Australian University Claims American Blacks Are Being Shot by Racist White Gun Owners

Mad Max (1979) 1

I did a research survey which suggested that Australia was run by armed gangs of gun-toting lunatics. But that may have been just Mad Max.

Racism and guns go together. The conclusion wasn’t too surprising for researchers at Australia’s Monash University and Britain’s Manchester University, which sought to better understand American gun culture.

And who better to understand America’s homicidal gun mania than two foreign universities who think that America is just like the Wild West. I’m surprised they didn’t throw obesity in there somewhere.

“There had already been research showing that … blacks are more likely to be shot, so we thought there must be something happening between the concept of being black and some whites wanting guns,” Monash researcher Kerry O’Brien said.

It makes perfect sense.

White people love guns. Black people are being shot.

It’s clear that they’re being shot by racist white gun owners.

Sure, the actual statistics show that blacks are being shot by blacks, largely as a result of gang violence or violent disputes, but who are the facts to argue with Monash’s finest?

“It is particularly noteworthy that the relationship between symbolic racism and the gun-related outcomes was maintained in the presence of conservative ideologies, political affiliation, opposition to government control and being from a southern state, which are otherwise strong predictors of gun ownership and opposition to gun reform,” said the study, published in the scientific journal PLOS ONE .

Also people who think PLOS ONE is a stupid name and that Monash University should stick to research studies of why Mel Gibson isn’t as popular as he used to be are strong predictors of gun ownership, opposition to gun bans and symbolic gun racism.

“As distant and dispassionate observers growing up in countries where there is 36 times less gun-related deaths — and gun ownership is extremely rare and well-regulated — we couldn’t make sense of why there would be resistance to gun reform in the U.S.,” O’Brien said. “Most of the logic for wanting to have a gun was illogical.”

I don’t think Kerry O’Brien understands what the word “dispassionate” means. Or what the word “reform” means. Or the word “logic”.

  • Veracious_one

    Sure, the actual statistics show that blacks are being shot by blacks, largely as a result of gang violence or violent disputes, but who are the facts to argue with Monash’s finest?
    Since when have leftists liberals paid attention to facts when making assertions…

    • poppakap

      Another trick leftist academics love to pull is the “corrolation equals causation” fallacy. Since too few lay people understand statistics, the lie proceeds unchecked.

      • kikorikid

        The Left is also the Master of “specious” and “spurious”
        argument bolstered by statistical manipulation.

      • frodo

        The researchers specifically say that they are not asserting a causal relationship here:

        “Indeed, in a sub-analysis of the black sample from the ANES panel study, we found that none of the variables reported in models for white participants were significantly related to any of the gun-related outcomes for blacks. Finally, the correlational nature of the study clearly prohibits causal inferences. While a view that racism underpins gun-related attitudes is plausible and supported by evidence on other race-related policy decisions [18], [23], it could be argued that there are other plausible but unmeasured variables that could explain the pattern of relationships we find here.”

        In other words, the question being asked here is not the one the column above says. The researchers were looking to see if there was a connection between rates of gun ownership and “symbolic racism” and found that there was. The “why” question is not addressed here. Nor is the study saying anything like what column says about actual violence. It helps to read the actual text and not cherry pick from the newspapers.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          That’s their quote from the linked story.

          • frodo

            Exactly–which is to say that the authors aren’t engaging in the so-called leftist habit of arguing that correlation is causation.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            “There had already been research showing that … blacks are more likely
            to be shot, so we thought there must be something happening between the
            concept of being black and some whites wanting guns,” Monash researcher
            Kerry O’Brien said.

          • frodo

            Yes, that’s what the *interview* said was the starting point for the research–what they found (as quoted above) was something other than what your headline states they did.
            This shouldn’t be hard to see, nor should it be hard to be even the tiniest bit more nuanced (or fair) in your coverage of this study.

            What they found was not that “American Blacks are being shot by racist white gun owners,” instead what they found was that there was a correlation between measures of “symbolic racism” and gun ownership among white Americans. They are not arguing causation, nor are they making the claims you assert they are. I’m not arguing for the accuracy of the study, btw, simply that if you’re going to report on something, at least report of what that thing actually is.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            What they found was a convoluted way of retaining their original idiotic premise

          • frodo

            Wrong–again! They state that all the study shows is what I’ve quoted above. Sometimes research takes you somewhere other than where you start.

  • v

    You miss the actual stupid point. What they mean to say is that whites keep guns ownership alive for blacks to get them and kill each other, ergo whites kill black because of racism. If that makes sense, then it’s all cleared up. Whites are racists and black are victims of white gun violence. I think the whole world is truning moronic and stupid

    • tagalog

      And just to add on other point to that: firearms manufacturers make more guns than their sales data show will be sold on the legitimate with the idea in mind that in some arcane way the excess firearms will make their way into the black market and be sold at gun shows and then used in shooting sprees. You betcha.

      That tortured reasoning was actually employed in the well-known case of Ileto v. Glock et al., a California lawsuit brought to tag firearms companies (with perceived “deep pockets”) with liability for shooting sprees (after the failure of the strict liability for defective products theory failed to work).

    • frodo

      No, they are saying that there’s a correlation between “symbolic racism” and gun ownership. Nothing more.

  • Clare Spark

    See We have devolved to the point where the most outrageous rumors are taken to be accurate. Mobbish behavior. “Gossip and the gullible.”

  • garyfouse

    Nowhere will you find such stupidity except on a university campus.

    • frodo

      Or here, where people refuse or fail to read the actual study.

  • Omar

    Of course, the universities wouldn’t care if white Zimbabweans were shot by black racist radical ZANU supporters. Or if black African Christians were shot by racist Islamist totalitarianism in Sudan. The double standards live on.

  • Jakareh

    Ironically, not too long ago a (white) Australian was shot in Oklahoma by three black/mixed race teenagers for no reason. Yeah, there’s racist gun violence in America, but it’s being committed by blacks.

  • LDMack

    Well that is because they only receive their news by our liberal news media. What else could they think?

  • ayai

    Well what a well balanced article, no quotes, just an allegation prompting an even more well ropunded series of responses.

    • kikorikid

      It is my understanding that Canada has retracted its own “NO-GUNS”
      laws. I have watched many,many videos of POME’s and Diggers who
      lament giving up their firearms. A significant number of Aussies got
      out the axle grease,tarps, and plastic sheeting, and simply buried
      their firearms. No doubt they will need them against the Jihadis.
      As for our “affinity” for guns? When the boot of tyranny is
      on your chest, put a bullet thru it and see if the tyrant doesn’t
      dance somewhere else. For me to try to explain further
      would be a waste of both our time.

      • UCSPanther

        Some of them. We still have a long battle ahead of us.

      • tagalog

        As Wild Bill Hickock said, a bullet in the guts will usually take the fight out of a person.

  • Jason

    Let me put an Australian point of view here, and explain how guns are viewed here. Not that I disagree with your laws, just a bit of context for you guys.

    In 1996 we suffered a major gun massacre, with 35 killed in Port Arthur by one lunatic gunman. The conservative PM at the time, John Howard, decided to regulate gun ownership, which was very difficult to do. He had to win over the states, and his own coalition (The junior partner, the Nationals, opposed the reform, it would affect farmers, who are their constituents). However, Howard managed it, and gun violence is now almost non existent apart from gang activity, with legislation being considered in parliament to give police extra powers to stop this.

    Australia does not have a gun culture. It is strange to most of us the way America sees guns. Most Aussies dont understand the affinity for the 2nd Amendment. It is therefore natural for an Australian university to take an anti gun stance. Gun control is supported by all sides of politics here, and there is little public support for this to change. Plus, we keep on getting stories about how 3 people were killed wherever, which I hate because I think it’s irrelevant to Australia to learn about that when there are things happening in Australia.

    Personally, I dont really have a problem with the American gun culture. I understand the significance of firearms to your history and culture, and I also realise that regulating American gun owners would be a very difficult task. I think that guns are just one of the things that makes America America. Most people disagree, but then again most people probably dont give it much thought.

    • zoomie

      thank you for your well written perspective. my 2cents worth – gun ownership is the final touchstone of freedom from a tryannical government. we’re just about subjects right now anyway. it’s been quite awhile since i considered myself a citizen.
      over here in kalifornia they put up quite a lot of traffic cameras for “safety”. i got a ticket in the mail for $500 for not making a full stop turning right onto a freeway on ramp when the people going straight had a red light. of course i understand londonistan is much worse. TSA is Big Brother. progress marches on

    • williamdiamon

      This is what happened in Australia,

      “Homicide has decreased by nine percent since 1990 and armed robbery by one-third since 2001, but recorded assaults and sexual assaults have both increased steadily in the past 10 years by over 40 percent and 20 percent respectively.”

      They have reverted to a “might makes right” society. Notice rape has increased 20 percent? Violent assaults 40 percent? It is THE reason to carry. Protection of yourself and loved ones, the innocent and community. Violent assault, home invasions, strong arm robberies. Compare the rates of these crimes before and after. Now that the innocent has only kitchen utensils to defend with as long as the criminal is bigger, or in multiples, there is no more deterrent. Think that’s a good thing?
      England is similar, with a higher violent crime rate than America. Search this yourself.

    • Tanks-a-lot

      Now Aussies have to full out riot to stop muslim predation

    • Nixys

      Hey guess what Aussie, we did not ask for your opinion or your kindness, you are not original or clever, and your socialist media is worthless. Hope the Chinese invade soon. Send my love to Chairman Mao’s effigy.

      • knowshistory

        australia need not worry about chinese invasion. they are being invaded and conquered right now by hordes of muslim criminals invited, supported, and protected by the treasonous australian government, with the full support of their traitorous media and academia. a chinese invasion would be an act of mercy compared to the islamic evil the australians have inflicted on themselves.

    • glpage

      To give you a bit of insight to the American gun culture the Second Amendment of our Constitution was established to protect the right of individuals to own firearms so they could protect themselves from the government. The founders knew that they could not have rebelled against the King and won if they did not have weapons. As one supporter of the Second Amendment said, “A man with a gun is a citizen. A man without a gun is a subject.”

      • tagalog

        Actually, the Second Amendment relates to the militia, whose existence was justified for several reasons: 1. Indian raids were not uncommon; 2. defense of communities from Indian raids, if not carried out by the locals in a local militia unit, would have to be done by army troops from a standing army, something the Founding Fathers thought was associated with tyrannical states; 3. much of what people ate was obtained by hunting. Defense from government was not very high on the Founding Fathers’ minds.

        Although the Second Amendment doesn’t say that the right to keep and bear arms can’t relate to resistance to oppressive government, either.

        • kikorikid

          Well hell no,Mr. Simple, what was on their mind
          was the oppression coming from George III.
          The U.S. Constitution was written so that our
          FUTURE govt would not be oppressive.
          You are presenting a framework of argument
          that will be before the Supreme Court soon.
          It will fail because the Bill of Rights have always
          been construed as INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, not
          the “Collective” rights to bear arms.

        • knowshistory

          you got it exactly backwards. the need for a well regulated militia was used to justify the non-infringement of the right to keep and bear arms. take note that it was the militia that was to be “well regulated”, and the right to keep and bear arms that was to be uninfringed. those who wrote the constitution were a lot more concerned about the danger posed to society by government troops than they were about armed citizens. i suspect that if the founding fathers were able to see the future: americans controlled by the government in the minutest matters, hordes of police on every highway, rounding up hapless citizens and herding them into court where their own testimony is worthless, and police testimony is holy writ. government snoops poring over the personal and business finances of taxpaying citizens, while using those taxes to pay parasites to vote for the worst of two very evil political parties, while invading foreigners are imported, paid, coddled, and enabled, those founding fathers would have endured king george’s minor infringements of their liberty with no further protest. if only they knew exactly what they were founding.

          • tagalog

            Except for the editorializing about the present, that’s what I said, although I disagree about the emphasis the Founding Fathers placed on armed resistance to government oppression.

    • James Edward

      It’s all good Jason until the tyrant (or criminal) knocks on your door.
      You guys have it good being so isolated from the rest of us. No illegal aliens marching in and overwhelming your good graces. No easy smuggling by anyone with two feet.
      Count your blessings.
      We here in America, on the other hand, don’t have the same situation.

      • tagalog

        Australians also have a pretty homogeneous society, unlike the U.S.A.

        • DavidKramer

          Not for long.

        • Ikari

          It helps living on an island continent in the literal middle of fuck nowhere. Mexicans can’t swim that far.

          Meanwhile Australia still does more to secure their borders than the US, while Obama just invites in more crime.

    • UCSPanther

      What Bryant did at Port Arthur was inexcusable, but collectively punishing gun owners for the actions of assorted killers is both unacceptable and unjust.

  • Raymond Hietapakka

    Blacks STEALING guns from white folks, then killing their own kinfolk with them? Darn us white folks for simply owning guns.

    • tagalog

      It’s white folks’s fault for leaving all those guns out for blacks to steal. Blacks should sue for restitution.

  • c w

    Go to stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot and learn the truth of demographics, crime, and colour in America.

  • tagalog

    Australia: the only country on earth where their university professors have names like “Bluie.”

  • williamdiamon

    I am the worlds most interesting kitty. I don’t usually get called a racist, but when I do, it’s because I’ve just won an argument with a liberal.

    Really? Is that the best they can come up with? 100 million gun owners, 12 thousand murders, half of them committed by blacks, but I’m racist? Tell that to my “other race” gun owning wife. You know they have lost the argument when they resort to insults like this.
    It’s bad enough when you have to point out the history, current data and common sense of the Second Amendment to them time and time again. When they reach for outright lies like this I realize it is mental health care they need as sociopathic anti-social behavior can be addressed.

    • tagalog

      It’s easy, when your answer to “What NEED do people have for an AR-15?” is “Meow?” and a flop to let them rub your belly.

  • robert clark

    When the white settlers arrived in australia there were between 500 to 750 thousand aborigines, in 1933 there were only 74,000 and the population at present have not yet reached the 500 thousand number. The same numbers also apply to New Zealand.
    However in South Africa the black population has grown from 750 thousand in 1652 to 45,000,000 at present so who killed all the black people in australia and new zealand? and white south africans are classed as racists.

    • philbest

      Tribal warfare was a constant reality in pre-colonial New Zealand. This, and the extinction of native animal and bird species by over-hunting, ensured low population of the Maori people.

      Connection to the world economy was bound to come one day, but while it is popular on the left to blame evil white colonials for the ills of new diseases and the introduction of guns to Maori tribal warfare, these things would have happened anyway one day. There is no evidence that Maori culture would have emerged into modernity on its own – they had not even invented the wheel by 1700.

      I recommend the book, “When Two Cultures Meet: the New Zealand Experience” by Dr John Robinson.

      Rapid racial intermarriage and the assimilation of Maori into western civilisation was something worth celebrating, but neo-Marxists have turned Maori activism into yet another WMD against western civilisation with their usual tactics of historical revisionism and sowing of false grievances. As usual such people want to have it both ways: the high rate of intermarriage is apparently now a form of deliberate “cultural genocide”. Of course a low rate of intermarriage would be interpreted as evidence of racism.

      One of the pieces of evidence that most arouses the antagonism of neo-Marxists, is a series of speeches given at a Conference at the town of Kohimarama in 1860, in which a large number of Maori tribal chiefs praised the benefits of Christianity, the rule of the British Crown, the rule of law, property rights, etc. A range of quotes are included in Ian Wishart’s book, “The Great Divide”, which is one of a number of books published in recent times that attempts to stem the tide of neo-Marxist historical revisionism in New Zealand.

  • Maluku manis’e

    There’s shootings here almost every second day by muslim gangs in western Sydney. Maybe they should research on that…….na that would be racist.


      Hang ‘em high.

  • EamonnDublin

    Is it not better to simply not report on such stupid statements? I mean, if I said “the world is square-shaped”, would you report it? Just leave these fools to bask in their own bigotry. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.

  • Guest

    Aussies have got to be the most sanctimonious pricks on this planet. Every time I talk to one of them they’re unbearably anti-american. Everyone in Europe condescends to them, and they desperately need American protection for their defense. This causes them to writhe in agony, worshiping their old master the UK while at least comforting themselves by feeling morally superior to “those dreadful Americans.” Aussies are bigger rednecks collectively than the biggest rednecks in the U.S., they stole their land, and what’s worse, they’re descended from convicts and utterly irrelevant on the world stage. And since they banned guns, crime has spiked in their worthless desert island. I think Aussies should basically shut the hell up forever about America is what I think.

  • Nixys

    Aussies have got to be the most sanctimonious pr*cks on this planet.
    Every time I talk to one of them they’re unbearably anti-american.
    Everyone in Europe condescends to them, and they desperately need
    American protection for their defense. This causes them to writhe in
    agony, worshiping their old master the UK while at least comforting
    themselves by feeling morally superior to “those dreadful Americans.”
    Aussies are bigger rednecks collectively than the biggest rednecks in
    the U.S., they stole their land, and what’s worse, they’re descended
    from convicts and utterly irrelevant on the world stage. And since they
    banned guns, crime has spiked in their worthless desert island. I think
    Aussies should basically shut up forever about America is what I

  • frodo

    The headline here is an enormous distortion of a far more modest claim that the paper’s making.

  • philbest

    The difference between the USA and Australia is the gang problem, not the gun problem. If neo-Marxists manage to turn Australia into a country with a gang problem (eg via immigration and a welfarist ghetto culture), a gun deaths problem will follow regardless of well-meaning gun control laws.

    Australia has generally not had a problem with the sort of ghetto culture that has ultimately led to the gang problem in the USA. But give the neo-Marxists time.

    I like to ask the gun control utopians, would gun control fix the problems Italy has with Mafia hits?

    Would banning all Muslims from flying, resolve aircraft-related terrorism? Oh, but this would be unfair on the peaceable, law-abiding majority, and the terrorists would find ways to get around the ban. So what about the peaceable, law-abiding majority of American gun owners, and the gangsters who will find a way to get around the ban?

    The Liberal Mind at work…….

    • James Edward

      You can’t just walk into Australia.

      • philbest

        Excellent point……! And the Australians tend to be very, very serious about stopping “boat people” sailing in too. Illegals that make it by sea or air tend to find themselves cooped up in a detention centre on Nauru Island.

        Again, the USA has a problem with wussy libbewwals who want those kinds of people in, not out.

        • tagalog

          The most frustrating thing about the American liberal argument for illegal immigration is “We’re a nation of immigrants.”

          Yes; so what? How does that translate into “Come on in, whatever way it takes?”

          • philbest

            Yeah, the correct way to sum it up is “we WERE a nation of nation-BUILDING immigrants…..”

            We are now a nation made up partly of “builders”/producers, and partly of parasites, and a high proportion of immigrants are additions to the parasite class.

            The ones we can do with are the ones we would let in anyway if they went about it legally.

    • tagalog

      That’s because aborigines have a background of being civil to one another and to others.

      The toughness of Australians, descended from Britons as they mostly are, is moderated by British civility.

      • philbest

        Another very interesting point. Aborigines do have war and violence in their history (but not to such a bloody extent as some native races) and still do have violence problems, but this has not manifested in an urban gang phenomenon or a gun murder phenomenon.

        NZ Maoris do form urban gangs, but the results are not “Chicago”.

        Come to think of it, Red Indians are not the source of these problems in the USA either.

  • glpage

    The gist of the article is that whites in America own guns because they’re racist. Whites fear blacks and therefore want to arm themselves. Given the left sees racism in anything conservatives do (we’ll ignore the fact that not all gun owners in America are conservative and/or white), I think the conclusions of the researchers are a form of self fulfilling prophecy; they see racism in the USA and they see people in the USA wanting to own guns, there’s got to be a relation. There probably was a bit of statistical mental masturbation to reach their conclusions.

    • frodo

      No, the gist is that whites who have some racist attitudes tend to own guns at a higher rate than others. Causation isn’t being attributed here–it’s specifically excluded.

  • Ikari

    Blacks are generally the ones doing most of the shooting.

    Black on black violence is by far #1. Black on white is a solid #2.

    But of course as an oppressed minority we must excuse the fact they are responsible for over half of all violent crime in the entire nation– thus, the only logical liberal solution is to blame white people.

  • judenjager

    What a crock of liberal bull shyite. Blacks get shot while committing CRIMES. You are 50 times more likely to be raped, robbed or killed by a n*i66er than a human. These are the FBI’s own statistics.