Absolutely love it, otb!

"Freedom is about letting others lead their lives and being responsible for your own choices."

You take out this week's prize for blatant hypocrisy on this forum.

Why...you've just spent many posts attempting to demonise me for having the temerity to use my "freedoms" to home educate my son.

Lol!

It cannot always be about you, Poirot and that is a load of rot.

BTT

Dear O Sung Wu,

Guns will always remain a controversial
issue. One reason is the persistent belief that,
since criminals have guns, law-abiding people
need them for self-protection. Actually, gun-owning
households are much more likely to suffer fatalities
from their own weapons that from those of outsiders.
Studies have found that only a very small percentage
of all slayings in gun-owning households were for
self-protection; the remainder were suicides, homicides,
or accidental deaths, almost all involving family
members, friends, or acquaintances.

Then of course another reason for the wish to own guns
is the belief, deeply held by some people that gun
ownership is an individual right. As we know, for
granting this liberty to the individual, American
society pays the price in the deviance of those who
abuse it.

As far as hunting goes?
I don't have a problem as this activity is regulated and
controlled.

Hi there YUYUTSU...

You've posed an awkward question there, raising the morality of hunting per se ? No I don't consider hunting is immoral, nor do I believe the possession of F/A'S is immoral or unethical either. What I do worry about, is the psychological impact that F/A's can have on 'SOME' individuals ?

Any inquiry I've been involved in, where a F/A is in question, whether legal or illegal, some people get very unsettled or agitated if there's the slightest suggestion it may be seized, or confiscated ? It should be stated herein, just because a copper may exercise 'a power' and seize a F/A doesn't mean the owner has lost it for all time ? The owner need only apply to the Courts to have that F/A returned to him, simple as that ?

No it's not that so much; YUYUTSU, it's as if by removing that weapon, you're removing his entire life's possessions ! And even a perfectly normal, reasonable, and law-abiding individual can become very very aggressive even violent, all over a bloody gun for goodness sake ! And I just don't get it, I really don't ?

Do I believe F/A's can sometimes cause trouble...unquestionably yes ! Should F/A's be banned because of it...absolutely not ! Should F/A's be regulated...it's useful, but not vital....Should F/A users or owners be licenced and carefully probed...Absolutely, without doubt !

My biggest worry has always been, individuals with 'undiagnosed' psychological issues or illnesses ? Issues of 'rage'; issues of 'violent tendencies'; and issues of a 'low frustration tolerance' ? All these Psych. conditions should be made known, to licencing authorities.

I can't possibly recount the number of people I've had to deal with, who've exhibited some or all of these worrying symptoms ? Thankfully only a few, have had access to F/A's, all of which could've become a potentially lethal situation ?

A couple of stories on the psychology of hunters.

I live in rural NSW, used to work for a government agency. One way of getting on-side with land-owners was to empathise with their problems.

1. Visited a property in the Riverina, and the issue of hunters came up. The landholder was deeply critical of pig-shooters who came onto the property without permission. Well, I said, maybe there's a silver lining - at least they get rid of some of the pests. It would be OK if that was all the did! he said. But I keep pigs and they can't tell the difference between feral and domesticated ones. Maybe hard to tell at a distance? I asked. He replied: No excuse - they even shot my prize sow, in the pigsty!

2. Once I hit a pig. It was small, and the 4WD rolled over it, with no damage to the vehicle. I pulled the dead pig off to the side of the road and left it there. A couple of days later I drove past, and was puzzled to see the pig was now on the opposite side the road to where I'd left it. When I got to my destination, a few km further, I commented that the dead pig I'd hit had moved across the road. Oh, said the guy I was talking to, you hit that pig? I saw some shooters photographing themselves posing with it - I assumed they'd shot it and I gave them an earful. We concluded that they had moved the pig so that the background looked more bushy and natural for the photos - the side I'd left it on had structures and levees.

What does it say about hunters? Shooting a pig in a pigsty, and taking selfies with roadkill?

My 'favourite' hunting magazine -http://www.sportingshootermag.com.au/bacon-busters. Nuff said!

o sung wu,

Good Lord man, you would never sleep if you thought about the pyrotechnic possibilities of ordinary pool chemicals, for instance.

Please do not slip into the maudlin catastrophysing that inflicts some older men and makes them into the stereotypical old women of jokes. I am sure that stereotype of older women is rarely the case anyhow, especially where practical country women are concerned.

You should be aware that gun crime (accidents too) has always been very low in Australia and was continuing the downward trend before and after Howard. So the cool $billion from taxpayers' was wasted - unless like Howard you believe it was worth a cool million to get him re-elected. What if Howard had put that money into infrastructure, eg hospital facilities, water storage, or some railway lines?

What about a good clean discussion where the many thousands of very normal, respectable and law-abiding citizens (and duly certified so) are not being put into the same basket as the 'scrotes' who couldn't qualify for a licence and wouldn't be seeking to obey laws anyhow?

Now, just talking about the duly licensed firearms owners, you should be aware of the various character and other tests? You should be aware too that citizens with such impeccable records are the very last people you should be slagging by insinuation.

Not referring to you, but from some of the 'unusual' posts seen on this site, there are some who would never in this lifetime be considered for a firearms licence. Just think though, they very likely possess a drivers licence, which provides the mobility, concealment, anonymity and safe get-away, that are the priorities for anti-social and criminal activities.

If police and legislators really, truly want to reduce and detect crime, what about character tests and lack of criminal record for motor licences? There is good evidence to support such an initiative. For example, when steering wheel locks were made compulsory on cars there was a lasting drop in serious crime and that was outside of the obvious instance of car theft.