With the announcement of the new firearms amnesty, it's now official that the Howard Gun Laws failed.

The Government admits that there are 260,000 unregistered and illegal firearms in the community; an admission of failure if ever there was one.
Further, the Minister says that criminals are not likely to hand in their guns, so it would appear that the amnesty is not aimed at the criminal element of society; one wonders what the Government plans for the criminals who have illegal firearms, probably some tougher gun laws that won't affect them at all.

When you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns.

Oh lordy lordy, do we really have to do this again?

Howard's laws were a brilliant success eliminating mass shootings in this country which was exactly what they were designed to do.

The latest amnesty is an attempt to reduce the number of firearms illegally held in the community. These are the ones ending up in the hands of criminals and terrorists. Why on earth wouldn't you two old codgers support it?

In fact every one that is returned during this amnesty will have a crim on the other end of it as it is a criminal offense to hold weapons without proper licences. These are blokes who your lot will call law abiding gun owners who are just showing a bit of civil disobedience. Rubbish. They are putting the rest of the community in danger as most of these weapons will not be held in gun safes and thus easy pickings for thieves.

So ultimately this is an acknowledgment there are still people out there selfishly flouting the law. Time to put aside your NRA membership and do the right thing.

"So ultimately this is an acknowledgment there are still people out there selfishly flouting the law"

Precisely, and that shews that the laws, designed to "make Australia safe" have failed; it's over twenty years, long enough that there should be no more drive by shootings (failure), no criminals carrying guns (failure), no terrorists able to get their hands on illegal pistols (failure) no illegally manufactured guns (failure).

While our streets should be weapon-free, the fact that criminals know that the people in the houses they break into are helpless and cannot defend themselves, does more damage than any (regrettable) weapon-stealing. While only a small minority would actually choose to have weapon(s) on their property, what's important is for criminals to BELIEVE that they can be opposed and even killed.

For that, it must be legal to have weapons in your own home/farm/business and for the owners to use them to defend themselves, their families and their property. Perhaps some GPS device should be attached to weapons, to alert police if a weapon is ever removed from its registered property.

Dear Is Mise,

Stop being so idiotic. The laws were a reaction to the Port Arthur massacre and designed to stop random shootings of that kind.

To do what you want we would have to have laws like Japan where hand guns are completely banned and hunters are strictly monitored even down to each individual piece of ammunition. There the police force of the entire country are unlikely to fire more than half a dozen rounds in a year.

So if you really want to stop 'drive by shootings', 'criminals carrying guns', 'terrorists using illegal pistols' and 'illegally manufactured guns' then the path is very clear, we need to enact laws that emulate those of Japan.

But these are not real concerns of yours at all are they. You instead are another second amendment wannabee seeking to dilute laws which are held in high regard by the majority of Australians. Your motives are selfish and base.

Shame on you.

What we need, Steele, are tough laws, such as a mandatory 20 years for using a firearm in a robbery, plus another 5 years if it is in working order and an additional 10 if it is loaded, add on the penalty for robbery and only the latter subject to parole.
Murder in the course of a robbery, then the death penalty.

"Stop being so idiotic. The laws were a reaction to the Port Arthur massacre and designed to stop random shootings of that kind."

Which they did not do, the Lindt Cafe hostage-taking and siege was a good example, had it not been for brave men, with guns, then there is every possibility that a massacre would have occurred.

Failure!!

The laws have been trumpeted as "making Australia a safer place".

There is firearms regulation at one end, and at the other, the political swamp infested by the 'gun control' crocs. 'Gun control' is a recent thing and is the creature of a number of billionaires and hugely wealthy funds that just happen to be very involved in secretive, closed-door manipulation of politics.

Especially billionaire currency dealer, George Soros, who is constantly interfering in the domestic politics of the US and other countries through his Orwellian 'Open Society' units that spawn and fund leftist activism. Universities are always crying out for grants and Soros gets his leg in by installing his own funded 'research' and researchers.

Soros investments have been in firearms manufacturing and in ammunition. -While his 'Open Society' spruiked for the 'gun control' that demands the complete disarming of lawful legal, licensed citizens of Western Democracies. This is the Soros the leftists cozy up to and who is heavily involved in the 'gun control'. Remember it is NOT aimed at good effective gun regulation, but at bans and compulsory confiscations, to disarm licensed civilians exclusively and in Western democracies,

"George Soros' offshore finances revealed in Panama Papers"
http://www.aol.com/article/2016/05/17/george-soros-panama-papers-hillary-clinton/21379016/

"HAS HE PAID HIS TAXES YET? George Soros Had Until 2017 To Pay $7 Billion In Taxes After Avoiding IRS!"
http://americanlookout.com/rms-flashback-george-soros-owed-7billion/

"DC Leak Exposes Top Clinton Donor George Soros Manipulating Elections
Billionaire investor buys access to high-powered Democrats"
http://observer.com/2016/08/dc-leak-exposes-top-clinton-donor-george-soros-manipulating-elections/

"George Soros Fails To Clear His Name Of Insider Trading In France"
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/george-soros-insider-trading-conviction-2011-10?r=US&IR=T

Now, might anyone, SteeleRedux postures as the forum 'expert'(sic), be aware of any links between the 'gun control' activists in Australia - they are very limited in number but somehow get the media's attention, especially the ABC (how about that!) - and any political party, say in NSW for a start?

contd..

The only strong control where firearms are concerned is the licence. All of the other bureaucratic paper-pushing weakens the strong control and wastes police resources looking over the shoulders of known, checked and certified reliable and reputable citizens.

Police do not want to be polishing chairs doing that. Police took up the job to collar criminals, not to hound and risk destroying the good relations that exist with respectable, law-abiding citizens. Goodwill that takes years of good, solid police work to build up.

SteeleRedux Quote "Howard's laws were a brilliant success eliminating mass shootings in this country which was exactly what they were designed to do."

That statement is rubbish, how can you say that it was successful at eliminating mass shootings when the future can't be predicted so for all you know there would have been no more mass shootings whether the guns were taken or not.

mhaze Quote "When you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns."

Wrong When you outlaw guns, only the outlaws and the Government (police army etc) will have guns.

The Lindt cafe score was
IS :1 . Police :1.

Compare that with Chicago which knows how to stop burglary.

"The city has logged more than 700 homicides this year, more than any other major U.S. city. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel recently announced the city would hire about 1,000 new people to work in the police department."

"These officers will be assigned directly to the streets of our communities," Emanuel says. "To work with residents in partnership to confront gun violence."

nicknamenick,

Soros and others would love you, reducing as you do those deep social problems and gang membership with drug use to 'gun control'.

Not only doesn't 'gun control' stop or deter illegal possession and of course illegal use, but it is a blind to prevent the rather obvious and very serious problems of black ghettos ever surfacing.

Obama also came to support 'gun control'. After a presidency that promised so much and delivered so little for blacks.

With so many 'useful idiots' abroad there is no wonder there are so many spreading behinds polishing Senate seats, with their owners supremely confident that a bit of 'class war', 'gun culture' and other chaff will keep the 'Useful Idiots' busy.

The move by the Turnbull government to call a second Commonwealth gun amnesty should be applauded. The first amnesty 20 years ago, was in response to the horrific Port Arthur massacre. At the time John Howard was commended by the vast majority of the community for the good sense he showed, The Howard amnesty was an outstanding success, resulting in some 800,000 illegal firearms being removed from the community,

The selfish minority of people, people like Is Mise, who are motivated by their desire to play with guns without restriction, or who are politically motivated like Leoj, seeking to form private citizens militia. will be bemoaning this positive move. After 20 years, anything that tackles the 260,000 illegal firearms in the community today has to be commended.

Those criminally holding illegal guns, have been put on notice, given 3 months to cough up. with no questions asked, or face the harsh new penalties, fines of up to $280,000, or up to 14 years' jail. CAN'T BE FAIRER THAN THAT!

Dear Is Mise,

Bull dust. Imagine Monis with an Uzi or an AR-15 with a drum magazine like the one used by the theatre shooter in Aurora instead of the 50 year old 4 shot shotgun he used. Lack of accessibility to high powered modern weaponry was likely a significant factor in reducing the number of lives possibly lost and to think otherwise is insane.

Tough sentencing laws exist in the US with little noticeable impact on shooting death statistics.

No mate, if you really cared about the list of things you flagged you would be advocating for Japanese style gun laws. But you don't and you won't because this is far more about you and your 'rights' than caring what happens to others, including our law enforcement personnel.

I say it again. Shame sir shame.

leoj
it weren't me what said 'gun control' it were da big cop
Your last sentence is way out , ya bin on grass man?

Paul,

"The Howard amnesty was an outstanding success, resulting in some 800,000 illegal firearms being removed from the community"

That is a typical Greens' misleading statement; the guns removed from the community were legally owned firearms, that's why the Government paid millions of dollars for them in compensation.

" The selfish minority of people, people like Is Mise, who are motivated by their desire to play with guns without restriction"

Not true, I would welcome evidence-based Uniform National Gun Laws, the which we don't have; the laws are neither evidence-based nor uniform.

A lot of the law is emotion based, such as the reclassification of lever action shotguns, these guns were around in 1996 and had been for a hundred years, none have ever been reported used in crime.
Their reclassification is an example of emotion based lawmaking and an admission that for twenty years the Government was not aware of any problem, 'cause none existed.

What we really need is a permanent amnesty.

Steele.

"Bull dust. Imagine Monis with an Uzi or an AR-15 with a drum magazine like the one used by the theatre shooter in Aurora instead of the 50 year old 4 shot shotgun he used. Lack of accessibility to high powered modern weaponry was likely a significant factor in reducing the number of lives possibly lost and to think otherwise is insane"

Monis had a pump action shotgun that could have its magazine replenished after each shot was fired therefore he could always have had the capacity of the magazine in reserve unless he fired repeatedly.
A simple double barrel, hammerless (Category A) ejector shotgun would also have served his purpose and could have kept up a rate of fire sufficient to kill all the hostages.

High powered modern firearms are readily available (Category B) as are 100 year old designs that have high rates of fire.
Semi-automatic high powered rifles are Category D. and are restricted, even those semi-autos that can be beaten for rate of fire by some bolt action (Cat B) rifles.

As I said, what we want are evidenced based laws.

Leoj is right about one thing. The foreign attempts at meddling in Australian domestic politics. The powerful American lobby group, the extreme right, National Rifle Association; is closely associated with the so called Liberal Democratic Senator, David Leyonhjelm. Now who are the useful idiots?

Issy, correct me if you feel I am understating. The John Howard gun amnesty which resulted in 800,000 illegal firearms being surrendered most likely saved a minimum of 100 innocent Australian lives, men women and children. If you believe more lives were saved feel free to say so. Of course if the selfish gun lobby had their way, no lives would be saved, quite to the contrary, and the carnage would have continued on the streets unabated.
I know you will agree with me that the latest development will go a long way in blunting the Dodge City mentality of the gun lobby, as they call for "guns for all". Leoj has rightly pointed out the sinister undertones of the likes of the American National Rifle Association providing financial support to gun groups within Australia. It is well known that Senator David Leyonhjelm is in lock step with that particular far right foreign gun lobby mob as they try to influence Australian domestic politics on the subject.

" The John Howard gun amnesty which resulted in 800,000 illegal firearms being surrendered ....."

Typical Green, keep repeating a lie and someone, somewhere will eventually believe that it is the truth.

The Minister, this morn, on TV said a couple of howlers, "All firearms in Australia must be registered".

Utter misleading bull, there are any amount of guns that are not required to be registered and anyone can own one; there are even guns out there that are not recognized as firearms at all.

Paul1405 Quote "The John Howard gun amnesty which resulted in 800,000 illegal firearms being surrendered most likely saved a minimum of 100 innocent Australian lives, men women and children."

You have absolutely no concrete evidence to prove that statement,also if someone is absolutely intent on killing someone and have no gun they will just use another method.

In 2017 the problem is Islamic . The PLO used to seize planes then knives were used for 9 /11 hijacked planes . In UK, terrorists still use knives . But in Chicago etc the Yanks use traditional and universal guns and the rate of gun-killings is rising in Oz. Lindt cafe and Melbourne Islamic siege used guns. The graphs indicate more IS and so more bullets in police and other unbelievers in Oz in the future . And if politicians are targets in US ,some MPs may add IS + gun + politician = no good.

Migrant children will be handed a book with a picture of Ned Kelly.
Title
The welcome book /​ [ABC Behind the News (BTN)].
Bazley, Nathan, (Editor.)
Australian Broadcasting Corporation (issuing body.)
Published
Sydney, NSW Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 2017.

Ned is wearing a full jihadi burqa with metal around the waist and semi-automatic bazooka for high-volume cop-outs. He died a martyr 1880 on Australia's cease-fire day 11th November and is coloured black in the extremist literature of ABC state .

Today was to be a pistol shoot, however, because of ongoing work on the range, the covered firing line could not be used.
On a dry day, we would simply move forward but as it was raining fairly heavily the shoot was cancelled.

10 metres to the right of the pistol firing line is the covered rifle firing line, which is not being used today.

Simple solution, shoot on the rifle range; but we're not allowed to use pistols on the rifle range.

I cannot imagine why, and people wonder why we want some sense in the laws and for them to be evidenced based.

The Howard inspired 'gun control' was a political stunt by John Howard who was a master politician and a skilled practitioner of wedge politics.

Although in this case (significant other cases too?) it is alleged that it was his fearsome wife Jeanette, the power behind the throne, who directed John Howard towards the political 'gun control' that all of his ministers advised against.

Of course his ministers and anyone with any smattering of statistics and risk assessment would never have signed up for 'gun control', which is the antithesis of evidence-based regulation.

Numerate secondary school students should find it easy to spot the sophistry and outright fraud in the claims that Howard:

- 'stopped' multiple homicides (just one example could be the expected clumping together of incidents, and later, the gaps or zero incidence, normal for random events);

- reduced suicide (rope was always most popular and a few more chose it); and,

- reduced gun crime (when it was not the licensed persons that 'gun control' focusses on that are the perpetrators, and secondly, there was a sustained downturn that commenced well before Howard and the starting incidence was very low anyhow.

The fraud of the 'gun culture' rhetoric and use of it to sledge respectable, licensed Australian citizens. Where Howard's and other political spin ignore the social eg black+drug+gang, linked to low eco-social status of the most affected population in the US. -Riding on the backs of ghetto blacks in the US to score political points.

The US does experience deep social problems in some areas, but overwhelmingly the US is safe and peaceful. It is nasty that the elites, billionaires and Democrat (also wealthy, for example, the Clintons) use 'gun control' to conceal the root causes of serious social disadvantage, while hypocritically posing as the 'saviours' of the poor and disadvantaged.

Similarly on both sides of politics but particularly the Greens, politicians make headlines for themselves out of creating and then appearing to solve problems.

Number 1, gun crime is very low in Australia and has trending down for years and long before Howard's cynical wedge politics.

The all knowing, all seeing Leoj, you certainly are the fly on wall, when it comes to politics... now claiming to know what Jeanette H was telling Little Mr H to do, knowing what ministers were advising the PM. Amazing stuff Leo, simply amazing. How do you find the time.

Issy, I am really upset to hear that news, Why didn't you switch to water pistols, free ammo falling from the sky, or declare it duck hunting season, since it was weather fit only for ducks. Then again you could have retired inside and took pot shots at each other, you would soon forget about the weather then.
Just trying to help Issy, i hope its appreciated.

Paul,

That post of yours illustrates perfectly what we are up against, emotion based thinking and here was I thinking, based on your past posts that you were all in favour of evidence-based law.

What do you think of the idea of a permanent amnesty?

Paul1405 Just in case you can't see what is in front of your eyes. My question too you again.

Quote "The John Howard gun amnesty which resulted in 800,000 illegal firearms being surrendered most likely saved a minimum of 100 innocent Australian lives, men women and children."

You have absolutely no concrete evidence to prove that statement,also if someone is absolutely intent on killing someone and have no gun they will just use another method.

A length of plastic conduit on the pistol muzzle creates a rifle complying with gun-club rifle-range rules . As the rules of the club are made by a shooter then a single shot at 20 paces will soon help him out. Pistol record distance is 900 metres.

Knife record is 90 metres , basically it comes down to lack of propellant and firing-cap in your knife. So it's just 10% the body-count of pistols .

A crumpet up the nose at 400mm is deadly and suited for domestic shoot-outs.

Phil, the reason I never answered your question is simple, you never asked one, it seemed to me you were making a statement. A question requires on these little things "?"

To rebut your statement <<if someone is absolutely intent on killing someone and have no gun they will just use another method>>

You have absolutely no concrete evidence to prove that statement.

I hope we are not going to go round in circles on this. I will say this, for every gun that is removed from the community, the potential to save lives is increased. Even if it is only Grannies old shotgun, sitting is some dusty old cupboard some where. In the wrong hands it has the potential to kill. It might be loaded, and fall into the hands of Grannies little Grandson, who accidentally blows poor old Grannies head off with it. No "absolutely intent" there, but never the less Granny is minus her head and dead!

It was when the Greens were running out of things to protest, particularly now that pink protest is not doing so well, that the opportunist, forever cynical Greens latched onto Billionaire Soros' 'gun control' scam.

It is a great scam, ensuring that the 'Useful Idiots' of the faux left are always being deflected onto 'its guns!' and never get to bother themselves about the entrenched social and economic problems that affect blacks, Hispanics and people on low incomes, including low paid workers, often young.

Of course Greens and Labor have for decades postured their claimed superior morality and faux concern about the environment, sustainability, 'poisonous CO2' (Gillard) and of course they have ridden on the backs of gays.

But nothing done to fix things, and exasperated ex-Labor leader Mark Latham finally challenged Labor's (and by inference Greens') hypocrisy, saying that Labor has an “obsession” with the symbolism of gay marriage and should be focusing instead on the nation’s “Struggle Streets”.
http://startsat60.com/trending/news/is-mark-latham-talking-sense-on-gay-marriage/comment-page-2

'Gun control' is a fraud, a sham. It is about the very rich elites protecting their turf, luxurious lifestyles and their conspicuous consumption, enormous houses, boats and the like.

'Gun control' is not about criminals. It is about bans aimed at the respectable, law-abiding citizens, involving State compulsory confiscation of legally owned property at the point of a gun and bans.

It doesn't take a great deal of commonsense to reckon where that might be going. But if anyone wonders, just ask migrants who fled authoritarian regimes.

Ask too, why the leftists, Greens especially, are so soft on criminal gangs who manufacture and traffic drugs, where billions of dollars are turned over annually. Coincidentally, that is also where Australia's low level of gun and other violent crime is coming from. But Labor and Greens talk up 'gun control', while scuttling Qld's successful anti bikie Vicious Lawless Association Disestablishment Act 2013 enacted to "severely punish members of criminal organisations that commit serious offenses".

Paul,

You said " "The John Howard gun amnesty which resulted in 800,000 illegal firearms being surrendered ....".

How were they illegal and why did the Government pay for them?

How about that permanent amnesty?

The Howard inspired 'gun control' was aimed at strong-arm government waging war against ordinary, law-abiding civilians, by instantly making illegal, their legal, legally obtained and legally used private possessions.

Remarkably, but expected because so many are left-leaning authoritarians, the so-called human rights lawyers and academics were unconcerned and unmoved by a supremely powerful government making ordinary law-abiding citizens effectively into criminals overnight, for their private possessions that had up to then been legal.

The figure of 800,000 has been pulled out of the air, but what is true is that the so-called haul of 'illegal' firearms, was from legally compliant respectable citizens being compelled to hand over their now banned possessions and under threat of arrest at the point of a gun and possible incarceration by the all-powerful State.

It should also be stated that many of the treasured possessions destroyed (although there are allegations of 'official' rebirthing of some firearms handed in) were no more than air guns, memorabilia of historical significance (for which there was no factory ammunition available or suitable), 'squirrel' rifles (.22 for example) and shotguns, such as semi-automatics necessary for elder and disabled scatter gun clay pigeon competitors who have arthritis and other skeletal/muscle problems.

Howard's imported 'gun control' of US billionaire Soros and his other wealthy mates would NOT have had any criminal turning in his tools of trade. Guns that are used for territory and payment enforcement, and to sort territorial fights, by the ethnic gangs imported by Australia's lax mass immigration over years, including the Calabrian Mafia and more recently, the nightmarish Russian Mafia.

What 'gun control' does for leftists and Greens are up to the ears in this scam, is to conflate the criminality of gangs and their illegal preferred 'gangsta weapons' -criminal gangs that Australian governments have for years gone to considerable pains to deny the existence of despite newspaper reports- with the legal, declared and licensed firearms ownership of ordinary citizens.

contd..
'Gun control' is a hollow meme that protects the criminal while unfairly blame-shifting to ordinary citizens. Good for headlines but does squat to deter and contain criminal gangs making billions in the drug trade. Why would politicians want to protect ethnic gangs dealing drugs and responsible for drive-by shootings and home invasions?

But above all, 'gun control' is useful to the wealthy, the chattering commentariat and political elites to distract attention from the now unsolvable social problems that are the negative consequences of leftist social reengineering and the blooming big industry of drugs.

Thinking about the billions from drug manufacture and distribution, how come that apart from The Courier Mail than did a series related to it some years ago, there is no investigative journalism into the corruption that must be happening where there is so much money involved? It is so much easier to talk about 'gun control' instead, along with gay marriage and other diversions for the 'Useful Idiots'.

Not Guns again? Emmmm. For once I agree with much of what STEELEREDUX has maintained, though I think he was a little too dismissive of what you'd said as well IS MISE.

I understand absolutely your passion for F/A's, and your desire to broaden the laws to an extent, an ordinary law abiding citizen, may own possess and use any F/A (other than military) of his choice. Together with the right to possess a F/A with which to protect himself and others. I do understand all of that and to some extent, I agree with you.

However, there are many people I've come across who I wouldn't wish them to come within a 'Bull's roar' of accessing a F/A under any circumstances, such is their level of emotional or mental instability. Or in some cases just plain 'cowboys' and too immature and irresponsible to even possess a water pistol.

Governments must draw a line and restrict access to F/A's as much as possible, for those individuals who simply shouldn't have them. In order to 'try'(sic) and keep the community safe. There's no doubt criminal elements are importing masses of illegal F/A's, and Border Force Officers and the AFP are doing everything possible to interdict this illegal importation.

A massive job, with too little resources available to effectively curb this burgeoning importation. Combined with a wholly uninspired judiciary, too weak and out of touch, to support police in their endeavors to pull these buggers into line.

Result of US Second Amendment brought in to enable uppity slaves and pesky redskins to be shot dead: 33500 Yanks shot dead by other Yanks each year.

Result of Howard gun laws in Australia: No repeat of Port Arthur massacre in the past 21 years.

Gun freaks calling for Yank style open slather in Australia are deadly enemies of the Australian people.

Julian,

"Result of Howard gun laws in Australia: No repeat of Port Arthur massacre in the past 21 years."

The Lindt Cafe happening was not a massacre, not because of Howard's laws but because of brave men with guns.

What will be your excuse when there is a massacre?

EmperorJulian, "Result of Howard gun laws in Australia: No repeat of Port Arthur massacre in the past 21 years"

That means absolutely nothing, zilch. You should be very wary indeed of the rogue who abuses numbers like that, others are.

But just to demonstrate how silly your belief is, outlaw bikies find it easy to import their gangsta guns and secondly, there are thousands of unregistered guns. So it can't be the guns now can it?

However, for as long as the politicians and media are prepared to sensationalise incidents, making multiple homicide the gold standard for idiots seeking international notoriety before all of those TV cameras, there is always the possibility, no matter how small. Ban accelerants?

What is needed and Australia has always had it and before the publicity seeking master politician John Howard, is:

- firearm licensing, a simple robust means of sorting the offenders from ordinary citizens; and,

- secondly the import regulations that were already in existence too, still exist and were being used to limit what can be brought in or not.

'Gun control' is anything but and as stated earlier, absolute political BS. But maybe you don't read earlier posts.

The Howard-inspired 'gun control' did diddley squat but waste police resources in mountainous paperwork, in watching over the shoulder of already certified safe citizens; and introduce a whole new spectrum of taxes. If truth has any part in this, it is right to say that it is all politics. Just think for a minute how many of those so-called illegal firearms were retired as stakes for garden taps or went to the tip years before Howard.

What we need to watch are drugs and especially the criminal gangs and ferals whose first take on any dispute is to reach for a weapon. Australian immigration seems destined, duty-bound, to import more of both, year after year. Remember Labor's Al Grassby as minister for immigration, 'father of multiculturalism' and matey with growers of certain 'herbs'?

Is Mise: You mean brave POLICE with guns. The right people be allowed to carry them. Not every Tom Dick and Harry as in the gunnies' US paradise where 33 1/2 thousand Yanks are shot dead by other Yanks each year.

leoj: " You should be very wary indeed of the rogue who abuses numbers like that"
Go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia#Murders_over_an_extended_period_of_time

Check after 1971, when wholesale gun murder of Aborigines was no longer the national sport, and identify gunshot massacres (multiple gun killings in the one incident) up to 1996 when Howard called a halt. Every few years another one culminating at Port Arthur.

The vast majority of Australians don't want our country reduced to a battleground like the USA. Only a handful of hobbyists who don't give a damn about the consequences of gun anarchy for everyone else.

EmperorJulian,

You implied that the Howard inspired 'gun control' ceased multiple homicides with guns. Statistically speaking you have no evidence to support that at all. The instances are random events and can be expected to be regressing to the mean. These are rare events in Australia and always were.

It is also ludicrous for other reasons. For instance that there remain thousands of semi-automatic firearms in the country. So why isn't there ongoing 'spates' (got to love the Soros 'gun control' activists' hysteria) of killings? As well, how come that Lindt Cafe, Sydney attack? So much for 'gun control'. 'Gun control' is a political scam.

Now, what about you read what I have written about the informed, risk-based, evidence-based REGULATION:

- of the person with a single licence (or two if pistols must be separately licensed for emotional reasons); and,

- of types of firearms through controls on importation.

Both existed before and after Howard. They are the only effective and robust controls. All else lies in policing (which includes Customs inspections) - which has been compromised by the 'gun control' emphasis that wrongly directs police resources against the compliant, licensed citizens.

How stupid is that?

leoj: "Now, what about you read what I have written about the informed, risk-based, evidence-based REGULATION:

- of the person with a single licence (or two if pistols must be separately licensed for emotional reasons); and,

- of types of firearms through controls on importation.

Both existed before and after Howard. They are the only effective and robust controls. All else lies in policing (which includes Customs inspections) - which has been compromised by the 'gun control' emphasis that wrongly directs police resources against the compliant, licensed citizens.
=
So what you are seeking to change is not the Howard controls (as is the gun hobbyist Is Mise) but stupid police actions in raiding compliant gun holders without first glancing at their paperwork. No change in the rules. Much ado about nothing unless there's another agenda hiding in the background like wanting to revert to the rules before Howard that delivered the Port Arthur massacre and a long string of gun massacres before it.

And your "before and after Howard" was merely an innocent slip of the keyboard. Before Howard means be ready to seek cover and after Howard means you won't be caught in a gun massacre.

EmperorJulian,

I want informed, risk-based, evidence-based laws across the board and not just where firearms are concerned.

Although the Howard-inspired 'gun control' is a perfect example of what any democracy should be attempting to avoid, which is cynical politics from both sides of government and sheer damned laziness and gutlessness of politicians.

Other than what I have written on the subject I don't know what might convince you of the fraud that is the imported political spin that is 'gun control'. Maybe if you, others too, would care to read up on the use of the Hegelian Paradigm in rhetoric. It is a very powerful propaganda, where you work back from what you want and devise (invent) a problem and causes for which the solution is (you guessed it) that original outcome/situation you sought. I will leave it at that. I am not going to be banging my head up against a brick wall trying to convince anyone who is not open to argument.

In closing though I would like you to know that I have never met anyone among farmers, the recreational hunters who visited our properties and target shooters who does not have the common good, the good of the public and Australia at heart and constantly in mind.

It is ridiculous to assert as the political spin of 'gun control' does that its activists (and the billionaire backers behind it) have the secret and the many thousands of respectable, responsible, licensed firearms owners do not. If there is one thing that all might take from this thread is that.

contd..
Now, just ask yourself why those few hidden 'gun control' activists that are beavering away getting Soros' and ors Hegelian propaganda into the media are so damned secretive that they refuse to publish ever the very basic information about themselves, their backers, any overseas links, any political links and (claimed) membership. But they ARE very forward in putting the begging bowl out for public donations. Again, no information, no due diligence on where the money goes and no auditing.

However we are all assured that our firearms licensed Aussies are decent law-abiding people and they, unlike those highly secretive 'gun control' activists, have their jealously protected licenses to prove it.

You referred to Is Mise. If Is Mise is prepared to show me his firearms licence and I have no doubt that he has his Categogy H although the A would be enough and I would be more than willing, utterly confident, to leave my wallet in his care. My children are older now but he could have baby sat them too. How many here for example have ever passed similar screening and maintained your clean character as they must do? Some of us have had high level screening as contractors for government and I can say to you that citizens like Is Mise have satisfied the equivalent.

Can you say that the activists and those overseas promoters of that politically loaded and damned useless for deterring and catching crims 'gun control' might pass even low level screening?

Honestly there is so much political spin about and the media will not invest in investigative journalism. With a ready market of dumbed-down 'Useful Idiots' they don't have do anything but entertain (and poorly).

Samantha Lee of Gun Control Australia not only has links to George Soros but worked for him.

The 33500 Yanks shot dead by other Yanks every year are not a problem invented by George Soros (whoever he is), they're on public record. Bang, you're dead, 33500 times. Open slather for gunnies and its consequences are responsible. The Slave-owners' and Injun-hunters' Second Amendment and its origins are also on record. Hard evidence.

There might be a few thousand people, tops, in Australia who want a return to pre-Howard anarchy, but most of the 24 MILLION people in Australia don't want it. Most of us can enjoy recreation without having to kill anything. Fishers, shooters and hunters parties are a minuscule demographic aberration in this country, gaining a voice only in the gerrymandered Senate. The gun freaks are no more than a noisy minority.

Thankfully the armed arseholes in the criminal fraternity who have been illegally importing guns are only killing other criminals who are no loss, but the pre-Howard record of domestic violence perpetrators massacring family members with guns is pretty damning.

Julian,

Are there no criminals killing other criminals in your American totals?

I grant you it was brave policemen at the Lindt cafe, but their presence and their guns are what stopped Monis, the gun laws failed, Monis had an illegal weapon, moreover, a weapon that had been shortened illegally.

Are you in favour of Uniform National Gun Laws?

I am.

Is Mise: "Are you in favour of Uniform National Gun Laws? I am"

So am I, and full marks to John Howard for pioneering them. The only decent thing that government ever did. Nobody should let him down.

EJ thanks for your contribution on this thread. You speak for the vast majority of Australians who were disgusted with Port Arthur, and applauded Howard for his stance on guns.

Issy, yes uniform laws wherever possible is desirable, but with a federation of governments we have in Australia that is hard to achieve, but does not mean "no laws" should be the norm.
Criminals are criminals, and have to be dealt with accordingly. Here in NSW the pro gun pressure group, led by their political arm, the Shooter and Hooters Party are continually trying to use their power position to force government to water down gun laws.

Leoj, tries to project that gun control is some kind of political conspiracy manipulated by sinister foreign forces, supported by a senseless minority of so called "useful idiots", when nothing could be further from the truth. All Australians have an interest in the subject as it effects each and everyone of us. It should be noted that under another nick Leoj expressed his support for a armed paramilitary style private citizens militia to act when police were seen not to be doing their job correctly. Take his furphies and red herrings with a grain of salt.

Now you mention it Issy, what are the links, political and financial, between the National Rifle Association of America, and the Australian gun lobby?

http://www.smh.com.au/world/your-gun-laws-are-a-mistake-national-rifle-association-to-australia-20150712-giaqal.html

We do not have National Gun Laws, their existence is a furphy.

In WA it is an offence to possess a fired cartridge case, whereas the other States couldn't care less.

The Minister recently said that all firearms in Australia have to be licensed, another piece of bull, all revolvers have to be licenced in NSW but not all of them have to be licenced in Victoria.

It is possible and legal in Australia for people to own rapid firing breach loading rifles without a licence or having to have the guns registered.

The Minister, Keenan, recently was crowing about the interception of some 5,000 firearms that were illegally imported into Australia and the media gobbled this up and reported it as fact.

The Sporting Shooters'Association of Australia thought that this was a bit of spin, so made inquiries and found that the figure was inflated a bit and that only a few over 300 were firearms and that the rest were parts.
Keenan in his announcement of the amnesty then said 5,000 firearms and parts, which was an improvement over the previous spin but he neglected to mention that over 3,000 of the parts were intercepted in the USA and were never in Australia.

Rather unsporting of the SSAA to shew that the Minister was not telling the Australian people the truth.

Paul,

"Now you mention it Issy, what are the links, political and financial, between the National Rifle Association of America, and the Australian gun lobby?"

I didn't mention it, but as you've brought up the subject, how about you telling us all the facts, the Greens and Gun Control have alleged it often enough, you should have the relevant references at your fingertips.

Are you in favour of a permanent amnesty?
Such an amnesty would be helpful to gun owners who want to hand in unregistered weapons that they may find down in the barn or that they've forgotten about.

Uniform MINIMUM laws (Howard laws) with further restrictions which individual States can impose. Try weaselling out of THAT.

Julian

"Uniform MINIMUM laws (Howard laws) with further restrictions which individual States can impose. Try weaselling out of THAT."

That is not what was proposed and has absolutely no logic.
What we need are uniform gun laws across Australia, so that everyone knows where they stand (particularly those folk who live on the borders).
People who live in Border Street, which is on the NSW/Qld border do have problems!!
Not as bad as the border between the Republic of Ireland and the Occupied Counties where it runs through farms and in one case through a pub, the pub has different closing hours in the same establishment!!

What is wrong with logical, evidence based gun laws?

Any comments on the Minister's utterance?

Re Is Mise: The Howard gun laws weren't merely proposed, they were legislated. The evidence they are based on is a history of periodic gun massacres leading up to that at Port Arthur. The only shootouts since have been criminals blowing away other criminals with illegal imported guns.

Are the gun hobbyists on OLO seeking a watering down of the Howard laws or are they not?

Are they seeking repeal of additional State laws covering every individual subject to them or are they not?

Are they seeking a halt to State legislation additional to the Howard laws or are they not?

Are they seeking a watering down of State legislation additional to the Howard laws or are they not?

I think that reduces the gun hobbyists' wiggle room to zero, given that the line separating States has a width of zero.

Julian,

Just laws based on logic and evidence, you got a problem with that?

No comment on the fact that the Minister mishandled the truth?

No comment that if I move to Victoria I can legally buy a pistol that can fire 6 shots in 4 seconds and I don't need to register it nor have a license to possess it yet in NSW it is a criminal offence to possess such a pistol without it being registered?

An example of Howard's laws working was the Adler shotgun, never a problem with a lever action shotgun until Greens and other nuts decided that a problem needed to be invented, so they invented one and convinced the pollies to solve it.

Result, Adler now needs a Category B license, which just about every shooter has and the Shooters' Fishers' and Farmers' Party have a seat in the Lower House in NSW.

Answered Wednesday, 21 June 2017 2:00:00 PM

And you were more than adequately answered here, Emperor Julian,

leoj, Tuesday, 20 June 2017 2:27:23 PM
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7818&page=8

Leoj has referred to his earlier post that says more or less
"I want informed, risk-based, evidence-based laws across the board and not just where firearms are concerned. "
Howard's laws are totally risk-based and evidence-based. The Port Arthur massacre alone was enough, but the string of gun massacres preceding it clinch it. Couldn't get any more risk-based and evidence-based than that, and the massive death toll from gun anarchy in the USA compounds it manyfold.
Fact is that the gun lobby is a noisy and tiny minority pitting its recreation requirements against the safety of 24 million Australians who want gun anarchy like they want leprosy.

Julian evidently doesn't want evidence-based law; seems that he's happy that some States allow unfettered access to rapid fire pistols, some shotguns and rapid fire rifles.

One repeating rifle that I can think of can fire 16 shots in about 10 seconds and its range is much further than the Adler shotgun.

The more restrictions on guns the safer the community. The gun lobbyists pointing to highly lethal guns they reckon are allowed in some jurisdictions aren't seeking that they be restricted, their whole campaign is directed to complaining about restrictions and especially the Howard restrictions that cover the whole of Australia.

It's only through the odd trade across issues that they can get gun-friendly pollies (a tiny minority) to join with deadlocked major parties to pass government Bills (themselves toxic to the interests of most Australians) through the Senate.

The mongrel Martin Bryant could get hold of a gun and hence the Port Arthur massacre.

To serve their own recreational wants the tiny gun lobby pit themselves against the overwhelming majority of Australians who don't want to be shot dead in massacres the way the Yanks are and Australians were pre-Howard.

If the gunnies REALLY want evidence-based logic they coud study the evidence and logic at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-23/howards-post-port-arthur-gun-laws-work,-researchers-say/7535690

Emperor Julian,

Are you one of those people who would prefer to buy a lottery ticket from an agency that has sold major prizes in preference to one that has not?

What about numbers for the pools? Would you be looking to select numbers that have not been coming up much?

Here is a clever move, give the local council a 'Oh Dear Me, accidents happen here' sign and installed free by you where there has been a recent 'spate' of accidents. Then offer, conditional on the sign being successful over the coming year in reducing accidents, to instal the same sign wherever there are other 'spates' of accidents. At a generous profit to you of course. A bit sneaky because the Council will not be game not to keep that sign and get more. Otherwise....Well, it doesn't bear thinking about, now does it?

Or alternatively, install a 'protective scientific device' (a garden gnome would do) wherever ABC women staff report a 'spate' of those 'women's cancers' in buildings in which they work. Do the same follow-up for another profit to clever you.

Now that I have made you a very tidy profit, you can review my earlier posts to see how it is done.

As for the link you tendered, you should read it again and not be so inclined to discount or disregard your own commonsense and judgement.

Howard's 'gun control' stopped mass homicide? How could it do that, exactly?

What do other researchers with relevant expertise said about the conclusions reported in that article of yours? Are there any peer reviews in professional journals of worth?

One of the most worrying aspects of "legal" gun ownership in Australia, is the number of those legal firearms that are being reported "stolen" each year. Between 2013 and 2015, 6451 guns were reported as stolen. The question is how many of those 6451, were not stolen, but sold illegally, by the good law abiding gunnies, and then reported as stolen? How many were never reported?
There could be as many as 600,000 illegal firearms in Australia, many illegal handguns are obtained through legal loopholes which allow for the import of so called "deactivated handguns" which are quickly reactivated by criminals. Others are obtained through the grey market of on selling unregistered guns by their owners. it should be questioned why some people find it necessary to have 300 to 400 registered guns in their possession? How may are simply stockpiling guns for future illegal purposes, such as a so called citizen militia, similar to the 'Doomsdayers' in America. How many gun clubs are nothing but fronts foe right wing extremists? Simmilar to some in America.

From the Age;

" Gary Fleetwood, the ACIC national firearm trace program expert, said that despite increased reports of shootings involving high-powered weapons, including in Victoria, it was unlikely the weapons being used were newly manufactured.

He said that weapons such as the Chinese-manufactured SKS rifle, which has been seized from bikie gangs and other organised crime groups in recent years, were often more than 30 years old.

"When people ask me where these guns are coming from, I say: 'They were already here.'"

Food for thought, don't you agree Issy.

Julian,

If you want evidence just go to the Government's "Port Arthur Inquiry", you'll find plenty there.

Paul1405,

Just taking Queensland as an example, while police have been seeking any evidence of stolen weapons being preferred by criminals and being used for crime, years so by without any evidence of either.

There is however plenty of ongoing evidence that the largely ethnic gangs that manufacture and traffic drugs have their own illegitimate (but of course!) suppliers for their tools of trade as well as for their importation of drugs and the contacts that work ever so well to conceal their activities and to protect them against laws that cause them inconvenience, such as Qld's now trashed VLAD law.

Criminals are delighted with 'gun control' that focusses police attention on the very people who can reliably be expected never to have any part in crime of any sort and who are opposed to illegal weapons, which of course are the many thousands of respectable law-abiding citizens who have earned their firearms licence and aim to keep it.

So in effect you, the Greens and imported US 'gun control' are doing the equivalent of blaming the rape victim for the crime committed against her.

Please don't continue with claims that have been proved false many times before.

Evidence-based regulation of the persons permitted to have firearms licences is the key.

You might also be surprised to be informed that it is part of the modus operandi of the offender to break available laws and yes, murder was always a crime, along with numerous other things that criminals do as they avoid work and flea of the public.

'Gun control' is a blessing for the offender, tying up trained police on the 'gun control' busywork of bothering already certified crime-free, respectable members of the public.

How many millions are there in drugs per annum? Is there any tier of society that the corruption of those millions cannot reach out for and influence? Say 'Yay, for gun control' for it keeps those punters* occupied, instead of thinking'.(sic)

punters* - that is how many politicians and the commentariat refer to and view the public whose taxes support them. Disgusting.

Gun control ties up police who keep revisiting licensed owners without first checking that the owner holds a licence, according to leoj. Leoj doesn't provide information on how many of these are found to be acquiring illegal weapons under cover of their licences. All this is supposed to be a valid pretext for putting the public at risk by replacing gun control laws with gun anarchy.

Forget it. The public when warned won't wear it. Controls are here to stay and the only acceptable changes are to tighten them and extend their scope. And to rally votes against gun freaks in the Senate.

Julian,

How're you going with that evidence from the "Port Arthur Inquiry"?

I'd give you a reference but I can't remember it.

Paul,

The actual figure of illegal guns in the community is 1,000,346.
This is the true figure based on the same evidence that you and Minister Keenan used; how could the three of us get such different conclusions?

How do you feel about a permanent amnesty?

EmperorJulian, "Gun control ties up police who keep revisiting licensed owners without first checking that the owner holds a licence, according to leoj"

I didn't say that.

I try to spell things out as simply as possible and I give details that are easily checked. However, you don't appear to do me the courtesy of reading and understanding my posts. Then you take off at a tangent. Or attribute things to me that I would never have said, like your first sentence above, which I did not say at all.

Your misunderstandings, along with the foolishness of what follows, clearly demonstrate that you have no knowledge whatsoever of the relevant regulations and processes.

Admittedly the whole game plan of that US 'gun control' political sham is to confuse and mislead and to muddy the waters. 'Gun control' is itself a deliberately misleading title. As explained earlier it is anything but that. It is solely aimed at disarming licensed civilians in western democracies by bans and compulsory confiscations, with or without any reimbursement, of the private property of ordinary law-abiding, licensed citizens.

Again, just ask yourself why those few hidden 'gun control' activists that are beavering away getting Soros' and ors Hegelian propaganda into the media are so damned secretive that they refuse to publish ever the very basic information about themselves, their backers, any overseas links, any political links and (claimed) membership. But they ARE very forward in putting the begging bowl out for public donations. Again, no information, no due diligence on where the money goes and no auditing.

Ask yourself, why should anyone believe them and, what possible motive/s might a billionaire currency dealer and his other wealthy mates who hide money offshore and at least as far as Soros is concerned, sponsor leftist demonstrations and all in western democracies, have for sledging and disarming the good guys, the ordinary respectable citizens who are complying with all laws?

There were various hits under "Port Arthur Inquiry". The only one I bothered to read was at http://www.itwillpass.com/nwo_port_arthur_massacre_CORONIAL_INQUIRY.shtml

It was a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory.

Naturally an inquiry into a single gun massacre would not relate to the string of gun massacres preceding it.

Julian,

Care to speculate on why there was no Coronial Inquiry?

If the page that you referenced was 'tinfoil hat' rubbish why didn't you give a reference to its refutation, surely someone has knocked it point by point?

Is Mise: "If the page that you referenced was 'tinfoil hat' rubbish why didn't you give a reference to its refutation, surely someone has knocked it point by point?"

Yeah, like knocking point by point the nutters' conspiracy theory that NASA faked the moon landing. The lunatics that put forward the assertion that the Port Arthur massacre was a government conspiracy made no points that were subject to verification. They just made it up. Learn something about the philosophy of science.

The gunnies with designs against public safety just make stuff up and the huge majority aren't buying it.

Graham Colyer, who was shot, said that Bryant was not the shooter, is that verifiable or not?

Suppose we'll have to wait till the 30-year moratorium is up; why do you think that the Government locked the records for 30 years?

Why no Coronial Inquiry, or is that not required under Australian law?

Hey, Paul, what do you think of the idea of a permanent amnesty?

Gunnies are to be given adequate time under the new gun amnesty to hand in their illegal weapons. Anyone found to possess an illegal firearm needs to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Hay Issy, what do you think of those American gung-ho lunatics The National Rifle Association trying to interfere in Australian domestic politics. Trying to turn us into a mini America when it comes to guns. Instead of Dodge City we'll have Gun City!

http://www.smh.com.au/world/your-gun-laws-are-a-mistake-national-rifle-association-to-australia-20150712-giaqal.html

From the ACIC report;

"The large number of legal firearms in the community, combined with the number of unregistered (including grey market) and illicitly sourced firearms ensures a continual and growing supply of firearms to the illicit market."

The full report;

http://www.acic.gov.au/publications/intelligence-products/illicit-firearms-australia-report

Since Port Arthur and the days of John Howard, the white-anting and undermining of gun control in Australia by the pro gun lobby has had a disastrous effect on the community. We are now in a state with an out of control number of illegal guns, and a lax legal gun control system. This has all combined to produce the present conditions of escalating gun violence in the community. The vast majority of decent Australians now expect the Turnbull government to act to destroy this blot on society!

Paul1405, 'gunnies' and so on

Utter rot.

It you set out to make an absolute jackass of yourself and to exhibit all that is so wrong and nasty about the Trotskyist Greens 'Eastern Bloc' you have done well.

Paul,

What do you think of a permanent amnesty?

Was that the best that you could do after alleging that the NRA was deeply involved in local politics? Pathetic!

So your reference alleges that there are 260,000 illegal firearms out there.
How do they know?
How did you get your figure of 600,000?

I know where I got my figure of over a million, out of thin air.

We all have access to the 'thin air' site.

For those that like statistics and are interested in the influence of minority groups, the Greens have some 18,000 members, Labor around 44,000, Liberals 50,000 and the Sporting Shooters 180,000.

Seems that the SSAA have more members than the other three combined.

The OLO voice of the Yank gun lobby writes "Graham Colyer, who was shot, said that Bryant was not the shooter, is that verifiable or not?"

Bryant's guilt was established in court. He pleaded lunacy and is currently in a secure looney bin in Tasmania. Fact. Verifiable in the public domain.

If anyone wants to verify with hard information in the public domain who this Graham Colyer is, whether or not he is a gun freak, and whether or not he told the truth, go for it - and best of luck.

EmperorJulian,

It is not true is it that Bryant is in an asylum or that he was suffering from mental illness when the offences he was convicted for were committed.

Bryant does have minimal IQ 66. The beliefs he formed, the rage and the behaviours are not inconsistent with that. -Not entering into the other aspects you and Is Mise are discussing.

Mild retardation would not excuse the horrendous crimes for which he was convicted.

However it is worth observing that the federal Parliament, on BOTH sides of the House, had for their own ideological justifications, decided to sell off the mental health and rehabilitation facilities where people like Bryant could go and find a predictable, supervised setting with some routine but appreciated tasks to do, some company, some observation by professionals and all of the soaps playing that they like to watch on TV.

Minimal IQ and mental heath sufferers and especially their families they were thrown back on, were the unfortunate victims and still are, of the whole mess of Canberra politicians, bureaucrats and others who should know better. And who are forever congratulating themselves and receiving bigger pay for more and more laws but ever poorer planning.

The problem was that the emerging victim industries and multiculturalism were far better prospects for political spin and opportunism, and of course were to become an endless pit for taxpayers' dollars. In effect, those facilities for mental health sufferers and disabled were sold off because federal governments could not plan and are focussed short-term, on the next election.

Did both sides of the federal Parliament appreciate Howard shelving what should have been a Royal Commission? Of course they all did. Have those same politicians who now enjoy much higher remuneration ever corrected that cynical, foolish decision to cast low IQ and mental patients back onto families and the community? Of course not!

Julian,

I took your advice,
"Bryant moved just a few metres and began shooting at the table where Graham Colyer, Carolyn Loughton and her daughter Sarah were seated. Colyer was injured in the jaw, nearly choking to death on his own blood."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)

Had you bothered to read the link that you gave you'd have seen his name.

"If anyone wants to verify with hard information in the public domain who this Graham Colyer is, whether or not he is a gun freak, and whether or not he told the truth, go for it - and best of luck."

Nice one that, feel free to stigmatize any other Port Arthur survivors that disagree with your preconceived notions.

The Yank NRA lobby writes: "that cynical, foolish decision to cast low IQ and mental patients back onto families and the community? Of course not!"

None of that (a call for more money to cope with the people described) gainsays that Bryant killed all those people because he had a gun and that without one he could not have done so, that the Howard laws protected non-killers from the likes of Martin Bryant, and that this protects all 24 million Australians despite the efforts of the Yank NRA to unravel it.

If the Yank pollies had the cojones that Howard displayed - to stand up to the NRA - they could protect a further 300 million people from being shot dead at a rate of more than 33 thousand a year.

As Paul1405 stated (eliciting an irrelevant ad hominem spray about European Trotskyites from the Yank gun lobby), the vast majority of decent Australians now expect the Turnbull government to act to destroy this blot on society!

EmperorJulian,

That is incoherent nonsense. Go back and read my post.

Re this sole individual Graham Colyer, is there any evidence that he told the truth in claiming Bryant didn't fire the shots, and about whether he told his story to the court that tried and convicted Bryant, and if not why not?

EmperorJulian,

That is way off beam. My posts had nothing to do with Colyer.

Graham Colyer was not the only individual to say that the shooter had a pockmarked face, others said the same, as far as I recall none of those who disputed the identification were ever called as witnesses.
Be that as it may, conspiracy theories abound and the reason for the spate of such theories can be laid fairly at the feet of Government.

Don't you like Graham Colyer, is that why you continue to insult this Port Arthur victim?

Proper to query every individual cited by the Yank NRA as now saying Bryant didn't shoot anyone, especially when accompanied by tinfoil hat stuff from the same source that it was a government conspiracy and by implication that the court that convicted Bryant was bent. Like the claims by the same Yank NRA source that the Sandy Hook murders were a government invention.

As Paul1405 wrote, this gun lobby blot is something the Turnbull government will need to confront head on. Indeed it is something that both the Tweedledum party and the Tweedledee will need to make an election issue.

Julian,

I hate to tell you but your ignorance is shewing, firearms law is a State matter.

Do you think that a permanent amnesty would be a good thing?

Paul seems rather shy on the question.

Well Issy you say 180,000 members, yep I went onto that web site where you get all your facts www.thinair.crap.issy, yep asked the question how many members does the Sporting Shooting Ass have in Aussie, yep there was the answer 180,000, I assume the number is as supplied by the two pump action Bobs!
That is about the same number of votes 1.4%, the Shooters and Hooters Party got at the last Federal election. Can we assume the gunnies vote for their own, but nobody else does.

Leoj, the jackass is that bloke who in a previous forum life, advocated for an armed para military style citizens militia. When exposed as a extreme right wing ratbag, he slinked off the forum, only to return with a new alias, as if nothing had happened. Do you have any idea who I an talking about.

Paul1405,

What schoolboy rot you go on with. This is a discussion site.

Richard Di Natale would be well advised to lance the boil that is the NSW Eastern Bloc faction.

Paul,

The 180,000 is the audited figure.

Gun Control Australia have an un-audited membership of 3, plus a cheap computer. They are very coy about their membership numbers.

And when I posted a perfectly logical argument, Leo you came back with this school boy guff; Where is your discussion in this comment, taking a leaf out of your own book. You are the great forum pretender, dishing it out, but not willing to tae it back. Say things, then claiming you never said them, or when you are called out, simply ignoring the fact you said it.

<<It you (Paul1405) set out to make an absolute jackass of yourself and to exhibit all that is so wrong and nasty about the Trotskyist Greens 'Eastern Bloc' you have done well.>>

Do you now deny you favor a citizens militia. Why do some need 300 or 400 guns in their possession. Is collecting the only motive?

Paul1405,

There is plenty of NSW Greens' dirty washing being hung out to dry ATM.

NSW has been the Greens' running sore for years. Bob Brown couldn't handle them.

Richard Di Natale is leaving it far too late. It is beyond a boil. Then there are the union problems. Sepsis. He has lost his mojo anyhow. Bob Brown knew when to get out.

Blah, blah, blah, Leo...it is amazing what "knowledge" one can gather while staring aimlessly out the window, down at the rest home. You do it rather well. Or do you just have an amazing list of friends on 'Facebook' Donald Trump, Malcolm Turnbull, Bill Shorten, Bob Brown, Stalin, The Queen, Noddy, The Pope, God etc etc. I am always amazed by your intellect, and your expert knowledge on all subjects, including Islam, Christianity, the Greens, growing geraniums, socialism, feminism, world poverty, the list goes on and on.

Back to the topic. I can understand why someone might have 300 or 400 stamps in their collection, or another having 300 or 400 coins in their collection. But I cannot understand why someone would need to collect 300 or 400 guns, as is the case with several strategically placed locations around Sydney. What is the purpose of these arsenals of, in some cases high powered firearms, I am sure it is for more than a bit of 'show and tell' down at the local kiddies play group (gun club). Are these "collectors" preparing for Armageddon, or for a future police state?

Anyone who wants a gun will get a gun. That's pretty much all there is to it.
Anyone who wants to kill will do so..whether they have a gun or not.
That also, is all there is to it.

I saw on the news last night a dog of a young man was sentenced to 20 years for killing another young man that he didn't even know that came to the rescue of a girl a mob of animals were harassing outside a macca's.

He didn't need a gun...used a knife straight through the heart. What did amaze me was the judge saying he understood the perp didn't actually mean to kill the other man. He used one stab and aimed straight for the heart yet didn't mean to kill him?

Such is the mentality of a lot of our judges.

Gun arsenal collections in Australia are not a matter to debate with the Yank NRA or its Australian metastases but to report to the police and to raise with mainstream political parties representing collectively the people of Australia. That is, the government, opposition and cross-benchers who don't openly represent the Yank NRA like that so-called "Lib Dem" bloke. Those will require hard evidence of allegations of illicit gun collections and any police complicity on behalf of the Australian arm of the Yank NRA.

Anyone who sets out to kill is by choice breaking the most serious law of all. What does it matter to him if he breaks other laws, for instance by carrying illegal weapons?

Firearms - it doesn't matter how many a good citizen with a licence has and collections would be old, valuable historical pieces with fine engraving, probably never fired.

Gun crime always was very low in Australia. Practically non existent before the mass immigration that allowed the Calabrian Mafia to establish its second, most important base, which was in Melbourne, Australia. That was facilitated by both sides of the Parliament in Canberra, who even when the courts and newspapers had evidence of a growing criminal gang problem, denied and ridiculed the very idea that criminal gangs like the Mafia could be in Australia.

Besides, immigration was a sacred cow that could never be mentioned unless in glowing, purple praise.

Later, even when the Australian Calabrian and other criminal gangs were the subject of official concern from other countries, from the Italian police for instance, Canberra continues to downplay it all.

What about Labor's infamous 'Father of Multiculturalism', Al Grassby, a Minister for Immigration no less? A clownish-acting politician, who was all 'racism this and racism that', but with alleged sinister connections to the Mob.

In 2017 the problems with criminal gangs involved in drugs and their violence continues. Middle eastern gangs have infiltrated OMGs for the cover and distribution networks for drug trafficking. They also happen to prefer settling even minor disagreements with violence.

The 'gun control' of the ambulance-chasing, headline-hunting Greens cannot lay a glove on the gangs responsible not only for the small incidence of gun crime in Australia, but also for the thousands of kids being introduced to drugs every year.

But the Greens are only after headlines. Like Labor, they resolutely opposed and trashed successful anti-criminal gang law (Qld's VLAD), that that made life difficult for criminal gangs responsible for drug importing, manufacturing and trafficking AND for gun crime.

contd..

The Australian illegal drugs market is extremely attractive to organised criminals. In economics parlance the Australian market is underdeveloped and for criminal gang entrepreneurs, ripe to be exploited, particularly by South American gangs.

Cocaine use flourishes in the well-appointed offices of lawyers and other professionals in the cbds on Friday night and likely through the week as well. There are other recreational drugs as well, including tabs. The money goes to the criminal gangs. Another market to be developed no doubt.

How much is the Australian drug trade worth annually? What might it top when fully exploited? One thing is for sure, those hundreds of millions would be feeding into corruption at all levels of society.

'Gun control' is a cover for failure and hypocrisy and deflects attention away from the real problems. Of course there are other political diversions such as gay marriage that occupy the federal parliament as well. The Fourth Estate are generally over-willing to help with that.

The Minister said the other day that there are over 260,000 illegal firearms in Australia.
The Government has had since 1996, that is 21 years to solve this problem, seems that the Gun Laws have failed rather miserably.

I have over 50 firearms registered to me, not a big collection as collections go, and I use quite a few of them on a regular basis.

Julian,

"Those will require hard evidence of allegations of illicit gun collections and any police complicity on behalf of the Australian arm of the Yank NRA."

Excrita bovinus!!

Paul,

How you goin' on the permanent amnesty question?

Talking about failure,

- did The Hon Michael Keenan MP Minister for Justice, happen to say when the drug testing laws that apply to other workers might be extended to the (federal) Parliament of Australia?

- what about their servants, the federal public servants and private contractor who advise policy?

No guessing why Ministers have so many political spinmeisters.

Of course many of those boozy political correspondents with the frosty noses as well (must be the Canberra winter) are over-willing too to talk about lost Daisy air guns (saw a few a a kid, must be thousands) and gay marriage.

Another red herring, gun crime in Australia was almost none existent until along come Giuseppe and his Calabrian Mafia. What a load of rubbish. Gun crime was prevalent in Australia before Ned Kelly, and Ned had not even heard of the Calabrian Mafia.
A bit of convoluted logic, if someone wants to kill you, then they are going to do so regardless. Many gun deaths are not premeditated, some are by accident. others are the result of things getting out of control. when the intention is to commit another crime such as robbery, the purpose of the gun is to menace, but often things don't go to plan for the criminal and murder is the result, the old "Do as I say, and no one gets hurt!" nonsense. I cannot recall hearing a news report than went like this "A late night service station attendant was killed when two men brandishing rocks held up his station.".

I suppose somewhere in all these posts by Leoj, Is Mise and moonshine defending gunnies there is some semblance of sanity, but I just can't find it.

Paul1405,

Through their own use of drugs, how many Greens are supporting organised crime AND GUNS?

Haven't you ever looked around at one of those Greens knees-ups where the elite who run the Greens strut their conspicuous consumption, that it is their use of cocaine and other recreational drugs that is the cream for those drug syndicates?

That it is the professional elite themselves who are contributing to the importation of those expensive new 'gangsta' guns, along with the shipments of THEIR coke?

What a hide the smug, amoral Greens elite have. What utter hypocrisy, what gall and hubris, to try to blame-shift it onto others.

And there you are, Paul1405, being used by them. How does that make you feel?

I don't care if people are allowed to grow a few plants of their own and have a personal 30gms or so on them. What I am concerned about are the cynical, hypocritical SOBs who abuse their positions of trust and don't give a rat's behind for the suffering of the many thousands of kids whose lives are going to be wrecked by the drugs of organised criminals who ARE the importers and users of those illegal guns.

Taking marijuana is probably pretty harmless. Taking stronger drugs is harmful but totally voluntary self-harm by the clown who is damaged. A bullet fired through gun anarchy means the target is dead dead dead, often without even knowing where it came from. The Yank NRA lobby are trying to bypass the need for protection of Australians from gun freaks by switching to other issues.

Look the fly on the wall is doing it again. Leoj you have never been within cooee of a Greens meeting, if you were, we would get the squatter out and that would be the end of you Louie, sorry Leo.

Paul1405,

Some mates of the Greens? You might confirm that.

"Construction unions using bikies as 'hired muscle' in industrial disputes: Victoria Police

Key points:

Police call for more powers to investigate union links to bikies
Concerns outlined in submission to trade union royal commission
Opposition calls on Government not to ignore problems with construction industry
In its 2015 submission to the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption, the force identified a "culture of fear" in the construction industry.
..
Spokesman Robert Clark said it was clear there was criminal elements in the trade union movements."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-08/construction-unions-using-bikies-as-hired-muscle-victoria-police/7075728

Hey! Paul,

How're you goin' on the permanent amnesty question?

A simple 'Yes' or 'No' will suffice.

Issy, I gave you an answer about that re; "reasonable time". If a gunnie has pangs of guilt after the amnesty period, and voluntarily wants to hand his firearms in, no problem. Providing he has not engaged in serious criminal activity etc, a degree of leniency should be shown by the courts towards that poor unfortunate, possibly a non custodial sentence may be warranted.

Paul,

That is not an answer, that is evading the question.

Are you in favour of a permanent amnesty?

Why won't you answer?

You are either in favour or you are not.

Julian,

I asked you also, why no answer?

No I am not in favour of a permanent amnesty. I am in favour of making possession of a gun without a licence (maximum one gun per approved applicant with stringent conditions for approval) a criminal offence attracting a mandatory prison sentence. Maybe a two week amnesty every 10 years. At least 20 years imprisonment without parole for stashing multiple illicit guns.

Julian,

".... (maximum one gun per approved applicant with stringent conditions for approval)....Maybe a two week amnesty every 10 years. At least 20 years imprisonment without parole for stashing multiple illicit guns.

What's the objection to a permanent amnesty?
What about people who need more than one gun?

I'd go along with the 20 years, but no parole? that's worse than for murder.

Nobody NEEDS more than one gun. Very few need only one gun. Want doesn't equal need.

On the Yank NRA's comment on penalties for murder (not comparable with illicit gun possession) 20 years without parole is not an adequate penalty. Only life imprisonment. As for parole for murderers, rapists or GBH offenders, parole would be acceptable only if members of parole boards were held jointly and severally liable for crippling damages if an offender they have sooled on to the public reoffends. Ever. If that applied the dear old Parole Board ducks would have thought long and hard before sentencing Jill Meagher to rape and death.

And armed insurrection against the government merits the death penalty, as should have been imposed on the Confederates in the USA -- a gun-armed regular militia as provided for in the Slavers' and Injun-hunters' Second Amendment.

In the final analysis, we as a community can expect freedom from gun anarchy only if we have the wit to enforce it at the ballot box. Same goes for the Americans.

Oh, and on permanent amnesty, the basis for objecting to it is that it weakens our protection against gun massacres.

We have some protection because of the only decent thing John Howard did in his political career. Up to us to nail it home.

Julian,

So you would not allow anyone to have a shotgun and a rifle, bit hard on aspiring Olympians.

What's your thoughts on Drillings, would you consider them to be two guns or just one?

You'd also make it hard for Olympians who want to shoot air rifle and air pistol events, as well as Australians who want to represent their country in other International events

Yes EJ, what about those people who need 300 or 400 guns to protect themselves, Issy believes there must be an allowance made for them.

On that permanent amnesty nonsense. Why should criminal gunnies be given special consideration. We could also have a permanent amnesty for murderers, they could just come forward and confess, without fear of prosecution. Could apply it to everyone in the criminal class, not just the criminal gunnies. Agree.

Yes Paul1405 I agree. And I'm glad to say practically all the rest of the 24 million Australians also agree. Olympians are a red herring - their clubs can keep the guns under lock and key. Non-lethal guns like air rifles are also a red herring as would be serving soldiers who the Yank NRA's Australian chapter haven't trotted out yet.

Julian,

"Non-lethal guns like air rifles are also a red herring"

Only an ignoramus would say that air rifles are non-lethal.
What about drillings, would they be one or two firearms under your "enlightened" ideas?

So, Paul, you disagree with the stated policy of the NSW Greens

"28. A permanent amnesty for the surrender of unauthorised firearms and strict penalties for those people found possessing unauthorised firearms;"
https://nsw.greens.org.au/policies/nsw/firearms

Brave of you, Lee Rhiannon will be after you!!

No Issy, that would be David Shoebridge. The Greens is a grass roots democratic party, and differing opinions are accommodated. unlike The Shooters and Hooters Party, where a party victim who displays the slightest hint of dissension is taken out at dawn and shot with his own gun.

Paul,

Lee will still be after you!!

"The Greens is a grass roots democratic party, and differing opinions are accommodated."

Pull the other leg, Rhiannon is on the outer with her fellow travellers in the Federal Parliament because she had a different opinion to the rest of them.

No idea what a "drilling" is but if it will shoot you dead, while you are wearing clothes, at 6 ft or more at the touch of a trigger it's a gun. My word you Yank NRA propagandists are persistent with your ducking and weaving. Lucky we Australians aren't as soft in the head as the Yanks and when we see danger from Leyonhjelm and other gun freaks, hobgoblins and monsters we'll punish them at the ballot box.

I understand the Japanese government has something to teach us about muzzling the gunnies.

Julian,

You have no idea what a drilling is?

Well, as you appear to be too stupid or too lazy to use Google, I'll tell you; it's usually a two or three barrel firearm which is a shot gun in one or two barrels and the other a high power rifle, essentially two guns in one.
So how would it fare under "Julian rules"?

How you going on those "non-lethal" air rifles, do you want me to put you right on them as well?

I don't mind, as shewing your ignorance is OK by me.

Julian,

Have you found those "non-lethal" air rifles yet?
--
"The Mordialloc-Chelsea Leader reported, beside tales of stolen purses and the like, that three men with iron bars “attempted to hijack” a late-model Commodore in a Bonbeach reserve on Sunday evening, June 4.

“One man opened the driver’s door while the others bashed the car but … they fled after one of the passengers challenged them,”

Now isn't that strange, what would make criminals armed with iron bars flee?
I wonder what was in the car that frightened them?

Maybe a woman with a "non-lethal" air rifle?

Julian,

Where did you get your figure of 33,000 shot dead in the USA each year, the most that I can come up with is 15,060 for 2016?
This year is shaping up much the same

see:http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls

and that's from a reliable site.

That shews the US firearms death rate at 2.13 per 100,000, which is low by world rates, so why do you quote the USofA all the time??

EJ, get it right, the Yanks have nothing to worry about, if only 15,000 are shot dead each year, now if it was 33,000 they would be most upset. Issy in your opinion at what number of gun deaths pa should they Yanks start worrying,the same for Australia?

Issy, you seem to think gunnies are the experts on guns, so therefore they are the best people to formulate (no) gun laws. is that the case?

Paul,

Why do you also use the USA as the bad example when they are way down on gun deaths compared to many other countries?

The incidence of gun crime in the US is very largely due to social problems - lower socio-economic blacks and involved in gangs and drugs.

The 'Open Door' immigration policy of the idiotic Greens who think Australia should be relieving the population problems of Third World countries would create a similar stratification, with similar unemployment, welfare dependence and city ghettos in Australian society.

But then the Greens are also soft on those criminal gangs dealing in drugs. They are not so keen on rights for victims of crime or on protecting the ordinary citizen against thugs.

In Queensland the Greens and Labor vowed to destroy the successful VLAD law that was passed by the High Court and was working well. Labor's Annastacia Palaszczuk became Premier and proceeded to undermine and trash the law.

Of course Paul1405, who claims to be bosom buddies with the infamous, totalitarian, NSW Greens 'Eastern Bloc' faction, who in turn are alleged to be in cahoots with the Soros-sponsored leftist 'gun control' activists, could be expected to be trash-talking the many thousands of honest, respectable citizens who qualified for and treasure their firearms licence.

The strange thing is (well, maybe not so strange given their union connections), the Greens are not interested at all in the deterrence and apprehension of criminal elements, especially those drug-dealing bikie gangs. And there is no way they are ever going to stop using illicit drugs themselves. 'Their' dealers need those illegal gangsta guns.

The Greens aren't interested in protecting the environment either.

Any wonder Richard Di Natale is desperate to shake the Greens faction tree to dislodge some of the mischievous monkeys hiding there. Interesting times to come.

Issy, "way down" you say, humm... lets take a look at firearm homicides per 100,000 at some comparable countries: As supplied by the THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE:

USA 3.6, Canada 0.5, Ireland 0.4, Belgium 0.3, Finland 0.3, Italy 0.3, AUSTRALIA 0.2, New Zealand 0.2, Denmark 0.2, France 0.2, Germany 0.1, UK 0.0, Japan 0.0.

I have not include countries like South Sudan, Somalia, Colombia, Syria, Iraq, etc. Not because they might have a high number, rather because I like to compare apples to apples. That is countries similar in nature to Australia, like the US. The US on my list is "way up" and not "way down" as you claim. Anything from 7 to 30 greater rate of firearm homicides than comparable countries.
Issy, that "way down" claim of yours was shot to bits long ago. Besides the extremest National Rifle Association of US, what other foreign pro gun organizations have seen fit to interfere in Australian domestic politics, and to financially support the Australian pro gun lobby. The $30,000 donated by 'The Federation of Hunting Clubs Inc' to the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party in 2015/16. What was the original source of that finance?
What is the link between the Sporting Shooters Association and the CFMEU? Answer, they both made sizable donations to Bob Katter at the last federal election. Issy are you a member of both organizations? If not, why not?

Leoj, you do a great job of turning codswallop, into something that appears meaningful, and then presenting it as fact. But unfortunately its still codswallop. WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE!

There you are, a new ready made nick for you; CODSWALLOP, its not taken, you can have it. Suit you to a tee!

Paul1405,

Everyone knows your form where denialism is involved. You could be standing in a tub of water and be denying the fact that your feet are wet. In spite of video evidence and reported police statements, you claimed that a victim of a street attack, Andrew Bolt, actually arranged it all himself for publicity. On that subject you remain more extremist than the claimed perpetrators, Melbourne Antifa.

Your claimed links with the political fringe-dwelling NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens are made rather likely by your half-truths and more usually, utter disregard for truth and established facts in the public domain.

From the outset you use the Big Lie technique of the foul propagandist, deceitfully blame-shifting the violence and illegal imported firearms of drug-trafficking criminal gangs that the Greens protect (see earlier post) onto the many thousands of police-checked, duly licensed and law-abiding, respectable, ordinary, Australian citizens who have proven lives of acting lawfully. You abuse these fine, upstanding citizens as 'gunnies', but you have never been inclined to provide any evidence that you or those opportunist 'Eastern Bloc' politicians you idolise, could ever satisfy the tests of character that they met and continue to uphold.

Honestly is there any wonder that the previous and present Greens leaders want to be freed of the rogue NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens outfit? -Can't trust them inside the Greens either, that is their form,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-05/nsw-greens-civil-war-intensifies-jeremy-buckingham-reform-call/7814678

Paul,

The USA is not comparable to any of your comparisons none of those countries has a land border with a largely unruly neighbour Mexico which had 15,000 firearm murders in 2016 and has a population of 127 million, which is less than half that of the US.

Why does the US have a low murder rate, in comparison to countries with much tougher gun laws?

"• The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people
• But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people
• Puerto Rico tops the world’s table for firearms murders as a percentage of all homicides - 94.8%. It’s followed by Sierra Leone in Africa and Saint Kitts and Nevis in the Caribbean"
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

Leo, "Everyone knows" Oh! how it must make you feel all warm and fuzzy, knowing you are included in the tribe, and little old me is unloved, unwanted, on the outer, persona non grata. Oh! how I long to sit by the warmth of your camp fire, where everyone else sits and not be cast away in some cold and damp friendless corner of this world. That really upsets me!

"You could be standing in a tub of water and be denying the fact that your feet are wet. In spite of video evidence and reported police statements,"

MY FEET ARE NOT WET! You failed to notice I am wearing gum boots!

"you claimed that a victim of a street attack, Andrew Bolt, actually arranged it all himself for publicity."

No, I claimed that was a POSSIBILITY" and still do, until evidence to the contrary is provided. Leo look up the meaning of the word possibility.

The rest of your post is CODSWALLOP and not worth responding to.

Firearms murders are only a part of gunshot deaths in the USA. Murders in the doubly underprivileged US-ruled non-US hinterland are no indication of gunshot deaths in the USA which amount to 36 thousand Yanks shot dead by other Yanks every year. The persistent attempts by the Australian chapter of the Yank NRA to distort figures can only help focus a campaign to go after them at the ballot box.

Issy. I am so relieved by that great news that we are doing better than Yemen, Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica, and even Puerto Rico. If the gunnies have their way and we work really hard we could beat the lot. Its a pity we have to suffer the way we do, and be like crappy countries like Canada, Ireland, Belgium, Finland, Italy, New Zealand, Denmark, France, Germany, UK and Japan.

If Issy and Leo have their way on gun control Australia will be another Yemen, before we now it. Something to look forward too.

Julian,

Where do you get your figures from, a reference would be helpful.

Paul,

The US has more guns in civilian hands than any other country in the world yet it does not have the highest rate of violence nor the highest murder rate; why is this so?

If the Greens and their fellow travellers are to be believed guns are responsible for violence and the more guns that there are in a community then there is more violence, why is this not so in the USA?

Interesting state there Issy. 88% of Americans own a gun. Since 76% of their population is over 18 years of age. And assuming every one of them owns a gun, even the blind one, and the ones with no arms. The other 12% must be owned by children, so half the children in the US own a gun, that is about 40,000,000 kids. No wonder they have a gun problem. Do they take them to school for show and tell?

EmperorJulian,

You should be getting upset about the sly spinmeisters of billionaires, an international currency trading billionaire in particular, and cynical, equally self-serving politicians who are showing complete contempt for your and the public's ability to question and think. They play you like a fiddle.

You would do yourself a good turn if you spent some time on a credible skeptic's site. Just Google.

While talking about Google, here are some easily found facts on the USA, which while interesting, are irrelevant statistically to Australia with its different culture and other factors.
US
Number of deaths: 2,626,418.
Death rate: 823.7 deaths per 100,000 population.
Life expectancy: 78.8 years.
Infant Mortality rate: 5.82 deaths per 1,000 live births.Mar 17, 2017

Homicide
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm
(Firearm homicides
Number of deaths: 10,945
Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.4)

Now, if you happen to realise that the contribution of gun deaths is very low to the overall number of deaths and the firearms deaths are attributable anyhow to longstanding social problems (made worse by leftist social policies that have unexpected negative consequences), the penny should drop as to why some very wealthy people and the politicians who cover and spruik for them, are so very keen for you to be chasing the 'gun control' rabbit (and other rabbits!). - That is lest you start wondering about things that shouldn't be concerning you, such as (in the US) very deep social problems that are being mishandled by cynical politicians who serve wealthy lobbyists and are selfishly concerned with their own entitlements and futures.

Australia is coming perilously closer to developing the very same social problems of the US through the 'diversity' tail wagging the immigration policy dog. You can blame both sides of the Parliament for being asleep at the wheel, but particularly fools like Rudd, Malcolm Fraser and the worst of all, the treacherous Greens and their 'Open Door' immigration.

Paul1405,

Are those the sort of factoids, from Soros' 'gun control' propagandists most likely, that NSW Greens 'Watermelon' Sh**bridge got from his 'familiarisation tour' of the US of A?

Jolly good work if you can get it, eh what? But it would have been available f.o.c from the less credible sites of the Internet.

Now, tell us all what interest NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens have in visiting Australia's 'Struggle Towns' and fixing things there? Y'know, being practical and getting cooperation. Nope, not in the NSW Eastern Bloc's lexicon. That would always be up to others to do, wouldn't it. No way those parliamentary seat polishing NSW Greens are going to be rolling their sleeves up and getting their own hands dirty by doing some work where it is sorely needed. Not while reclining in an aircraft or limo is on offer.

You might get to run, Shank's mare, beside their guvvy limos though, Paul1405. Lucky you.

Paul,

Do the Greens et al a favour and tell us all why the US has more guns in civilian hands than any other country in the world yet it does not have the highest rate of violence nor the highest murder rate?

What of the mantra "More guns, more deaths"?

If one trained person had been in the cafe at Port Arthur and had a concealed pistol then the story would be different.

Why have neither you nor Julian speculated on why the files on the Port Arthur murders were locked for thirty years?

Did the Government have something to hide?

No point in speculating about side issues. Focus must be on suppressing the gun freaks and their supporters in parliament.

Issy, please tell us about the 40,000,000 children (minimum), in the US who own a gun? I got that from you.

Some of those 40,000,000 enjoying themselves!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGCKFzGAfQ0

Are you a regular at Bullets and Burgers? Uzi every child should one, the perfect Xmas gift.

And when do expect Australia will be up there with Yemen in the gun owning stakes? Have we passed Somalia yet?

Are the Shooters and Hooters working on it? Have you joined the CFMEU yet?

Julian,

"No point in speculating about side issues. Focus must be on suppressing the gun freaks and their supporters in parliament"

Focus is on getting members into Parliament,shooters that is; had it not been for good old John Howard, The Father of the Australian Gun Lobby, shooters, collectors and other firearm owners would not have become political and elected their own representatives.

Of course, for you Port Arthur may be a side issue, I did notice how quick you were to vilify some Port Arthur massacre survivors, seems that they didn't agree with your personal views.

How're you going on the "non-lethal' air guns?

Funny that the very laws that you laud, declare air-powered firearms to be lethal weapons. Do you think that the law is stupid on the matter?

How're you going on finding references to back up your claims?

On owning more than one firearm, the law recognizes that one gun is not enough, to take the case of a farmer who has a .22rf rifle to shoot rabbits etc., and who has deer on his land in pest numbers.
He is not allowed to shoot deer with the .22, it's not considered humane, and a centre fire rifle of at least .30 calibre is usually required.

Would suggest that you do some study, we are never too old to learn.

"Would suggest that you do some study, we are never too old to learn"

How much study is needed to notice that Martin Bryant was able to wipe out all those people because the lax gun control let him get his hands on a gun?

How much study is needed to learn not to notice that the American slave owners and Injun hunters managed to get the US constitution to permit gun anarchy and that 36 thousand Yanks shoot 36 thousand other Yanks dead every year?

Where study is needed is to find the way to mobilise politically the interest 23 million or so non gun freaks in Australia have in stamping out the attempts by the Yank NRA's Australian chapter to put them at risk of joining the 36 thousand Yank dead.

EmperorJulian, "Martin Bryant was able to wipe out all those people "

Yes and he used an accelerant too. Which might have been employed to devastating effect and with far less chance of detection elsewhere.

What makes you believe that Bryant would not have sought other means to 'win' the 'golden prize' of international publicity and attention for life that the idiotic, self-serving media give these mongrels?

How he must gloat when the headline-hunting NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens give him even more publicity. Or those tabloid (most seem to be tabloid now) media outlets use him, a NSW serial killer and the murderous killer of a UK tourist regular columns and minutes on The Box?

If you don't think and challenge, you will rapidly lose that grey matter.

Now, exactly what do you believe exists in the Howard 'gun control' that will stop perpetrators of homicides?

Bluntly, why do you believe that perpetrators will be obeying Howard's paperwork faux 'barrier' when they have already resolved to break far more serious and always existing laws against murder?

The most illogical line of argument the pro gun mob put forward to justify lax gun laws is the "murderer would have used another weapon nonsense". In the case of Martin Bryant according to the Leo line if he didn't have a gun to murder people with he would have simply used an axe, or a sledge hammer, or even a rock. The fact is he used a gun, and that gun was available to him because of those lax gun laws at the time.
The Leo line is simply to deflect attention away from one of the major problems with gun availability, that being the probability of mass murder taking place from time to time using guns.

Paul,

What do you suggest reference the probability of mass murder using petrol, kerosene or diesel fuels?

Thirty -six people were murdered by arson, in three incidents, since 2000, that is three massacres by fire since the introduction of the Howard Gun Laws.

What to do about the easy availability of fuels and igniters?

Julian,

Your statement that

".... 36 thousand Yanks shoot 36 thousand other Yanks dead every year?" is fatuous (synonyms: silly, foolish, stupid, inane, nonsensical, childish, puerile, infantile, idiotic, brainless, mindless, vacuous, imbecilic, asinine, witless, empty-headed, hare-brained)

FBI: US Homicide Rate at 51-Year Low

"The US homicide rate in 2014, the most recent year available, was 4.5 per 100,000. The 2014 total follows a long downward trend and is the lowest homicide rate recorded since 1963 when the rate was 4.6 per 100,000. To find a lower homicide rate, we must travel back to 1957 when the total homicide rate hit 4.0 per 100,000."

Overview
In 2013, the estimated number of murders in the nation was 14,196. This was a 4.4 percent decrease from the 2012 estimate, a 7.8 percent decrease from the 2009 figure, and a 12.1 percent drop from the number in 2004.
There were 4.5 murders per 100,000 people. The murder rate fell 5.1 percent in 2013 compared with the 2012 rate. The murder rate was down from the rates in 2009 (10.5 percent) and 2004 (18.3 percent). (See Tables 1 and 1A.)
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/violent-crime/murder-topic-page/murdermain_final

and that's all murders, the murder rate by firearms is much less.

So the more guns the safer the society, this holds good for Australia also as our murder rate continues to fall, and the number of guns in the hands of civilians continues to rise.

Anther erroneous line of argument from the gunnies is, well gun murders are okay, because 36 people were murdered by arson. What is the relevance between the two? None what so ever.

Issy, you are ridiculous, from your own statistics provided, 88% of Americans own a gun. From the US population number, and age, at least 40,000,000 of those gun owners must be children. That makes you look stupid, and willing to put up any old nonsense to support your argument. I think you spend too much time in the gun happy joint of 'Bullets and Burgers'!

How about you answer those question I asked.

Just to make it really so simple that the Yank NRA's Australian chapter can't wriggle out by pretending not to comprehend it:

Gunshot deaths are people getting shot dead. That's what the 36 thousand a year in America stands for.

It includes murders but is not confined to them.

It is not about day by day or month by month or year by year trends or fluctuations in the killing rate.

It is a product of the gun anarchy promoted by the Yank NRA and sought by its Australian chapter.

It is the enemy that John Howard took on and the Australian community has to be warned and empowered to squelch wherever it is active.

Julian,

You really are fatuous (plus derivations)

To say that 36,000 people killed 36,000 doesn't allow for multiple killings'

From where did you get your figures?

I got mine from the FBI site.

Paul,

There is no need for you to be as silly as Julian, the 88% figure is obviously arrived at by comparing the number of gun in the US to the population, we all know that some people have more guns than do others

Each gunfire killing has a shooter and a victim. 36000 victims means 36000 shooters. Source not FBI because FBI is about murders. Source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

What is needed is evidence-based regulation of persons who are allowed to own firearms. That licensing exists and has worked well in Australia since the year dot. The type of firearm is easily controlled through import regulations, which again were always in existence and working.

What has been well established and in similar threads before, is that 'gun control' is a political sham. It is the creature of very wealthy United States interests who have a vested interest in concealing persistent social problems, some largely endemic to blacks, in the United States.

It is just another of those rabbits invented for the chattering commentariat to occupy themselves chasing and to shock/horror/dismay their dumbed-down, unthinking audiences.

The numbers of blacks from low socio-economic status being involved in drugs and criminal gangs is a bellwether of serious social problems that beg study (that has been done) and political action. The latter is being frustrated by the pressure on politicians by vested interests, billionaires and those who receive their patronage. The great hope, Obama was just another self-promoting BS artist. You really have to feel sorry for blacks who are at the mercy of suave politicians saying they will care for them, but blaming others to eventually shelve responsibility themselves.

The overwhelming causes of death are: in children, accidents (which should indicate education for parents and safer design of appliances and homes) and for the mainstream, cardiovascular is top and climbing fast. That is a bellwether for government action on health, especially food (sugar, grease and salt in foods for example).

For curiosity, suicide is the 10th ranking cause of death and again, another bellwether of social problems.

But to work on these issues is to disturb such giants as the food and drug industries and billionaire currency and share manipulators like Soros. Even though the solutions are simple, such as get that damned salt, fat, sugar and chemical additives out of foods, particularly out of tuckshops, those wealthy share owners and traders are not going to allow that to happen. So one of their strategies is diversions and outright lies.

contd..
In Australia, the notorious and nasty NSW 'Eastern Bloc' faction of the Greens, the same serial troublemakers who picketed an innocent small chocolate shop owner (the Eastern Bloc's partition against Israel!) has seized upon the lie of 'gun control' (lies have an attraction for the 'Watermelon' faction) as a way of getting headlines. The main figure is an ineffectual politician, Sh**bridge, who has pretensions of following the awful Lee Rhiannon (Brown) and is the boy who has been swinging from her coat tails for years, mimicking her. The problem for Sh**bridge is that he has no ideas and gay marriage is running out of puff.

Of course, Sh**bridge and the NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens faction are not interested in anything as mundane as drugs&kids, 'Struggle Towns' or aged care problems. They figure themselves as big-time players on the stage of international politics and getting paid by the taxpayer for being disruptive in parliament.

The Australian chapter of the Yank NRA writes:
"What is needed is evidence-based regulation of persons who are allowed to own firearms. That licensing exists and has worked well in Australia since the year dot. The type of firearm is easily controlled through import regulations, which again were always in existence and working."

Didn't work too well at Port Arthur, did it?

Julian,

You found a reference, congratulations.

But the 63,000 figure that you tout contains 21,175 suicides, which, though firearm related, were the deliberate choice of the person concerned and had a firearm not been available then they would probably have killed themselves in another way.

"New preliminary 2016 data shared Wednesday from the National Safety Council estimates that as many as 40,000 people died in motor vehicles crashes last year, a 6% rise from 2015. If those numbers bear out, it would be a 14% increase in deaths since 2014, the biggest two-year jump in more than five decades."

In 2015 there were 257.9 million registered cars and trucks in the USA.

"According to the Congressional Research Service, [there are]: more than 300 million guns in all.Jan 5, 2016"

Clearly motor vehicles kill more people than do guns in the US, this is true of Australia as well, in fact more people died from vehicles
in NSW than died from firearms in the whole of the country.

The Australian chapter of the Yank NRA is back to the old bleat that people die of other things than gunshots. Tell that to the 36 thousand Yanks shot dead by other Yanks every year. And to the relatives of those shot dead at Port Arthur and in earlier gun massacres before John Howard introduced a (minimalist) counter-attack against the gun freaks.

EmperorJulian, "Didn't work too well at Port Arthur, did it?"

You were challenged to demonstrate how the imported political sham that is 'gun control' would have prevented it. But you are silent on that. What about Monis and the Sydney siege? Illegal everything and he could easily have used common household cooking vessels, hardwares items and so on for a catastrophic consequence. Mercy!

Authorities are painfully aware that it is only intel from the public that might allow them to intervene in time. These people set out to break laws, you should be aware.

As well, if the media and scurrilous ambulance-chasing, headline-hunting outfits like the Greens NSW 'Eastern Bloc' faction could stop giving the mongrels the international personal infamy through the sensationalist coverage they sought and are still getting.

Australia had and still has - admittedly underneath that faked up paper-chase faux 'gun control' - a world class personal licensing system and a separate control on types of weapons imported.

Regarding that grub who murdered so many souls in Tasmania and brought suffering to hundreds more (millions, since we all suffered a loss), there were opportunities lost because BOTH sides of government for differing IDEALISM, had sold off the perfectly good Commonwealth mental and rehabilitation facilities that had catered for low IQ and mental patients. Authorities knew about him, but obviously there was nothing available to help since mental health sufferers (low IQ in his case) had been thrown back onto their families who could not cope and onto the general community.

Now, what about you come to grips with the issues in lieu of your pages of parroting a mantra? A lot of work has gone into drafting replies to give you information that slack politicians would prefer was not said.

From the Yank NRA re the Port Arthur massacre:
"You were challenged to demonstrate how the imported political sham that is 'gun control' would have prevented it. But you are silent on that."

The animal wouldn't have had a gun to shoot people with, would he?

Duh!

EmperorJulian,

Emulating Homer Simpson is your 'out'?

Come on, don't be holding all of that wisdom to yourself, the world is waiting to hear.

"The animal wouldn't have had a gun to shoot people with, would he?"

Now there's logic for you all, from Julian.

Tell me, Julian, how did Monis get a gun, a gun moreove that was prohibited to most people and was illegally shortened as well?

Further to Julian,

Don't be such a dill,
"36 thousand Yanks shot dead by other Yanks every year"

If 21,000 odd were suicides how could they be shot dead by others?

The wriggling Issy, trying to wriggle out of your nonsense claim are you;

FACT: there are more guns than people in the United States 1.12 guns per person, that is for every man, woman, and child.

What you were trying to claim by the following was, typically in ever 100 Americans 88 own a gun, obviously from the fact that 100 typical Americans own 112 guns, its obvious some own more than one gun. For your following statement to be true, as I pointed out, in 100 typical Americans 74 only can be classed as adults (over 18) therefore 24 must be children (under 18). If all 74 adults own one gun or more, to get to your magical figure of 88 owning at least one gun, 12 children would have to own one gun or more. Given the US population of children is 80,000,000 half the gun owning ones is 40,000,000! What a laugh!

<<The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership>> RUBBISH!

One American could own all 360 million guns in the country, that would make them most likely the lowest gun ownership country in the world. only a country with no guns at all would be lower. Is this to complected for you to comprehend Issy?

wriggle, wriggle, here we go with the wriggle;

<<the 88% figure is obviously arrived at by comparing the number of gun in the US to the population, we all know that some people have more guns than do other>>

OBVIOUSLY nothing of the sort, you are making it up as you go along!

The Yank NRA is correct in stating that suicides using ready-to-hand guns are Yanks shot dead not Yanks shot dead by other Yanks.

The NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens must have a container load of that 'gun control' propaganda from foreign currency dealing billionaire Soros.

It was when the Greens were running out of things to protest, particularly now that pink protest is not doing so well, that the opportunist, forever cynical Greens latched onto Billionaire Soros' 'gun control' scam.

But as has already been said, there is no getting away from the fact that 'gun control' is a political scam and is the opposite of effective regulation based on risk analysis and evidence. It is useful to the US billionaires and the also very wealthy presidential hopefuls like Hilary Clinton for talking points and to ensure that the political commentators are always being deflected onto 'what about guns!' and never get to bother themselves about the entrenched social and economic problems that affect blacks, Hispanics and people on low incomes, including low paid workers, often young.

In Australia, the NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens are casting about for something to protest. For years they have ridden on the backs of gays to get headlines for 'Boy' Sh**bridge, Lee Rhiannon and ors. Scrabbling for headlines picketing chocolate shop owners. Slagging police with drug dogs trying to deter drug dealers introducing kids to drugs at music concerts and other social gatherings. Such a great game exasperating police who are only trying to save young students' lives from criminal gangs trafficking drugs.

But nothing practical being done to address the social and drug problems of 'Struggle Streets'. Exasperated ex-Labor leader Mark Latham finally challenged Labor's (and Greens') hypocrisy, saying that Labor (Greens too) has an “obsession” with the symbolism of gay marriage and should be focusing instead on the nation’s “Struggle Streets”.
http://startsat60.com/trending/news/is-mark-latham-talking-sense-on-gay-marriage/comment-page-2

contd..
'Gun control' is a fraud, a sham. In the US it is about the very rich elites protecting their turf by fodder, negative hysterical pap, to commentators after the easy headline and column some. That leads interest away from the underlying social disadvantage and poor social planning by governments (with politicians sponsored by the same billionaires).

'Gun control' is not about criminals. It is about bans aimed at the respectable, law-abiding citizens, involving State compulsory confiscation of legally owned property at the point of a gun and bans. As so clearly evidenced in the Sydney terrorism incident (Monis), Howard's 'gun control' is a sham, worthless. All it does is create huge amounts of paperwork and take trained police away from collaring criminals to waste their time bothering the already certified safe licence holding citizen who can be trusted as law-abiding anyhow.

Linked to the routine plea for return to total gun anarchy, the Australian chapter of the Yank NRA writes:

"Exasperated ex-Labor leader Mark Latham finally challenged Labor's (and Greens') hypocrisy, saying that Labor (Greens too) has an “obsession” with the symbolism of gay marriage and should be focusing instead on the nation’s “Struggle Streets"

"as well as", not "instead", is the term that would make that paragraph relevant to Struggle Streets.

Should be, "In the US it is about the very rich elites protecting their turf by providing press release fodder, negative hysterical pap, to commentators after the easy headline and to fill columns". I could have added, on those slow news days when hack journalists don't find much 'news' at their local drinking hole.

It is interesting that the 'spokespersons' spruiking for SOROS' 'gun control' always hide their identities and refuse to disclose even the very basic details about their claimed 'organisations'. Of course their suspected one person, one-phone and one-fax 'organisations' are misleadingly called 'national, 'Australian' and the like, implying something more substantial. And the 'spokespersons' refer to themselves by their assumed grandiose titles too, 'President', 'CEO', 'Chair' and the like.

Leoj, how is progress with that armed paramilitary 'Citizens Militia' you have previously suggested was necessary for Australia to protect the good folk from leftest and other undesirables when police action failed. It was also suggested by you that such a well armed, and well trained private army could act when authorities went 'soft' on the criminal class. What rank do you hold in the 'Citizens Militia'? Honorary colonel.
As a One Nation supporter, it is clear you also adhere to that parties open door policy on gun ownership.

Paul1405,

Your dissembling and ad hominem always come to the fore where you cannot dispel facts or bluff your way out.

The NSW 'EasternBloc' Greens are purveyors of half-truths and outright 'wobblies'.

The national Greens have this one chance to slough them off.

Otherwise, Richard Di Natale has probably had his fill of trying to bring some sense, direction and leadership to the Party. Unfortunately, Di Natale's capitulation and final resignation is what the NSW 'Eastern Bloc' are after. Bob Brown's dim view of Rhiannon et al comes from his own sad experience.

Leoj, you seem to be suffering from some form of 'Sensory Processing Disorder', whereby the mentally ill person repeats the same phrase, often meaningless, over and over, Ad infinitum. In your case it is the worthless line;
"Greens, Eastern Bloc, watermelon, Trots", "Greens, Eastern Bloc, watermelon, Trots" on and on it goes.

Leoj, do you find yourself constantly tying and retying your shoelaces, possibly a hundred times a day? Either seek medical help at your institution, or try wearing slip on's. As for the, "Greens, Eastern Bloc, watermelon, Trots", "Greens, Eastern Bloc, watermelon, Trots", I suppose we will just have to put up with it until medical help arrives.

Paul,

Grow up!

Is that it Issy, a grow up! I expect a lot better from you. At least a "Paul you bloody nincompoop!"
Now I have let that slide, how about you answer my questions. I am forever answering yours.

Senator Rhiannon represents NSW, which elected her. Not the other States.

The spectacular implosion of the Australian Democrats came because the Senators in the party room forgot that each Senator represented his or her own State, on the basis of the party's publicly declared platform which opposed regressive indirect taxation, not a bunch of Oberstompenführers who had a stranglehold on the party's South Australian division and an eye to advancement as an ally of the Howard government.

If the Greens' party room, with that party's visceral antipathy towards democracy, seeks to override the NSW branch's role in informing Senator Rhiannon's approach in the Senate it is staring at a repeat of the Democrats' fate.

NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens? The differences with the rest of the party (and Australia!) are far more fundamental than that. 'Trots' and other extremist influences, anarchists, you name it, wild stuff. Been that way for years and always a problem. Barking mad and known for it. Like dragging a ship's anchor.

Just one example,

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/dec/22/richard-di-natale-says-greens-group-that-wants-end-to-capitalism-does-not-represent-party

Egocentric one-trick ponies like Stott Despoya, made lucky by the events of the time, finally destroyed the Democrats. Don Chipp thought of others and was a team player.

".... my questions. I am forever answering yours"

Overstatement of the year!!

The NSW 'Eastern Bloc' cancer will continue to drain any vitality and hope from the Greens nationally right up to the next election according to the SMH. The SMH can usually be counted upon to spin flattering reports for the Greens and leftists, so the situation is dire,

"[Rhiannon's] nine party room colleagues wrote a letter of complaint about her behaviour. Years of simmering tensions – about the party's structures, its policy direction, its very reason for being – had suddenly come to the boil.
..
Unlike in other branches, there is no NSW Greens leader. And while the Tasmanian Greens party has its roots in environmental activism, several senior NSW Greens such as Senator Rhiannon entered the party via socialism.
..
Senator Rhiannon's rivals disparagingly refer to her grouping as the Eastern Bloc or the "watermelons" – green on the outside and red (communist) within."

The 'way out past Mars' far leftist rogue elephants who find refuge in the NSW branch and do their own thing and could never be elected off their own 'brand'. They are parasitic on the Greens and uninterested in the environment and sustainability. Greens offer camouflage, a faux legitimacy, an organisational structure of sorts and a convenience for them.

There is a risk that the contagion may spread, to Victoria (Adam Bandt) first.
Richard Di Natale may not want to continue to push the proverbial uphill and wasting his energy and life in the process. His fellow Greens need to put principle first and excise the NSW cancer before it becomes terminal.

"His fellow Greens need to put principle first"

What principle?
Anti-democracy? (Greens are good on that).
Anti-socialism?

It is intellectually dishonest to deploy the buzzword "principle" to deflect from what is actually meant.

A more honest statement from leoj would be:

"His fellow Greens need to put anti-democracy and anti-socialism first"

EmperorJulian,

Maybe you are right and there is a more apt word. I am a glass half-full type though.

I favour internal democracy ('intra-party democracy') for political parties and have posted on that before. Labor is the worst in that regard I imagine. Its falling membership shows that the members have reacted to that failing. Some here might remember Rudd's fight with factions (union heavies) and the sorry aftermath for the leader and for ordinary members. It suits Shorten and others though. LNP cannot be boasting.

But it was Rhiannon's 'loose cannon' behaviour, her arrogant and deceitful undermining, that was the problem. That is what her colleagues objected to and she does appear to have form for that.

What do you reckon?

Leoj, glass half full seems the right evaluation of Rhiannon. Yes she was right as a NSW senator in placing her NSW branch ahead of the views of the party room but no it is not at all clear that she was really reflecting the views of the branch rather than merely her own.

EmperorJulian,

She is well off with her two parliamentary pensions to collect whenever she wants them and for life. Other assets including a million dollar plus house apparently.

You've got to be wondering why she would want to be hanging around the Senate. She could be travelling and doing some voluntary work in between. Although they do get travel.

Would you be hanging on? Must be the power.

Meanwhile,

"Open Season: Ordinary Czechs Get Right to Shoot Terrorists on Sight"
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201706291055076372-czech-republic-firearms-terrorism/

"Deputies in the Czech Republic voted overwhelmingly in favor of a constitutional amendment allowing ordinary citizens to carry arms and use them in case of a public emergency such as terrorism."

The times they are a changin'.

Would you be hanging on as a senator? Must be the power.

Senators I know who have hung on have been attracted by acceptance and opportunity to have a say in events. Power yes, but not coercive power over others.

Explosions in parties ranging from the peripheral and policy-driven to the mainstream corporate-funded power-driven parties are inevitable once parliamentarians become sucked into power-seeking for the sake of overriding others rather than devotion to the research and critical engagement necessary for pursuing a constructive vision.

Competitive power-seeking for power's own sake is what destroyed the Hawke-Keating government (along with the public becoming increasingly aware of the impoverishing role of the "accord") and the power-driven Howard-Costello conflict didn't do that government a whole lot of good either.

In the corporate-funded parties a great deal of store is set by connections and ability to bring in the shekels, and the resulting power brokerages become destabilisers as we see in the current excuse for an Australian government.

Two shootings in Victoria in the last two days and one in NSW.

"Keeping Australia a Safer Place".

Two shootings in Victoria in the last two days and one in NSW, crows the Australian chapter of the Yank NRA.

Absolutely right, our gun control laws need to be radically toughened.

For the way to handle the gun freaks read

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/

right through, three times.

EmperorJulian,

In Japan that didn't prevent 19 murdered and 26 injured while they slept. It is the person not the tool. However one should confirm that murder is illegal in Japan as in Australia. Breaking weapons ownership/possession/carriage laws is a minor consideration.

In the US, almost all gun crimes (other weapons too) are committed by blacks and most often on other blacks. Drugs and gangs are involved.

While Australian federal governments past and present would not like to admit the fact, gun crimes in Australia, while miniscule compared internationally, is almost invariably ethnic+criminal gang+drugs. It is getting worse.

-Ain't(sic) that 'Open Door' immigration and that 'diversity' tail that wags the immigration policy dog both doing great things for Australia? (NOT!)

Bone up from The Age,
http://www.theage.com.au/interactive/2016/gun-city/day1.html

You are in constant denial.

Julian,

I'm willing to bet that the shootings were with illegal firearms that are banned by the Howard* Laws.

*Father of the Australian Gun Lobby.

In denial??

Read https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/ a dozen times if three times isn't enough to shake the denial. It is totally factual. The real world. Not the gun anarchy the Yank NRA dreams about. Gunshot deaths. Japan, America.

Cold, hard truth. Ducking it is denial.

The gun freaks continue to hold forth while boasting - boasting - about our laws not being nearly tough enough to stop gun deaths.

Japan's are.

Would the gun freak Leyonhjelm dare to press for a binding referendum on gun laws, with the contrast between America and Japan getting wide publicity in the runup? To let the people decide on their own safety? Betcha no way.

Julian,

Japan is a prime example of how to runa society.

"The country’s homicide rate is associated with a stable and prosperous society with low inequality and high levels of development. Young Japanese males now commit only a tenth of the homicides committed by their predecessors in 1955,"
Read more at https://www.businessinsider.com.au/why-japans-murder-rate-is-so-low-2014-4#7hD3W6JzfmrfZcAw.99

If Japan had as many guns as the US I doubt that there would be any difference.

How do you explain the falling homicide rate in the US with the increase in the number of guns?

How do you explain the same result in Australia?

EmperorJulian,

OK, so ship some of the Oz Middle Eastern drug gangs to Japan, along with some ship loads of black drug-dealing gangs from US ghettos.

Add for good measure, some of those young fellows who have been re-educating Europe, Islam style. Because Japan too should 'embrace' the 'dynamism' and 'vibrancy' of multicultural diversity.

For good measure, Australia can easily afford to send a few plane loads of fools of politicians who like to strut their superior morality internationally at the public's cost. They can sort an immigration program for Japan. Long needed. We just don't want the pollies back either. They are a gift too that will keep on giving....problems, that is.

48 hours and the drugs and weapons, nice and new and cheaper than from the US, will be hitting the streets. And the Yakuza would be pulling out their hidden guns - Japan is a major supplier of firearms - to protect their territory from the imported gangs.

EJ, in my absence, I see you have been doing a good job against the pesky pair.

leoj, once more takes to waving his 'Hakenkreuz', blaming all the gun ills in America on blacks, and since Australia does not have a huge negro population to act as Leo's fall guys, he uses the non white ethnics as being the bad dudes at home. The rationale is, if you're not white, your more likely to be a criminal, than those good white folk. Leo, you are absolutely correct, well at first glance you are, blacks commit a disproportional amount of crime in the US, far in excess of that committed by good white folk. If all the socio economic factors were equal for both groups then you would have a good argument for your simplistic cold claim; "In the US, almost all gun crimes (other weapons too) are committed by blacks and most often on other blacks. Drugs and gangs are involved." But being of reasonable intelligence Leo, you know there is a lot more to it than simple skin colour.

I will have to agree with your brother in arms on this one, although he applied it to the Japanese;

"The country’s homicide rate is associated with a stable and prosperous society with low inequality and high levels of development. Young Japanese males now commit only a tenth of the homicides committed by their predecessors in 1955,"

But of course the white boy, Martin Bryant did not understand any of that stuff, when he went on his shooting rampage at Port Arthur. So we certainly need strong gun laws. Do we not?

Issy, what's this about the crazy Czech's and allowing ordinary citizens to carry arms and use them in case of a public emergency such as terrorism."
Do you advocate similar for Australia? Instead of duck hunting season we could have open season on those other two legged varmintslike, kabab shop owners.

Paul,

Been away?

Welcome back.

Paul1405,

Are you having some time off from the continuing blood feud between the Greens Trotskyist and Stalinist factions?

As usual where you are devoid of argument, which is commonplace, it is back to the amateur funnyman and playing stupid by disregarding all of the previous posts.

But then you have boasted a number of times while cheering on others you imagine to be of a similar ilk, that you are here to stir.

From an earlier post since you are plagued by memory loss:

'Gun control' is an imported political scam and is the opposite of effective regulation based on risk analysis and evidence. It is useful to the US billionaires and the also very wealthy presidential hopefuls like Hilary Clinton for talking points and to ensure that the political commentators are always being deflected onto 'what about guns!' and never get to bother themselves about the entrenched social and economic problems that affect blacks, Hispanics and people on low incomes, including low paid workers, often young.

- In Australia, the NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens are casting about for something to protest. For years they have ridden on the backs of gays to get headlines for 'Boy' Sh**bridge, Lee Rhiannon and ors. Scrabbling for headlines picketing chocolate shop owners. Slagging police with drug dogs trying to deter drug dealers introducing kids to drugs at music concerts and other social gatherings. Such a great game exasperating police who are only trying to save young students' lives from criminal gangs trafficking drugs.

- But nothing practical being done to address the social and drug problems of 'Struggle Streets'. Exasperated ex-Labor leader Mark Latham finally challenged Labor's (and Greens') hypocrisy, saying that Labor (Greens too) has an “obsession” with the symbolism of gay marriage and should be focusing instead on the nation’s “Struggle Streets”.
http://startsat60.com/trending/news/is-mark-latham-talking-sense-on-gay-marriage/comment-page-2

So now it's not guns that kill people it's immigration. Importing Moslems causes Koran-inspired bigotry, it's true, but there's no evidence that Moslems have been especially prominent in the shooting crime scene here or in America. They're prominent in crimes involving guns in the Middle East but much of their gunplay is related to justifiable nationalist struggle against foreign intruders, especially in Palestine and in Yemen. Calling Resistors "terrorists" was common among the Hun invaders during the war.

None of this accounts for gun deaths in America or Australia, or freedom from them in Japan. The Yank NRA's outsourced metastases are the main gun threat to life and limb in Australia.

Hi Issy,

Been in Melbourne for a few days, catch up with family and friends. it was a busy time, dinner Saturday night, QV markets on Sunday. Sunday night at a 'Multicultural' social gathering, people from as faraway as the Pacific, also we met a very nice lady from Sudan, with a very interesting life story, been in Australia 17 years. Home last night.

Thanks for asking.

EmperorJulian,

That is ridiculous. Please try to engage with the facts.

Yank NRA Australian Chapter wrote: "That is ridiculous. Please try to engage with the facts."
What facts? Gunshot deaths in Japan and America are facts.
What precisely, in English, was "ridiculous" and in what way? Try a reasoned answer as throwaway descriptors alone are mere ducking and weaving.

Dear Is Mise,

Did you happen to watch "Sixty Minutes," on Sunday night?
There was a feature on the black areas of Chicago and
the problems involved with guns, violence, murders, and
crime. People were asked the question, "Do guns contribute
to the amount of killings in this neighbourhood?"
The answer was a unanimous - "Yes, definitely!"

Foxy,

Of course guns contribute to the killings in Chicago but a greater contribution is by the people who pull the triggers.
If people are shot then the guns must be a contributing factor, just as cars are a contributing factor in road deaths.
Doesn't take rocket science to work that out.

Chicago has tough gun laws by the way,

"....the New York Times described Chicago's gun laws as some of the "toughest restrictions," saying:

Not a single gun shop can be found in this city because they are outlawed. Handguns were banned in Chicago for decades, too, until 2010, when the United States Supreme Court ruled that was going too far, leading city leaders to settle for restrictions some describe as the closest they could get legally to a ban without a ban. Despite a continuing legal fight, Illinois remains the only state in the nation with no provision to let private citizens carry guns in public."

Meanwhile, as the murder rate drops in the rest of the US it goes up in Chicago, and the guns used in Chicago are 99.999% illegal.

What a joke. all that proves is that dumbed down audiences like sensationalist pap.

There is a number of obvious research flaws in that, all fatal. It is worth zero, but worse, it is deliberately misleading.

TV makes the news!

My above post was referring to Foxy's 'discovery'.

Chicago's gun laws are the strongest possible under the slave owners' and Injun hunters' Second Amendment.

In other words as weak as piss.

And the Australian Chapter of the Yank NRA cites rate of changer in Chicago gun deaths while ducking the question of the actual number

For real gun control read about Japan's.

By the way, imagine the fate of the Yanks' Second Amendment if America was a democracy like the State of California.

Julian.

"And the Australian Chapter of the Yank NRA cites rate of changer in Chicago gun deaths while ducking the question of the actual number"

Please translate the above into understandable English.

EmperorJulian, "For real gun control read about Japan's"

Is that so? Then how come Japan's Miroku and Howa factories produce thousands of civilian and military firearms annually? Just a couple of examples.
Remington, USA, for instance, imports and re-brands these high quality firearms.

Yet you say that Japan has 'gun control'. Do you even know what Soros' 'gun control' is all about?

Why does that foreign currency healing billionaire keep interfering in Australia's domestic politics Emperor Julian?

Why does the highly secretive Soros outfit and their very secretive mates in Australia (who apparently regularly visit the US for re-briefing) want to disarm the lawfully licensed and firearms registered civilian population of Australia?

Australia's skills in gun smithing have been all but wiped out except for small scale Lithgow. It may well be that there are no new apprentices and haven't been for some time.

Who gains from that? Not Australia, that is for sure.

The rate at which a variable changes (up, down, stationary) is not the same as the value of the variable.

Quoting the changes in the number of gun deaths in Chicago per given period (hour, day, week, year or whatever) as decreasing or increasing ducks the question of the actual number.

10 per annum? 50 per annum? 100 per annum? 1000 per annum? How many? Any number above zero is unacceptable.

Plain English.

The Australian chapter of the Yank NRA on OLO has been referring to the rate of change, ducking the question of the NUMBER.

Check back to what you wrote.

Compre?

Duh.

But nobody is that stupid. The gunnies* are ducking and weaving, not innumerate or illiterate.

*Australian Chapter of the Yank NRA

Julian,

"*Australian Chapter of the Yank NRA"

Can you back that up, or are you just parroting the Greens "misinformation"?

Relationship to the Yank NRA has been fully declared in the gun freaks' own posts. At this stage they can do their own research over their own posts.

Issy, what about that Czech law where everyone carries a gun, just in case of an emergency, like slow service at Macca's, being over charged at Woolies, too many people on the bus (I want a seat) etc etc.

America has similar Dodge City gun laws, when is the gun freak in the senate going to introduce such a bill.

Can you shed some light on how you see it working in Aussie? Other than the examples I have given.

Julian,

"Relationship to the Yank NRA has been fully declared in the gun freaks' own posts. At this stage they can do their own research over their own posts."

In plain English, you just don't have any proof of the non-existant fairy tales that you post.

If something looks like a duck, walks like a duck, flies like a duck, quacks like a duck, tastes like a duck, hangs out with ducks, it's a duck.

A bit more about the city of Chicago and gun violence.

Michael W. Austin writing in "Psychology Today,"
February 25, 2014 states that "It is true that Chicago,
a city which has very strict gun laws, also has a
high level of gun violence. However, the case of Chicago
does not support the claim that restrictive gun laws are
ineffective."

"Instead, it shows the need for more widespread laws. People
who want guns can simply go outside of Chicago, obtain them
with ease, and bring them back into the city."

"Consider the fact that between 2008 and 2012 Chicago police
recovered 1,375 guns that were used in criminal activities.
Almost 20% of these guns came from a single store "Chuck's
Gun Shop," located a few miles outside of the Chicago City
limits in Riversdale, Illinois."

"Strict gun laws in one city will be ineffective if the laws
of the state in which that city is located are lax,
as is the case in Illinois."

Here is the full link:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ethics-everyone/201402/we-need-stricter-gun-laws

Foxy,

Is this the same Michael W, Austen, 'Cultivating Character in Christ' as he would have it?

http://www.michaelwaustin.com/

It is just that I cannot find any relevant skills he might have to claim any authority of criminology.

So his opinion is not worth any more than someone riding a bike past your door.

No surprising though, since he has yet to discover the reality that criminals acquire and use illegal tools, illegally, ie for crimes. Criminals break laws, well who would have thought!

However that billionaire currency dealer Soros' 'Gun control' is about compulsory confiscation and bans of LEGAL assets bought legitimately and used for LAWFUL purposes by LICENSED citizens.

Why would he be wanting to do that? Or is 'gun control' just a clever political scam to keep the media and commentariat busy, instead of looking into those social problems that plague some sectors of society?

leoj,

He's a Professor of Philosophy at Eastern Kentucky University.
He's published numerous works (books and journal articles)
on a wide variety of subjects. However ethics is his speciality.
He lives and works in the US, he has a PhD, and does his research
on a variety of subjects. Unlike other opinion holders in this
country (Bolt, Hanson, Ackerman - and many others who come to
mind). He knows what he's talking about. He knows his facts and
cites them.

You of course are quite welcome to use your own sources for
your information.

So he has squat. SFA. Nil. Nothing. A waste of time.

Just another self-promoter casting about for something 'controversial' to get his name up somewhere?

He is not too flash on research methods either. Not scientific by any stretch of the imagination.

Julian,

"If something looks like a duck, walks like a duck, flies like a duck, quacks like a duck, tastes like a duck, hangs out with ducks, it's a duck."

So you cannot back up your assertions with a reference; why am I not surprised?

Google NRAA

leoj,

So let me get this straight.

Are you disputing the facts that strict gun laws in
one city will be ineffective if the laws of the state
in which that city is located are lax, as is the case in
Illinois?

Are you disputing the fact that between 2008 and 2012 Chicago
police recovered 1,375 guns that were used in criminal
activities and that almost 20% of these guns came from a
single store "Chuck's Gun Shop," located a few miles
outside of the Chicago city limits in Riversdale, Illinois?

And are you disputing the fact that people who want guns can
simply go outside Chicago, obtain them with ease and bring them
back into the city?

These are all well known facts. One doesn't need a degree
in criminology to argue these facts.

What is your problem? I suspect you are merely trying on your
usual diversion tactics here.

Tsk. Tsk.

Julian,

NRAA ! !, you seem to lack a lot of knowledge, the NRAA is in no way connected to the NRA of America except that their members sometimes shoot in the same International competitions.

You'll have to do better than that to shew any connection between the gun lobby in Australia and the NRA in the US.

Foxy,

It was you who quoted Michael W, Austen, 'Cultivating Character in Christ', as an expert.

I merely pointed out the obvious, which is that your expert wasn't and expert at all.

Now, what about that gun shop you are trashing. Would you kindly provide the evidence that the licensed owner has been found guilty of the offences you allege, or failing that, any serious offence relating to firearms?

Just a reminder that you yourself do ask for such proof. You also argue that allegations are quite out of order, pre-emptive, pre-judging and wrong and should never precede conviction.

Your belief isn't good enough.

The fig leaf of formal difference is like the fig leaf that separated the Communist Party of Australia from the Communist Party of the Soviet Union - they were all Commos. The parent body is the NRA and it comments frequently on the lack, which it deplores, of a gunshot death count in Australia. Pretending no connection is no more than ducking and weaving by those who are part and parcel of the same body.
A duck is a duck.

Ever been to America? Ever contacted the NRA in any way? Ever accepted their advice? Periodic pilgrimages were part of holding the Commos together with global HQ too.

leoj,

No. what I did was cite an article on why America needed
stronger gun control laws and why by an American living
in the country who was familiar with the problems.
I did not claim he was an expert on the subject. You did that
on your own and then set about to prove that it was necessary
to be some sort of an expert in criminology to have an opinion
on the subject. I asked you were you refuting the facts that
the man raised, especially in the city of Chicago. You did not
answer and again are attempting to divert the discussion.

As for providing you with proof on the gun shop in question.
Certainly. Glad to oblige:

http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21718895-2013-more-1500-guns-found-chicago-crime-scenes-were-traced

This information is available on the web and you could have
Googled it yourself.

cont'd ...

leoj,

Here's the link again. Excuse my earlier typo:

http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21718895-2009-2013-more-1500-guns-found-chicago-crime-scenes-were-traced

Foxy,

Why should I search for the proof you don't have? You claimed as an expert that opportunist self-promoting religious fundamentalist who is hitching a ride and is casting about to flog his religious books (which I am certainly not going to link to, to help the sod out!).

Where it suits you, a Kangaroo Court is more than enough and anything will do to hang 'em high. Where it doesn't suit you, even a court conviction would not be enough to convince you.

If the gun shop licensee you are trashing has committed a serious offences s/he would have been found guilty, convicted and presumably would have lost his/her licence and probably the business as well since assets would have been confiscated.

So what conviction, if any, has been recorded?

leoj,

I'm not going to be manipulated by you and
play your game. The shop in question has a
violent history and is Chicago's most
notorious gun shop. It is according to the
national newspapers and the Economist the
Nation's No 1 source of crime guns.

You can Google all this information for yourself.
But I suspect that you've already done this and
know full well that the owners have not been
convicted of any criminal charges.
Now why do you suppose that is?

This is America - where crime does pay after all.
Just ask their President.

Hi EJ,

I took your advice and checked out the Aussie chapter of the Yankee gun freaks NRA. I was shocked with the cozy relationship between the two. Obviously Aussie is the lap dog in the relationship, and relies heavily on trheir Yankee controllers, and a bit of the folding stuff from the cashed up US crazies as well.

Aussie gun freaks in their own words are "a full member of ICFRA (International Confederation of Full-Bore Rifle Associations)" sitting at the same table as the Grand Wizard himself. Which I believe has it HQ in the deep deep south, possible Alabama, down there with the good olde' boys.

Issy are you a life member? How about a briefing on those varmint extermination laws you want to introduce based on the crazy Czech model.

But you were not volunteering before that the shop owner had not committed an offence. That is 'your' Kangaroo Court in action. I didn't look. I didn't need to.

Now, to follow your 'reasoning', should David Jones, a seller of plenty of cutlery, or retailer, what about wholesaler, of cutlery, be held accountable for any harm that comes from their knives and be shamed and their business reputation and goodwill trashed, if some offender, or make that plural, should decide to use the kitchen tools as weapons?

Cars next?

Paul,

Keep pushing the lies and someone, somewhere might believe you.
The Greens and GCA have been thrashing this dead neddy for years but have never come up with any evidence.

So, how about a reference or three.

Paul, you've got 'em hopping.

Issy, I was quoting from the web site of the Australian Chapter of Yank NRA.
Please Issy will you fill me in on those Czech Experience laws you think are such a good idea for Australia. Why are you "ducking" the question?

Paul,

"Please Issy will you fill me in on those Czech Experience laws you think are such a good idea for Australia. Why are you "ducking" the question?"

I only put it up to shew that some countries think rather differently to Australia, i.e. they allow and, it seems, encourage their citizens to defend themselves.

Julian,

Go back to sleep.

leoj,

Again, you are being annoyingly slow to understand
or deliberately digressing. The point that is being
made is that while it is true that Chicago, a city
which has very strict gun laws, also has a high level
of gun violence. What this shows is the need for more
widespread laws. People who want guns can simply go
outside of Chicago, obtain guns with ease and bring
them back into the city. Therefore strict gun laws in
one city will be ineffective if the laws of the state
in which that city is located are lax.

The need for more widespread laws is the point being
made here. Everything else is mere digression on your
part.

cont'd ...

leoj,

You still haven't answered the questions I asked
you earlier.

Such variations and they can appear large are most commonly the statistical phenomenon of regression towards the mean.

The social problems continue. Almost invariably the violence (and firearms is a sub-set), is black on black and involving gangs and drugs. The background from Wikipedia,

"Chicago street gangs
Chicago is considered the most gang infested city in the United States, with a population of over 100,000 active members from nearly 60 different factions. Gang warfare and retaliation is common in Chicago. Gangs were responsible for 61% of the homicides in Chicago in 2011.

Former Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy blames Chicago's gang culture for its high rates of homicide and other violent crime, stating "It's very frustrating to know that it's like 7 percent of the population causes 80 percent of the violent crime...The gangs here are traditional gangs that are generational, if you will. The grandfather was a gang member, the father's a gang member, and the kid right now is going to be a gang member."

Mayor Rahm Emanuel disbanded the Chicago Police Department's anti-gang unit in 2012"

Amelioration lies in real, practical improvements to the socio-economic conditions for blacks, with education, employment, recreation for youth and so on. It will be a slow grind and unfortunately governments and the political parties competing for that role, do not always think that way. Practical improvements mean some set-backs, a lot of planning and public contact and a lot of coordination. Above all, elbow grease.

According to FBI statistics and reports -
homicides regarding American blacks have been on
the rise since the start of 2015 - largely driven by
street violence in Chicago, Baltimore and the nation's
capital. This was shown clearly on the 60 Minutes program
on Sunday - mentioned earlier.
Even President Trump has declared that "African
American communities are absolutely in the worst shape
they've ever been in before." And, "Inner-city crime is
reaching records levels."

The high involvement of American blacks in homicide results
primarily from the profound social disaster - involving
broken families, drug abuse, poor education, and unemployment -
all of which has afflicted a small segment of black youth
in the ghetto "underclass."

But lets look further afield.

In international terms, the United States is an extremely
violent society with a homicide rate far exceeding that of
any other industrialised nation. A single city like Chicago
Houston or Los Angeles records more murders in a typical
year than does the whole of the UK.

We now come to the question of handguns. Most other countries
severely restrict private handgun ownership. But there are
millions upon millions of handguns in the United States and
weapons of this type are used in most of the thousands
of murders that occur each year.

Why then, does the US permit such a widespread access to handguns?
One reason is the persistent belief that, since criminals have
guns, law-abiding people need them for self-protection.

Actually, experts tell us that -
gun-owning households are much more likely to suffer
fatalities from their own weapons than from those of outsiders.

One study found that only 2 per cent 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.

A second reason for the proliferation of handguns is the belief,
deeply held by many Americans, that gun ownership is an
individual right.

For granting this liberty to the individual, American society pays
the price for those who choose to abuse that right.

Foxy,

"gun-owning households are much more likely to suffer
fatalities from their own weapons than from those of outsiders."

Care to reference that?

Dear Is Mise,

http://www.minnpost.com/second-opinion/2012/12/health-risk-having-gun-home

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-oe-hemenway-guns-20150423-story.html

There's heaps more on the web regarding the health risks of having
guns in the home.

cont'd ...

Here's another one:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110427101532.htm

Foxt,

Very interesting and I was particularly struck by

"And it doesn’t matter how the guns are stored or what type or how many guns you own."

Now what we need to see is a study done in Australia; licenced firearms here are required to be locked up, so what is the injury and suicide rate among Australian licenced pistol holders?

Dear Is Mise,

Great question.

Aren't you glad that you live in Australia?

Where most people are concerned, I do not regard them as gullible for the cognitive thinking mistakes that make us human.

We are all prey to the sly manipulators who know and use against us those human weaknesses described and proved by psychological research (REAL science not the sloppy, self-serving 'science' of feminists for example).

There are also those who BS us with 'statistics findings', which asn't statistical findings at all. Or abuse research by stretching the weak findings or simply the truth. -At the same time quoting the researchers for interpretations they would never have allowed themselves.

It is to its great discredit that SOROS' 'Gun Control' sham quite deliberately does all of those things.

One would imagine that the very first dead giveaway that the Soros 'Gun control' outfit is up to something nasty is its strict emphasis on secrecy about anything however minor to do with its organisation, structure, office bearers, sources and application of funding (no public auditing either), sponsors especially overseas, political contacts and so on.

It is immediately made obvious that 'Gun control' refuses to give any of the basic information that any reputable business, association or even minor sporting club would be giving up-front as a matter of course.

General comment
It would be only polite and respectful for anyone who joins this or any thread at a late stage to do all posters the politeness of reading and comprehending previous posts.

Another kill down to the gun lobby and our lax gun control laws. I guess y'all saw the scene on TV. A greedy pig with a farm wanted to destroy trees where the trees were a fauna habitat and the destruction of them was illegal. An environmental officer approached the landowning pig who fetched a gun and opened fire on the officer, hitting him several times, finally landing the killing shot as the officer was fleeing. Thankfully the killer went to gaol and will leave in a coffin. Hopefully he will suffer while inside.

But the Yank NRA offshoot claims farmers are quite suitable people to own guns. So what about the rest of the farmers? The background to the TV report was that environmental laws were regularly breached by other greedy farmers feeling a God given right to treat the Australian environment the way they pleased. Just like the squattocracy that blighted Australia three centuries ago. The class whose metastases were still active enough to press for a Brisbane Line during a Jap occupation to demark a traitor regime modelled on that of the then French traitors at Vichy.

And these NRA-led enemies want the squattocracy to be armed with guns!

Emperor Julian hates farmers.

Here you go Emperor,

"Woman ‘stabs husband and four kids to death’ in Loganville, Atlanta

A US woman has reportedly been detained after her husband and four young children were found stabbed to death in their home in Atlanta.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that a neighbour of the family says the woman was depressed about the death of her father and that churchgoers prayed for the woman at mass on Sunday."
http://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/woman-stabs-husband-and-four-kids-to-death-in-loganville-atlanta/news-story/42f07c09edd038ebfdf36a8df25d8f62

So, will Emperor Julian,

a) become hysterical, instantly hate all mothers, sledging them as 'squatters at home' or suchlike and call for all kitchen knives to be banned as part of 'Knife control'; or,

b) see his GP?

Not often do I agree with leoj, but this statement is perfectly true.

<<Amelioration lies in real, practical improvements to the socio-economic conditions for blacks, with education, employment, recreation for youth and so on. It will be a slow grind and unfortunately governments and the political parties competing for that role, do not always think that way. Practical improvements mean some set-backs, a lot of planning and public contact and a lot of coordination. Above all, elbow grease.>>

The problem there is, what Leo says smacks of progressive socialism, Leo you are not a progressive socialists are you. With the American free enterprise system, the citizens are free to succeed, but equally the citizens are also free to fail. On the one hand you have people with lots of money, materially well off, and no one can deny America does not have many in that class, But on the down side they have lots of failures. This is manifested in a large prison population, violence in society, disadvantage of all kinds. It would take a cosmic shift politically, for America to embrace progressive socialism to have any meaningful impact on its deep seated social problems.

Julian,

Have you yet found a reference for your assertion that thee NRA (US) has funded any organization in Australia?

Hi Issy, I've got to give it to you. You keep firing away, even when you're out of ammunition!

I think its time you started your 199th thread on something to do with guns. You have been well and truly shot down in the other 198 attempts, including this one, always off target.

p/s If I was you, I would sack the Leo bloke as my backup, seems to be suffering from 'Sensory Processing Disorder', Get a trained monkey on the keyboard, you would do better.

Paul1405,

You may be perilously close to discovering a possible motivation for currency trading billionaire Soros' and his wealthy mates' interest in diverting attention of the chattering classes onto his invention of 'gun control' as THE reason for the violence affecting 'Negro-Americans'. I use inverted commas in this case because the intentional wedge politics of such new terms and the inevitable deliberate disempowering is abhorrent too.

While I would disagree that 'progressive socialism' is any solution for lower socio-economic blacks (the attempts at social re-engineeering could be contributing to problems) and the difference between blacks who are thriving and those who are not is not explained by 'progressive socialism'. Nonetheless, there are social and of course political effects from the concentration of wealth in the hands of some who are anything but disposed to allow improvements and are hell-bent on hiding, justifying, protecting and extending their obscene wealth.

Soros is one such, and his conviction in France for currency trading, his avoidance of US taxes and his very murky and of course highly secretive interferences in the domestic affairs of western democracies are not easily explained. Or applying Occam's Razor, is there a simple personal interest ie making more money through social troublemaking?

It is hard to see any blue sky between between the far left and far right where a consuming interest in totalitarianism, media manipulation (propaganda) and censorship are concerned. But both appear to be acting in concert in pulling the tarpaulin over the real, already established, contributors to black criminal gang membership, drug use and violence (gun violence is merely a sub-set) in the US.

I suggest that the NSW Greens faction you are apparently astroturfing for (with or without their knowledge) realise that its interest in Soros' 'gun control' scam and the comparisons with the US, are just for headlines. How convenient is it to have all of that twisted propaganda from Soros' 'Open society' (another misleading descriptor if there ever was one!), huh? Soros and the Marxists have a lot in common where political (mis-)use of language is concerned.

contd.

What is needed in Australia is evidence-based regulations which focus on the only strong and robust control, the licence, that ordinarily would, were it not for the bureaucratic paper-chase of 'Howard's farcical 'gun control' enable police to focus on collaring offenders and not being required to wasted their time looking over the shoulders of the already checked and certified law-abiding, licensed citizens.

NRA-led gunnie asks: "Have you yet found a reference for your assertion that the NRA (US) has funded any organization in Australia?

No such assertion for which to find references. I assert that they lead the Australian chapter, not that they fund it any more than George Soros funds public resistance to the people's deadly enemies. The leadership is like the Soviet leadership of the Communist Party of Australia loosely covered by a fig leaf of fake separation but not necessary hard cash.

On another issue, hostility to the squattocracy (who pioneered the early colonial "boong drives" which continued until as recently as 1928) and its modern metastases is not the same as hostility to every citizen who works a farm. However the TV programme to which I referred reported that blatant illegal environmental vandalism was endemic among farmers in the region on which it was reporting. This leads to the conclusion that being a farmer is not a qualification (as asserted by the NRA-led gun freaks) for being trusted with guns.

Here's a handy reference to how the Yank NRA lies about Australia:

https://theconversation.com/faking-waves-how-the-nra-and-pro-gun-americans-abuse-australian-crime-stats-11678

Here's a good reference to guns in the squatters' "safe hands":
https://c21ch.newcastle.edu.au/colonialmassacres/?
So far it relates only to the "boong drives" of the 19th century but the historical project is ongoing.

There's a comprehensive list of massacres in Australia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia which shows which were due to lax gun laws leaving guns in killers' hands.

EmperorJulian,

Your claimed 'gun control' promoting 'authority' is a self-described star-gazing astronomer.

What is fatal to your implied support of YOUR opinions by your 'expert' first, that he himself avows that his views are irrelevant to Australia, his article was solely directed at challenging some claims by the US NRA; secondly, he is woefully ignorant of Australian regulations (quite obvious); and he makes schoolboy howlers where statistics are concerned.

Taking the last point and referring to a reply to a post, there is nothing surprising to any statistician in a peak in the number of multiple homicides (in this case by firearm) returning to a low number nil. That was earlier described to you, 'regression to the mean'. Is your memory playing tricks on you? Or are you incapable of changing your mind where contrary evidence is presented? That is another cognitive error. I am allowing you the benefit of the doubt there, you could be being mischievous along with Paul1405, Mk 1, 2,or whatever it is today.

I will not bother to go back over the many pages here where your own claims have been thoroughly dispelled.

However I will agree with the stargazer where he says,

"Weapons (including knives) are only used in 13% of assaults and 2% of sexual assaults in Australia. Firearms are rarely the weapon used, and only 0.3% of assaults in New South Wales used firearms.

Firearm use is almost completely irrelevant to assault and sexual assault in Australia, and cannot be driving changes in these crimes. Suggesting otherwise is deceptive".

That proves again (see earlier posts) that the NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens are pushing a big sham with Soros' 'gun control' and they should be doing something useful like addressing the problems of those 'struggle streets' and indigenous communities, where the drugs, gangs and violence are booming and damaging women and children.

Here is a link that's worth a read:

http://theconversation.com/australias-gun-laws-save-lives-but-are-we-now-going-backwards-58134

This is a complex topic and we ought not to dismiss
arguments because they do not square with our gut
feelings. We need to have a proper conversation,
not a mud-slinging contest, regardless of which "side"
we are on. A debate and a discussion must be had, since
discussion can help us in achieving the goal we all want.
A country with less violence or, more realistically one where
fewer innocent people die.

Foxy,

That last link is one of the best jokes do far, it is full of inaccuracies and downright lack of knowledge.

Foxy,

Would that be 'THE' Rebecca Peters who is alleged to be long term involved with Soros' Open Society?

Rather than require all to re-visit their posts for you, why don't you do the polite, respectful and good mannered thing and read through and familiarise yourself with all of the posts that have gone before?

The ducking and weaving of the Yank-led gun freaks is in tinfoil hat territory. The issue is not about gut feeling and it's sure as hell not about selfish wants. Posts like " That last link is one of the best jokes so far, it is full of inaccuracies and downright lack of knowledge" - no facts, no reasoning - no more than "The Yank NRA has spoken - you iggo underlings must just accept it"

The big facts are Japan virtually no gun deaths, America tens of thousands. The Yank NRA is an enemy of the Australian people and also the American people and conversations with the enemy are like asking North Korea "pretty please".

To put a stop to the public enemy the conversation has to be with the public through public institutions including political parties. That's where my own and my mates' focus is.

Emperor Julian,

Been through that a number of times. Your memory is failing you. For example,
leoj, Monday, 3 July 2017 10:48:19 PM
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7818&page=31

To be helpful again since you are forgetful, there are substantial social differences. When the triple disaster hit Japan, you did not see civil strife, rioting and looting. People lined up patiently to receive their food supplies and helped one another wherever possible. It should be obvious to you that the US has a multiple of Japan's population, a vastly different social culture, individualism and freedom and it is highly multicultural. Of those, the influence of a multicultural society must rank as a significant feature, if only because the gun crime you are talking about is far more prevalent among lower socio-economic blacks and features gang membership and drugs.

The other stuff you go on with is better left alone.

Please tell me that you are in the habit of having a few too many.

Dear Is Mise,

Perhaps the following link may be more "accurate" for you:

http://www.theage.com.au/interactive/2016/gun-city/day1.html

leoj,

The following link may help clarify who Rebecca Peters
is and why it makes sense to present her views
in this discussion. She knows what she's talking about
and has received awards to prove it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Peters

As for the rest of your advice to me?

I'm sorry I didn't realize that you're an expert on how
I should post (and what I should write?). Please
continue while I take notes.

On the other hand - I can only please one person per day.
Today is not your day.
Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

cont'd ...

leoj,

You neglected to mention that the link I cited was
not only by Rebecca Peters but it
also had input from Prof. of Criminology at the
University of New South Wales, Prof. Chris Cunneen.

You had earlier disclaimed one of my other links
because the author was not an expert in criminology.

Are you disputing the information given in this link
by a Professor of Criminology?

Foxy,

"Perhaps the following link may be more "accurate" for you:"

a good link, seems that you also realize that the Howard Gun Laws aren't working.
Welcome aboard.

The following remarks are addressed to the few remaining posters who wish for freedom from the gun anarchy which has America in its grip and bother to stay with this unproductive platform for a couple of gun freaks. The enemy can listen in but I am unlikely to try to engage them.

There are well known mathematical tests that can show whether the rate of more than 30 thousand gunshot deaths per year in America compared with the near-zero rate of gun deaths in Japan, allowing for population size and the presence in America of people some followers of the Yank NRA regard as racially inferior, demonstrate that gun anarchy costs many people their lives.

The steady stream of gun deaths Australia, crowed about by the gun freaks, shows that gun laxity in Australia compared with rigorous control in Japan is a threat to the lives of Australians.

The tests for mathematical validity of the statement that comparison of gun death rates in Japan and in America supports this can be found by Googling "statistically significant difference between two means".

However one can conceive one statistician who could be relied on for showing the difference between Japan and America, and by extension Australia as demonstrating that gun anarchy costs lives and those seeking any version of it are deadly enemies of 24 million Australians along especially with those with hideaway gun stashes.

That statistician is named Blind Freddy.

Hear, hear EJ spot on again. It has also been proven through years of painstaking research on volunteers that if you hold a loaded gun to your head and pull the trigger the most likely outcome is death. For example, in 1923 Dr. Larz Bunble, a rather big man, of Kirkinhimer Finland attempted to conduct experiments to prove that very point. Firstly Dr. Bunble experimented on a herd of reindeer, he had hoped to conduct his experiments on a herd of South American llamas, a more cooperative beast, but unfortunately the Finnish herd had already migrated south to Monaco, where they spend the winter, they can be seen happily grazing at the local casino. Unfortunately the uncooperative reindeer refused point blank to hold the guns to their heads, and ran away. Not perturbed by this setback Dr. Bundle then turned to human volunteers, one hundred members of the local 'Om Par Par' musical quartet volunteered, you may be familiars with the group, they play traditional North Finnish folk music, No! I have all their CD's. One group of 50 were given loaded 45 Magnums to hold to their heads, the control group of 50 were given 'Slumpenbugers', a traditional North Finnish pastry, best eaten with congealed reindeer's milk, an acquired taste I must say. On the count of three, the test group pulled their triggers, while the control group ate their 'Slumpenburgers'. The result was, carnage, guns going off, 'Slumpenburgers' being devoured, supporters playing traditional North Finnish folk music in the background, chaos! It resulted in the complete annihilation of the test group, but only one death was recorded among the control group, seems he had a violent reaction to his 'Slumpenbyrger'. Dr. Larz Bundle was awarded the 1919 (in advance) Noble Prize for his ground breaking research. Research, the gun freaks continually deny!

Julian,

Have you looked up the number of Sarin deaths and injuries lately?

Japan's incident ".... killing 12 people, severely injuring 50 and causing temporary vision problems for nearly 5,000 others."
(Wiki).
It could have been much worse, and not a gun in sight.

Foxy,

I have no intention of being forum baited by you and your verballing, putting words into my mouth. Then there is your disrespect for other posters where you inject yourself into the discussion late and revisit old ground, because you do not consider the dozens of earlier pages of discussion worthy of your attention.

You were asked a very simple, direct question about Rebecca Peters. But true to form you didn't answer, Googling a link instead. Peters claimed to be the 'Chair' of that highly secretive 'gun control' in Australia. It is alleged that 'gun control' that consistently refuses to give even the merest details of its structure, membership or sponsorship (but it gathers and obviously uses details of any foolish enough to give their details to it!) was/is one or a few activists, obviously including Peters it seems. You might like to flesh that out. However you went all around the woods, even verballing me, without volunteering the simple reply, a sentence in that wordy link and here, I have found it for you,

"[Rebecca] Peters worked for the Open Society Institute, a private foundation funded by George Soros"

Now, you might like to also reveal what other political links and links to 'gun control' activists that international currency trading (convicted of insider trading in France) billionaire Soros has in Australia. And you should be reading earlier posts to inform yourself.

Because 'gun control' is not about illegal guns or criminals, it directs itself exclusively at the compulsory confiscation and bans, at the point of a police gun if necessary, of the lawfully acquired and lawfully used property of the respectable, lawfully acting Australian citizens who can be relied upon to do the right thing and apply for a licence.

Dear Is Mise,

The problem is deciding who should and should not
own guns. Even "good" people can become enraged, drunk,
take drugs, become unemployed, et cetera and easy access
to a gun can escalate a mere drunken brawl to a murder
spree.

Imagine what would happen if peaceful protesters carried
guns when police stormed.

Fire-arms after all are weapons. They are tools. In the
United States - self defence is regarded as a fundamental
right - however it should also be a responsibility.
We have local, state and federal law enforcement. We have
our military. Surely
this should be the primary means by which we seek protection.
We don't need weapons for home defence or protection.

As a society we need to focus on
the individual and what drives gun crime. Often times it is
the lack of education, the use of drugs, as a result of
unemployment, broken families and people living in poverty.
If we learn to help those that need it the most we just may
eliminate a huge portion of gun related crime. It is the
job of governments within society to see improvement on this
front.

People that question gun laws? I don't for one moment
believe or imagine that they are crazy, sky-shooting
cowboys.

The responsibility lies on society as a whole as well as
individual gun owners. Society needs to put out strong
restrictions on gun ownership. Thinking logically, there are
weapons that the risk of harm far outweighs anyone's rights
to own them. Assault rifles, guns with high capacity magazines,
machine guns, are just some worth mentioning. These are all
weapons of war and the military should be the sole owners of
these.

It is not impinging on anyone's rights to say, "NO, these are
not okay to be in our neighbourhoods."

Part of the reason my husband and I chose to return to Australia
after having worked and lived in the US for over ten years
was the fact that we wanted a healthy environment for our
children to grow up in.

contd..

As for the article you [Foxy by name and by character it appears] rudely insisted that I respond to, that highly expensive and wasteful to police resources White Elephant gun registration the authors referred to - which has been discontinued in other countries because it was found to be ineffective - has never been found to have prevented a crime in Australia and nor has it led to a conviction in the case of a crime.

However it has gathered into a database the personal particulars and homes addresses and contact details of thousands of ordinary law-abiding citizens and presents a high risk to their and their families' safety. Organised crime, the drug-trafficking outlaw bikies for example, have been alleged to have gained useful contacts within the police departments.

Daily we are informed of breaches of security of citizens' details held on government databanks, including Social Security and Taxation Department. Where the useless, White Elephant' gun registry is concerned, if 'gun control' itself is to be believed and owners are targets of criminals, the thousands on the registry should be living in fear of home invasion by determined criminals or terrorists who have bought the information.

Using the Google you are so fond of, although unlike you I do read links before I post them, there is deep concern among licensed that criminals could use gun registry details as a shopping list. It is a reasonable concern. Then there are persistent errors in data held, Errors that are reasonable in a way because trained police have better things to do than look over the shoulders of the licensed and law-abiding citizen. Police went into the job to collar criminals not to be bothersome to the respectable citizens they depend on for support and intel. Now, what about you dispel that?

http://www.lafo.com.au/queensland-firearms-registry-can-keep-firearms-records-secure/

leoj,

I have now come to the conclusion that
if you don't like me but still watch and comment
on everything I say.
Leoj,
you are a fan!

Foxy,

"Imagine what would happen if peaceful protesters carried
guns when police stormed."

I imagine that the peaceful protesters who were stormed by the police would protect themselves, after all as the police are acting illegally then their actions are criminal.

Assault rifles, large capacity magazines and machine guns are illegal in Australia so there is no need to bring them up, unless you are referring to their possession by criminals, who have little difficulty in getting them.

"Imagine what would happen if peaceful protesters carried
guns when police stormed."

Hysteria. Forum baiting.

The debate is about evidence-based laws versus billionaire Soros' invention of 'gun control'.

Any reasonable, civic-minded person would be in favour of evidence based laws. That is where effectiveness and efficiency is to be found, along with the protection of the public and individual rights.

The creature that is 'gun control' is not about criminals and illegal guns at all.
It is poorly targeted at wasting police resources on looking over the shoulders of and even badgering the ordinary citizens with licenses, the very people who can be expected to uphold laws and have demonstrated that through their clean police record and character references. 'Gun control' sets out to drive a wedge of distrust between police and ordinary law-abiding citizens.

However the 'gun control' meme is very useful to its backer, his mates and the politicians who benefit from his donations, the billionaire currency dealing billionaire Soros, who is credited with very nearly sending the Bank of England broke, losing the savings of thousands of small depositors.

As might only be expected where sly political activism and overseas interference in domestic politics is concerned, 'gun control' has always been and remains, highly secretive about its hidden backers, membership, political links and so on. In fact it refuses to give any of that very basic due diligence information that any business, charity or political lobbyist gives as a matter of course.

No-one has presented any case against evidence based laws.

Dear Is Mise,

Once again I shall repeat what I stated earlier -

There is a huge body of evidence on gun violence
not only in our own society but in the US - and
homicides in the US have been on the rise since
the start of 2015 - largely driven by street
violence in Chicago, Baltimore and the Nation's
capital. As President Trump stated "African
American communities are absolutely in the worst
shape they've ever been" And, "Inner city crime is
reaching record levels."

Of course as we know emotive and controversial
discussions easily ignite the worst part of so
many people. Whether it is descent into name-calling,
insults, ad hominems and similar lazy, childish
tactics, or a dismissal of anyone other than those on
"their" side, attempts at objectivity are often scarce.

However, again, as stated earlier, this is a complex
topic and we ought not to dismiss arguments because they
do not square with our gut feelings - regardless of whether
we want more or less guns, more or less laws.

A debate and discussion must be had, since discussion can
help us in achieving the goal we all want. A world with
less violence or, more realistically one where fewer
innocent people die.

We have to figure out if guns aid or hinder that goal.
And having a proper discussion, not a mud-slinging contest,
will or should help towards that end regardless of which
"side" we are on.

I'll try to find even more links (no matter who they're
by). I tend to lean towards credible links for the
information they contain and the evidence they provide.
The studies that have been done that clearly back up
what's being argued.

See you soon.

The 'gun control' meme is useful to some.

Obama was the hope of black America. But during his term he did squat for the thousands of kids being raised in poor districts, to join gangs and carry out the same drug taking and violence, because that was the being set example before them and so often the family tradition. Cycles.

Then at the end, the smooth, fast-talking, globe-travelling (Air Force One!) international celebrity and master of the international stage, Barak Obama used the meme of 'gun control' to excuse and cover for his own inaction in improving the conditions of 'Negro-Americans'(sic, they are ALL Americans and that is where equality lies!).

I wonder, did Barack or his always-in-your-face and always-in-the-fashionista-mags missus ever sit down for a chat and mean it, with those many thousands of young kids who are now thugs, but might not have been?

But hey, Mr Soros' 'gun control' meme has an easy out: just propose 'gun control' and the commentariat obligingly chase that and the awkward questions just melt away.

For anyone who's interested here is a small
list of the achievements of former American
President Barack Obama:

http://www.godd.is/articles/obamas-achievements-in-office

Above all else the former President was and remains
what he has always been - an honourable man.

cont'd ...

Again excuse my typo.

Here is the link again:

http://www.good.is/articles/obamas-achievements-in-office

With the fly on wall leoj claiming gun laws are nothing but a left wing conspiracy designed to disarm the good folk, and place them at the mercy of the sinister lefty forces.

The question for Australia should be, are Leo's good folk, the licenced gunnies, that good to start with? The first cab off the rank is NSW's number one gunnie, and used car salesman, Tony Azzi, who in 2015 was photographed kneeling over a dead (shot) wombat, smiling with a gun over his shoulder, Azzi was investigated for this crime. rather minor one might say.

Azzi's actions pales into insignificance, when you look at the case of licenced gun freak and farmer, Ian Turnbull, should be Leo's ideal person to hold a gun licence. Unfortunately that was not to be the case, Turnbull cold bloodily shot and killed NSW Environmental Officer and family man Ian Turner at Moree in July 2014, Turbull received a sentence of 35 years for his wicked crime.

These are not the only cases where gun freaks have either disregarded the law, or taken the law into their own hands in recent time, with diabolical consequences.

Don't worry about America, its happening right here in Australia!

Gee Foxy, the Grumpy Old Man, has once more got you in his sights, to give you a blast.

Post whatever you like girl, don't be put off by a bullying attempt, for the purpose of suppression of free speech, by a member of the rabid right, the forums number one Hansonite himself.

He knows you are a sensitive person, who is vulnerable to his caustic insults, as I have said to you many times in the past, apply the 'armadillo principle' and carry on.

Paul,

"These are not the only cases where gun freaks have either disregarded the law, or taken the law into their own hands in recent time, with diabolical consequences."

Tell us about them, not everyone has your wide knowledge.

Paul1405,

The debate is about evidence-based laws versus billionaire Soros' invention of 'gun control'.

This is the umpteenth time you have tried to disrupt to derail and censor the discussion.

That is because NSW Greens 'Watermelon' 'Boy' Sh**bridge is beavering away trying to give legs to Soros' 'gun control' meme in NSW.

'Boy' recently visited the US for that purpose. Pity the NSW taxpayer. The ambulance-chasing Greens need new subjects for stirring and headlines now riding on the backs of gays is not having the impact it used to have.

What about you direct your attention at those 'Struggle Towns' and the violence of the drug-manufacturing and trafficking criminal gangs, including those Middle Eastern bikie gangs that the Greens protect, as demonstrated by the Greens and Labor inexplicably trashing the successful aniti-gang VLAD laws in Queensland?

But no, the NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens, the 'Watermelons' are about cheap stirring and have no interest at all in cooperating to improve anything. The NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens 'Trots' just want to ride on the back of misfortune, stirring the can, while polishing leather seats in Parliament and doing OK for themselves. Nice work if you can get it. But how do they sleep at night?

Howard's 'gun control' is the antithesis of evidence based regulation, resulting in police resources being wasted looking over the shoulders of ordinary, licensed public and conducting compulsory uniformed inspections in the homes of these citizens,

http://corporate.olympics.com.au/news/three-trap-shooting-world-cup-medals

while NOT laying a glove on these,

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/act-policings-bikie-taskforce-investigating-car-fires-shots-fired-in-kambah-20170707-gx6nsv.html

It is all politics. That 'gun control' meme is useful to politicians. But what is needed is evidence-based regulations aimed at those who offend and a stop to cynical politicians like QLD's Labor and Greens who buried, REPEALED!, the successful, High Court approved anti-bikie law (VLAD).

Then the bikies objected to the softer law of Labor Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk,

"Bikies consider High Court challenge to new laws

United Motorcycle Council (UMC) spokesman Mick Kosenko said the [Qld Labor] Government should have scrapped the laws altogether.

Mick Kosenko from the United Motorcycle Council
Mr Kosenko said bikies helped get Labor elected and the laws should be scrapped altogether
"I feel we helped Labor get across the line in the election — they know we helped them?" he said.

... It got [former LNP premier] Campbell Newman booted out and Labor's just done a big turnaround."

UMC lawyer Zeke Bentley said the group could challenge the laws in the High Court." [ABC Apr 5, 2016]

The Bikies are laughing, 'More of that 'gun control' meme thanks and none of that evidence-based law that might get in the way of our business'.

Dear Paul,

Thank You for your advice.

It does get annoying - especially when the arguments
are illogical and abusive and difficult to comprehend.
For example, -
I don't understand all the attacks on one-time
international speculator, and now philanthropist,
George Soros.

I know that George Soros calls an "open society" the
ideal form of social and political organisation in his
1998 book, "The Crisis of Global Capitalism: Open
Society Endangered."

He defines -

An open society as a democratic one, the opposite to a
one-party state ruled by an unbending ideology, such as
was the Soviet Union under Stalin. Soros foresees the
possibility that the excesses of modern financial
capitalism will lead to a similar breakdown of democracy.

This is what Soros has to say:

"The Enlightenment constituted a giant step forward...
Allowing reason to decide what is true and false,
what is right and wrong, was a tremendous innovation. It
marked the beginning of modernity ... The philosophers
of the Enlightenment are no longer read- indeed, we may
find them unreadable - but their ideas have become ingrained
in our way of thinking. The rule of reason, the supremacy
of science, the universal brotherhood of man... The political,
social and moral values of the Enlightenment were admirably
stated in the US Declaration of Independence, and that
document continues to be an inspiration for people
throughout the world...Instead of accepting tradition as the
ultimate authority, the Enlightenment subjected tradition to
critical examination. The results were exhilarating. The
creative energies of human intellect were unleashed."

Reason, the supremacy of science, and the universal
brotherhood of humans are the pillars on which we can build a
better future. That George Soros should laud the Enlightenment
for its achievements, and for foundations it has given us in
our quest for sustainability, proves that a business-person
as much as an ecological scientist or a moral philosopher
can willingly embrace sustainability. And isn't that our
goal - when the world's population is in the billions and
growing?

Back to the topic:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/23/australias-gun-laws-stopped-mass-shootings-and-reduced-homicides-study-finds

Foxy's whitewash of Soros, from his own book no less, sent the B.S. meter waaay into the red zone.

"Dumped files show influence of George Soros on Western politics
The Australian, August 22, 2016

In perhaps the biggest political scandal since WikiLeaks, a group of hackers has dumped hundreds of files exposing the influence of socialist billionaire George Soros on Western politics.

The files show Soros has established a transnational network that pressures governments to adopt high immigration targets and porous border policies that could pose a challenge to legitimate state sovereignty. His Open Society Foundations target individuals who criticise ­Islamism and seek to influence the outcome of national elections by undermining Right-leaning politicians. The Australian arm of the Soros network is GetUp!.

GetUp! was established by ­activists Jeremy Heimans and David Madden with funding from Soros. The Labor-affiliated Construction Forestry Mining Energy Union donated $1.1 million to the group. Bill Shorten and John Hewson are former board members. A major funder listed on its 2014-15 Australian Electoral Commission expenditure return is Avaaz, the US GetUp! ­affiliate that has received copious amounts of funding from Soros networks.
..
Soros-affiliated organisations follow a well-worn political and rhetorical strategy updated for the digital age. Like the socialists and communists of old, they attack liberal democracy by delegitimising the classically liberal values of ­individualism, free speech, logical argument and public reason. They attack democratic states by advocating a porous border policy, ­reframing illegal immigrants as refugees and degrading critics of totalitarian tendencies such as ­Islamism in orchestrated campaigns of PC censorship.

Documents uncovered by Soros leaks reveal a pattern of funding for programs that prosecute porous borders, mass immigration into the Wes­t nations from Islamist regions, and overt campaigns against dissenters. OSF has provided several million to the Centre for American Progress, whose programs ­include the explicit targeting of free­thinkers critical of Islamism. A recent program grant described a strategy to target six critics of ­Islamism and the “right-wing media” in an “audit of Islamophobic activities”...

Soros keeps making money hand over fist out of currency fluctuations.

"That George Soros should laud the Enlightenment
for its achievements, and for foundations it has given us in
our quest for sustainability, proves that a business-person
as much as an ecological scientist or a moral philosopher
can willingly embrace sustainability."

Ha! Ha! Ha!

As usual, Foxy is making the most sense. "As a society we need to focus on the individual and what drives gun crime." Many people cite the American example. Austalia's homicide rate is about 1 per 100 000 (all rates are per 100 000). The US has a rate of 4.9. As bad as that is, there are a number of poorer, less newsworthy countries with much higher rates. The rate in El Salvador is 108. Even in America, the rate varies markedly. Certain suburbs of big American cities have a rate over 90, while other suburbs have less than one. Both examples suggest that money and the hope of having a good life seem to account for much more that availability of guns. President Trump is unlikely to bring many factories back, but he has reminded everyone of the importance of jobs with a living wage.
Secondly, cancer and heart problems each kill 160 out of 100 000 Americans per year. Changes in health insurance can save more American people than better gun laws.

Hi benk, Foxy always makes the most sense. The only acceptable murder rate is 0.00 per 100,000, anything else is unacceptable. There is nothing to be gained by comparing Australia's homicide rate to that of anyone else, particularly some lawless state like El Salvador. Nor is there anything to be gained by pointing to some unrelated statistic like deaths from cancer.

What comfort would there be for the family of Ian Turner, to tell them; "Well how lucky it was for Ian that we are not living in El Salvador, or you know, Ian could have contracted cancer and died."

You say <<Changes in health insurance can save more American people than better gun laws.>>

I say; Changes in health insurance and gun laws can save even more Americans than changes in health insurance alone. i don't think America should have a problem with multi-tasking, do you.

Dear Benk and Paul,

Here are two links that are worth reading, in case
you haven't read them earlier. The first is the
stand that the Australian Medical Association has
taken on the National Firearms Agreement 2017.
And the second link is the agreement itself:

http://ama.com.au/position-statement/firearms-2017

And -

http://www.ag.gov.au/LegalSystem/Firearms/Documents/2017-national-firearms-agreement.pdf

I have no problem with current gun laws or multi-tasking, but I think that the interest that some Australians take in American gun laws is mis-placed. If we wanted to make the world safer place, there are worse places than America to worry about. If we are worried about Americans, fixing their health insurance system will save more lives. If we are worried about the American murder rate, anything that brings hope and jobs to poor suburbs will save more lives.

We need to use the data to understand where the problem lies.

Hi Foxy,

I have little dis-argument with the AMA position on firearms, I can live with that.

Maybe those here who are antagonistic towards gun control laws, Issy and leoj could have a look at the AMA's stated position, and see if they agree or disagree, offer improvements, if seen as necessary in their view. As can anyone else.

Paul,

" There is nothing to be gained by comparing Australia's homicide rate to that of anyone else, ...."

Well said!

Paul1405,

Seemingly you must tell porkies, misrepresent and stir. Next, the amateur funnyman as another way to disrupt.

To my knowledge there is no-one here who does not believe in the regulation of persons with a firearms licence. The licensed citizens have a particular interest in that. Obviously too because they are law-abiding citizens of good character, they would be strongly for law and order.

The licence is a strong, robust control and all of the certified law-abiding citizens of good character who have met the standards for a licence all agree.

For your part and I will mention first that unlike those many thousands of respectable licensed citizens that you slander and conflate with criminals, you have never bothered to spend a few minutes for even a cursory familiarisation with the available regulations and nor have you ever shown any knowledge or interest in the controls on importation.

But you sure do spend a lot of your time disrupting the discussion and muddying the waters.

Soros' 'Gun control' has nothing in common with the regulation of firearms ownership and use'.

Soros' 'gun control' is directed solely at the bans and the compulsory confiscation of lawfully bought and lawfully used assets. That ONLY affects the already licensed, compliant citizen. To claim otherwise is a lie. The difference has been canvassed at length in this and previous threads on the subject. Bluntly, you know better than that. And so do the NSW' Eastern Bloc' Greens who are trying to climb onto Soros' 'Gun control' bandwagon, now that their headlines from gays and so on are threatened.

benk's post above is a good one, going right to the heart of the matter and succinct. Those NSW Greens faction need to heed their national Greens' pleas to get real and stop acting as a collective of serial protesters.

It would be good if they could put some effort instead into cooperation to achieve better things for those kids in Struggle Towns and others.

There is very little gun crime in Australia and what tghere is

First, to finish my last sentence from the previous post, there is very little gun crime in Australia and what there is almost invariably associated with criminal gangs and drugs. Most usually where shootings are concerned, it is the Middle Eastern criminal drug gangs (thanks Malcolm Fraser!) who have penetrated the outlaw motorcycle hangs. Many cannot ride a motorbike. They are in it for the drug distribution, strictly business. Qld's VLAD law had their measure, but Labor and Greens scuttled it.

At this juncture it is worth reminding all that illicit drugs turns over hundreds of millions of dollars annually and MUST be regarded as a very real threat of corruption at all levels of society.

Worse, Australia is regarded by international criminal gangs, and the South American are the most dangerous, as an undeveloped market, ripe for the picking.

The illegal guns are linked with the drugs criminals. But 'gun control' is aimed exclusively at bothering and bans affecting lawful compliant citizens. Gun control has nothing to say about criminals and it does NOT lay a glove on them. Instead, 'gun control' is a jolly good political diversion for the serial protesting collective that is the NSW 'Eastern Bloc' Greens.

Leoj, you continue to post that fallacious diatribe, ad infinitum, that in someway George Soros is behind gun control Australia. However no comment from you when the reprehensible foreign outfit, the hard rights National Rifle Association sees fit to wade into Australian domestic politics and criticize our vigorous gun laws.

You said; "Obviously too because they (licenced gun owners) are law-abiding citizens of good character, they would be strongly for law and order." "The licence is a strong, robust control and all of the certified law-abiding citizens of good character who have met the standards for a licence all agree." I have one name for you which makes the lie of that statement. IAN TURNBULL.

It is not surprising that the Australian Medical Association's statement on gun control contains all the major elements of the Greens Firearms policy. Leoj are you of the belief that the AMA is also some left wing subversive organization, being controled by George Soros?

Why don't you read the AMA statement and then comment, rather that continue to post that nauseating nonsense about Soros, Eastern Bloc' Greens, Trots, gays, watermelons, VLAD, Labor Party, Bikies, drugs, South American and Middle Eastern crime gangs, Struggle Town kids. The list grows ever larger. Now who is muddying the waters there.

The opening line of One Nations gun policy;

"Recognise that as a matter of principle, licensed firearm ownership by law-abiding citizens is a right"

The policy, like that of the Shooters Party, then goes on to remove or water-down all restrictions on gun ownership presently in place. The objective being to create a virtually unrestricted gun environment within Australian society.

I repeat, if you are so concerned about firearm regulation then comment on the Australian Medical Association's statement. rather than all that other mumbo jumbo.

Paul1405,

Another fallacious 'appeal to authority' where the authority is anything but an appropriate, informed expert witness. If they were in court, representing themselves as having any expertise would be laughed out of court.

Senator David Leyonhjelm questioned the AMA's role in gun control in Australia.
"It falls into the category of what the difference is between God and a doctor," Senator Leyonhjelm said. "God doesn't think he's a doctor."

Not only that but it would be very quickly brought to the court's attention that doctors themselves have a shocking record for misadventure involving patients,

"Estimates tell us that between 18,000 and 54,000 Australians are killed by their medical treatment each year"
http://www.medicalerroraustralia.com/

That excludes the serious effects of pharmaceuticals.

Add to that the estimated 4000 rural Australians who die a year due to lack of access to medical services, largely because doctors won't go to the bush to work. Too good for the bush. Despite large incentives and recruitment of doctors from overseas, Asia, to do it for them.

In 2001, in NSW, there were 94 suicides by firearm, in 2014, there were 50. In the same year in NSW, there were 24 murders by firearm, in 2014, there were 16. How many of those suicides were due to lack of public health, such as available diagnosis and counselling? How many murders were attributable to criminals and illegal firearms. This has nothing to do with the lawful licensed citizens that imported Soros' 'gun control' is aimed exclusively at through confiscation of legally held assets and bans..

As for the US, a recent article in The Age Jan18,2017, 'Stay calm in hospital for best treatment' stated,

"A study by Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore has estimated that medical errors cause more than 250,000 deaths every year in the US"
tbc..