澳大利亚的禁枪真的对降低犯罪有用吗？

[helpme]

前面说了，首先用state level的数据研究就是错的，对此我几个月前本版证明过了

link?

[jhe123]

link?

几个月前的事情，标题我都忘了，自己慢慢找吧。叔撤退了，灌水太他妈浪费时间，得赶快去补上搬砖的定额了，LOL。。。

[jhe123]

下线前，先谢过版主奖励，虽然你发钱的出发点不对，但钱钱总归是钱钱，不要白不要哈。

[helpme]

尿遁慢走不送

几个月前的事情，标题我都忘了，自己慢慢找吧。叔撤退了，灌水太他妈浪费时间，得赶快去补上搬砖的定额了，LOL。。。

[ldxiek]

站务把这个贴置顶是为了让大家一起来骂的吧？
疮粉这些孙子学疮破的无耻学得真像，两个事实，哪个对自己有利就选哪个，以为特么的是在选妃呢

反枪分子一说禁枪有利于治安，就经常提到澳大利亚禁枪后治安好转作为证明，澳大利亚从1996年禁步枪，2002年禁止手枪。犯罪率是从2002左右开始下降。但这个只是个巧合而已。真正的原因是经济发展个人收入提高。

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/A ... ic-product

图中可以看出，澳大利亚个人收入从2002左右开始快速增长。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。
如果不信我说的，那就来看看澳大利亚各种犯罪的历年变化。

https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/27-year ... ctims-data

从图中可以看出，所有和金钱相关的犯罪，抢劫，入室，偷车和其它偷窃案等都从2002左右开始下降。偷车和其它偷窃案和枪支没啥关系，它们的下降肯定和禁枪无关，是经济因素造成的，抢劫和入室同偷窃案同步下降，那很可能也是经济好转造成的。

再来看看和金钱无关的犯罪，攻击和性攻击两项，从2003年来没有啥大的下降，甚至呈现了上升趋势，显然不管是经济好转还是禁枪对这样犯罪没有效果。

然后看杀人案，这个数据比较复杂，首先杀人案有各种原因，其中抢劫占了很大比例，抢劫案少了自然杀人案也就少了。在没有杀人案原因的具体数据前，无法作更多结论。

但是禁枪对平民自卫不利这点确被澳大利亚的禁枪行为验证了：

Attempted murder was the most common homicide offence type between 1993 and 2005. From 2006, murder was the most common homicide offence recorded nationally.

看见没有，没禁手枪以前，平民可以更好的自卫，所以attempted murder，也就是罪犯想杀人但没杀成的案例最多。禁枪以后，罪犯想杀人成功率就高多了。

[resso]

下线前，先谢过版主奖励，虽然你发钱的出发点不对，但钱钱总归是钱钱，不要白不要哈。

你这话说的，哪个版的钱不是发给attention who're的。lol

[ldxiek]

妈的给点智商吧，首贴里说2002年后的治安状况变化跟禁枪没关系，还没到第二页就说治安状况变得不好的那部分是禁枪造成的

起码比禁枪导致治安变好要有力的多。禁枪后攻击和性攻击几乎不减甚至还有上升，就这两项就足以戳破谬论了。

[resso]

妈的给点智商吧，首贴里说2002年后的治安状况变化跟禁枪没关系，还没到第二页就说治安状况变得不好的那部分是禁枪造成的

文明

[fortyNiner]

You are so shameless. You compare the max of one set to the min of the other set. Is that how you do analysis?
Look at the growth rates in these five years. 4.59% in 1984, 5.28% in 1985, 5.76% in 1988, 4.61% in 1998, and 4.96% in 1999. Can you find any rate higher than any of these five in the twenty years after 2002? No, you cannot. Dumb ass. The economy growth in Australia was slowing down since 2002, compared to the 20 or 40 years prior to 2002.
I don't know how stupid one needs to be to deny this simple data.

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

你个蠢逼再去按计算器看看。

[fortyNiner]

文明 my ass. This jhe called me 弱智 at least twice last night.

文明

[jhe123]

你这话说的，哪个版的钱不是发给attention who're的。lol

你这话就太没水平了，为了和我较劲，结果把你上任以来，美新版所有被奖励过的ID都给骂了，LOL。。。

[jhe123]

You are so shameless. You compare the max of one set to the min of the other set. Is that how you do analysis?
Look at the growth rates in these five years. 4.59% in 1984, 5.28% in 1985, 5.76% in 1988, 4.61% in 1998, and 4.96% in 1999. Can you find any rate higher than any of these five in the twenty years after 2002? No, you cannot. Dumb ass. The economy growth in Australia was slowing down since 2002, compared to the 20 or 40 years prior to 2002.
I don't know how stupid one needs to be to deny this simple data.

呵呵，虽然我知道你的错误从哪里来的，但还是要问你到底会计算增长率不？

[resso]

你这话就太没水平了，为了和我较劲，结果把你上任以来，美新版所有被奖励过的ID都给骂了，LOL。。。

我就说了句实话，怎么没水平了

[jhe123]

我就说了句实话，怎么没水平了

你是承认你在骂美新版自从你上任后所有被奖励过的ID了？

[fortyNiner]

No matter how you calculate the "average", it was better prior to 2002, as long as you use long enough time. Don't just choose your max against my min.
1. (n1 + n2 + n3 + ...)/n
2. (1+n1)(1+n2)(1+n3)...
3. (1+x)^n

呵呵，虽然我知道你的错误从哪里来的，但还是要问你到底会计算增长率不？

[jhe123]

No matter how you calculate the "average", it was better prior to 2002, as long as you use long enough time. Don't just choose your max against my min.
1. (n1 + n2 + n3 + ...)/n
2. (1+n1)(1+n2)(1+n3)...
3. (1+x)^n

呵呵，不用这么复杂，你就写出你是咋算出来“ 5.28% in 1985” 的就行了。

[fortyNiner]

YOu don't need to 算出来“ 5.28% in 1985”. Jut put the cursor over the bar on the "annual % change graph" at 1985, the third graph, 5.28 is automatically displayed.
I also have searched "Australia historic gdp growth rate" and got data from other reliable sources, they are very similar and almost identical to the one you gave, giving the same exact conclusion of "the average gdp growth prior to 2002 in Australia is higher than that after."

呵呵，不用这么复杂，你就写出你是咋算出来“ 5.28% in 1985” 的就行了。

[jhe123]

YOu don't need to 算出来“ 5.28% in 1985”. Jut put the cursor over the bar on the "annual % change graph" at 1985, the third graph, 5.28 is automatically displayed.
I also have searched "Australia historic gdp growth rate" and got data from other reliable sources, they are very similar and almost identical to the one you gave, giving the same exact conclusion of "the average gdp growth prior to 2002 in Australia is higher than that after."

这么简单一个问题让你自己写出来咋就这么困难？难道你真不会算增长率，所以只能引用图表给出的数据，实际上自己算不出来？

[fortyNiner]

>>只能引用图表给出的数据
Otherwise why did you give this graph? You don't want people to quote numbers from it when it's against you?

这么简单一个问题让你自己写出来咋就这么困难？难道你真不会算增长率，所以只能引用图表给出的数据，实际上自己算不出来？

[jhe123]

>>只能引用图表给出的数据
Otherwise why did you give this graph? You don't want people to quote numbers from it when it's against you?

看来你就是算不出来呗，诚实点承认了不就完了。