Re: Gun Laws Do Not Reduce Criminal Violence

"Trevor Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "David Hartung" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "Trevor Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > "David Hartung" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > "Trevor Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > > **Even a cursory rad, shows that their facts about Australia are
> > > > incorrect.
> > > > > For instance, they claim that the gun buyback cost AUS$500 million
> > > > Dollars.
> > > > > The real cost was somewhat less than AUS$300 million. Clearly,
such
> a
> > > > basic
> > > > > error throws the rest of their 'data' into disrepute
> > > >
> > > > You say that the cost of the Australian buy back was AUS$300
million,
> > > Fraser
> > > > says it was AUS$500 million. I assume that a research institute has
> more
> > > > extensive access to such information, than you do. Where do you get
> your
> > > > information and how completel is it?
> > >
> > > ** http://www.ssaa.org.au/iladec97.html
> > >
> > > Scroll down the page. You'll find the figures.
> >
> > Thanks, but just scanning the article seems to indicate that they are
> > essentially in agreement with the Canadian study.
>
> **AUS$500 million vs. AUS$300 million, is not agreement.
>

The difference is most probably the A$200 million concurrent increase in
bureaucratic costs mentionned in the next line..
    300+200 = 500....