ooooooh burn! you just got told Batman.
Kal-El pretty funny, Kent.
I think you should go up to the front door of a US vets home and tell him he can not have a gun. And you are here to take it from him.
+Farmer Dude357 why does he need a gun? Hes at home not deployed. Not at some military base. Having a firearm in a civilian area just cause im a 'army man' is no justification.
I just came here to laugh at the comments of American's trying to defend guns, hahaha, that's the best comedy on the net.
thats why i watch US election speeches :D
Big Mac
Genius!.
Gear Justice
Stop, you're embarrassing yourself. I feel very safe in my country with no guns, haven't once thought about a gun causing a problem whilst I'm out and about, haven't seen a gun here.....seen one on the first day whilst visiting the US, definitely wouldn't go back, it's overrated.
But by all means, keep your guns, keep having to debate gun laws as guns are clearly a problem, that's your choice. But don't expect everyone to not make fun of your country anymore than they already do.
Chris Nicholl YEAH!
keep your guns. We need an example if some one feel that he has a right to kill people.
Manchelle Soetoro
Oh my, is this still going on?.....
I don't care anymore, have guns, shoot one another, who cares. I'm from a country where guns are illegal, I don't worry about guns, haven't worried about guns, it hasn't been a situation. Enjoy your life buddy, do what you will with it, I'm glad I live thousands of miles from you.
Everytime there is a gun massacre in the US, I watch these videos. Nothing has changed, and nothing probably ever will in the US. To the people of America - are you really the land of the free, or just free within the confines and boundaries designed by vested interests like the NRA?
+Arun Sudarsan nope just free to say stupid stuff :L free to believe propaganda in the media too ;)
+Arun Sudarsan I love how everyone thinks the NRA is the problem. We don't give a shit about the NRA, but when criminals come breaking down your windows and you have no way of protecting your family, maybe you'll see the use of guns
***** damn, what a good argument. I love your use of h's and a's
+strober dolb Most criminals don't break into homes where people are home. Most criminals don't break windows to gain access. And should an intruder enter you home (knowing you are home because he is coming for you - why else break into a not-empty house?), how much time do you think you'll have to get your gun that is, of course, safely put away in a gun-safe so your children can't get to them?
Your logic is flawed and driven by fear which is the real problem in the US because the media drives that fear - particularly the media that supports gun rights...
Could you do me a favor and look up the statistics of people that have successfully defended their home with guns vs. the # of accident, including fatalities, that has occurred due to a firearm being present in the home. Maybe also look up how many of those incidents involved children. I think you might be surprised by what you find.
+wolvieguy What a load of BS.
I can't understand this. Why do Americans feel the need to own guns to protect themselves? Isn't it for the sake of protecting themselves from other gun owners? How is it Americans have such a massive reliance on guns to protect themselves while other countries do just fine without guns?
Why is it America has been the only first world country to make international headlines repeatedly for mass shootings? And people still vote against gun control? Really?
A ban on gun ownership obviously isn't feasible in a country ridden with crime. Gun control though? Prohibiting sales of assault rifles perhaps? What, a handgun ain't enough?
And Requiring some background checks for gun owners? Too harsh? Too intrusive?
What a hilariously backward country the US is. Declining economy and a population filled with idiots. Murica!
M4x P0wer Unfortunately you don't seem to understand the difference between gun control and a gun ban. How unfortunate.
M4x P0wer Your rhetoric is mind numbingly stupid. Can you NOT read? I've been talking about gun CONTROL. Christ. Increased background checks too much for you to handle?
Mikhail Kalashnikov hi Mikhail, please let's try to be nice. I own guns, starting from one time when I was threatened by a man who I had no chance of beating in a fair fight. I don't go looking for trouble, but when it makes sense I keep a gun nearby because cops are heavy and usually too far away if I need them in a hurry. I do my very best to be a good person, but America just doesn't have enough police to go around all the time. Guns are a cost effective way to maintain independence from jerks who would try to hurt you. It's not the only way, of course, and maybe not the best way, but it works.
In America, every gun purchase from an official gun dealer requires a federal background check, except in very few special cases (like inheritance). I'm not sure we could instate any more checks if we tried. The problem with that is that lots of people seem normal until the day that they snap. They have no records and no way to indicate that they will some day try to murder people.
We could take away guns, but then people would just get sliced like the student stabbings in China, or bombs in Pakistan, or whatever is next easiest. It is saddening how easy it is to take a life with bombs, poison, or disease.
I don't have an answer because the situation is complicated. But hopefully, I can offer you a smarter discussion than half the idiots around (both for and against guns).
Mikhail Kalashnikov To answer your original post, which I find fascinating, I think America has an unsecure border with Mexico and indirectly the rest of South America, places where gun ownership is mostly illegal and yet crimes in some places are still high. This is a complex problem involving drugs, snuggling, gangs, and violence. Australia, being an island, is fortunate enough to easily control their borders and therefore decrease the number of available guns. In America, it's currently not feasible to do that. I find that many gun owners support securing the border for this reason.
The problem with current proposed gun control laws is that they often ban things like adjustable stocks or muzzle devices. That's like banning adjustable seats and mufflers on cars and hoping it makes them less likely to get into accidents. This makes actual gun owners feel like legislators have no idea what they're doing, and makes us distrust their concept of safety.
Oh yes, plenty of idiots here, just like anywhere else (and I've lived in a few different countries). Unfortunately, Americans are masters of media, so our idiots get more exposure.
Otherwise, good morning!
M4x P0wer Yet you guys ignore that you are nearly 5 times more likely to be murdered in the US than Australia or the UK, and over 2/3rds of these murders in the US are with guns. How is that not making you realise that your guns are not making you safer?
How many NRA members does it take to screw in a light bulb...?
More guns.
You want evidence that gun-control works? How about this. Let's look at the Homicide rates per year and the strictness of their gun laws.
Intentional Homicide Rates (Murders per 100,000 people) -
Japan - 0.3 as of 2011 (4th lowest) - Very strict anti-weapon laws from the 1600s
UK - 1.0 as of 2011 (27th lowest) - Fairly strict anti-gun laws
Australia - 1.1 as of 2012 (34th lowest) - Fairly strict anti-gun laws
USA - 4.7 as of 2012 (107th lowest/112th highest) - Minimal gun regulation
South Africa - 31.0 as of 2012 (11th highest) - Minimal gun regulation passed in 2000
Honduras - 90.6 as of 2012 (1st highest) - Literally no gun control.
Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate (based on UNODC murder rates)
Noticing a pattern here? More gun control means a lot less homicide. If you think the right to be able to grab an assault rifle from a gun store is gonna protect you from the government, I got news for you; it won't. Between drones, tanks, and other advanced military hardware, guns are nothing. The 2nd amendment was written in a time when the gun was the most powerful weapon and when we didn't have a proper military. Nowadays? Guns are hardly the deadliest thing out there.
If you REALLY are worried about a Tyranny, America, perhaps you should reduce the USA's military budget so they don't have the capacity to use 100s of million-dollar smart-missiles capable of individually killing more people then all USA terrorist deaths since the turn of the 21st century combined.
"Noticing a pattern here? More gun control means a lot less homicide."
With a gun invovled
With no guns in Australia that guy still killed a cop with a Axe cause he had to get more creative
And people with no access to guns and wanting to commit suicide can still down a bottle of sleeping pills, jump off a bridge, slit their wrists or throat or hang themselves
And in American Horror Movies none of the Baddy/phychos use guns to kill droves of horny,stupid teens....mostly cause they are in New York if you notice.
Nope they use knives,axes, picks, awls, harpoons, shovels. garage doors. acid, flame throwers, and...of course...chainsaws
*****
To bad the US is a Republic of States and not a County and to bad the US Feds have no power to take over State and County government Sovereignty rights on regulating things like guns within State boarders and city/county municipalities cause of the 2nd and 10th amendments then,eh?
Again the US Feds have no authority to enforce gun laws without infringing on individual rights and the rights of the States, Cities, Counties,towns,etc to self govern via the "will of the people"
Obama' s "Executive orders" nothing more then suggestions much like his EPA Czars suggestions to the States concerning energy policy and pollution ...they cant do much more then fine a State for telling them to fuck off (IF even that)
For instance the US City I Live in is a Corporate Municipality with local gun laws prevailing over any State or Federal "suggestion" if it isn't written into the City charter/constitution
Lot of States didn't even ratify "Obamacare" into their Constitution cause it infringes on State Souvergnty to regulate Insurance companies practices within their boarders
TheRealArchAngel While yes people can choose other forms of self harm to commit suicide one effect gun control does have is that fact Australia had a higher rate of gun massacres then the US per a capita before gun regulation, After gun regulation our gun massacres disappeared (Except for a single incident a few years later involving a hand gun).
Yes people can attack others with knifes, axes hell even metal pipes but the chance of them being able to kill them decrease as you have a better chance of running from a knife then a bullet. They are also unable to attack multiple people with such weapons (effectively at least).
As to US being a republic of states, That does seem to be one of the biggest issues in the US. Other nations have been effective in area's that the US has not mainly due to the fact it becomes universal across the entire nation, In the US it get's broken up not just from state to state but from town to town. Gun control in nations mentioned by Ryuu Ainaki are universal across every state/region, Not so in the US. In countries with universal health care it is universal across every state/region, Not so in the US, In fact the US has 3 separate programs [Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare] (that not all states have taken up) while other Western nations have just the one which causes undue expenditure (Us spends roughly double on medical care per a capita then most other developed nations and has a worse life expectancy - Cuba is ahead of the US). In taxes the US has different tax rates from town to town making the system needlessly confusing, With three levels of tax collection with no universal rate the US is a stand alone in the tax set up with most nations having at most two levels (Australia we have corporate tax (business), GST (Tax on everything 10%), and income tax (Not taxed until earn earning about $18,200 with tax rate increasing as your earning increase) with those all collected by the Federal government who then divides the funds up as needed. The only tax the states collect is the payroll tax which is different state to state but tax is for the entire state, Not just certain regions or towns..
Just seems to me that if the US doesnt want to go all in and make things universal then they would be better off breaking up the union. Spend more time fighting amongst each other (politically) then actually solving the issues to make the US a beacon once again (At the moment it is a joke, No offense)
Matthew East
"After gun regulation our gun massacres disappeared "
Instead of a loon with a gun cops had to face a loon with a axe instead with 1 being killed and 3 seriously wounded if I remember correctly after the gin laws passed
Crimes stay the same, just the tools change when certain tools are taken away
"US it get's broken up not just from state to state but from town to town.
Yes, hardest part of the forefathers setting up the Feds was that what would become the US was not only many cultures from State to State but even within a State there are different people with different ways of living with different values from many different countries of all income/class levels
"US has 3 separate programs [Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare]"
Actually "ObamaCare" isn;t really enforceable unless the State adopted the "guidelines suggested" by the bill amd it basically allowed Insurance Companies to drop millions of sick people because the insurance plan didn't comply with the guidelines which the insurance companies gladly adopted to get out of some expensive plans
Most States had to clean up the mess by not allowing the Insurance companies to drop patients with serious/expensive illness cause their plan wasn't complying with "Obamacare"
"which causes undue expenditure"
Actually the Feds and States interfering with medicine and medical is what drives up costs and places like Catholic Hospitals and Charities, Ronald McDonald Chariries, Shriners Charaties,Lion Club Charities, Salvation Army, and College funded medical provide low cost or free services despite all the red tape bureaucracies like the FDA,USDA,FTC,MICK,KEY,MOU, SE create
Before I ended up on State Medical I wad going to Bat clinic with all but 10 dollars paid by a Catholic Charity (Im Not even catholic....or religious...just filled out the application for help)
TheRealArchAngel "Instead of a loon with a gun cops had to face a loon with a axe instead with 1 being killed and 3 seriously wounded if I remember correctly after the gin laws passed
Crimes stay the same, just the tools change when certain tools are taken away"
Cant recall that incident, If could supply a year of occurrence it would be helpful. As to crimes and staying the same, Yes we will always have crime that is a given and yes in our society there will always be murders and attacks. What our gun regulation achieved was not so much stopping it outright but rather lessening the damage that could be caused. Ill admit we still had our loons after the fact and still do to this day but statistically we have removed the factor of gun massacres (Minus a recent incident this year), Since the Port Arthur massacre in 1996 we have had 5 other massacres killing 46 people and injuring 20+ others, Only 5 of those are related to gun violence (Occurred this year, Murder suicide family incident), 5 other deaths can be attributed to blunt instruments while the remaining where arson. Based upon our own lessons gun control does work in the sense that not as many people are hurt in a single incident, Yes we still do get attacks but the days of dozens of people being gunned down are a thing of the past and that is what gun regulation did for us.
"Actually "ObamaCare" isn;t really enforceable unless the State adopted the "guidelines suggested" by the bill amd it basically allowed Insurance Companies to drop millions of sick people because the insurance plan didn't comply with the guidelines which the insurance companies gladly adopted to get out of some expensive plans
Most States had to clean up the mess by not allowing the Insurance companies to drop patients with serious/expensive illness cause their plan wasn't complying with "Obamacare""
Yes as I understand it not all states signed up, And the set up of Obama care while good intentioned just allowed Insurance companies to get away. Is a shame that every one cant agree to scrap all three, Choose one of the several options globally and just adopt that word for word system for system. In Australia it is a levy of 1.5% (Not applicable to low income earners and rate raised up to 1.5% depending on earnings) with a further 1% levy on high income earners ($70,000+) that do not have health insurance.
For the insurance side of things we created Medibank, Provides insurance to people that sign up so as to keep 'for profit' groups in line from ripping off the consumer. The average cost for health insurance in the US per a single is in excess of $2,000 and that doesn't include everything where as Medibank which is run for profit a single plan that covers almost everything and has a 70% back for extra's in it costs $28.57 a week or $1,485.64 a year.
But it's not meant to be, Hopefully in the future it will come to be.
"Actually the Feds and States interfering with medicine and medical is what drives up costs and places like Catholic Hospitals and Charities, Ronald McDonald Chariries, Shriners Charaties,Lion Club Charities, Salvation Army, and College funded medical provide low cost or free services despite all the red tape bureaucracies like the FDA,USDA,FTC,MICK,KEY,MOU, SE create
Before I ended up on State Medical I wad going to Bat clinic with all but 10 dollars paid by a Catholic Charity (Im Not even catholic....or religious...just filled out the application for help)"
Yes and No, Government intervention can be a good thing but also a bad thing depending on how they intervene. In the case of the US it has been a downright disaster. In the case of every other nation with universal health care it has been a bloody beauty. Best thing the US could do would be to bring in some one from outside to review it all, Companies do so all the time because they know that some times you miss what is right in front of you so they bring in a fresh set of eyes so the government should to. Let an independent person with no stake in it be it financial or nationalistic review it, Bet my last dollar they would tell every local, state and federal leader to get their heads out of their ass and bring in a universal system, Scrap Medicare, Medicaid and Obama care and make One single system and rather then trying to over regulate insurance companies make your own health care insurance company, You would see a big drop in prices from the private sector and actually have them chasing customers rather then kicking them to the curb.
Just my 2 cents =)
0 massacres since 1996. Maybe the Yanks are upset that it worked over here?
Jose Quintero bit of an overexaduration there, mate, but you had a point. Total gun homicide has tracked generally downwards since 1995, accelerating following the gun control and firearm buyback measures after 1996. Unfortunately a rise in criminal use of handguns (linked to serious and organised crime and criminal gang activity), fortunately dropping away after 2005-6, initially dwarfed the positive results of the 1996 reforms. However, Australia is currently the seventh safest country in the entire world, followed entirely by countries with gun control.
Jose Quintero Which crime rate? Come on, be specific. Break and enter has dropped. Home invasion is a steady rate. Homicide is nearly halved. Only assault has increased, almost all alcohol related. Guns going to help there? I think not...
ratofvengence USA murder rate 5.0 per 100,000, Canada 1.8, New Zealand 1.5, UK 1.2, Australia 1.2. www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/Homicide/Globa_study_on_homicide_2011_web.pdf
Table 8.1
Also my video
Why Gun Control Saves Lives Extreme ER S1 Ep4
on Jo'burg South Africa where violence has risen BUT since strict gun control deaths from that violence has dropped.
***** Good argument. As an Australian I don't think there were many if any women who carried pistols or other concealed firearms (I am pretty sure they have been restricted for a long time). I can even remember the controversy when police on the beat were issued with guns.
Good point about "shooting a loser". In the early 90s I asked the security guard if he'd ever confronted someone trying to enter the premise where I worked. He said he once saw some in "the computer room". Instead of physically trying to confront them he shouted, turned the lights on which made them jump through the door and run like hell.
millertas Reread my post, you don't need to convince me...
They keep crapping on abut he 2nd amendment. Well the 18th amendment was repealed. That was prohibition.....
Try to repeal a Right or amend it. Please, try and you will learn The Bill of Rights are not simply Amendments but the final say in The Constitution which gives you power and Rights which is all you have, ten Rights. Government has no Rights and they want yours taken away. Tell me how that will end, please... You are a class A idiot.
So you are a bigot that is anxious to see and promote tyranny and the violation of human Rights? You believe that US military will gun down its own citizens because what? the president orders them to do so? That of, by and for The People no longer applies?
You are a weak and frightened twat that deserves nothing and that is what you will have in the end.
The states wouldn't ratify the Constitution with the Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) since our current Constitution granted the national government more powers than it had under the articles of confederation (our first constitution). For this reason, those 10 amendments putting specific limits on the national government were necessary for the individual states to agree to the new constitution.
150 million people were killed by their own governments in nations where people couldn't own guns during the 20th century. So I'd rather take a risk with the occasional criminal than live in a nation where the populace isn't armed. If the politicians have a problem with our murder rate they need to put teeth back in the sentencing laws. Nearly every murder is committed by someone with a long record of violent crime.
Proud to be an Aussie
Taymin .M. I really wanna go to Australia someday (want to visit a dear Friend of mine ^_^) but, my Fear of Spiders and general uneasyness around Insects makes Australia Nope-Country for me :(
That Guy who had that long ass Username If your friend lives near or in one of the cities, you'll be right. Just don't go to the middle of the country. You'd be fucked without proper Australian training
Yea that's true never seen a wild snake in my life but I like in regular neighbourhood near the city
Ryan Shaw Taymin .M. So, as long as i stay in the City i will be good? I thank you two a lot, because now i have more confidence in traveling to Australia one Day. It's gonna be great! ^^
I live like an hour outside a city and I've seen one snake outside of captivity ever.
The only problem is that the guns in Australia won't kill you. It's the wildlife.
1911GreaterThanALL JUST LET THE JOKE LIVE.
Rin de Paz The only way to stop a bad guy with a poisonous spider is a good guy with a poisonous spider.
You misspelled boomerangs
i know its a comment from a long time a go haha, but just for reference, we lost a war to emu's in the 30s. Fact hahahaha, a genuine war on emu's
And they got rid of their guns anyway!!???? My God, it's a wonder they weren't all killed by the spiders
fucking oliver..hes just a partisan liberal....videos selected and edited so people who agree with him look smart and those who disagree look stupid. Partisan conservatives actually do this too. I hate both partisan sides doing this. Objective journalism means u report the news, not your fucking opinion, be it liberal or conservative.
Yeah people who give their opinions are idiots.
I remember 28 April 1996 vividly. Report came on the radio that a mass shooting in my state of Tasmania had occurred & 15 were confirmed dead. That was the same as the two I had been in familiar land of Melbourne (Hoddle street -7 & Queen street -8). Then it was 21, 27, 30 PLEASE STOP. It did at 35. I remember thinking NOTHING will be done about it just like nothing was done after the other mass shootings especially since there was a Conservative Govt. in power. A few days later I heard Tim Fischer on the radio say that this was the last straw and he was not going to listen any more to the excuses of the gun lobby. I later read a book of one of the victims - Walter Mikac. Like Walter I was a Melbourne boy, like Walter I had come to Tassie during the early 90s with my wife and two children (he settled in the south while I went north), he had two daughters, I had two sons. He lost them all on that Sunday Afternoon. My wife and I read the book while on holidays. We would come out of the room with tears in our eyes. I have since had the experience of losing one of my sons BUT I know that everything was done to help him. It is now difficult to obtain a gun in Australia but not impossible if you really have a need one.
millertas yes Port Arthur... very sad... i used to argue with the idiot conspiracy theorists who insist that PA was a govt set up to take our guns and that bryant is innocent... i wouldn't even bother now... thing is i have talked with surviving victims and Mick Sargent says it was bryant (doesn't deserve a capital b) and he should know. he was wounded by bryant in the Broad Arrow Cafe and his partner Kate Scott was killed. Mick identified bryant without any exposure to media yet conspiracy theorists will swear no one ID'd bryant at all. yep the senseless killing of Nanette Mikac and her 2 little girls Alannah 6, and Madeline 3, is one of the most gruesome heartless things i've ever read about. Walter will never recover from his loss.
it's actually not difficult to get a gun licence in Oz. thing is if you say it's for self defence or protection you won't get one at all. gun ownership has risen and the last few years have seen the biggest ever issuing of licences and weapons sales. thankfully our good gun laws have made safe storage and handling a priority. it's a credit to a brave govt and people who backed it.
Who justifies what you need and don't need?
BlackNYC who's says you have the right to justify anything you want in life anyway?
freedom?
so you're also free to be a criminal... right?... nope we have rules for that kind of behavior... if they made a plasma rifle available to military next year will that be justified in your civilian needs too?... after all you and i are just civilians. why do you think you have individual justifications anyway?
and who justifies it? democratic vote... don't like it then vote against it. one voice, one vote... rules for the collective good and safety of all, not just a few... too bad if we are out voted... it's the majority that counts in a democracy.
AVportau We elect officials, and then they decide on laws, bills and issues, not majority. If you agree that other people can dictate the way you should live your life then you are no different from a sheep on a farm, no different from Nazis believing that they are fighting for greater good.
BlackNYC really?... it's as you admit... it's 'we' who elect the officials who then vote on laws, bills, and issues 'on our behalf', and if you don't understand their policies before you vote then who's the sheep?... this is the problem... people either vote on biased opinions or blindly... but few vote for what they really believe in personally themselves... most of the time there isn't even the option to vote for an independent politician who doesn't tow a party line.
i'm a Nationalist if anything... i believe in flying the flag of your team you play for. don't like it then find another team (country)... so whilst the human rights civil libertarian do-gooders say we must accept all cultures and religions in our lands those same cultures and religions don't accept our way of life... and let's face it, that's why they left their old homeland in search of a better life in our countries... yet we let them destroy any sense of nationalistic pride we have left?... big difference in that vs nazism, communism, or any other discriminating 'ism'.
and the our democratic systems of govts are becoming a joke... more money and time spent on arguing than actually getting things done... i believe all politicians should be independents and stand for what they personally believe in, not some party policy... now we have politicians who oppose anything, whether good or bad, just so they can discredit the other ruling party, yet both lie and attempt to cover their tracks. that's about how good our govts are.
so who's the sheep?... and i'm sure not the wolf... i'm actually just the shepherd who tells the truth.
After three days in the bush with a guy in a kangaroo suit........(best transitional statement ever)
John Howard was the best Prime Minister we ever had. And for all the nubs saying "they'll find a way to get a gun anway" yes that happens in Australia but it's just criminals killing criminals. You hear of drive by shootings where the most that was fired was "3 shots" because they can only get their hands on bolt action rifles or single shot shotguns.
I wish we still had Johnny, but he got cocky and Kevin 07 won with the kiddies. A major set back for Aus, it'll take years to repair the problems Labor created and we will all suffer for it.
Vertical Smurf Wasn't really that he grew cocky, the Fair Work act barely changed much of work choices apart from a few key issues. The problem was that Howard grew old and the perception became that he was out of touch with his party and the people. No Prime Minster has ever served that long before in Australia, and he was the second longest serving elected leader in the developed/1st world.
agree about john howard but your comment on people only being able to get their hands on bolt action rifles and single shotguns is very ignorant!
todosbien In general its many many fold harder to acquire illegal firearms in Australia than it is in the USA, especially if you are looking for something more than a handgun/shotgun/bolt action rifle.
As someone who was born in 1990, I grew up only knowing John Howard as Prime Minister.
I do like him as a politician, but some of his anti immigration laws were pretty unacceptable.
Australian politics is only going down hill but I did like Kevin Rudd.
I was too young to vote in kevin 07, but I liked his refreshing attitude. I know that's not a good enough reason to like a politician, but in a country where every adult needs to vote, you gotta vote for someone.
He was at least different. Labour, Liberal, they're all the same. Both have the xenophobia around boat people and illegal immigrants, both are boring and dry. Problem in this country is politicians now (as with many other parts of the world) are politicians first and foremost. It's their career.
Keating, Fraser, Hawke were all somethign else in previous stages of their lives. Not anymore. Now all that matters is getting more votes from the other party, which is just a breeding ground for deceptive marketing and scape-goat politics. ie Refugees.
Yeah! Move to Australia! We have gun control, good healthcare and lovely lifestyles!
What more would you like in the Downunder bundle?! :D
With a rational budget, NBN that actually works and a less idiotic government we'd be one of the best places in the world.
J-Plus Exactly! Haha.
Nude beaches.
Bob Jones That has gotten a lot better lately though, now that they've introduced R18 rating. Also since most consoles are now region free it's no longer an issue
J-Plus Australia sucks
Terrible lifestyle
Its basically UK but a little worse.
"Bloody oath we're free!" yes strayaaa lmao
In 2014 the police of Norway fired a total of 4 shots - none of them lethal... why?? CAUSE NOBODY OWNS GUNS!!!
+Torben Rudgaard Norway doesn't have the scale of income inequality as the USA. You also don't have Bloods, Crips, MS-13, and La Eme.
+Torben Rudgaard In 2014 the police of Switzerland fired a total of 11 shots. Many people own guns. What is your point?
+Torben Rudgaard But then again, there was Anders Breivik who killed 77 people.
+Torben Rudgaard thats nice New Zealand police havnt fired a shot in like 5 years and our cops dont carry guns
+ianharwood That's irrelevant when it comes to firearms. The Swiss have mandatory military service and many of their citizens have been trained and drilled to use a firearm and also have their firearms registered at their armories so they also have to be accountable for their weapons.
In the US, fat idiots who play too much Call of Duty and listen to too much Glenn Beck can waddle on into a gun store and purchase a weapon and not have to worry about any training or form of accountability. They also have a powerful lobbying arm that defends people who misuse firearms or are criminals such as wife beaters, people on the terror no fly list, and crazies and also assures that many Americans will be able to obtain a firearm without a background check through loop holes, private sales, and straw buying. If the US tried to implement the same policies the Swiss have with firearms the far right would take a break from gulping down Chik-Fil-A and banging their cousins to protest in the streets with guns, torches, and pitchforks.
I hate the way that it's generally believed in America that because Australia is "unarmed", that we Aussies are somehow less empowered,... that Australian's are a "slave race", nothing could be further from the truth.
Australia's democracy is sound, it works, just because there's not an Assault rifle and Handgun in every Aussie household doesn't mean that Australians are any less safe.
In fact there's no way I'd holiday in America, you couldn't even pay me to go there, for fear of being shot from a stray bullet!
Dude, no one is calling Australia a Slave race.... I always felt a respect from Americans. We're allies, we just have a few differences. Neither country is perfect. I love America and I'm 100% Aussie. When I visited I felt the nation was too into making money and not as much about living life and being happy, which seems to be more about what we're about. If America solved it's gun laws it would be a mega rad nation.
Unfortunately on this subject they seem to think we're less of a nation because we don't have an assault rifle and/or Handgun in every Australian household, that's the view I get back on this subject.
Captain Sum Ting Wong It's pretty difficult when (through the media) the issue seems to be in ya face all the time over here!
I think your referring to Japan. lol
Anthony Franken
Enjoy getting bullied by abos loser
omg 😂 that was soo sad that that Phillip didn't get the "people are the problem" 😂
What about Switzerland we can see what They're doing they have lots of guns but no Massacres.
Comparing to the number of citizens, the US has 4 times as many guns as the Swiss. They also have very strict gun laws, automatic guns were made illegal for example as were silencers. They also have mandatory conscription, meaning men actually know how to use guns.
@@pulpficti and most eu have law in such a way that if ou want a gun you can (yes we can have guns in eu, i'd bet that'd surprise more then one american)
but there is a real background check with no way around it, the obligation to follow a proper/basic traning, rules about how to carry/handle the gun safely (when you realise how many death/wound are not wanted but just come out of sheer stupidity/ignorance in the us ... like that mother with a loaded gun in a handbag whose kid shot himself i mean come on)
Well, too bad that France gun control... maybe some of their citizens could have protected themselves today from the bad guys who seemed to have no problem obtaining kalashnikovs.
Keith Torrence There was a case in Texas where two terrorists attempted to do a suicide attack in 2015. ONE COP with a single handgun shot and kill them. Not ONE person was killed. Yeah - a single handgun CAN protect you from a terrorist attack.
You mean like the one that two terrorist shot point blank outside of the Charlie Heebo office? Maybe it would be a good idea for that guy to be carrying - or how about the nut in your own country that tried to BEHEAD a guy in the subway and the police had trouble taking him down? The video of that is a complete embarrassment. Thankfully, that would never happen in the USA. You pull a knife on a cop here and the world will soon be rid of one more nut.
I thought you were from UK but perhaps I'm mistaken?
Keith Torrence
I know some guys from New Zealand and they're a bunch of wanker horse thieves.
Well, somewhere at some place and time in another life outside of TH-cam, I'm sure we could have a beer together.
Why is it that everyone seems to be so irrational when talking about this issue. I thought the segment was brilliant. But when I read the comments it's either There should be NO gun control, and the other side going we should get rid of all the guns.
Why can't we find something in between that works. Why can't we talk about this without devolving to insults and hyperbolic internet memes.
Exactly right. The main thing the gun lobby try to scare people with is saying it is a gun ban people are after. That's not on. Gun control is about allowing appropriate weapons, to appropriate people, and storing them appropriately. We still have gun clubs, hunting, sporting shooters. We don't have a 3rd world homicide rate and monthly mass shootings.
Actually I don't think anyone is saying get rid of all guns. You can still own firearms in Australia to the best of my knowledge, and Canada where I am from, it is just that the type of firearms and who can own them is "controlled" thus the term "gun control laws", it is not a gun ban.
Alan C I agree with you. But as the gentleman who responded to you demonstrates, so many people seem to feel that any sort of gun control is just a slippery slope to a gun ban. I don't see how people don't see how crazy that sounds. It would be impossible to outlaw guns in this country. People love them too much it would be impossible.
SlovPeter Why does gun control have to lead to some sort of gun ban. I don't get how anyone thinks that anyone could actually ban guns. Everyone knows that it would never work in America. Remember when they tried to ban alcohol? How about when they tried to get the Bundy Rancher to pay for the federal grass he used. And you think that the government can just decide to take everyone's guns and everyone will just be like "Okay, you're the boss."? I mean you can't actually believe that can you.
SlovPeter Did you even read my comment to you? I talked about that exact thing.
proof once again that facts mean nothing to these people and it's all about muh feelings and muh strawman
Number of massacres in Straya since you posted v number in Murica...
The comment section on this video gives me cancer.
This show is the exact reason why the rest of the world hasn't given up hope for the US.
I Twine Aahhh, so that's why you keep shooting eachother.
Lord Whoopi Naw, those are the blacks.
@ 1:25 Ninja police ... was laughing so hard for a minute, then realized, he's talking about militarized police such as SWAT teams that wear ski masks, helmets and goggles to protect their heads during raids ~ though it does also serve to conceal their identity. Just do a Google image search for SWAT, you'll see thousands of images verifying this notion ... so, if we do manage to get gun control passed in the US, can we also expect to see a dialdown of militarized police at the same time?
Well there was a dial-down in police power Australia, especially NSW (a state about 20% bigger than Texas) where the controls were brought in followed by a massive corruption inquest that aimed to literally rebuild the police force. As there was less gun violence the techniques used by the police force were also scrutinized more, and where problems didn't stop there was a push to crack down on corruption. Victoria and Queensland improved to a lesser extent but at least in Victoria they don't just kill criminals for possessing a gun anymore. There was a big anti-corruption push again in Victoria in the mid 00's. Queensland's problem is more political, where the government cuts funds then blames the police force for not being tough enough on crime.
The public's view of the police force in Australia is more about anger towards revenue raising activities like fines.
CorporateEvolution Whereas here, the anger goes mostly to police brutality cases, unjustified shootings, anti-activist tactics and racism/profiling ...
AvangionQ Police in the US talk about the thin blue line, and all the dangers that they have to deal with. If it wasn't so dangerous they would not have the justification/excuse to get away with such things. Then it would be interesting to see what would happen if they had broad sweeping state and national level corruption inquiries.
In NSW there was both justified and unjustified railroading of people out of the force, corruption convictions and forced early retirements, but the image of the police force is completely different a decade later. There was even a protest recently after an officer was killed that police should be allowed to carry firearms more often. Thats unthinkable in the US to imagine such a thing. People still protest against the police, but the situation is far better now days.
Looking at poles as well, in the 90s Americans used to have more faith than Australians in their police force, now its the reverse.
CorporateEvolution Them police with their fines and speeding cameras that are simply revenue raising tools *shakes fist* :D
/s
Dude I saw an anime series with ninja police and it was awesome!
what was it called?
Bloodklot Maybe Naruto, but the ninja police got murdered by the secret ninja police.
Yeah just give out false information, according to actual Australian statics gun crimes have not gone down
HAHA....okay please show me your source you idiot?
“The number of homicide incidents involving a firearm decreased by 57 percent between 1989-90 and 2013-14,” the government crime trends report says. “
www.factcheck.org/2017/10/gun-control-australia-updated/
Rate before gun control was 2,6/100,000 killings...afterwards it was 1,0/100,000....so if a drop of more than 100% is "acutally nothing" you're actually right! :)
This video is so good in every way.
I Twine how so? do explain
I Twine In what way is this information bullshit? Seems like he all he is doing is providing facts based on statistic provided by the Australian government. So do tell how this information is bullshit.
He just wanna guuuun.
I think one question that needs to be asked, Will you give up your 2nd amendment if it could prevent one less child being killed in Sandy Hook elementary? removing guns will not solve the problem absolutely, however it will definitely make it that much more difficult to do the equivalent damage with any other accessible weapons.
Not necessarily, might want to look up William Unek.
Also this makes a very fatal assumption, that illegal guns are by some reason impossibly hard to get, which is demonstrably not true.
crazypants88 At the least it will mitigate any 'spur of the moment' anger shootings. Regarding William Unek, 'Within twelve hours Unek shot dead ten men, eight women and eight children, murdered five more men with the axe, stabbed another one' - source wiki, that is farcry from being ineffective, quite the contrary rather.
paranoidx9 There's really not much to grant that assumption. First off, illegal gun ownership is most certainly possible. Second, the US has had an amazing rate of adopting open and concealed carry laws, which allow citizen to openly carry a gun or to conceal it on them. If legal gun ownership facilitated "spur of the moment" shootings, it would seem odd that shootings have not increased in accordance with the number of new open and/or concealed carry users.
And yes, he also used a gun. But the majority of them were non-firearm deaths. So you'll excuse me if I say you're grasping at straws to say it's effective when he got away when he used the axe as opposed to the gun.
crazypants88
I'm not really sure I'm understanding the rationale of your argument. I was referring to mitigation where as you are referring to increase. Given your example of Unek which occurred in Africa is poor correlation as compared to US at best.
Regarding illegal firearms, ofcourse it will exist but the chances of an insane murderer premeditating to obtain a set of them without notice would be far less likely as compared to going to walmart and purchasing one right off the shelf.
Going back to the 2nd amendment, How many cases have we've seen that a armed-civilian have taken down the murderer?
paranoidx9 I'm addressing the claim that guns will do more damage than non-firearm weapons, which as evidenced by the William Unek example isn't necessarily true.
And I wasn't comparing S Africa to the US, I was showing how non-firearm weapons can be just as, if not deadlier than guns, even though it's unintuitive.
There have been plenty of instances where guns are used defensively. You can look up "defensive gun use" for several.
But usually defensive gun use doesn't entail shooting anyone. Usually it only entails displaying that you're armed. Estimates of this vary a great deal but even the most conservative is quite high, 2.5 million times a year is the highest and 80-55.000 times a year is the lowest.
Are we sure, americans will get the sarcasm here?! From what i can tell (Donald Trump *cough*) they wont...
It's a popular American show. . .so. . .yeah.
Jack Brauer
We're not all like Donald Trump, in fact the vast majority loathes him. You're watching a show cast with Americans that are against the conservatism infesting our country. And I count John Oliver as American bc he is an American citizen.
most of us get it. the problem is that our government dosen't actually represent us.
@@zanvoy6848 Why don't you revolt then ? You have guns for that haha
@@nerze3157
1) I'm anti gun
2) I'm a coward
f.f.s. You people are not moving over here to Australia. We're quite happy the way we are thank you very much.
Yup. We're quite happy the way we are.
"You're justifiably frightened about ninja police" gets me every time!
If people are the problem then why allow everyone without a back ground check the right to own a Gun????? Oh right, sorry, that's Logic, my bad :/.
Well you see, the US constitution is sacred and to alter it any shape or form is akin to nuking every major US city... despite the fact that it's been amended several times... one amendment banning slavery... another allowing women to vote... another banning alcohol... another banning the amendment that banned alcohol... and the most recent one added when america was still developing.. in 1992...
americas "gun control" is like a 400 pound fat guy eating 50 whole chocolate cakes a day, switching to eating only 49 a day and saying he's on a diet. and i love how this guy turned around every argument that america used against gun control so easily. brilliant
Easily because you agree with him? Gotta love how brainwashed anything remotely political on TH-cam is, even seven years ago. How's the echo chamber from back in the day? Not much different than today, I bet
amazing what what some didgeridoo music, ripping off Karate kid and a furry, can make you realize.
GUN LAWS AND SUDDEN DEATH Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?
JEANINE BAKER and SAMARA Mc PHEDRAN
British Journal of Criminology Advance Access published 2006
Conclusion: *There is insufficient evidence to support the simple premise that reducing the stockpile of licitly held civilian firearms resulted in a reduction in either firearm or overall sudden death rates.*
The Australian Firearms Buyback and Its Effect on Gun Deaths
Wang-Sheng Lee and Sandy Suardi
The University of Melbourne 2008
Conclusion: This paper takes a closer look at the effects of the National Firearms Agreement on gun deaths. Using a battery of structural break tests, *there is little evidence to suggest that it had any significant effects on firearm homicides and suicides. In addition, there also does not appear to be any substitution effects that reduced access to firearms may have led those bent on committing homicide or suicide to us alternative methods.*
Sorry, didn't have some ridiculous music and furry to make you realize the truth. Only facts-
Real Life Loli
asgardian-poledance.tumblr.com/post/135463423469
+Real Life Loli
Australia's 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mas shootings.
Injury Prevention
S Chapman, P Alpers, K Agho, M Jones
In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm homicides (p = 0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased. No evidence of substitution effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws
Firearm related deaths: the impact of regulatory reform
Injury Prevention
J Ozanne-Smith, K Ashby, S Newstead, V Z Stathakis, A Clapperton
Dramatic reductions in overall firearm related deaths and particularly suicides by firearms were achieved in the context of the implementation of strong regulatory reform.
More general than just australia:
Changing Times: A Longitudinal Analysis of International Firearm Suicide Data
American Journal of Public Health
Vladeta Ajdacic-Gross, PhD, Martin Killias, PhD, Urs Hepp, MD, Erika Gadola, MA, Matthias Bopp, PhD, Christoph Lauber, MD, Ulrich Schnyder, MD, Felix Gutzwiller, MD, DrPH, and Wulf Rössler, MD, MA
Read this especially example 2 criticising the first paper you mentioned and their statistical methods.
www.palgrave-journals.com/jphp/journal/v30/n3/full/jphp200926a.html
The researchers chose 1979 as the beginning year for the trend analysis. They gave no explanation for this choice, and data were available for each year back to 1915. The Australian firearm suicide and the homicide rates in 1979 were the highest and the third highest, respectively, for any year 1932-1996.
The researchers' assumed counterfactual was that a linear trend of the actual death rate from 1979 to 1996 would continue forever. In other words, the assumed counterfactual was that if the historical rate fell from 3/100 000 to 2/100 000 in the initial period, it would fall to 1/100 000 in next period, then to 0/100 000, and then to −1/100 000. This assumption meant that the counterfactual predicted an ever-increasing percentage fall in death; indeed, the model predicted that without the NFA, the number of firearm homicides in Australia would be negative by 2015.
They clearly fudged it to give a result showing no drop in crime by selecting the period of time which gave the fastest drop in gun crime, (because there was a spike) and then comparing this to the trend following the legislation.
At the same link under notes (C):
Other researchers have used sophisticated analyses to search for a single year structural time series break date as a means of identifying the impact of the NFA. They could not find any such break, and concluded that ‘the result of these test suggest that the NFA did not have any large effects on reducing firearm homicide or suicide rates’.15 However, when policies have even modest lags, the structural break test can easily miss the effect. It can also miss the effect of the policy that occurs over several years. The massive Australian gun buyback occurred over two calendar years, 1996-1997. Firearm homicide and firearm suicide dropped substantially in both years, for a cumulative 2-year drop in firearm homicide of 46 per cent and in firearm suicide of 43 per cent. Never in any 2-year period, from 1915-2004 had firearm suicide dropped so precipitously.
(The second paper you linked is cited in this paragraph)
So, both the papers you linked seem to have dishonestly fudged the numbers to conclude that the legislation had no effect and there are other papers which claim that it did have an effect. This is why doing only a little research and cherry picking papers is misleading.
+Ishizu montoya Jefferson did not use the words "unalienable rights" when he wrote the Declaration of Independence just for kicks. These are the principals in which the country was founded upon.
Alex Wesker
maybe, but after seeing the numbers he might have been open for phrasing it differently.
besides, while the law does give you the right to arm yourself. it can hardly be used as a argument for restricting what type of guns you can buy. you can still arm yourself as the law states, you just need to go about it in a safe way. like getting training, or having a background check done.
it´s not a toy you´re buying. if something goes wrong, it´s literally hit or miss.
think about it,legally you can drive a car once you reach a certain age, but no one would just give you the keys to a car and say " here you go" without you getting lessons first, why? because it´s dangerous to yourself and ppl around you.
and just like if you drive illegally your license can be taken away, maybe banning ppl with criminal history from buying guns should also be possible.
" but the amendment"
see we always get back to that, because for reasons i can´t understand. no matter how many ppl get shot over there, Americans still care more about an amendment to the point where they won´t even consider restricting guns in any way, supposedly for protection against other ppls with unrestricted access to guns -_- , than about all those lives.
John's face at 4:43 is like, "Crap, I should have moved to Australia!"
Well this didn't age well.
Not at all. 3:34
@@yabadabadoo72 have you not seen the news?
You like coofcamps?
Just a question here, no bias, as I do live in Australia, so I don't know what it is like over there in 'murica.
When have you ever used a gun as self defence?
And, if you do use a gun for self defence, why do you need assault rifles, shotguns and various other impractical firearms where a .22 LR pistol will do the job just fine?
And even then, would it not just be better to take the guns away in general so that would-be dangerous individuals have to go through a much more arduous process to get a gun, at which point the police force has already found out about their plans and executed a process to stop it? So that then, people at home don't need to defend themselves with a gun?
Sorry, I just don't understand how such a process makes sense, as I do live in Australia. But it has been shown time and time again that if you take away something that someone can kill with, it makes it a lot harder to kill?
Sure, someone can use a knife, axe, hammer or something, but I think the police force would act on someone carrying an AXE around with them, would they not?
'murica is weird.
No bias.
I've lived in America my entire life (I'm only 18 though so that's not very long), and I have never heard of a situation where someone was being attacked/robbed/raped and a gun saved them. But I can tell you a couple times off the top of my head when an innocent person was shot because they were mistaken for a robber.
The problem is America has a fantasy about killing bad guys and "Being a man" here's a great article I read that explains it better than I can.
www.cracked.com/article_20396_5-mind-blowing-facts-nobody-told-you-about-guns.html
M4x P0wer it's because they aren't understood by the average person.
M4x P0wer "attack the country for being a world police" Lolz, you kidding? Look at the damage the US has done around the world. You want something done properly, you DON'T want the US involved.
M4x P0wer I call BS on that. We were fighting the Nazi's for a couple of years before the US was forced off the sidelines by the Japanese. Learn some history.
M4x P0wer US homicides 2012; Knives or cutting instruments; 1589
Blunt objects; 518
Unarmed; 678
Firearms; 8,855
See the point yet?
This guy should have his own show
he does it is called last week tonight
Zachariah Spencer this was a joke I wrote 9 months ago
I should have known
Right?! he's so talented - Imagine if a big very rich network picked him up
And lo and behold, he got one, and it's AMAZING 😍
Australia is a sad place. They have banned big sized cold drinks. They have rule when you should close YOUR OWN shop.
Fucking flinching when the gun was fired each time?
Does this represent all Europeans well?
+David Davidson no, I fired my first gun in Canada when I was 10, went clay pigeon shooting and was an ace...guns are cool, because they make shit go boom, but they should be controlled and it takes a mature person, and society, to realise it.
+David Davidson In this case it sure was for comedy purpose (as i´m sure you know) but more or less yeah that actually isn´t very far from reality.
Here in central europe the vast majority of people knows guns only from movies. So it´s quite likely to flinch when a gun is fired near you. If we really have to settle an argument violently we´ll prefer a fist fight.
For Example, you can buy weapons here in germany, for sport or for hunting but you need a license and have to obey strict rules on how to handle your gun. Furthermore you can´t buy what i would call "war weapons" especially no automatic rifles. But everybody seems to be fine with that. There isn´t even a debate about weapons. Maybe because gun-involving crimes are very rare here? idk it´s just like it is and nobody seems to think about it at all.
+jay jay, your link is no longer available mate
I can usually find some common ground with The Daily Show but this segment was incredibly biased and not so well thought out.
Care to elaborate?
The results speak for themselves. www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide/weapon.html
prototypep4 Might want to look at the other charts: www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.html
Less murders overall, hence, it was successful. The chart you posted is a function percentage. Of course non-firearm murder percentages are going to increase if you have less firearms. You neglect to notice that the overall murder rate DECREASED as well.
Dremora Kynval I am sorry but you must have posted the wrong link as the one you posted " www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.html " actually shows no improvement in the trend of falling murder rates be it firearm or over all.
If you gave a mathematician the data in those links blindly and asked them when tight firearm laws where introduced they would not be able to tell you the actual date as there was actually no improvement. They may guess the early 60s as this is when the use of firearms started to take a decline or they may think the early 90s as this is at the point the graph appears to show a downturn.
There was at least with the statistics you have given no improvement after Australia introduced its tighter gun laws and implemented the initial
buy back.
SomethingNewEveryDay Zero mass shootings in Australia since 1996, FACT !
In the USA they're becoming a monthly event. The USA has more of its citizens incarcerated per head of population than any other western nation, FACT !
Yea, your 'Dirty Harry' gun laws are proving a great deterrent to crime aren't they !
The moment at 6:05 is hilarious. Phillip didn't have a clue.
Ninja police - that didn't age well John...
"I wish we didn't have gun control... I would feel much safer if everyone carried guns to protect themselves" - said no Australian ever.
Meanwhile in America....
To be fair, I'd feel a lot safer if I could legally carry a knife, given that I go to a school in an area full of meth-heads, drunks and (now former) students who tried to kill me late last year
noneed4sleep64 Good luck in the nanny state where false safety overturns the safety of the individual.
Thanks
I would say it...
Why don't they do a one year period in the United States with the same gun laws as Canada or Australia and look at the difference and if not, give the citizens of the United States their firearms back.
Australians are also REQUIRED to vote. We're doing good to get 30% turnout :-\
If Americans were required to vote, the gun control that 85% of the country was in favor of would be a no-brainer. 92% is in favor of mandatory background checks. If we were required to vote, or hell, even if it was just easier to vote; the common sense stuff would pass.
+Mathew Hines If 85-95% of people truly supported that crap why is it such a huge portion of the population is happy when it fails?
Although, that said, with anti-gun politicians going around lying to people about background checks, saying you can buy at a gunshow without them, buy guns online without them, buy guns in gunshops without them, I can see why at least a significant portion of gullible idiots would believe them. Still that falls way short of the 85-95 figures I see touted by you people.
"Common sense." That phrase has lost all meaning thanks to the gun control movement.
Then you live under the fallacious thinking of Democracy and majority Rules which is a BAD idea. Think it through.We are a Republic. Forcing people who do not care either way to vote is the dumbest premise of all. If I do not want to vote I do not have to. If I wish to defend my life I want the tools to do it and not you or anyone else making me ask permission, dummy. Think things through, common sense is not common, majority rules is bad for minorities, Mr. Hines.
Well, to throw a wrench into your proverbial point. Not as a test, but in the interest of protecting my dogs from coyotes when they go out for runs, I did go to a gun show and buy a rifle. They let me walk out with a gun, and never even asked to see my state I.D.
So, just saying. It does happen.
SyntheticBrilliance Safe bet, but I'm gonna ask anyway. Was it a private sale or a licensed dealer?
Because if it was an individual, they probably didn't have a way to perform a check. No support is usually given to them for that, and the opposition prevents NICS from being available to the public. The only thing they can do is ask to see your CHP, if you have one. That said, not asking about for your ID and not writing any info down is extremely abnormal. I've bought and even sold at gun shows in multiple states and I've never not had to had over my ID or more. And when I had a table, absolutely everyone had a notepad and/or took a pic of the ID with their phone. You could even lose your table for the next day if you weren't doing that. Though that was the organizers rule, and not everyone would do the same.
If it was a dealer, then they committed a crime, and this is really the issue I was addressing. Because so many politicians and opposition talking heads would have you believe that gun shows are a special place where background check laws are exempt, as opposed to a place where dealers and citizens congregate and do what they do the rest of the year as well. The line I always remember as the quintessential example of that talking point is from adoseofbuckley "unless you're at a gun show, which, hey what do you know, there happens to be one in the back room right now." Though he is far from the only one to express that view. Point is, gun shows do not circumvent background check requirements, there is not gun control loophole, at most there is a private sale loophole, which could be alleviated if NICS was opened up. A proposal that is strangely ignored or worse opposed by advocates for stronger gun control.
I've made it a ritual to watch these segments after every mass shooting in the U.S. I'm watching this on March 23, 2021, after 10 people were killed in Boulder, CO. It's fucking insane we STILL don't have sensible gun control.
Man, every time I watch basically anything in the news or on these comedic news shows, it really makes me want to leave this country because of how backwards we are as people.
Additional context that is poorly conveyed in the video - obtaining a firearm in Australia (generally non-semi rifles among other guns such as pistols) is lengthy but not challenging. All it takes is an easy written test (much like a driving exam), a practical test concerning firearm safety and a reasonable amount of time, among other small trivialities.
Most city-dwellers in Australia do not own guns of any sort, but those that do use them recreationally and generally do not, realistically, perceive them as a viable self-defence option - many of the fallacies that surround gun control are simply overreactions that have since become virtually nonexistent, and the small amount of effort required to own a firearm is now generally accepted and understood by most who own them (although there are assholes you see occasionally).
"We're headed towards a police state."
Oh 2020. You've made crazy people seem normal now.
i think he thought that crazy left wing people are making it a police state he probably thinks the storming of the capital was done by far left communists
I have a gun and I support gun control
+armygringo This may be 5 months after you posted that comment, but is that gun a full or semi-automatic death machine or a small arm? There is a massive difference.
in new zealand my friends dad has a 30 round ar15 legal
So?
You're in the majority of gun owners. I swear that people who don't own guns are the most passionate about not controlling guns. Seems like it's... hmmm.... could it be.... mainly an issue of political identity? And at the disservice to the country as a whole?
thatoneguy33198 lmao. Hope your being sarcastic.
What is so wrong with doing background checks? Honestly? Do you want criminals, violent offenders and mentally unstable people to buy guns? Aren't they the ones doing these massacres? Sure you'll say they'll get their hands on them anyway but why make it easier? In Australia we do have gun laws but that doesn't mean there are no guns. It's just that there is tighter regulations around them. Anyone who buys a gun must have a gun license just like a drivers license that must be earnt by doing a gun safety course. It is also renewed every few years where checks will be made on the person. The gun you can buy depends on the type of license you hold. Background checks are required when obtaining a gun license and when purchasing a gun. This means only responsible people are granted access to guns. If Americans want to keep their guns but not allow violent and mentally ill people to be able to purchase them, what is wrong with having gun laws like Australia? And why does anyone need semi-automatic weapons? Australia banned them and nobody gave a shit because we know the harm they can cause. But I believe that if the Sandy Hook massacre wasn't enough to change people's minds, nothing will. Absolutely unbelievable that some people are so selfish that their "right" to own a semi-automatic weapon is more important than keeping these little kids safe at school.
"zero massacures since 1996" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia
studentdrake zero GUN-massacres since 1996, those after 1996 are simply cases of arson and knifestabbing
cool, we agree, gun control sucks
HakenRPG the point i was making is that gun control does not prevent or reduce violence. look at the massacres (not gun massacres) since 1996 (in Australia).
studentdrake Gun control prevents gun massacres. That is the point of gun control, why would anyone take into consideration events that have no firearms to make cases against gun control laws??????? Try to use your brain for a second.
***** That was my point, it worked in australia, i never said anything about the U.S. Also i think it's pretty stupid to not even try to change a law that was written 220+ years ago, on a total different era, but thats a whole new subject.
There are roughly 32,000 gun deaths per year in the United States (that is verifiable).
Of those, around 60% are suicides.
About 3% are accidental deaths (less than 1,000).
About 34% of deaths (just over 11,000) make up the remainder of gun deaths.
Roughly 8,900 of 11,100 gun deaths are gang related homicides.
That means that there were 2,200 non gang-related firearm deaths.
Police in the course of duty shoot around 600 people a year. There aren’t figures for self-defense shooting deaths, but they come from the remaining 1,600 a year in a country of over 300 million people and 250 million guns.
The USA has the highest gun related deaths in the world, but Australia has a population of 22 million, so our numbers of firearms related deaths would be proportionally lower.
In 1990, the President of the United States introduced "The Gun-Free School Zones Act". Since the legislation was introduced, school massacres
have increased five-fold.
The Cinemark Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado was a gun-free zone. Out of the seven movie theatres within 20 minutes of James Holmes’ apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned.
Fort Hood, Texas military base is a gun-free zone. Except for the military police, soldiers on military bases are banned from carrying guns. But that hasn’t always been the case. The ban itself hasn’t been around that long. It was proposed during the George H.W. Bush administration as an effort to make the military a more "professional business-like environment." President Clinton rewrote and implemented the ban in 1993.
We haven’t had any mass shootings in Australia recently. Have you heard of Roger Dean? He killed 11 and seriously injured another 8 people with a box of matches at the Quakers Hill Nursing Home fire
Funny how nobody seems to have replied to this
these 3 clips are pure GOLD
Give me leaders who need no guns and i will follow
Well you can follow GAHNOFF THE GREAT
John Oliver in a suit on the beach interviewing holiday makers in bathing suits. Out-effing-standing.
This series is just hilarious! I wish John Oliver would still produce pieces in that style.
Never tell idiots they're idiots with sarcasm! All they'll do is think they're right! Sting them where it hurts most: their pride. It's the only argument they'll understand!
Please remember, this is a COMEDY PROGRAM! It's not legitimate investigative news!
While murders committed with guns did go down, the total murder rate went UP, as did ALL violent crime. Why? Because the people were defenseless. If you want to be a successful violent criminal in Australia, all you have to do is be born big, and target small victims. There's only so much Karate is going to do for a 90 pound woman when she's confronted with a 200 pound rapist. This weight disparity is meaningless when the 90 pound woman has a gun.
This gun ban made NO meaningful positive changes, what so ever. Yes, the suicide by gun rate dropped, but suicide by all other means increased more than the decrease by guns. Net suicides were UP after the gun ban (probably grief and shame from all the rapes that couldn't be stopped without an effective means of defense)!
Oh, and by the way, there HAS been a mass shooting since they enacted this legislation. In 2002 there was a school shooting in which 7 were shot. There have been at least 2 mass stabbings, and at least 3 mass murders via arson which add up to an additional 35 mass deaths with more than 20 others injured. This has not stopped mass murder by any stretch of the imagination. It's simply changed the method by which the murderers do their killing.
Moral of the story: you can't make someone safe by making them defenseless.
This is about GUNS not Arson ....Mass shootings stopped. “In the 18 years up to and including 1996, the year of the massacre at Port Arthur, Australia experienced 13 mass shootings. In these events alone, 112 people were shot dead and at least another 52 wounded. In the years since Port Arthur and the revised gun laws, NO MASS shootings have occurred in Australia.” [Mass shooting defined as five or more dead.]
Gun suicides declined. “In the 18 years (1979-96) [before the law], there were 8850 firearm suicides (annual average 491.7). In the 7 years for which reliable data are available after the announcement of the new gun laws, there were 1726 firearm suicides, an annual average of 246.6.”
Whoop-dee-dooooo!!!!
So because you can't get rid of all crime and suicides don't implement gun control?
Yes people will always find ways to kill others or themselves but when you can't get a gun how many are they realistically going to be able to kill before being stopped?
there are plenty of ways to stop a rape from happening without the use of a gun, you bloody idiot.
Surely, you're not defending the American stance on guns, are you?
Congrats Eric Moore. That's the dumbest thing I've read all week.
May ask which statement you are referring to?
Eric Moore
Oh I see, that's means your full crap and can't hold a proper discussion.
Eric Moore NEVER go full crap
I'm still waiting on an answer, just what was it I said that Mr Carson thinks was so dumb?
As a Canadian, we need to build a wall around our borders... and no no americans this isn't an insult to you guys we want you to keep your guns, we're just tired of your fucking pistols being smuggled into Canada (Pistols are illegal in Canada as they're easily concealed). Why are we tired... because we're sad to see you lose your guns of course!
Look at the benefit of this wall and why you should make it.
1. You get more guns!
2. Canada's murder rate by pistols would go down (which again pistols are illegal, unless they're contained to the firing range)
Win Win if you ask me!
Pretty genius lol
For what's it's worth. I am a gun collector with some 150 firearms in a family gun trust worth some $150,000.00. I support extensive background checks. I support gun registration. I support a waiting period of 10 days. And if a government buyback program that paid me for the actual value of my weapons was set up, I'd participate as long as the four adult members of the trust could keep a shotgun, a rifle, and a pistol. I'm not a paranoid conspiracy theorist but as long as firearms are legal I will continue to purchase high-quality historical firearms because they hold their value and always appreciate. I don't think for a moment that my puny weapons hoard would be of the slightest use against an organized military force.
Seems there's a lot of differing opinions here... I'm from Australia. I'm very happy to be from this country that I call home. I was very young when the massacre they referred to in this video happened but I have known about it all my life since. I know people that were upset by the proposed legislation and the eventual introduced gun laws but it just becomes a part of life... We aren't some dictatorship that says "no guns because then we can't control you" or "we're taking away your rights", it was introduced for the benefit of the innocent lives that could potentially have been cut short from another massacre or even just the general use of firearms resulting in accidents or those with malicious intent.
So we don't get to shoot at a wild animal with an Uzi... big deal.
I grew up on a cattle station in a remote area of Queensland and I had a fantastic childhood. I learnt to shoot a gun from a young age but I was always informed of the dangers and risks involved. Not just for my safety but for the safety of others. The gun itself isn't inherently evil. It's the wielder that poses the threat.
"People are the problem." It's true... but if we take no steps to prevent the guns from ending up in the hands of wrongdoers then we as a society have failed to protect our own.
I understand the U.S. has a very strong gun culture... but that doesn't mean that they should be exempt from making sacrifices to benefit their society. We all have to share this planet, we can't just accept that shit happens. DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
3:45 "I felt as if I had a bit of a duty to the rest of our society."
This is it right here. The problem in America is that too many people can't seem to grasp the basic concept that "it's not all about you."
With no guns though, we've developed a hell of a dropbear problem, tourists beware!
Australia recently went George Orwell, banned online harassment, or any language that might offend someone.
Just Saiyan.
The amount of ignorant and uniformed people in these comments about world history, American History, the Constitution, current firearms laws, current world events, economy, and firearm owners, is a very sad thing to see. Please people, use critical thinking and research.
+rafael502 They can't. Your typical liberal is willfully ignorant.
OK. I will research on all these subjects thoroughly and post a satisfactory comment because you said so. But don't expect me in this year though.
+rafael502 Can you give us some examples and why you think what you just said?
+Arne Wolz
Here are some facts from the top of my head:
1. Violent crime in Australia increased after the ban
2. Same thing happened in England when they too banned guns. Not only that, but England is the violent crime capital of Europe. So much for people being safe.
3. As sales of US guns and gun ownership keeps increasing every year, while violent crime has been decreasing every year as well.
4. Firearms in the US are protected by the constitution. No other country on Earth has something similar.
4a. The intention for the 2nd amendment by the founding fathers is so that the US population may be armed at all times to defend themselves from a possible tyranny and domestic threats.
4b. Self defense in England and Australia? That does not exist. People are legally obligated to run away and not even try fighting back. Doing so can lead the victim being sued and arrested, unlike the US
5. These "assault rifles" that liberals and politicians want to ban and restrict in the US? They only account for approximately 300 murders every year in the US, while handguns account for approximately 10,000. Why ban something that rarely is ever used to commit crime? While on the other hand, there are over approximately 400 million firearms in the US of all shapes and sizes. Imagine trying to ban that amount that Australia was not even close to having.
5a. Of those 10,000 handgun murders, around 80% or so are done and committed exclusively by inner city gang violence from places such as LA, Detroit, and Chicago. Also, guess what? Those same democrat-controlled cities have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the entire country.
5b. You'll often hear that handgun murders are around 30,000 a year. The extra 20,000 are exclusively from suicides via gun. The US's suicide rate is about normal when compared to other countries. Places like Japan and Sweden have some of the highest firearm restrictions in the world, and yet their suicide rates are one of the highest in the world.
6. Approximately 40% or so of Americans are gun owners.
7. Places like France have basically banned all guns as well, but that didn't stop terrorist armed with machine guns to shoot up people who had nor right or chance to defend themselves since they cannot carry guns.
7a. When seconds count, police are minutes away. In America, people have a choice to arm themselves so that they may protect themselves or others. There have been many cases of people who prevented mass shootings because they carried.
7b. In America, the police have no legal obligation to protect any individual, as the case in Warren vs DC ruled.
7c. Firearms in America is believed to prevent around 2 million crimes every year, and most of the times the firearms are never fired.
+rafael502 your reason 7. was so stupid it actually gave me cancer, may that weird thing you call the american god of Power have mercy apon your soul. giving civilians guns, that has panicked, open fire at terrorists would kill even more people since they are in panic
Colbert and Oliver are master trolls lmao. Love when their sarcasm goes over their interviewees heads.
Also, Police wearing ninja suits. "Ninja police" What the fuck.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
That is a direct quote of the second amendment in the American constitution. Somehow in favor of gun control are more in line with this amendment than people think, considering the "well regulated" part.
You seem to forget the “the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” part
@@hazardous0887 this is like religion ffs. Read. PEOPLE will bear arms to be part of a WELL REGULATED militia. It's both. It doesn't say, people will have an absolute right to bear arms. It doesn't end there. It's a condition to have the right, if anything. See? Interpretation leads to war on all issues.
Ali Living
No, it’s basically two parts. It says a militia is necessary, not required.
The founding fathers clearly intended that the people shall keep and bear arms freely.
America's is a FAR different, larger, and more complex culture than Australia's, with a vastly different role in world history. It's not similar, as those silly examples of sameness are meant to prove. Let John Oliver and the people for whom he prostitutes himself try to make their point to a prepared group, a group with a much organization and pre-planning for the debate as Oliver's has.
This is the most rational debate America has have ever had on gun violence.
Is Australia perfect? Nope. Our current government is a pack of idiots. However in 1996, multiple politicians deliberately killed their careers to bring gun control in. It wasn't popular at all, and Australia didn't want it (just like America doesn't want it), however we needed it, and hindsight proves it was a necessary move..
No mass shootings since 1996. Period.
Gun crime is down. Period
People do not fear they will get shot in a public place, ever. Period.
The NRA and radical US Libertarians have some weird videos online with fictional stats and 15 year old discussions about Home Invasion definitions, however the stats and culture in Australia in 2014 are pretty damned solid.
And if the USA doesn't trust their government enough to police them (ie "the man" has high powered/concealed weapons but citizens don't), well it seems like there are bigger issues at hand, and the gun massacres will continue. Scary thought...
Oh and for you 2nd Amendment sticklers out there, remember that there are about 27 amendments on this document now (Most recently from 1992). So in practise, if a law is no longer needed nor justified, it can be changed. The Bill of Rights is a work in progress, not a static document, so if your society requires it to be modified, it is the duty of the country to do so.
Best of luck with it all, peace out.
When it comes to the subject between what's worse a nut with a gun or nut with a bomb I'd take my chances with the nut with a gun because you can at least run away if you get a chance or if your armed stand your ground and you know where the threat is coming from.
The nut with a bomb is far scarier because it comes out of the blue and boom it's done and the potential for loss of life, injuries and property damage far out does guns any day, imagine if that nut job had set that car bomb off in that crowded airport, we already seen the effects of what can done via Oklahoma city, the World Trade Center 1993 or even 2001 when the terrorist turned planes into flying bombs (Missiles) and how many troops died or were injured by IEDs and VBIED's (Car or Truck Bombs) in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In Iraq those IED's were responsible for more US deaths than anything else and I'm retired to day because of one that blew our armoured car (Rhino) off a road in Afghanistan and even though all I lost was 70% hearing in my right ear and other minor injuries that's something beyond scary and I'd rather be in firefight where at least I know where the threat is coming from rather than have that happen again so I finally retired from that form of security.
I don't always sleep well at night because I still see a truck full of Iraqi soldiers being wiped out by an IED, I was two vehicles behind them and the thing was evidently dug into a pile of rocks or dirt and hit their truck from the side not the bottom and I still see in slow motion these days flame, the truck being picked up and torn apart along with the men inside then the aftermath for the length of a football field truck parts and limbs, heads, torso's and lot's of blood all over the place, imagine that dream popping up in your head when your falling asleep.
One of my main functions as a security contractor during my stint in Iraq in the 2000's was doing rear guard on convoys in an armoured humv or other vehicle and manning the gun, besides ambushes form insurgents with arms and RPG's (flying bombs) our biggest worry were the VBIED's which suicide bombers would drive up to convoys and set off, so I'm in the revolving turrent behind a 50 or minigun watching vehicles and hoping they will keep their distance ( We had signs in 4 languages telling to stay so far away on the back of the vehicle) and when a car or truck started getting closer I would signal them to move back because if they didn't my orders were to take the vehicle out and this I did many a time and I can tell you this 65% of the time they exploded. What's really bad about this is the insurgents especially the foreign ones would grab kids and mothers and put them in the vehicles with them in hopes of getting closer so there's a few more bad memories I have because of these thugs and their bombs.
What's worse a nut job coming into a theater and shooting up the place like Colorado or a nut job coming in sitting down and halfway through the movie setting off 50 pounds of explosives and ball bearings?
Let me tell you the suicide bomber is worse by far because as frightening as the shooter might be at least some people had a chance to get the hell out of there and run for their lives or if someone is conceal carrying they could have a chance to fight back and stop the guy unless of course it's a Gun Free Zone, you don't have that with the suicide bomber.
I'm sure the Israeli's and plenty of Iraqi's would agree.
So yes, I say fear the bomb more than the gun any day.
Dude, I understand that, but in the US you have gun nuts, AND you have bomb nuts. We have neither. You 'could' take action on one of those things.
Evidently we did, the Kansas City Airport bombing was stopped and a lot of would be shootings are stopped before they as well, but not all can be stopped.
Eric Moore So the strict crack down on bomb nuts which has successfully prevented multiple bombings somehow means you don't need gun regulations?
Not like Australia's, we already have laws on the books maybe those should enforced first before new are made.
Eric Moore A hodge podge of variably enforced and variably strict laws within a couple hours of each other is not going to be very effective.
Its like how fireworks are banned everywhere in my state except they are not banned in Canberra a few hours away so there are firecrackers everywhere for new years and Australia day. (Not as much as America)
Damn I spent a New years eve and fourth of July with American relatives in the past and the fireworks are a bit mental lol. Those bunker buster fireworks are impressive, especially in terms of the amount of shattered windows they create.
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people. People like me. People with guns." - The Star-Striped Bastard
How free do you Australians feel now ? Stay locked down , government knows best
I wish John Oliver would revive this topic on his new show @LastWeekTonight
One of the best reports on the Daily Show history.
John Oliver is a master of political comedy.
The whole argument of "Oz gun control worked" is based on (humourous) fallacies and one set of statistics... I'd like to see how these stats were derrived.
“People are the problem”. Well then, implement gun restrictions and don't allow them the weapons.
Same with hammers, cars (more accumulated deaths than guns), anything pointy sharp or just looks scary.
But the difference is that those things were not made to kill, guns primary focus is inflict damage upon another living thing. When there is war, people don't fight with hammers, they use guns, because guns can kill people easily. So your point has no logic at all.
EntityPlays B-but why do the things that weren't designed to kill kill more than those that supposedly were? Hmmm?
Or is it better for your agenda that we just forget about that fact?
John Oliver is the most epic troll that has ever existed. The fact he can just mock them in their face is precious!
Too bad there was just that mass shooting Sidney. Kind of blows a hole in the findings here.
Good grief, if you can't even spell the place it happened, how do you expect anyone to take you seriously?
Timm Neeley Just because there is Gun Control, doesn't mean there would be no mass shootings ever again. Still it's quite a good quote: 1 mass shooting in 20 Years.
Especially compared to the 39 alone in 2014 in the U.S.
Timm Neeley There were 3 fatalities including the gunman..so technically not a mass shooting
Timm Neeley Also, it's not a mass-shooting. It was a terrorism/hostage situation. That guy didn't go into the cafe and start shooting.
Timm Neeley I believe the weapon used in the Sydney Siege was a shotgun and NOT an automatic weapon - there was less loss of life as a result. Imagine if it was an automatic weapon...
I love it when people talk about us Aussies, it makes me feel all warm & fuzzy :P I can't wait to travel (not to America though, it's dangerous over there).
It's annoying how the Daily Show is so quick to criticize police militarism, until someone mentions it in a pro-gun argument. "Ninja police? What ninja police?"
I don't think any rational person looks at police militarism and thinks "ninja police." Maybe "military police," and maybe even as far as "Nazi police" or "dogs of tyranny," but that someone, in his pro-gun "argument," insisted on "ninja police" repeatedly and specifically as the reason why we should be able to get assault weapons with no background checks or waiting periods.
Oliver was improving, he wasn't trying to make a political point about police militarism
Maybe guns should just be out of the hands of Americans
Heh what’s funny is that the U.S gained so many new gun owners because of the riots and pandemic which showed that people are finally starting to realize that nobody is in charge of your safety except yourself.
in Brazil we have gun control (almost a ban, as it is incredibly difficult to have a legal firearm), does not stops us of having the highest murder rate by guns in the world (not considering war regions).
All serious studies (www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf) show that this control is negative to society, in fact if you look into the UK case, after the ban (in 1996) the murder rate almost doubled and the government had to increase to police force in great numbers, just to go back to the same murder rate (after 2003 it went back to the same rate in 1990, when there was no ban on guns).
Even in Australia, as soon as the ban was in place there was a spike on the murder rate, soon returning to the same rate pre-ban. So, you stop sporadic gun massacres, paying with much more lives. The math just simply does not add up.
Studies? Who needs studies when you have Comedy Central.
+yenomragus you're just forgeting that our homicide rates are heavily swollen by police murdering people :)
dont go and try to spread your brazilian bs outside of brazil. you have yet to learn how to deal with our own situation
Swollen by how much? BS is when you say shit without proof. Also, "Dead in confrontation against the police" is not counted as murder (even though it might be murder, because of bad cops), just so you know. So how about you LEARN the situation on Brasil instead of spreading misinformation?
I never said "dead in confrontation", I said MURDER.
If you're not aware of how responsible for violence police is in our country and think this is only a matter of cops killing bad guys and some bad cops killing civillians then you're not misinformed, you're plain dumb.
I think you don't understand statistics plain and simple. the way the police registers homicides does not include most murders commited by the police themselves, they are usually registered as other types of death, therefore, the murder rate (by civilians) would not be swollen. perhaps death by firearms would be swollen. It is not a matter of "good cops, bad guys", it is a matter of how the numbers are registered. A lot of deaths are caused by the police? sure, but most are not registered as murder, is it too difficult to understand.
In fact, our real murder rate would be understimated, because a lot of murders are classified as other types of crime, or even as other types of death (such as in confrontation with the police).
When you learn basic math and finally go read the police reports you can, maybe, try to debate. Until then, you are just repeating ideological propaganda without even understanding the numbers.
www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/nota_tecnica/160405_nt_17_atlas_da_violencia_2016_finalizado.pdf