IS MISE & PAUL1405...

Without question 'unrestricted F/A laws' would prove catastrophic for our society in a number of ways ? Firstly, back in the late fifties and early sixties there were very little controls placed on F/A's. Though in that era we saw the inexorable emergence of Drugs and all they encompass.

Moving through the sixties into the seventies and eighties, were saw the burgeoning growth of organised crime, essentially centred on major drug importation (around that of S.233b of the Customs Act). Many of those organised criminal groups were from abroad, as well as being significantly connected to 'heavy' criminal elements here.

Leonard Arthur MACPHERSON aka MURRAY and ors were most notable, and substantially involved in all manner of drugs, protection, and guns. Particularly, they were closely linked to mafia figures, both from the Reno, Las Vegas and Atlantic City mobs ! If it wasn't for the sharp eyes of a leading Sydney Daily Newspaper, these bastards would have entered Oz, without our knowledge ! The AFP didn't exist in those days, only Compol.

And of course, in the last twenty five or so years, we've got repeated incidences of terrorism, drug importation, organised crime, and much much 'worse'...the darkest, most formidable enemy of all ? A *very weak, politically correct, 'dumb' judiciary* ! A judiciary who seemingly is either too scared, or too 'witless', to understand that meaningful gaol sentences MUST be given for all serious crimes !

And at the end of it all, we have a very disillusioned police 'service', often too nervous to 'come on hard' lest they upset some ridiculous magistrate or magistrate acting in the capacity of Coroner. With possible findings of excessive force etc etc. All this despite the public loudly clamouring for tougher action on ALL crimes of violence !

If F/A laws were relaxed, there'd be significant more F/A incidences recorded, particularly in western and south western Sydney ! I would not advocate tougher F/A laws. Only much tougher vetting and screening of applicants ? Singularly, that of a more comprehensive psychiatric assessment of applicants, is all !

Paul,

Give over, you're just not up to it.
If all that you can point to is a claim, which you dispute, and call it a lie then that's pretty weak.

On the other hand I can prove that the lies that the Greens are guilty of are lies. The proof is in the public record and the lie about Monis is among their policy statements, just go to the site and bring up Policies.
Therefore it is not a press release and even if it were that is no excuse for lying.

o sung wu,

I have never called for unrestricted firearms ownership that is merely Paul's over active imagination.

I remember the days when the police could get on with the job.
I knew 'Bull' Calmann and I'd met 'Bumper' Farrell; a good friend of mine was diverted from his family enterprise of a life of petty crime by Bumper. My mate lived in Darlington and one night as he was "giv'n a bita lip t'th coppers" he ran around a corner and straight into Bumper.
That worthy lifted his feet and trapped the mate by the toes and proceeded to read 'the riot act', pointing out to his captive the errors of his ways and emphasizing each point with a jab of his finger into the mate's chest.

He said the next day that he was black and blue and thought to himself that if Bumper could do that with his index finger, what the hell could he do if he got serious.

So the mate changed his ways and lived a crime free (well almost) life thereafter

Have a deko at this and follow the links, doesn't get much better.
http://www.nramuseum.org/guns.aspx

G'day there IS MISE...

Frank FARRELL was my boss for awhile, and as long as you followed League he was happy, moreover his beloved Newtown, all the better ! If you were silly enough to pursue the 'round' ball game, or worse, Aussie Rules, you'd be working cells for a month ! You may already know, he played against the Poms and Kiwis too, in reality he could've had as much success as a top (test) League player as he was a famous copper !

He had the reputation of being very fair with the troops too, and would always back you, provided your sins were of the more harmless or innocent kind, not the deliberate (corrupt) style. If he found out you'd lied to him, well look out ! Nevertheless he was a good bloke, and thoroughly devoted to his family and his dear missus (Phyllis), and as far as I know lived at the same address for centuries ?

Many thanks for that most interesting link you kindly sent me, I really appreciate it ! The NRA I think, are the most influential, the most powerful organisation of it's type in the world ? With many direct links to Washington ? In fact I've heard it said, there are some members of both the House and the Senate who are only there, because of the immense influence of the NRA. As well as their many prominent and distinguished players who are still currently active, in DC. Very interesting indeed ! Shouldn't there be a clear line of delineation, between politicians and corporate America ? How ever can they possibly believe, they can corporatize a whole National government ?

Is Mise, good to see you have finally moved away from the 'Pakistani Model' and no longer support "unrestricted firearms ownership" highly commendable on your part.
On this issue as on many others the voters of NSW will shorty be given the opportunity to cast a vote for the individual/party they believe best articulates their feelings. If the 2011 result is any indication the Greens are a clear choice over The Shooters Party. In the Legislative Assembly vote the Greens out polled the Shooters by a factor of 182 to 1, that is right, for ever vote cast for The Shooters Party 182 Legislative Assembly votes were cast for The Greens. I would say. when it comes to policy its a no contest!

Official result; 2011 NSW State Election Legislative Assembly.

Shooters 2,346 votes.
Greens 427,144 votes.

Paul,

As the only evidence that you have for my alleged support for the 'Pakistani Model' is your own erroneous suppositions then I must assume that you are modeling your actions on those of David Shoebridge.

The number of votes that the Greens get is merely an indication of how easy it is to mislead some Australian voters.

Surely the hypocrisy of Shoebridge voting for hunting in National Parks will not go unremarked among some of them.