After Dropbox finds a child porn collector, a chess club stops his knife attack

"I failed my mission to kill everyone."

Read the whole story

 

[Idontno]

dermott[/url]":3b3aafs1]

Flaming Sasquatch[/url]":3b3aafs1]


Yet, since banning almost all guns in 1996, Australia hasn't had a single mass shooting in the last 20 years. Similarly, after heavily regulating firearm possession in 1997, the UK has had only a single gun rampage in 18 years (in 2010). In that instance it took the perp over 6 hours to find and kill about a dozen individuals. (Not exactly the gun-down-the-kids-in-60-seconds problem they'd been having previously).

There is a strong correlation between increased gun control and decreased mass killings.

I count 9 massacres in Australia since 1996.
Not counting the 2 in 1996 alone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... _Australia

The two in 1996 were shootings. Two of the other nine are shootings (Hunt Family Murders, Hectorville Siege), so your statement (Australia hasn't had a singel mass shooting in the last 20 years) is wrong on its face.

I agree with accuracy of your data - but not what you conclude from it. To start with, the horrific (35 dead) Port Arthur massacre in 1996 was the catalyst for the the change to our gun laws - not something that happened afterwards. Unfortunately our gun controls have been under steady attack since then - and they were not a ban on firearms, but a control on them.

Hectorville saw 3 deaths, Hunt family - 5. Whilst terrible I think this almost fades into insignificance when compared with the the US - If I were a parent of school-age children and my main concern was seeing them arrive home safely I know where I would like them to go to school.

Based on the link below the death rate per 100,000 by firearms in Australia is 0.86 whilst in the US it was 10.5 / 100,000.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... death_rate

You guys win - we need open access to firearms and the right to carry - so we can close that gap.

 

[AliceWonder]

operagost[/url]":jricf8nf]

ayemahnuhrd[/url]":jricf8nf]So... lessons from the last two weeks. When planning crazy civilian attacks - Having assault rifles = mass casualties, not having them = minimal casualties, able to be stopped by heroic unarmed elderly people.

Or able to be stopped by heroic armed elderly people.

Your argument is invalid.

You won't find heroic armed elderly people in a library because guns are not allowed in a public library, and most gun owners do not carry.

 

[AliceWonder]

No Wire Hangers[/url]":29ytvxvp]I don't understand these people that are driven to download and trade child pornography. There seems to be a lot of them. Do they want to have sex with children to the exclusion of everything else? What is wrong with them? I'm sure that there are people that are attracted to children and dont ever act on it. What is it that pushes someone over the edge?

There are people studying that, but it does appear to be a mental illness.

 

[InfiniteWisdom]

PhotoDNA was created in 2009 but they haven't figured out how to use it on videos in almost 7 years?

 

[Worminator]

One brother is a child molesting heroin addict, the other squirrels away child porn on his dropbox account.


I always find it odd that no one ever talks about where their mother and father are in these situations, and, more pertinently, what they were doing to these kids 5-10 years back when they were growing up.

 

[PrimalxConvoy]

andrgl[/url]":8zerli8e]Russian sites seem to be the common source. Anyone know why that is?

Up until recently, Japan and Russia were the "only" two (G8?) countries where the possession of child porn was legal. In Japan's case, distributing it was illegal, but possessing (and possibly, by default, downloading it) was not. At that time, those two countries were thought to be the biggest hosts of (online?) Child pornography in the world. Even today, with possession now illegal in Japan, certain "artistic" works, such as manga, anime, depicting child-like characters in sexual acts, and photo- magazines showing underaged girls in bikinis and underwear is still fairly easy to buy.

Russia, I think is still a legal place to host such content, however:

- http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europ ... index.html

 

[Thrownaway]

No Wire Hangers[/url]":ns1cyodo]I don't understand these people that are driven to download and trade child pornography. There seems to be a lot of them. Do they want to have sex with children to the exclusion of everything else? What is wrong with them? I'm sure that there are people that are attracted to children and dont ever act on it. What is it that pushes someone over the edge?

(Note: I'm not a pedophile, nor do I know any; I've just ended up reading quite a bit about it over the years.)

Most of my browser history was lost (so I can't grab links to most articles I'd read this year) but I was able to dig up a few that gave most of the same information I've seen over-and-over on sites like the BBC:
Salon - I'm A Pedophile, But Not A Monster (child molester)
Salon - (replies to questions & hate mail from above)
The Atlantic - I, Pedophile (this is the guy caught with CP because he used his own credit card)
NYTimes - Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not A Crime
LA Times: Many Researchers Taking A Different View Of Pedophilia
Salon - Virtuous Pedophiles: The Men Who Are Attracted To Children But Devoted To Denying Their Desires
I'll try to summarize what I can recall off the top of my head:
As far as scientists have been able to figure out, pedophilia is effectively an extremely dysfunctional sexual orientation; it can either exist alongside a regular adult sexual orientation, or it can be the person's only source of attraction. At the same developmental point that regular kids start feeling drawn to their classmates or somewhat-older kids, pedos instead are drawn to much younger children — usually one gender or the other, sometimes both.

Creepily enough, researchers have also discovered that only approximately 20% of child molesters are actual pedophiles. (I'm guessing that the rest are examples of the old saying that "rape isn't about sex, it's about power.")

Nobody knows what percentage of pedos do harm children or even how many consume child porn, as most can't safely "come out." Ironically, that situation is a big part of why some do molest kids. They're left to self-police their thoughts to be sure temptation isn't leading them to start deceiving themselves — while simultaneously fighting depression (from self-hatred, self-inflicted isolation, knowing they'll never experience sexual touch or a sexual relationship), and resentment at knowing they'd be demonized if anyone knew of the sacrifices. Like addicts, the danger is if the depression makes them feel like they have nothing left to lose and they start to convince themselves addict-style that a little tiny bit (of porn, touching, fantasizing, etc.) would be no big deal.

Is there treatment? Sort of. As with normal sexual orientations, there's currently no known way to change which kind of person they're attracted to. Some European countries have successful confidential treatment programs to help pedos refrain from harming kids, like Germany's Project Dunklefeld, which has the message of "You are not guilty because of your sexual desire, but you are responsible for your sexual behavior. There is help! Don’t become an offender!" (I can't find info on the others I've run across in articles, dammit.) Wikipedia sums the treatment method:

Patients are encouraged to accept their sexual inclinations, integrate it into their self-concept, and involve relatives or partners in the therapeutic process. Cognitive behaviour therapy is used to improve coping skills, stress management, and sexual attitudes. Drugs that reduce general sex drive, such as serotonin reuptake inhibitors and anti-androgens, may also be offered.

There are also online support groups for celibate (aka "virtuous") pedophiles to refrain from acting on their urges. Some of them (from Wikipedia & Salon) are, just in case there's any pedos reading this:
The Shadows Project
Virtuous Pedophiles
Schicksal und Herausforderung ("Fate and Challenge") (German)
ČEPEK - Czech and Slovak Pedophile Community

 

[Pinjata]

I admit this person was/is in need of help and might have been been triggered by other things - but consider how things would have ended if this guy was offered proper help instead of the threat of having his life ruined.

 

[Pinjata]

ChiralMichael[/url]":1iguj4ih]

Ralf The Dog[/url]":1iguj4ih]

Iphtashu Fitz[/url]":1iguj4ih]

simonov<ca>[/url]":1iguj4ih]How is a PhotoDNA file of child porn any different, fundamentally, from, say, a JPEG file of the same image? Both are computer codes that could be used to display a prohibited image. Or does the one-way hash make it okay?

The same exact way the value b2650798dd5f07838ccd91af91b22db1 is different from this image:

That first value is the md5sum hash of the image. There's no way you can get the original image back from the hash, but it's easy to calculate the hash from the image.

PhotoDNA apparently creates a similar hash but it's not a hash of every individual byte in the image (as this md5sum one is). The PhotoDNA hash value will apparently be the same even if the image has been altered slightly by cropping, watermarking, etc.

Mods, please check out this post. I don't think that dog is of legal age.

/snark.

Well, if you think that photo constitutes pornography, god help you.
;-P

Well, it was a sexy bitch!

bitch
bɪtʃ/
noun
noun: bitch; plural noun: bitches; noun: a bitch

1.
a female dog, wolf, fox, or otter.

 

[GreeneX]

 

[NetworkElf]

Brown had been using Dropbox to store files but had made no serious effort to hide his identity.

So, stupid and a disgusting pervert.

Nice combination.

 

[wlt.minus]

ProfessorGuy[/url]":3hpzedyj]I guess I'll get labelled as a monster, but let me point this out: Having these penalties so high and ruining a life so thoroughly that suicide (or murder/suicide) is the only acceptable outcome may be counterproductive.

This. It's not that you shouldn't punish child porn offenders harsly, because you most definitely should. But if you make a punishment last for life, you need to lock that person up for life. Taking away any hope a person might have of a future, yet leaving them free in the population is a recipe for disaster.

Don't make the sex-offender registry for life. Make it 5-10-20 years, depending on severity of the crime, then allow reformed offenders some small measure of hope for redemption, and you could likely avoid situations like the one that happened. here.

 

[jinjuku]

iOSecure[/url]":2e5uu7wc]Wow.. child pornography charges and attempted mass murder at 19... he needs to be locked up in a ward for a few decades.

Hope they cover Jame's medical bills, and give that guy a beer too.

I was thinking of solving the problem for about $0.38.

No way I want to go to work, earn a living, pay taxes, so I can keep this budding little monster locked up.

 

[jinjuku]

CraigJ[/url]":32lxew0i]Too bad the asshole didn't fall on his knife saving us the time and expense of housing his psychopathic ass for the next 60 years. OTOH would be child killers don't seem to do very well in prison... here's hoping.

What bleeding heart liberals voted this down?

Some people fucked up their chance at participating in the human race.

 

[jinjuku]

SixDegrees[/url]":3e0fr6wi]

ProfessorGuy[/url]":3e0fr6wi]I guess I'll get labelled as a monster, but let me point this out: Having these penalties so high and ruining a life so thoroughly that suicide (or murder/suicide) is the only acceptable outcome may be counterproductive.

If we were talking about drug use or other crimes, I might agree. But child porn directly harms children. And that harm is not a secret. I have very few problems with long sentences for this particular crime, particularly in light of the fact that there is simply no effective treatment for such problems.

You currently just were down voted by 13 people that are seemingly warm and fuzzy when it comes to child pornographers morphing into wanna be mass murderers.

 

[CSMastermind]

Is anyone else a little disturbed that Dropbox is scanning users content? I get that we want to catch child predators but isn't that a slippery slope?

 

[PaulWTAMU]

If he's ever here in Amarillo I'll buy him a beer or two. Or three

 

[Natt]

Sigh, WTF does this story have to do with guns? Just STFU if you have nothing relevant to say. M'kay?

 

[Natt]

cerberusTI[/url]":1dzyxs31]

ayemahnuhrd[/url]":1dzyxs31]So... lessons from the last two weeks. When planning crazy civilian attacks - Having assault rifles = mass casualties, not having them = minimal casualties, able to be stopped by heroic unarmed elderly people.

As a society, this inevitably leads me to support LESS regulations for assault rifles because... just... reasons... I'm sure we'll get this answer soon from the internet and then I'll understand better and life will fit back into its black and white / good/evil / manicheanistic categories where reason isn't so necessary.

An assault rifle would not be the weapon of choice for a single person to cause mass casualties (assuming you could obtain one, that takes some doing in the US). It is far too specific in its target and obvious in its use to be a good tool for this purpose.

Topping the list of much more suitable methods to cause mass casualties would be things like explosives or toxic gasses in poorly ventilated areas. If you wanted to be more creative, a plasma cutter used on a rail line or important structural component of a bridge, decompression and ignition of a natural gas delivery system, or any of like a dozen other things I can think of off the top of my head would be much better at this than a gun.

This was a poorly adjusted teenager raging against the world. The ease with which he was foiled was due more to his lack of serious planning, means, and accomplices than anything else. ISIS is a serious threat because they are organized and have some means.

Nonsense, the only difference between this kid and radicalized ISIS terrorists is guns, amirite??? It's obvious, are you people stupid or what? Had he had a gun he wouldn't have stopped his charge when confronted by an elderly chess instructor and engaged in an edgy conversation instead of pressing the attack, while the kids escaped. The gun makes all the difference! Had he had a gun he would have killed them all! The urge to do so would have simple been irresistible. Guns will do that to you. That's why they are so dangerous! /s

Sorry, there's only so much stupid one can read without mocking how silly it is...

 

[EchtoGammut]

Thrownaway[/url]":1bpp8a66]
(Note: I'm not a pedophile, nor do I know any; I've just ended up reading quite a bit about it over the years.)

That was some really good information. After skimming it, I wonder if this shouldn't be a part of High School sex ed. I don't know how current sex ed is taught today, but back in my day, it was a half semester combined with driver's ed. There was some real basic anatomy and something about condoms always break and you should suffer the consequences. I was 13 at the time (graduated from High School early), so I didn't really figure out that sex was a lot more complex until I graduated a couple of years later. Nevertheless, sex ed would be a great time to teach kids that if they feel the compulsion towards children that you can't stop how you feel, but there are people who can help you manage it.

 

[jinjuku]

PaulWTAMU[/url]":3eugafby]If he's ever here in Amarillo I'll buy him a beer or two. Or three

Not sure if your comment is tongue in cheek.

 

[jinjuku]

I don't know about others but I don't think I would come onto a public forum and offer to buy beers for a child pornographer / attempted mass murderer let alone up vote it.

But that's just me.

 

[lewax00]

I don't know about others but I don't think I would come onto a public forum and offer to buy beers for a child pornographer / attempted mass murderer let alone up vote it.

But that's just me.

Unfortunately "him" is vague, and could also refer to the guy who stopped the attack, or could refer to the detective on the case...so the poster and upvoter may have meant and interpreted the post differently than you did.

EDIT: Not to mention, the attacker isn't old enough to drink anyways, so that adds some evidence he might not have been the subject of the post.

 

[jinjuku]

Thx. I'm overly sensitive to this stuff with having youngun's and all. Seeing people just saying he needs a shrink in spite of everything is mind boggling.

Predators like this don't get cured. I wonder what the relapse rate is...

Why wait to buy the gentlemen that saved the day a beer. Send one to him...

 

[Shice]

pj-[/url]":3jg728bb]

brshoemak[/url]":3jg728bb]I'm glad that so many of these offenders are complete idiots when it comes to obscuring their identities.

While it doesn't help for the larger pornography rings out there, it definitely culls the low-hanging fruit.

That's like saying you're glad street level drug dealers are dumb. I guess it's satisfying in a way, but it's scary to think of how many smart ones there are, and that they get smarter every time something like this happens.

What would really make me glad is if the gov't exposed and arrested every member of this hell hole:
http://www.cracked.com/personal-experie ... sters.html

That place is much more terrifying than the 19 year old moron here.

Only Cracked would look at a topic like that and think to themselves "hey, this is perfect fodder for a top-five listicle!"

 

[somerobot]

Back to the subject at hand, the sad part is that most people who perpetuate these atrocities are themselves victims in one way or another. I would like to see as much done as possible on all fronts, prevention as well as intervention and justice for current victims.

 

[Tam-Lin]

jinjuku[/url]":2fu2zlja]Predators like this don't get cured. I wonder what the relapse rate is...

So, basically, you're saying you have no evidence, but you're sure of something anyway.

The problem with attitudes like this is that, when something is demonized, it prevents people from trying to get help. And maybe even incentivizes them to strike out at the world.

 

[AliceWonder]

somerobot[/url]":310e1noc]Back to the subject at hand, the sad part is that most people who perpetuate these atrocities are themselves victims in one way or another. I would like to see as much done as possible on all fronts, prevention as well as intervention and justice for current victims.

It frequently is the case but I think it has been debunked by science.

Some people molest/rape children as a means of expressing power. Those I think are where there is a victim correlation.

But some are genuinely attracted to children as lovers. They may never act out with a child.

Those I believe there is no correlation to childhood abuse,

 

[thelastdonut]

Kudos for stopping him and all but I'm more interested in this PhotoDNA thing. I've wondered for a while now how various places search by image so successfully and yet I had trouble matching a screenshot to a random vid (not child porn btw). Hearing that the Microsoft's matching hash stays the same even after altering the base image is hella surprising to me, I wonder just how much alteration can occur before an image no longer matches.

I'm curious but I'm kinda afraid to journey down that rabbit hole

 

[AliceWonder]

thelastdonut[/url]":1406bsni]Kudos for stopping him and all but I'm more interested in this PhotoDNA thing. I've wondered for a while now how various places search by image so successfully and yet I had trouble matching a screenshot to a random vid (not child porn btw). Hearing that the Microsoft's matching hash stays the same even after altering the base image is hella surprising to me, I wonder just how much alteration can occur before an image no longer matches.

I'm curious but I'm kinda afraid to journey down that rabbit hole

If I were to do it, I wouldn't require exact pattern match of two different images, just close pattern match.

When the match is close but not exact, you then have cause to have law enforcement look at the image itself and see if it is illegal content.

I suspect that is what is they do.

For video, I would pattern match the audio stream if present, until it was figured out how to do it based on the video itself.

 

[metrometro]

Pokrface[/url]":rmtjp66z]
Federal firearm law already working as intended here—"Persons under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than one year are ineligible to receive, transport, or ship any firearm or ammunition." He was indicted months ago, so this dingdong purchasing any firearm was already illegal. In this particular case, no additional legislation necessary.

Aren't we happy he didn't realize that he can purchase a gun at most any gun show in a private sale with no background check or paper trail. A loophole that should close now that instant background checks are technically feasible.

 

[Jogan]

If he'd had access to guns this would've been another Sandy Hook.

 

[S8ER01Z]

Jogan[/url]":2pz8cwwm]If he'd had access to guns this would've been another Sandy Hook.

It happened in IL which means there is a sign on the door so he wouldn't have been able to bring a gun in.

 

[just.Joe]

Realy hate seeing the picture of bloodied knives with pedofile written underneath on front of ArsTechnica for the whole day. It makes it borderline NSFW at my job and it makes me not fond of going to ArsT.

There is some other message to the story and it ain't blood and knives.

 

[jinjuku]

Tam-Lin[/url]":2ycw55y5]

jinjuku[/url]":2ycw55y5]Predators like this don't get cured. I wonder what the relapse rate is...

So, basically, you're saying you have no evidence, but you're sure of something anyway.

The problem with attitudes like this is that, when something is demonized, it prevents people from trying to get help. And maybe even incentivizes them to strike out at the world.

I'll have to find the research on this but have read where the general consensus is the biological urge can't be purged.

The difference is those that act or don't act on said urges.

 

[infected]

just.Joe[/url]":2c4lsckc]Realy hate seeing the picture of bloodied knives with pedofile written underneath on front of ArsTechnica for the whole day. It makes it borderline NSFW at my job and it makes me not fond of going to ArsT.

There is some other message to the story and it ain't blood and knives.

It truly is grim times when you can't even skive at work without eye-catching article pictures blowing your cover.

Shame on you ars!

 

[ayemahnuhrd]

Natt[/url]":924fs8l2]

cerberusTI[/url]":924fs8l2]

ayemahnuhrd[/url]":924fs8l2]So... lessons from the last two weeks. When planning crazy civilian attacks - Having assault rifles = mass casualties, not having them = minimal casualties, able to be stopped by heroic unarmed elderly people.

As a society, this inevitably leads me to support LESS regulations for assault rifles because... just... reasons... I'm sure we'll get this answer soon from the internet and then I'll understand better and life will fit back into its black and white / good/evil / manicheanistic categories where reason isn't so necessary.

An assault rifle would not be the weapon of choice for a single person to cause mass casualties (assuming you could obtain one, that takes some doing in the US). It is far too specific in its target and obvious in its use to be a good tool for this purpose.

Topping the list of much more suitable methods to cause mass casualties would be things like explosives or toxic gasses in poorly ventilated areas. If you wanted to be more creative, a plasma cutter used on a rail line or important structural component of a bridge, decompression and ignition of a natural gas delivery system, or any of like a dozen other things I can think of off the top of my head would be much better at this than a gun.

This was a poorly adjusted teenager raging against the world. The ease with which he was foiled was due more to his lack of serious planning, means, and accomplices than anything else. ISIS is a serious threat because they are organized and have some means.

Nonsense, the only difference between this kid and radicalized ISIS terrorists is guns, amirite??? It's obvious, are you people stupid or what? Had he had a gun he wouldn't have stopped his charge when confronted by an elderly chess instructor and engaged in an edgy conversation instead of pressing the attack, while the kids escaped. The gun makes all the difference! Had he had a gun he would have killed them all! The urge to do so would have simple been irresistible. Guns will do that to you. That's why they are so dangerous! /s

Sorry, there's only so much stupid one can read without mocking how silly it is...

Intellectually honest moment here - you REALLY believe (as opposed to hold the position strategically) that a person who can just pull a trigger from a room away versus need to literally run up to someone with a frikkin knife and start stabbing doesn't cause differing casualties? I strongly doubt you really believe this. Guns make killing much easier. Is that really something you don't agree with?

If you did, you'd be implying that guns aren't really that effective versus knives or other weapons in killing folks, and I'm pretty sure you would believe the opposite if you're on the shootin' end.

Here's the real issue - do we want to 1) permit guns of all kinds to be super easy to be bought, sold, traded, and given away AND 2) know that an assumed, but real percentage of them will be used in mass killings, or 1) make guns more regulated, restricted, and harder to find their way into the hands of bad guys at the expense of the public's ability to own the very best, most lethal ones and 2) feel that the trade-off is worth it due to less dead children/innocents. Note, I'm not accusing folks of 'wanting' dead kids, but just know that it is a real and provable outcome, just like seatbelt laws saved lives and restricted freedoms. That trade-off, on the whole, saved people, just like this one would.

Of course, framing it like that betrays my sympathies (I have kids) but an intellectually honest gun owner should be able to answer why this issue is somehow different than any other type of public safety issue in which the very same cost/benefit tradeoffs are made. This story is a great example of the how good guys can stop bad guys without death (even to the bad guy) when guns are removed from the equation. I think that's a good thing. That's all I'm saying.

 

[just.Joe]

infected[/url]":3ohdli3g]

just.Joe[/url]":3ohdli3g]Realy hate seeing the picture of bloodied knives with pedofile written underneath on front of ArsTechnica for the whole day. It makes it borderline NSFW at my job and it makes me not fond of going to ArsT.

There is some other message to the story and it ain't blood and knives.

It truly is grim times when you can't even skive at work without eye-catching article pictures blowing your cover.

Shame on you ars!

And your point regarding my question is? Oh, I get it, you're a troll... well done, sir, well done! #slowclap

 

[cpast]

Jurrasic[/url]":ceyljmm7]

Rommel102[/url]":ceyljmm7]Great job James Vernon, a 75 year old Vet taking down a 19 year old psychopath.

I have a very strong suspicion that this attack was not real, but was a cynical ploy to set up an insanity defense.

A scrawny nerd who is not skilled in knife fighting who REALLY wants to kill some kiddies is NOT going to march into the area in question, pull his knives and loudly announce his intentions! He will enter the area, pick his first victim away from any adults, move close to him/her and THEN pull blades and go to work.

I don't buy it at all. It's a either an actual cry for help (unlikely in this case) or a ploy to get a reduced sentence or committal to a mental hospital rather then go into the prison population upon conviction, where he will rapidly learn what it felt like to be the abused kids he jerked off to.

That would only make sense if you had no clue what the insanity defense meant. It's not a matter of "he did something irrational? He MUST be crazy!" The Illustrated Guide to Law has a good primer; essentially, insanity (which is a legal term here, and not a medical one) means that because of a mental issue, you were unable to understand that what you were doing was criminal at the time you did it (Illinois law says "at the time of such conduct, as a result of mental disease or mental defect, he lacks substantial capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct").

Going on a berzerker rampage isn't actually any evidence at all that you are incapable of understanding that what you're doing is criminal, nor that you were insane when you did something different over a year ago before you had a huge extra source of stress. And the insanity defense puts a pretty high burden of proof on the defendant; the defendant has to prove it by "clear and convincing evidence." Insanity is a defense which is very rarely tried, and when it is tried is very rarely successful.

 

[strykerakamack]

Myth: Gun control in Australia is curbing crime

GUNS IN OTHER COUNTRIES - Australian Homicides before and after Port Arthur Masacre and Gun Ban BuybackFact: Homicides were falling before the Australian firearm ban, matching a global downward trend in most industrialized countries. However, non-firearm homicides are relatively stable in Australia.

Fact: Crime has been rising since enacting a sweeping ban on private gun ownership. In the first two years after Australian gun-owners were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms, government statistics showed a dramatic increase in criminal activity. 33 In 2001-2002, homicides were up another 20%. 34

From the inception of firearm confiscation to March 27, 2000, the numbers are:

Firearm-related murders were up 19%
Armed robberies were up 69%
Home invasions were up 21%
The sad part is that in the 15 years before the national gun confiscation:

Firearm-related homicides dropped nearly 66%
Firearm-related deaths fell 50%
Fact: Gun crimes have been rising throughout Australia since guns were banned. In Sydney alone, robbery rates with guns rose 160% in 2001, more than in the previous year. 35

Fact: A ten year Australian study has concluded that firearm confiscation had no effect on crime rates. 36 A separate report also concluded that Australia’s 1996 gun control laws “found [no] evidence for an impact of the laws on the pre-existing decline in firearm homicides” 37 and yet another report from Australia for a similar time period indicates the same lack of decline in firearm homicides. 38

Fact: Despite having much stricter gun control than New Zealand (including a near ban on handguns) firearm homicides in both countries track one another over 25 years, indicating that gun control is not a control variable. 39