澳大利亚的禁枪真的对降低犯罪有用吗？

[jhe123]

攻击性攻击不就是打架和性侵嘛，本来也和枪没啥关系

哈哈，那偷车以及其它盗窃就更和枪没关系了。已经说了，和金钱相关的犯罪2003后急剧下降，和金钱无关的没下降。

[resso]

澳大利亚物价比美国贵，收入和美国差不多，lol 接着spin 啊
https://www.globaldata.com/data-insight ... 0income%20(PPP,household%20income%20increased%20by%2010.2%25.

[jhe123]

>>经济状况是决定治安好坏的第一要素，所以治安好转完全是经济起飞造成的，和禁枪没关系。
>>禁枪后攻击和性攻击几乎不减甚至还有上升
Again, where is your consistency? According to you, 治安好转 and 禁枪 are just coincidence. So your second sentence is basically like "禁枪后治安好转后攻击和性攻击几乎不减甚至还有上升".

弱智理解不了和金钱相关犯罪减少从而导致总犯罪减少？

[jhe123]

澳大利亚物价比美国贵，收入和美国差不多，lol 接着spin 啊
https://www.globaldata.com/data-insight ... 0income%20(PPP,household%20income%20increased%20by%2010.2%25.

和美国比个鸡毛？当然和澳大利亚自己不同时期比。

[resso]

和美国比个鸡毛？当然和澳大利亚自己不同时期比。

因为以美国的经济条件，禁枪后治安应该比现在的澳大利亚好啊

[fortyNiner]

So property crimes are as bad as homicide and violent crimes?

弱智理解不了和金钱相关犯罪减少从而导致总犯罪减少？

[fortyNiner]

So basically your data says after gun ban, homicide rates, robbery, unlawful entry with intent, and motor vehicle theft all dramatically decrease in Australia. You have no guts to deny that, right? So they all are just coincidence? Again and again?
And econ growth is the only cause? What about before 2002? The econ also grew before 2002, but how came crimes also increased before 2002?
By the way, your analysis has a fatal error. Australia's average or max econ growths since 2002 is not better than the average or max of the previous 20 or 40 years. Since 2002, the average growth is 2.706%, while the average of the 20 years prior to 2002 is 3.2985%, and the avearge of the 40 years prior to 2002 is 3.698%, both are significantly better. The max growth of the 20 years after 2002 is 4.22%, and five times in the 20 years prior to 2002 the growths were better than that. So are you going to spin again and conclude that the decrease in crime in Australia is due to the slow down of the econ growth? (Looks like my revised expectation on you is still too high. Who taught you elementary school math?)
What is next? Are you going to bring up their penis size? I won't be surprised since you have spewed out too much crap. In a shopping mall during its busiest hour, you look around and find only twenty to thirty people within 100 meters in all directions? Is that a curse?

[helpme]

和金钱无关的没下降

谋杀死亡率在2002后稳步下降：

The largest recorded number of victims for this offence was 809 in 2001. From 2002 the number of victims declined across most years.

[jhe123]

因为以美国的经济条件，禁枪后治安应该比现在的澳大利亚好啊

你这个结论步子迈的太大，会扯着蛋的。首先枪和治安没关系，其次就算美国经济改善，两国国情差别太大，不能指望有同样效果。就以AA比例来说，澳大利亚不到2%，美国多少？呵呵。。。

[jhe123]

谋杀死亡率在2002后稳步下降：

The largest recorded number of victims for this offence was 809 in 2001. From 2002 the number of victims declined across most years.

澳大利亚2002通过禁手枪的法令，针对手枪的buyback是从2003后半年开始执行。显然2002的下降和2003头半年可以排除禁枪的原因。

[jhe123]

So basically your data says after gun ban, homicide rates, robbery, unlawful entry with intent, and motor vehicle theft all dramatically decrease in Australia. You have no guts to deny that, right? So they all are just coincidence? Again and again?
And econ growth is the only cause? What about before 2002? The econ also grew before 2002, but how came crimes also increased before 2002?
By the way, your analysis has a fatal error. Australia's average or max econ growths since 2002 is not better than the average or max of the previous 20 or 40 years. Since 2002, the average growth is 2.706%, while the average of the 20 years prior to 2002 is 3.2985%, and the avearge of the 40 years prior to 2002 is 3.698%, both are significantly better. The max growth of the 20 years after 2002 is 4.22%, and five times in the 20 years prior to 2002 the growths were better than that. So are you going to spin again and conclude that the decrease in crime in Australia is due to the slow down of the econ growth? (Looks like my revised expectation on you is still too high. Who taught you elementary school math?)
What is next? Are you going to bring up their penis size? I won't be surprised since you have spewed out too much crap. In a shopping mall during its busiest hour, you look around and find only twenty to thirty people within 100 meters in all directions? Is that a curse?

93-2000，人均GDP18000到22000
03-10， 24000 到52000

你个蠢逼再去按计算器看看。

[Fnhdx]

枪和犯罪数量应该不是简单的线性，没枪也可以用其他武器。但是和犯罪的严重程度可能相关。有没有这方面数据

[jhe123]

枪和犯罪数量应该不是简单的线性，没枪也可以用其他武器。但是和犯罪的严重程度可能相关。有没有这方面数据

严重程度的标准是啥？

[helpme]

为啥？合法途径再买不到枪支弹药了，当然可能造成谋杀死亡率下降

澳大利亚2002通过禁手枪的法令，针对手枪的buyback是从2003后半年开始执行。显然2002的下降和2003头半年可以排除禁枪的原因。

[jhe123]

为啥？合法途径再买不到枪支弹药了，当然可能造成谋杀死亡率下降

呵呵，为了达到你禁枪导致犯罪下降的结论，你可以各种找各种理由来证明，但对另外一个更简单更直接的解释却鸡蛋里挑骨头。这就没意思了。不是科学客观的态度。

经济好转导致和金钱相关的犯罪下降，有犯罪数据为证。简单明了的解释，不需多说啥。你的禁枪导致治安变好的结论，首先必须Spin攻击和性攻击的犯罪和枪没啥关系，所以禁枪后没下降。然后又解释不了为啥和枪更没有关系的偷车和其它偷窃却下降了。

谋杀案有各种动机，和金钱无关的原因造成的谋杀案不会受经济太大影响，但抢劫杀人的案例会随抢劫案的下降而下降。在有谋杀动机的具体数据以前，不宜作太多结论。

[helpme]

呵呵，为了达到你禁枪导致犯罪下降的结论，你可以各种找各种理由来证明，但对另外一个更简单更直接的解释却鸡蛋里挑骨头。这就没意思了。不是科学客观的态度

这不就是你一直在干的事情吗？你号称人均GDP快速增长才是导致各种犯罪率下降的主因，但又解释不了14-16年间人均GDP大幅下滑犯罪率并没有反弹。又开始扯什么非线性关系啦，赚少不等于穷啦，你给出任何的理据来support你这些说法吗？你的态度科学客观吗？

[jhe123]

这不就是你一直在干的事情吗？你号称人均GDP快速增长才是导致各种犯罪率下降的主因，但又解释不了14-16年间人均GDP大幅下滑犯罪率并没有反弹。又开始扯什么非线性关系啦，赚少不等于穷啦，你给出任何的理据来support你这些说法吗？你的态度科学客观吗？

靠，难道你真的认为二者应该是严格线性关系？那2015到2016谋杀案从418增加到453，8.3%的年增长又怎么解释？因为枪又多起来了？LOL。。。

[helpme]

叔不知道两者是什么关系，但现在是你在硬下“人家GDP快速增长才是导致犯罪率下降主因”的结论

2015到2016谋杀率有8.3%的年增长又怎样，如果不禁枪也许2014年谋杀率就会大增，而且会高于8.3%

靠，难道你真的认为二者应该是线性关系？那2015到2016谋杀案从418增加到453，8.3%的年增长又怎么解释？因为枪又多起来了？LOL。。。

[jhe123]

叔不知道两者是什么关系，但现在是你在硬下“人家GDP快速增长才是导致犯罪率下降主因”的结论

2015到2016谋杀率有8.3%的年增长又怎样，如果不禁枪也许2014年谋杀率就会大增，而且会高于8.3%

“也许”都能拿来作证据，呵呵。。。

[helpme]

你的理论，连“也许”都不如，LOL

“也许”都能拿来作证据，呵呵。。。