Wobbles writes

'She may be a magnet for anybody with a complaint but in truth there's absolutely nothing she can do to change anything, except maybe her own bank balance'

at least she is not deluded enough to think she can change the climate by taxing people.

She does have one big plus going for her, she's not a Green.

Over on the Ethics Forum there's a bloke having a go at the Greens and he seems to support Hanson as well.
Quote:
Could someone, David Shoebridge perhaps, explain the reasoning behind this :
[from the NSW Greens' policy document]

(Quote):
16.3 Mental or physical fitness - reliable evidence of a mental or
physical condition which would render the applicant
unsuitable for owning, possessing or using a firearm;

If a person was judged to be mentally unfit to posses or use a firearm wouldn't that person be unfit to have access to matches?
Should such a person not be in protective custody?
For the good of society and 'if it only saves one life'.

Physical conditions are a bit of a problem, perhaps David could elucidate.
Not being able to walk perhaps?
Being wheel-chair bound?
Being quadraplegic?
I can think of no good reason why a quadraplegic should be denied owning a gun.

Just another Greens' ill thought out bit of tree hugging feely-goody (unquote)
Just like their having a go at Hanson, not really thought out, I wonder does this apply to their other policies as well?

Well it is a democracy anybody can run for Parliament as we are constantly reminded.

I am not sure why Hanson causes such a fuss, she is an Australian citizen with a view, some will agree, some won't, people vote on what people stand for. If you don't like Hanson or the Greens don't vote for them.

Regardless of what one thinks of Hanson, she should not be hounded by the media, by major parties scared of losing a few votes and be prosecuted for made up crimes. That was a travesty in a fair minded democracy. Like all politicians however she should be able to argue in support of her policies and be prepared to cop some flak in the spirit of freedom of speech.

However, Is Mise your post above about the Greens is pretty straightforward. It is reasonable I would think to argue a person who is unstable should not have access to a gun. It is not about people with physical disabilities in wheelchairs being denied access to guns or matches.

This is just anti-Green propaganda with little merit evidenced by distorting the intention to pander to the faux morally outraged.

Yup, "physical" incapacity should not impede firearm ownership, but anybody who has a problem with firearms licensing regulations denying mentally-unstable people from ownership really needs to get their own head checked.

Now CARS on the other hand WOULD warrant both mental and physical capacity, as the number of incapacities that might result in the driver killing someone are drastically increased (a gun only harms someone if it discharges (someone pulls the trigger) and pointed at something it shouldn't, a car can kill someone by simply not paying attention while driving).

Simply put, any dangerous device that warrants licensing requirements, should obviously be discriminatory to those who, for any reason, would be judged incapable of operating it safely.

I am not sure why Hanson causes such a fuss, she is an Australian citizen with a view, some will agree, some won't,
Pelican,
The reason is so transparent that every leftie & because the majority of people in all media & public service are lefties her pragmatic approach scares whatever wits lefties have out of them. I bet she can ran a chook raffle but I'm not so sure about most lefties could.

Is Mise, paranoid schizophrenics are not criminals and so do not need to be in protective custody, unless they have done something nasty of course. Many I have known smoke, so yes, they do have access to matches.

Would you seriously think that someone with cerebral palsy or similar should be allowed to own a firearm? They aren't allowed to drive without doctors recommendations, so gun ownership should be more lax than driver licences?

I disagree.

If you can't aim it, you can't own it.