O sung wu,

A good summing up, this particular murderer had planned in advance and would have killed the children by any method that was available, at least the method he used was, probably, relatively painless; we simply don't know at the moment.

People intent on murder will do it any way, e.g. the grandfather who killed his wife and two grandchildren and seriously wounded their mother.
He used an axe and bludgeons and drowning.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/grandfather-axe-murderer-to-spend-rest-of-his-life-in-jail-20090807-ec4u.html

//and you left the "?" out after "proud of yourself"//

No, attaching the question mark would imply that it was a question. But it obviously wasn't a question, it was a statement. Because it's pretty clear to most of us that, yes, you are immensely proud of yourself.

And every time of another of these stories comes out you get a little bit prouder that you and your mates in the Shooters party have helped contribute to a society where these murders could be carried in a neat, gentlemanly fashion with guns instead of people having to resort to barbarism.

Because apparently the fact that some people kill their kids with axes makes it OK for others to kill theirs with guns. It's that whole thing with two wrongs making a right, which everybody knows is a sound ethical principle and not dodgy reasoning at all. [sarcasm]

Get help, Is Mise.

The very serious question being asked;
Was John Edwards able to exploit a lax gun licencing system which enabled him to without a legitimate reason obtain two legal guns, described as "powerful handguns" by police, for the sole purpose of committing these premeditated and horrendous murders.
"The information we've gleaned in the last 15 hours [leads] me to believe that this is something premeditated and planned," NSW Police Acting Assistant Commissioner Brett McFadden said.

Edwards was known to police, however Commissioner McFadden said he had no "contemporary" criminal record.
This puts the spotlight on the police to explain what they knew of Edwards, and what was his criminal record.

ttbn, I hate to say I told you so. Like the typical conservative you got it wrong again. Unfortunate events of yesterday prove how out of touch you are when it come to Australia's position on gun violence.

Posted by ttbn, Monday, 2 July 2018 10:10:07 AM

“Like America, should Australia be concerned that not enough is done to determine the mental state of those who in the first instance apply for a gun licence, and then their ongoing mental fitness to hold such a licence.”

The predictable, but rather pathetic response from the far rights ttbn.

Thanks to the Green-like knee jerk reaction by John Howard, we have extremely draconian laws on guns. What goes on in America is not our concern. And, do you have any idea of the cost and practicalities of determining the “mental state” of even the relatively few people wanting firearms in Australia? For decent, law-abiding citizens, there is a virtual ban on gun ownership. Who wants to put themselves through the rigamarole of acquiring a firearms licence? Those wanting a firearm can get one illegally with no hassle from the law.

We are more at risk from drunks and druggies on the roads,politicians and a non-performing judiciary than we are from guns.

Sad.

Good evening to you TONI LAVIS & PAUL1405...

Hi there PAUL1405...

Firstly I cannot account for this bloke obtaining a pistol licence, for not one, but two handguns. As for the police description of these two weapons as being 'powerful' I suspect, but I don't know, they're probably centre fire's in either 9mm, 10mm, .38 spec, .357mag or 44mag. These calibres are the most common, but not limited too other 'CF's' among those used in competitive shooting.

Those very few individuals, who have a handgun for hunting, might employ more powerful calibres. Competitive shooters would not necessarily need calibres outside those mentioned above, unless they shoot 'steel' using a Thompson Contender or similar, employing the more 'wildcat' calibres. As I said in an earlier contribution - what is meant by this fellow having no 'contemporary' criminal record? As I indicated earlier, when I was a licensing sergeant, he'd not be given a license by me, he'd need to appeal to a Magistrate - perhaps that's precisely what he did?

Hi there TONI LAVIS...

It's a fact of life, that F/A's have become part of our life, both professionally, vocationally and from a sporting viewpoint. Every time we're burdened with another senseless killing of innocents, we as a society cringe. I believe all of us do. Most certainly the police do! You cannot imagine the feeling you get, when you take a job over the car radio, to attend a possible homicide/ suicide/or report, shots fired?

Your imagination runs riot as to what ghastly vision await's you, upon your arrival? Can you hold your 'own emotions' together? The last thing you want is to 'break down' in front of strangers. So believe me when I say, guns can be a real problem for police as well? Yet many police (male & female) participate in gun sports when off duty?

TONI, if we tried to outlaw F/A's altogether, it take at least 60 to 80 years. Well before the community/politicians, and everyone else in Australia, was in full accord. To do otherwise, would plunge our Nation into Civil War?

The solution lies in the societal transformation. Never it can be settled by technology. Please understand guns are destructive weapons. Let us not misuse science to settle scores with fellow humans.Use of guns is no different from barbarism.