this is at least 30 years too late.

Thanks StukaFox, you managed to produce no peer reviewed papers but have claimed some sort of research victory because you got some answers from Google. Nice. I'd hire you as a researcher for sure.

So I mentioned the Australian and New Zealand legislation. Lets see if there is a peer reviewed paper that examines this.

McPhedran, Samara; Baker, Jeanine (2011). "Mass shootings in Australia and New Zealand: A descriptive study of incidence". Justice Policy Journal.

New Zealand didn't enact Australia's draconian laws. You can buy an AR15 there with high capacity magazines. They also haven't had a mass shooting in 20 years. The peer reviewed paper examines this and comes to the conclusion I stated above.

I see you have some ABS data. Nice. I use the ABS all the time.

Oh wait. You took only the last two years of data for a data set that spans over 40 years. Bad form mate. Lets see if the rate of firearms related homicide was reducing at a similar rate before the legislation changes using a much larger time period.

Lucky for me someone else already did this to make my day easier. They used Australian Institute of Criminology (the official government source) data over a 30 year period. It shows the rate did not change with the legislation change in 1997.

Nice examination of the issue on Quora

Are there peer reviewed papers which come to the same conclusion? Yes.

Lee, Wang-Sheng; Suardi, Sandy (2010). "The Australian Firearms Buyback and Its Effect on Gun Deaths". Contemporary Economic Policy. 28 (1): 65–79

Jeanine Baker, Samara McPhedran; Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?, The British Journal of Criminology, Volume 47, Issue 3, 1 May 2007, Pages 455–469

Chicago? I wasn't going to mention it. I'm not American. I am Australian.

Conclusion: go wipe the egg off of your face.

Edit: forgot to answer your question.

"What conclusions can we draw from this? "

We can conclude that for a short period of time the homicide by firearm rate went up. Just as it goes up and down for any short period of time in most countries. This does not negate the TREND, which in the USA has been downward year on year for the last 25 years. The rate of firearm ownership has increased over the same 25 year period.

hey Jenny McCarthy, you were hot about 30 years ago, but you're still a dummy now

As I recall, my comparative religion professor only touched on it, explaining essentially it's like Shinto without the spiritual components or rituals. That was 30+ years ago though.

Alan McSmith's got 30 years experience. I'm more impressed with the poor camera operator who was just starting his first week!

It's no shock, but it's horrifically destructive and a devastatingly sad state of affairs.
Statutes of limitations means no criminal complaints are possible on 30+ year old crimes, but he's been accused of having sex with 14 year olds when in his 30's, a moral crime without time limitations, and there's good evidence he's also a bold faced liar currently.

What a beautiful time to be alive. To watch the electric vehicle come about and mature over the nest 30 years will be awesome.

First, this case is near 30 years old.
Second, California did seize millions from him.

So, he did business in California, collected royalties in California, and lived in California, and after the fact tries to "move" to Nevada (without a home or address) in an effort to not pay taxes on what he made in California, $13 million of taxes.
In the end, it was found he did do business in California even though he claimed Nevada residency at the time, and he lost the case (contrary to the narrative) and he was charged $1.9 million in back taxes (but not penalties).

This looked like a criminal investigation because it was one.
Making his SS# public, that should be actionable, although it was far less of an issue in the early 90's. I bet that's a big part of his $50k offset.

I doubt steam will be the first company with verifiably active software out there that it still being used past the reasonable lifetime of the licencee.

My prediction is that someone will see a business opportunity in buying up licence enforcement rights and doing what patent trolls do today... threaten to bring hell down on everyone whose licence is over, say, 30 years old unless they pay a relatively small (possibly recurring) amount to relicence. Even genuine licencees would need to produce proof under pressure.

My suggestion to someone enterprising who has too much moral fibre for the above is to somehow patent this as a business method, wait for the practice to become slightly established, then bring righteous justice down in a fiery rain of lawyers.

So basically you're not to blame if you contractually agree to a shitty service and then forget to maintain the conditions? There's a good reason I do my credit business through reputable establishments with reasonable T&C and interest rates rather than Bruce the leg breaker at the local fucking pub... Because Bruce is a cunt and his T&C are ass rape...

I have 55 days interest free on my platinum card and I've not spent a single cent in interest in about 16 years. Mostly cos my wife would kick my ass harder than the bank, but it's a matter of discipline rather than the bank being a pack of pricks. I agreed to the terms, I need to meet them.

There's probably a fair point to be made somewhere in there about usuary rates re: credit cards, but the airline bit is a fucking silly...

Budget airlines offer everything as a pay for after the ticket price service because people want cheap fairs. In some cases, it's actually cheaper to fly today than it was 30 years ago in the 80's... (http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviation/international-air-fares-at-30year-low-20160422-gocr1r.html)

Well, funny that, people don't want to pay for a premium product and they get a shitty one that nickel and dimes them to death to try and keep the margins up (aka "staying in business").

You can look at plenty of markets where cheap, shit products are now the standard because people either won't or can't pay for quality ones. It's the entire reason why many industries outsource to foreign wage slaves and why cheap Chinese shit shows up everywhere as well known and reliable brands go out of business.

Yes, the US certainly has a problem with a lack of oversight on various industries which allows them to get away with a lot, but the customer/end user has to take some responsibility as well.

Fade-outs are (were) done for radio play (when not for artistic reasons), so that songs can overlap or someone can start speaking over the end. Youtube videos have a defined beginning and an end so it makes sense the music should go that way too.

The nice thing about fade-outs is they sometimes hold easter eggs, but mostly I find them annoying. For in-car listening I either make them louder or cut them short or both.

What I took away from all this is that a long version of "Life during wartime" is available sans fade-out, scratching a 30 year itch.

Also made me remember 70s singles which skipped on the last groove of the record - except I dont remember which ones those were...

Your video, Scuba diver 30 year friendship with a fish, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

It's going to take media pundits a while to adjust to this new style. They'd not used to the playground style stuff, because they only ever interviewed slippery spinny politicians in the last 30 years of news. Now they need to get to grips once more with ridiculing what is an obviously childish point of view.

Was the girl who was arrested driving? Due to video quality...unknown. Someone who was passed out was.
The motor was running.

The girl grabbed the bong, evidence, and threw it back in the car....on video....then made furtive moves pretending to both attack and run from the officers. She also, as a minor, refused to give her parents contact info, another reason to arrest and positively identify her to be sure she's not a runaway.

OK, I see, you're splitting hairs....driving while under the influence then....although I've smoked for over 30 years and never passed out cold on just weed so I'm not convinced it was just weed.