I can't say what I wanted to really say or I'd be banned. But it goes a long the lines of "while he's F.........g er up the___________"

Get it now?

Are you people that stupid?
I think you need to get out in the "real" Australian world and get a clue, FFS!

Ah, now all is clear Rawmusturd.

Your modesty prevented you from saying what you normally do.

Fair enough.

Very understandable, considering.

Suzeonline, no, you have it wrong there I'm afraid.

Rawmusturd wrote, "some thug checks for her prostate gland with his third leg."

Now, I could be wrong, given Rawmusturds slipshod writing, but I think he might be a fan of the Rolf Harris song, Jake the Peg, the 'raunchy' version.

The man with three legs song.

Now, when Rolf sings it, it is an innocent silly song, albeit open to imagination, but I suspect when used by Rawmusturd, it refers clearly to the 'male appendage', not the doctors testing probing finger.

I think, in Rawmusturd parlance, he is referring to the 'back bum' rather than the 'front bum'.

Some chaps have difficulty understanding the different roles of these 'parts', and describe all within their limited framework of understanding, perhaps from suffering an 'institutional' experience at some time, where their humanity is removed from them, and replaced with a, well, for want of a better image, a bestial approach to life and living.

Time to put all behind us I think, now we know the misfortune that has befallen Rawmusturd.

It is probably not his fault, after all.

This discussion is beginning to look like an envelope without any address on it.

In an attempt to try and get back on topic - the following website may help:

http://usliberals.about.com/od/patriotactcivilrights/i/ProConGunLaws.htm

Pros and Cons of Gun Ownership & Use Laws for Individuals.
by D. White.

Yabby,

This thread was directed at policy in Australia, using the 'lost cause' of the US 'gun culture' as an example.

What I do understand is that like Switzerland and NZ it is exceptionally unusual for a private, licensed person in Australia or NZ to commit any offence with a gun. In fact the rifle and gun clubs made the boast for years that none of their members ever committed a firearm related offence.

Almost invariably any instance of gun crime involves criminals and drugs and it represents only the tip, a small part of an overall pattern of criminal behaviour and violence. [Other deaths are as stated earlier, from police use of their service pistols and mainly involving mentally ill persons.]

All should understand that gun control regulations only affect the law-abiding person who obtains a licence. The strong control lies in the licensing of the person, the rest are weak bureaucratic controls, superficially impressive but practically useless and a waste of police resources. However, no person with criminal intent will be stopped or even seriously impeded by the gun regulations.

After years, there is no evidence whatsoever that John Howard's redundant gun regulations (licensing was already in place), gun registry or gun buy-back produced any discernible positive result. That was a billion dollars plus that could have gone to another worthwhile purpose.

Weapons Branch and local station police are exasperated by having to maintain extensive computer records on ordinary citizens, being required to update a useless white elephant gun registry (criminals do not register their guns) and being required to conduct random inspections in the homes of respectable, law-abiding, licensed firearms owners. Police would prefer to be collaring criminals.

Yabby, I don't reckon you have a clue what is 'wrong' with US society that violence and criminal behaviour are so entrenched, but then again I don't know either, or even if the 'stats' support the stereotypes some peddle. What I do believe in however is policy based on facts and evidence and that is not what is being put forward here, not by a long shot.

Cornflower is worried that any tightened gun laws in this country will only target "...the homes of respectable, law-abiding, licensed firearms owners."

Well Cornflower, that may well be true, right up until the time that 'respectable' gun owner gets really upset by someone else and decides to reach for the quickest, most comfortable method he has for solving that problem.
At the end of the day, gun owners don't buy a gun because they are pacifists. They buy them to kill animals or to pretend to 'kill' targets.

How many times have we heard of guys who owned their gun deciding to shoot the girlfriend, wife and/or kids because she had left him or had an affair or similar reason?

Are you suggesting that the only gun owners who kill others are all mentally unbalanced?
That's the oldest murder defense in the book!

Wouldn't we then have secure mental health facilities holding a lot more 'mentally ill' murderers?

No, of course not.

There is no place for guns in private homes in Australia, only for the military, law enforcement or farming use.

We can't do much about criminals and the black market etc, but we can do something about the other unnecessary guns.

Otherwise, we WILL end up like the trigger happy USA.

*However, no person with criminal intent will be stopped or even seriously impeded by the gun regulations.*

I'd have to disagree there, Cornflower. You are correct in terms
of hardened criminals, not so for petty crime, which is commonly
committed by drug addicts, wanting another fix.

The latter rely on resources that are easily available to them.

I'd be rather suprised if the police supported the deregulation
of guns, for of course they would be the first casualties.

The nature of drugs today, has alot to do with violence etc.
When people use dope, they are quite placid, usually smiling,
its not a problem. Even on heroin they are quite placid, but will
do anything for another fix.

But these days there is alot more speed and particularly Ice around.
Speed makes them think that they are Tarzan and Ice fries their
brains to the point where it sometimes takes half a dozen security
guys to wrestle them down. I know of cases of nurses who have
quit, because they were sick of being attacked by patients on
drugs, in emergency wards.

Alcohol too, does its share of damage. Some turn violent on it,
some don't, it seems to vary.

The billion spent by Howard, removing half a million guns, is neither
here nor there. We spend over a hundred billion $ a year, just
on social welfare, the gun buyback was over 10 years ago.

The bloke in America who shot these people recently, had to stop
to reload after 33 bullets. A woman overpowered him. Even Americans
are realising that if such large magazines were not allowed, less
people might have been shot. Americans it seems, will simply take
even more pain, before they learn.