Dear Is Mise,

Come on young fella, are you serious. You are condemned by your own words.

“That is not an example of weakening gun laws as there has been no weakening, allowing more access to silencers is a proposal.”

So because it was still just a “proposal” in Victoria there had been no weakening but now when I pointed out in NSW it is now law it suddenly becomes a 'strengthening'?

Get your hand off it mate. Your story chops and changes like that of a panicked drowning rat.

I don't believe you and most people would correctly judge you as completely disingenuous on this. Anything I put up as evidence of weakening will be treated in the same disingenuous manner won't it.

You really do take the cake.

Dear o sung wu,

Noted.

Dear O Sung Wu,

You've always been close to my heart in the many
years we've shared on this forum. And I've
valued your opinion. I sometimes don't adequately explain
my position or I express things that are taken the wrong
way to what was intended. I am learning to try to keep
things shorter and more to the point - perhaps I'll be
less misunderstood that way. Thank You for understanding
and your kind words.

Steele,

A proposal and a law are two different things and I see the allowing of silencers, by the relevant authorities, as strengthening the law not eroding it.

Why are you ignoring the strengthening that I have shewn you?

Doesn't fit the agenda?

You'd be on the side of the Greens who stopped the proposal by the SF&F's Party from having the penalties for the unlawful use of firearms increased; would that impact on your mates too?

Here's another strengthening of the gun laws,

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/691/098/077/reverse-unjustified-and-ill-informed-regulation-that-will-destroy-firearms-collections-of-museums/

Further to the above.

"The purpose and operation of Museums are vastly different to any other stakeholder possessing firearms. We exist for the community and display a range of artefacts of historical, educational and community value. Grouping Museums as part of the overall firearms collective is mistaken and does not reflect the important role that Museums play in this field.

Through the new Regulation, the Government is forcing Museums to destroy their valuable and historically significant artefacts.

The impact of the new Regulation on the Lithgow Small Arms Factory Museum will be devastating with around 70% of our comprehensive firearms collection irreversibly destroyed. We will lose significant value, considerable patronage and become non-viable. And with this, there will be an unimaginable loss of history, knowledge and community-based volunteering spirit.

Moreover, the cultural, scholarly and scientific significance of heritage firearms collections, including our understanding of the technological evolution of such firearms will be seriously compromised. For example, prototypes, first issue and rare firearms will be lost in line with the destruction of our collection.

The 9000 annual visitors we have through our doors, the many local and international technical researchers and the ballistics personnel using our facilities for research and/or investigative purposes, and our extensive archives amassed over the past 22 years will all be adversely impacted, and lost forever."

"In 2006 Ron Hayes donated his amazing handgun collection to the museum. Rarities in the Hayes Gallery include the Borchardt, Webley 1904, and the Persian Luger. Among the 800 varied handguns featured are a number of gold plated and hand-engraved presentation masterpieces."

This latest unwarranted assault on firearm owners will somewhat adversely affect any future donations.

http://www.lithgowsafmuseum.org.au/

Hi, there IS MISE...

Our mate STEELEREDUX is implacably against F/A ownership for us suburban dwellers, though I understand you live in the bush. Nevertheless, I believe STEELEREDUX can be persuaded otherwise, with both logical and rational discussion. Therefore as a bush dweller, you have a reason to possess a Single Shot .22. Which in the minds of most anti-gun advocates, would be more than adequate to take care of game from the size of a Bull Pachyderm to a fully grown Bengal Tiger, as well as the humble Rabbit.

Unfortunately, the anti-gun lobby has no, in-between, nor balance in their views. For instance, a .177 Gecado should be able to accommodate most ferals that do so much harm to stock & property. Therefore they need to be re-educated and shown the folly of their ways by having it pointed out to them, a F/A is a tool; it has a purpose and a well-defined function. And whether they agree or not, an indispensable tool right across the entire spectrum.

Those of us in the 'burbs,' who like to keep their eye in with their F/A of choice, I see no problem at all, after scrutiny, they should not receive a F/A Licence? As you know IS MISE, we license M/V drivers, Aircraft pilots, etc., both of which have proven records, of being the originators of fatalities, some of which have been immense, yet the anti-gun lobby is all over the legitimate use of F/A's, and there owners. One might wonder why? Is it the intent of a 'Greens' Government to disarm the entire nation?