“Although armed robberies increased by nearly 20%

Of course, you could argue that crims simply swap a gun for a knife and go ahead with the robberies anyway, but I know what I’d rather be facing in a hold-up.

Doesn’t seem to make much difference. Your violent crime levels are still rising despite firearm control.

From the AIC: “Less than one in five Australian armed robberies involve a firearm.”

More importantly, in the year following the gun-laws,

“Although armed robberies increased by nearly 20%, the number of armed robberies involving a firearm decreased to a six-year low.”

– Recorded Crime, Australia, 1998. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Jun 1999

Again:

“There was a decrease of almost 30% in the number of homicides by firearms from 1997 to 1998.”

– Australian Crime - Facts and Figures 1999. Australian Institute of Criminology. Canberra, Oct 1999

“We have observed a decline in firearm-related death rates (essentially in firearm-related suicides) in most jurisdictions in Australia. We have also seen a declining trend in the percentage of robberies involving the use of firearms in Australia.”

– Mouzos, J. Firearm-related Violence: The Impact of the Nationwide Agreement on Firearms. Trends & Issues in Crime & Criminal Justice No. 116. Australian Institute of Criminology. Canberra, May 1999; 6

There is a whole bunch more. Basicaly, crimes involving guns dropped after the buy-back scheme. Overal violence has been on the increase more recently, but its harder to draw a correlation to guns on that count, since most don’t involve them.

I might also point out that tougher gun-laws in the UK and Canada also had strong positive effects.

Make no mistake: Cornell Toombs was no Jean Valjean.

Anyway, without belaboring the point, valid reasons exist for the gung-ho attitude you gripe about.

I wonder if firearm control legislation in Australia has had an effect on violent crime:

“The Australian government made sweeping changes to the firearms legislation in 1997. However, the total homicide rate, after having remained basically flat from 1995 to 2001, has now begun climbing again. While violent crime is decreasing in the United States, it is increasing in Australia. Over the past six years, the overall rate of violent crime in Australia has been on the rise – for example, armed robberies have jumped 166 percent nationwide.”

http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/.....entRev.pdf

I disagree. I think the thugs will avoid Jason Lee. One thing must be acknowledged about the strong arm robber, he is a coward behind his gun. G-d bless Jason Lee, he is a good American.

How fortunate we expat-residents are that Korea is relatively gun-free, that we don’t have to fear hardly ever having to face this situation — any sort of armed robbery is so rare — except when we Americans visit the good old homeland, of course. I find that one of the weirdest and worst things about visiting the USA on vacation — having to deal with the threat of armed criminality, all the neighborhoods you shouldn’t even enter, the fear after dark.

I agree.

It is not only the lack of easy access to firearms, but the difference in mentality. Koreans just do not become the sort of hardcore thugs of the type shot by Mr. Lee. Lack of those types is a distinct lifestyle advantage Korea offers over urban America.

You were one twitch of the trigger finger away from oblivion, Sonagi. Doesn’t that make you even a little mad, in retrospect?

I presume your Irish ancestors weren’t willing to tolerate such a status, which is why this country (the US) got settled by the kind of people it did. Mr Lee is that kind of a person also; he may be “purely” Korean in ethnicity, but ideologically I say he’s now “purely” American.

To the admiration of some here, and the horror of others.

And I’m not criticizing you — at all. You made the “right” decision for your circumstances — every one of these situations is going to be different and only the “man on the spot” can be the judge of what to do.

I wager you were an employee (rather than an owner); probably of a franchise or a chain, which provided you with very strict instructions as to what to do during a hold-up. And also which absolutely forbade its employees to keep guns on the premises for defense.

Also, I think you as a female are automatically less psychologically threatening to the “average” armed robber.
You were able to see the gunman’s demeanor, and to make a judgement that he was “more or less” rational — at least, as far as armed robbery can be said to be a rational act.

But we aren’t in a position to judge what Mr. Lee thought he saw, and in his case his own livelihood and the lives of his family were at total risk.

But, let’s take the comparison one step further — into the hypothetical. In your robbery situation, what would you have felt (and what would you have done) had the gunman taken the money and then (instead of just leaving) ordered you to kneel on the floor, facing away from him, while he tied up your hands behind you?

Perhpas you would have obeyed, in hopes that all the gunman wanted was to improve his chances of getting away.

I honestly don’t know what I would do, in a similar situation to this “hypothetical” one. I think I might grab a can or a hard object and try to brain the guy, rather than kneeling for possible execution.

I do know that I would want to have a gun available — as I’m sure I would go for it if it looked like I was going to be executed, no matter how hopeless the chances seemed.

So I’d have a hard decision to make, if I desperately needed a job as a convenience store clerk, working alone late at night. And it was a chain or franchise that forbade the keeping of guns by its employees and insisted on strict instructions to always hand over the money and submit to the bandit.

I’m lucky that I’m not in that situation, so I’m damn sure not inclined to judge others who are (unlike some of the other commentors here).

I find it wryly amusing that the only remaining “original sin” recognized these days is being “judgmental” — except of course for the fact that we Americans aren’t allowed even that one any more.