Hi there LEOJ...

Thank you for your citation apropos David CLARK trying to provided 'the facts' to an audience all the while he's being continually interrupted by the host and others. In response to that small illustration, I'll quote one of the Commissioners of the AFP, a Major General Ronald GREY, a very astute military man and a decorated Vietnam Veteran. He was quoted as saying '...he'd rather confront a full company of well trained NVA soldiers, than one member of the Australian media!

As a Police Commissioner, he was apparently fearless. Yet with any one in the media, he was utterly lost; often being misquoted, flummoxed by trick questioning; and generally embarrassed whenever possible. This was not unusual. The media want a story, not the precise facts. Most police of my former rank had nothing but disdain and abhorrence for most of those employed in the media, and there's little wonder why? Thanks Leo.

Dear o sung wu,

I'm afraid I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you on this.

Firstly to Is mise. If I had my way any nutter who thought the Port Arthur massacre was some sort of plot to rid Australians of their guns would be immediately ineligible to own a firearm full stop. To me it indicates a mental illness, a good measure of conspiratorial paranoia, and an ability to comprehensively distort falsehood into so called facts. Now I'm not exactly sure how far down that toxic path Is Mise lies but I know from his earlier postings that it is aways.

The Las Vegas killer was a hunter and a sporting shooter. Mise. He was not a criminal. Up until this incident he was for every indication a completely normal citizen who enjoyed collecting and using firearms, much like our Is Mise.

You yourself earlier put this;

“Personally, I would argue a person would not have a legitimate need, for more than six F/A's, notwithstanding the enthusiasm he might have for the sport. And on past appeals quoting excessive F/A's, I reckon police would've been successful in almost 70 - 75% of the time.”

I fully agree.

So why wouldn't you want to see a mandated limit placed on the number of weapons and individual can own?

As to me being too hard on Is Mise I'm afraid I have taken to conversing with others in the tone they themselves adopt. He is pugnacious, bullying, dismissive, belittling and abusive. If you feel I have overstepped the parameters he has set then I would welcome you flagging it to me and I will undertake to modify my behaviour.

it puzzles me how those wanting to ban guns want to legalise drugs. Somehow they think the character of druggies is more noble than farmers.

SteeleRedux: "As to me being too hard on Is Mise I'm afraid I have taken to conversing with others in the tone they themselves adopt. He is pugnacious, bullying, dismissive, belittling and abusive. If you feel I have overstepped the parameters he has set then I would welcome you flagging it to me and I will undertake to modify my behaviour."

Well said, Steele Redux. We the vast majority of the population are not a threat to their lives. They are an insistent threat to ours (and one another's as well, but that's of far less moment).

Hi there STEELEREDUX...

It's not the number of F/A's he has, it's their capacity to do 'real harm'. Let me explain; some of his weapons are S.S. A couple are Handguns, others are Black Powder. His .303 would be, I suppose the most powerful of all his weapons. And probably the most accurate is his .220 Swift, which also a S.S.

What I'm trying to say, very badly I admit; If it was his intention to do something unlawful, he would need to add several other weapons to his current inventory. Because what has, albeit lethal, wouldn't be the most appropriate selection of F/A's to undertake anything near to a Las Vegas event. And I'd be very surprised indeed, if any licensing authority in the Country, would mount any objection to his current F/A inventory.

It's also quite unfair to 'unload a ton of emotion' upon another, who just happens to enjoy using F/A's as a legitimate pastime.

Many people I know like chocolate, as do I! One of the most heinous criminals ever to continue to breathe air in this country, will do *anything* for chocolate. His name is Martin BRYANT current address 'Risdon' Prison, Tasmania. Because BRYANT likes chocolate should we all vilify and malign others who like chocolate?

Stelle and Julian,

Keep it up, your inventiveness is always amusing.