The Forum > General Discussion > Washington shooting (last year)
Washington shooting (last year)
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Page 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- ...
- 15
- 16
- 17
-
- All
Posted by SteeleRedux, Monday, 11 March 2019 9:19:09 PM
| |
Dear Is Mise,
You wrote; “Steele, "I do not support weakening of laws to allow silencers. Do you?" Emphatically no.” Well bully for you mate it means Jack. You asked for an example of a weakening of gun laws and there it was, yet your response was just 'well I don't support it so it is irrelevant'. Doesn't cut it I'm afraid. Will you actively campaign against it within your organisation? Will you offer to resign your membership over it? Emphatically no I would imagine. All bloody talk mate. Posted by SteeleRedux, Monday, 11 March 2019 9:25:47 PM
| |
Steele,
"You asked for an example of a weakening of gun laws and there it was, yet your response was just 'well I don't support it so it is irrelevant'." ( in reference to weakening gun laws). That is not an example of weakening gun laws as there has been no weakening, allowing more access to silencers is a proposal. Now shew me where the gun laws have been weakened, you can't because they haven't been weakened but on the contrary, they have been strengthened. Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 12 March 2019 8:38:02 AM
| |
Philip S.,
Your claim about my identifying as a mushroom is wrong.( No surprises there). I'm a sunflower. I always end up facing the sun but I go through a lot of dirt to find my way there. Here's a "golden oldie" just for you about mushrooms: "Why did the mushroom go to the party? Because he's a fun - gi!" Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 12 March 2019 9:12:44 AM
| |
Dear Is Mise,
Okay mate, I'm a sucker for punishment. Why don't we try these one at a time with the proviso that if you deem something which is patently a weakening not so then we stop the dance. "Applications under the business/employment genuine reason must demonstrate that a suppressor is ‘necessary’ in the conduct of the applicant’s business or employment." "In February 2016 the NSW Firearms Registry’s ‘genuine reason’ application form was amended to include the recreational/sporting purposes genuine reason, which prompted a substantial increase in suppressor applications which had previously been suppressed." Sporting Shooters website. This is a weakening of the national gun laws which deemed applying a silencer to a weapon made it prohibited. Posted by SteeleRedux, Tuesday, 12 March 2019 10:07:11 AM
| |
Steele,
There are no national gun laws, so none of them has been weakened. "Okay mate, I'm a sucker for punishment. Why don't we try these one at a time with the proviso that if you deem something which is patently a weakening not so then we stop the dance" So, if I disagree then you take your bat and go home? The extending of the silencer provision in NSW was deemed necessary because certain persons needed a silencer and if they comply with the NSW guidelines then they may now apply. How many licences for silencers have been issued would be more to the point than the number of applications. The ban on silencers is stupid law, they are encouraged in the UK, possibly because the lawmakers in the UK are not influenced by TV 'cops and robbers' shows. Any criminal who wants a silencer can buy one and they are not hard to make. http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CAFB_enAU718AU718&q=how+to+make+a+silencer+out+of+pvc+pipe&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjd9OKfsPvgAhUh7HMBHSGGDLMQsAR6BAgCEAE&biw=1008&bih=604 http://archive.org/stream/How_To_Make_Disposable_Silencers/How_To_Make_Disposable_Silencers_djvu.txt http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CAFB_enAU718AU718&biw=1008&bih=604&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=vwKHXLehCoa_9QOs6LjwAw&q=using+auto+oil+filters+as+firearm+silencers&oq=using+auto+oil+filters+as+firearm+silencers&gs_l=img.12...22527.31147..36219...0.0..0.253.2661.0j15j1......0....1..gws-wiz-img.TuSlB3STiAA Go for it, knock one up in the shed!! Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 12 March 2019 10:55:09 AM
|
You wrote;
“Well, regurgitate the same answers because as I remember it you failed miserably to shew where gun laws have become more lax.”
Nick off.
“Keep up the sexual references, they point to some deficiency.”
Exactly which is why I make them.
“Your references to shootings are irrelevant as what I was pointing out is that when a civilian uses a gun in successful defence there is never any mention of it in our press.”
So your one perpetrator being shot by a civilian last year should rate more of a mention than 8 mass shootings over a single month period?
“Why are you so down on law-abiding people who want to shoot and who comply with the law?”
Because they are fuelling a gun culture and supplying the criminal classes through having their caches stolen. Absolutely no issue with farmers having guns it is just the weaponisation of our suburbs I object too.
“The recent Melbourne shootings, five in number, are irrelevant as they were by criminals, who, you might be surprised to know ignore the law.”
How do you know that? Are you saying no weapon was legally owned? Or are you just making this up as you usually do?