Continued

The offence of raping elderly females is almost exclusively committed by black males. Nobody knows why. Almost all serial killers are white. Nobody knows why.

Secondly, your claim that no one is now getting massacred ignored the fact that 14 people were burned to death at Childers, Qld, and the weapon involved was a box of matches.

Lastly, I have a book on the phenomenon of student school killings in my own library and despite the fact that the author of that book claimed that popular culture had no part in the new phenomenon of kids killing kids, it is clear from reading the book that it did. One noted US criminologist (Bill Reisman) who specialises in violent juvenile behaviour has examined the bedrooms of boys who have committed school massacres. He notes the violent posters, the violent music, the violent movies, and the violent computer games where shooting people down for fun is the aim of the game. He said "When we go into the rooms after the fact, it's all there. The signs are all there."

Now, I am not against divorce, and I do not wish to see the entertainment industry return to the days when Shakespeare's VENUS AND ADONIS, or even scientific works like PSYCHOANALYSIS and CURRENT PSYCHOLOGY were banned. But what I am saying, is that it is clear that if people wish to create a safe society, then always blaming guns while giving our "artistic" class the a free pass to create media promoting drug abuse, gang membership, revenge behaviour, the idea that Real Men are killers, or extoll the joys of raping your mother or bashing your skanky ho girlfriend, it going to achieve nothing.

Just as in Britain, violence in Australian society is going to rise long after all guns are banned because our media industry is creating a product which is harming our society. Like the tobacco industry before them, they know what they are doing but they are very successful in denying it and shifting the blame. And the "artistic" class who are the industries employees support them.

Dear LEGO,

Thank you for your considered reply.

You wrote;

“Firearm laws are a litmus paper test on how violent any society is. Violent societies need strong gun laws, while peaceful societies do not. English society was once so violence free, that much to the amazement of every other police force in the world, English police alone had no need to carry handguns. That has now changed and English beat police are now armed, despite the fact that all privately owned handguns are banned.”

I am afraid you will find this is not correct.

“The issue of routine arming in Great Britain was raised after the 1952 Derek Bentley case, in which a Constable was shot dead and a Sergeant severely wounded, and again after the 1966 Massacre of Braybrook Street, in which three London officers were killed. As a result, around 17% of officers in London became authorised to carry firearms. After the deaths of a number of members of the public in the 1980s fired upon by police, control was considerably tightened, many officers had their firearm authorisation revoked, and training for the remainder was greatly improved. As of 2005, around 7% of officers in London are trained in the use of firearms. Firearms are also only issued to an officer under strict guidelines.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_use_of_firearms_in_the_United_Kingdom

Further surveys done of the police membership consistently show over 80% are against the routine arming of police officers.

Gun related offenses have declined for the seventh year in a row in the UK.

re: "Emperor Julian"

no elephant here, champ....but there might be *several* in *your* lounge-room, eh?

@EmperorJulian, Saturday, 21 June 2014 12:17:46 PM

With respect, you demonstrate your ignorance of the relevant regulations now and before the John Howard inspired bureaucratic monstrosity that wastes police time monitoring law-abiding citizens.

You just don't get it, you cannot separate the good guys from the bad guys. You have no idea of assessing risk and risk management, and misunderstand cause and effect. That comes as no surprise because the highly secretive few persons behind 'gun control' activism in Australia do the same. Ignorance that refuses to examine facts is bigotry.

In the case of 'that' cloak and dagger secretive 'gun control', the site owner/s spruik for public donations and support, but they refuse to identify themselves, refuse membership and in fact refuse to divulge any of the details that a legitimate person and political lobby groups would volunteer without thought.

The Greens, in particular the Trotskyist NSW Greens' Watermelon faction - a strident, barking-mad rump of the lunar Greens - appear to have links with 'that' secret squirrel gun control outfit (probably one or two people who are themselves public servants!). The Greens are also secretive about their links with them. To top it off, the individual/s who are behind 'gun control' are alleged to receive sponsorship and travel from a shady undeclared overseas source, a billionaire currency dealer who it is said once nearly sent the Bank of England broke (nothing said about the small mums and dads investors who would have been bankrupted).

These are the deliberately obscure influences behind 'gun control'. It is all secret squirrel, ignorance and skewed factoids.

My concern as always is that government be transparent in its decisions, measure results and demonstrate that it is getting value for the money it has compulsorily taken from Taxpayers. While 'gun control' is any easy mantra to score populism in the media and particularly with the ABC(?!), it fails any independent, objective test.

John Howard's 'gun control' was a $2billion mistake. Totally ineffective and misleading, it would fail the lax advertising standards that apply to those hard sell, snake-oil, cosmetics advertisers on late night TV.

LEGO,
Correction. Most serial killers are not White, in terms of bodycount there are only three Whites in the top ten worldwide and in the U.S.A the majority of serial killers are actually Black.
Serial killing is defined as three or more victims with cooling off periods in between, so the co-relation between race and crime is again borne out in statistics.
The image of the serial killer as exclusively a heterosexual, middle class White male is a fictional creation of Liberal Jewish film-makers, they invert reality to suit their own beliefs when they create TV shows like Law and order:SVU.
The serial killer is most likely to be non White, homosexual or both.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8gYc5fvMQ0

And still the elephant remains stubbornly in place: ten thousand Americans shot dead annually by other Americans and the Australian gun lobby hopes to use a Senate presence to wedge a rollback of the Howard gun law reforms by an avalanche of repeated complaints and conspiracy theories without producing a shred of evidence that any Americans could have shot their countrymen dead without using a gun or that any Australians could be shot dead without using a gun.

The standard BS about "leftists", "populism", the ABC, the Greens, blacks, and blah blah blah is trotted out as expected of those who are driven to try to hide the elephant, effectively defining their type in doing so.

And tellingly, nary a one of them comes up with any suggestion of a legal framework to adopt to replace the laws that have been keeping us much safer for the past 18 years than before Howard stood up to the gun freaks.

But still not safe enough. The Howard reforms might well be reviewed to make them tough enough and punitive enough to shut off the residual gun killings, and if the freaks fan up a head of steam for their deadly project a public discussion of how to do so might be the best response. I even have some ideas of my own, for another thread not this one.