Paul,

"7.That personal protection should never be regarded as a genuine reason for owning, possessing or using a firearm".

Having a law that would prosecute an Australian citizen for protecting themselves or others with a firearm from terrorists or murderers is support for terrorists and murderers.

You can understand plain English can you not Paul?
Principle 7. (above) is, as you said, in plain English; can you not understand what it says?

When is the vigil for the 120 dead in Baghdad going to be held, or is there no political mileage in that?
If I am interpreting it wrongly, perhaps you or Foxy(who supports Principle 7,)or Suse can set me right.

@ Paul1405, Monday, 4 July 2016 8:08:00 PM

Your depiction of Joe (Loudmouth), who is one of OLO's respected researchers of indigenous history, of "Aboriginal (sic) bashing.. something (he) is expert at", is particularly outrageous and disgraceful, even for you.

No-one who is familiar with Joe (Loudmouth's) site, articles and posting record could ever believe that. The reverse is true.

Is Mise, you are one sick human being, now you mock the dead in Baghdad where the death toll is over 200 innocence's from senseless violence. I don't know what to say to you. I hope its just senility on your part which leads you to this disgusting insensitivity.
You care nothing for those people in Baghdad, or anyone else who is needlessly slaughtered. Maybe your war service, and the killing of ordinary defenseless people you experienced has hardened you this way. Driven you to love violence, your perverse fascination with guns and killing I don't know.

Thank you for your kind words, OTB :) One's best friends tell you like it is - if they are concerned for you, then they don't lie or pussy-foot around or ignore your shortcomings. That's always been how I saw any relationship to the Aboriginal Cause.

BTT: Indirectly, Paul, there are similarities between Green supporters and Islamist terrorists, although of course nobody is suggesting that Greens = Terrorism.

From a Marxist point of view - of terrorists having some class basis - is it possible that the terrorists are often young, aspiring would-be professionals, frustrated at their chances of promotion or even employment, and opportunist in their sudden allegiance to Islam ?

Young, righteous, relatively well-educated but not valued fully by society in their own eyes, and so resentful of the status quo - do you reckon there may be any Green supporters who fit that description ?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Greens could become terrorists, simply that they may have a rather forgiving, indulgent attitude to terrorism - after all, it's anti-American, and therefore .... sort of .... well, not totally bad.

What do you reckon, Paul ?

Cheers,

Joe

Paul,

I don't mock the 200 dead, I merely point out the politically motivated selective mourning that goes on; don't these 200 Muslims (in all probability) deserve the same reverence as the 49 in Orlando or the 35 at Port Arthur?
I'll ask again, when is a vigil to be held?

Bye the way, does Principle 7 mean what it says?

Under Green Law would a mother be prosecuted for using a gun to save herself from a wild dog?

That's how it reads to me "Self defence is never a reason....for using a gun." (Greens' Law, LOL!!).

Paul,

I love this one:

"6. Rural owners of licensed firearms should limit their use of firearms to legitimate farm purposes and minimise disturbance of people on neighbouring properties."

Out there in the bush, miles from the nearest neighbour, the man
on the land fires his .22 rifle and the thunderous report reverberates through the land, but doesn't disturb the sheep grazing a few hundred metres away.

Who ever wrote this piece of Green Law should get out of the inner city a bit.