The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Mum's Day

Mum's Day

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. All
Here'a heartwarming Mother's Day story:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5724427/Gunmans-attempted-robbery-families-waiting-outside-school-Sao-Paulo-foiled-mother.html

couldn't have turned out better.
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 14 May 2018 5:53:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here'a not so heartwarming story about a family who did't get to celebrate Mother's Day!

Four children and three adults have been shot dead in a home near the West Australian town of Margaret River, in what is the nation's worst mass shooting since the 1996 Port Arthur massacre.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-11/seven-people-found-dead-in-margaret-river-murder-suicide/9751482

Issy, forgive me for not sharing your gun happy joy!
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 16 May 2018 10:17:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

That was apparently a murder, suicide event and the method used is not material to the outcome even though some of the media and the three members of Gun Control Australia jumped on the tragedy to further their agenda, now you.

Is it not great to see a woman defend other women and children from a gunman who may have killed many of them?
Much better for the antis agenda if he had killed a few or better if it had been a massacre, then the event would have made the mainstream media.

Of course, such a thing as this woman's brave action could not have happened in Australia as our police, though brave enough, are not trusted to be armed when off duty.
Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 16 May 2018 11:22:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The terrible tragedy at Margaret River was perpetrated by a person that the pro gun lobby like to describe as a law abiding citizen of good character.

"On Friday Katrina Miles, her four children - daughter Taye, 13, and sons Rylan, 12, Arye, 10, and Kadyn Cockman, eight - and parents Peter and Cynda Miles were found dead at their property in Osmington, northeast of Margaret River."

"They had all been shot by firearms licensed to Mr Miles."

Issy, quick to gloat about a shooting in the US when you think it gives a boost to your pro gun toting mentality. Instead of being dismissive of the use of a licensed firearm to commit this terrible crime in WA, please explain how Mr Miles was able to hold a gun license in the first place! Were mistakes made in issuing Miles a gun licence, or do you believe it was appropriate for Miles to be granted a gun licence.
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 16 May 2018 7:11:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Paul,
I don't know much about this particular shooting tragedy, but I found your question interesting.

"Were mistakes made in issuing Miles a gun licence, or do you believe it was appropriate for Miles to be granted a gun licence."

It seems like damned if you do, damned if you don't type of question, which made me think more.

THIS IS HYPOTHETICAL

Let's say somebody got on social media and announced they were going to stab a heap of people.
Could, should or would others intervene and hold this person against their will just for saying it; in order to prevent this person from ever gaining access to a knife?

What if some psycho said they were planning to run a heap of innocent people over?
Could, should would others intervene and hold this person against their will just for saying it; in order to prevent this person from ever gaining access to a vehicle?

What if someone wanted to use any other type of item to harm someone else with...

Say a ice-pick, 40oz blacksmith hammer or a fireaxe?

http://ebay.com.au/itm/172713084964

http://www.amazon.com/GearWrench-82291-oz-Blacksmiths-Hammer/dp/B00AEBVQ76

http://m.made-in-china.com/product/Pick-Head-Fire-Axe-with-Fiberglass-Handle-749250935.html

What if the person does not announce their plans?

How can you realistically prevent people from gaining access to items that could be used for mass killing?

That said, what does it matter whether it's a gun or not?
A gun might do it more efficiently, but a person could put a small tin of canned food in a long sock and murder just as many people with that if they set out to do so.

How can you prevent someone from harming another if they are determined to do so?

Would you support holding people against their will before they have committed an offence?
Posted by Armchair Critic, Wednesday, 16 May 2018 8:34:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

" please explain how Mr Miles was able to hold a gun license in the first place! Were mistakes made in issuing Miles a gun licence, or do you believe it was appropriate for Miles to be granted a gun licence."

Let's wait until the coroner makes his findings or the police issue more information.
Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 16 May 2018 9:39:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy