Following horrific massacres in their countries, John Howard in Australia some years back, and Jacinda Ardern more recently in New Zealand, moved to tighten gun laws in their respective countries. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his government has been forced to do likewise in Canada. Prime Minister Trudeau told the Canadian public that they "deserve more than thoughts and prayers" after a series of shootings in Nova Scotia killed 13 people. On Friday Trudeau announced a ban on "assault-style" semi-automatic weapons in Canada that would apply immediately. Seven years after the Sandy Hook massacre the United States is still the major English speaking country to hold out on gun law reform. this is due to the direct action of the powerful US gun lobby.

It's now 24 year since the terrible massacre at Port Arthur and John Howard's government introducing much needed federal gun laws in Australia. With the recent increase in shootings, and a growing concern that our gun laws need reviewing, just as we are dealing with one virus, its time to get stuck into another virus, the gunvirus! With controls in place at the moment preventing gun clubs and recreational shooting, etc from operating it would be timely if Australia moved in the direction of banning most private guns, and gun activity, only allowing some very limited private professional gun use. I am not suggesting a ban on police or the military holding guns.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-gun-control-measures-ban-1.555213

Not sure what "Team Canada faces hockey finals tonight" has to do with gun control". Do you ever read these references, or do you just see 'gun' and go wild.

Hello Paul,

I don't understand why any one needs to have semi-automatic
assault weapons. I am grateful to our former PM - John
Howard for the strong stance he took after the Port
Arthur massacre.

The United States permits the widespread access to
handguns. One reason is the persistent belief that since
criminals have guns, law-abiding people need them for
self-protection.

According to FBI and police reports however, gun-owning
households are much more likely to suffer fatalities from
their own weapons than from those of outsiders.

Studies have shown that only a small percentage of all
slayings in gun owning households were for self-protection,
the remainder were suicides, homicides, or accidental
deaths, almost all involving family members, friends, or
acquaintances.

A second reason for the proliferation of handguns in the
US is the belief, deeply held by many Americans, that
gun ownership is an individual right.

For granting this liberty to the individual, American
society pays the price in the deviance of those who abuse it.

I'm certainly glad we have more sense in this country.
And that we shall follow suit with Canada and New Zealand.

Dear o' me ttbn wrong link, I'm human after all.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-gun-control-measures-ban-1.5552131

CBC is Canada's version of the ABC.

when we stop murdering about 80000 unborn children a year we can take shots at other people's gun laws.

Not sure about human, but that sort of carelessness doesn't generate confidence. Your concern with gun control is an obsession when you have to drag up foreign countries to talk about it. Our draconian laws, plus the the fact that we don't have a gun culture should be enough for you, surely.

runner,

Who's murdering unborn children?

Be more specific please.

Foxy,

"Who's murdering unborn children?"

If you need to ask that then you are way out of touch.

Paul,

The multiple murderer in Canada had many weapons and was dressed in a police uniform and was driving what appeared to be a police car.

Yet Trudeau pounced on the wrongly classified "Assault" style weapon, seems like a bit of political "seen to be doing something".

Maybe the Canadians should introduce a Firearms Registry such as we have in Australia, that should solve their problems.

Funny, locally, that the Labor states all shut gun shops during the pandemic but didn't shut bottle shops, wonder which has the most social contact during business hours?

WA even shut down one man gunsmithing operations, the local gunsmith couldn't serve a customer but he could take him into the kitchen for a cup of tea and a biscuit or two.

Is Mise,

So put me "ïn touch", Oh "wise one."

Howdy partner! Issy me dearest,

Since all this gun activity hasn't been missed by 99.9% of the population, how about while we're controlling one deadly virus in the community, we do the same with the deadly gun virus.

"Labor states all shut gun shops during the pandemic" you do say, how come that jelly gun mob have still been open in Queensland? Another pesky lot to get rid of!

"shut down one man gunsmithing operations"

Under a spreading chestnut-tree
The village smithy stands;
The smith, a mighty man is he,
With large and sinewy hands;
And the muscles of his brawny arms
Are strong as iron bands.

Is that the same bloke?
Anyway, once we dispose of the recreational renegades with guns, then your bod in WA will still have plenty of work dealing with the professionals. Does that hit the target?

Paul,

What hits the target is how the Green in you latches onto the current tragedy of the virus to push your own narrow-minded agenda.

Have you no shame?

Foxy,

You're not that stupid or you have never read runner's posts; on second thoughts...

..murdering unborn children.
runner,
I wonder about people who rather tolerate children existing in misery than take steps to prevent that.

individual,

If people can't tolerate children or don't want them to suffer from who knows what, surely contraception and/or stopping rooting like rabbits with people barely known to them is better than abortion. Laying off the booze and not acting like animals would be a good start.

Hey Paul,

You forgot to mention the third group that the Greens would allow to keep their guns, the criminals.

As usual target the law-abiding but look after your criminal mates.

Were you unhappy when the Greens failed to get rid of Sniffer dogs?

Foxy,

Did you know that most people killed in car accidents owned the car, or that most people killed in chainsaw accidents owned a chainsaw?

Foxy and Paul,

While I agree with you this time, I will try not to again.

While I enjoyed fishing and shooting as youngster and did rifle and clay pigeon shooting competitively, even in our household where gun safety was paramount, we had an accidental discharge that narrowly missed a guest. That more people are killed with their own firearms is a statistic that is mirrored in just about every country where citizens carry arms and I can clearly see why.

Since leaving home I have never owned a gun, nor had one in our house as I value the lives of my family over the enjoyment of target shooting.

Shadow Minister,

That's so noble of you.

Is Mise,

Do you know that some people who have God-given
faculties of reasoning do not use them?

Foxy,

Good of you to admit that you do have a problem.

Did you know that motor vehicle fatalities in Australia far outnumber gun deaths, would you be willing to give up your car to save lives?

Is Mise,

It's time you stopped stagnating and admitted your
problems. You have more than one.

Foxy,

I admit my problems, starting at the bottom, ingrown toenails but the podiatrist takes care of them.

Sludge in the blood, Warfarin is the fix, plus support stockings.

Back problem, back support belt; eyes, glasses; I'm also a bit hard of hearing.

Apart from those, no problems at all.

Would you give up your car to save lives?

It's a simple question that should not be above your level of comprehension.

Is Mise,

I no longer drive.

So it's not a problem.

Is Mise,

However, talking about levels of comprehension.

Comparing gun deaths to automobile deaths misses the
mark.

Unlike the issue of guns, whose sole purpose is to kill.
Vehicles main function is to transport humans as well as
the food we eat, the clothes we wear, and the goods we use.

It's the incompetence of drivers largely causing the numbers
of deaths, injuries and billions of dollars worth of
damage on our roads, as opposed to the maliciousness
associated with gun killings.

The overwhelming majority of auto deaths and injuries are
due to driver error.

New and improved safety features are a great thing but how
much energy do we as a society give to requiring lessons in
how to navigate an auto safely through a variety of
circumstances and avoid crashing in the first place.

We had to take away my elderly mum's car because she was
incapable .

This is not a pro or against gun rant. It's an attempt to keep
one issue separate from another.

Foxy,

"Unlike the issue of guns, whose sole purpose is to kill."

Utterly wrong, guns are used to protect life as well as take it, target rifles are not designed for killing, they can kill but just as carving knives are not designed to kill but they can kill.

The car death rate is all the more appalling in that they are not designed to kill but still kill.

How many car deaths are murders that go unsolved and not counted?

Would you say that cars are never used as a murder weapon?

If you still drove would you be prepared to give up your car to save lives?

Is Mise,

Far fewer people are tortured and murdered each year in Australia than die from heart attacks.

So what ? Do we make light of torture and murder ? I don't think so.

Joe

Is Mise,

Cars have never been designed to kill people or
animals or any other living thing. And no one
uses them for that purpose on a regular basis.

Yes a person can use a car as a lethal weapon, but
that's NOT what they were invented for.

Guns on the other hand were invented to kill and/or
maim animals or people.

Yes guns can be used for target practice and marksmanship
has become sport, but that's not what guns were invented
for.

Target practice was and is designed to help people get
better at killing animals and people with guns.

Of course a person can enjoy target practice with no desire
or intention to kill, but there's no question that is the
express purpose for which guns were created.

Guns used to protect people? Of course - by killing or
maiming others.

Stop comparing guns to cars.

They are not the same thing and they were invented for totally
different purposes.

Foxy,

"They are not the same thing and they were invented for totally
different purposes."

Quite right, but would you, if you owned one, be prepared to give up your car to save lives?

"Of course a person can enjoy target practice with no desire
or intention to kill, but there's no question that is the
express purpose for which guns were created."

Not all guns, paintball guns cannot kill, replica firearms (non firing) cannot kill, kiln guns were designed for an express purpose other than killing, airsoft guns cannot kill, they were designed for firing at TV screens without doing damage, the Zimmerstutzen is used for a game similar to darts and the list goes on; suggest that you do a bit of research before pressing the send button.

Is Mise,

There's nothing wrong with shooting
for the stars.

Foxy,

White Scout car, designed for killing.

http://www.google.com/search?q=white+scout+car&rlz=1C1CAFB_enAU718AU718&oq=white+scout+car&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l7.14753j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Research costs nothing, here's a few more.

http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CAFB_enAU718AU718&sxsrf=ALeKk01BcZz0qhn2_i1mEpmFsj9E4anL6w:1588577552072&source=univ&tbm=isch&q=armoured+cars&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiUusHF2JnpAhW46XMBHQI4CDsQ7Al6BAgFEEU&biw=1024&bih=625

Is Mise,

Now you're talking armoured military vehicles?

Not a real threat to most people.

I find it interesting that whenever we discuss mass
shootings, or stricter gun control laws - gun owners
dust off their talking points to try to explain why
any latest gun tragedy does not mean we should
tighten up access to deadly fire-arms. Because after all
cars and knifes also kill people, and not all guns kill.
The usual blarney.

We're not talking about harmless weapons, pop-guns
don't gill either. We're not talking about armoured cars.
We've heard all these arguments hundreds of times.
We're talking about guns that do kill - we can recite
the arguments in our sleep, and, they haven't grown better
with repetition.

The old arguments that a car or a knife can also often kill a few
people before being stopped is a fantastic argument for
someone who can't tell the difference between one death or several
dozen.

Absolutely a nut case can kill one, two, or half a dozen
people, with a knife or a car (we're not talking military
vehicles) before being stopped but to really rack up those
mind-blowing death counts - to make sure that many lives and
their families are destroyed and ruined in the space of five
to ten minutes you need a lethal fire-arm.

You don't see armoured vehicles on our streets and most
people don't have access to them.

Lethal weapons are a different story. They are easier to
access. Hence the necessity for stricter laws.

Fozy,

You said "Cars have never been designed to kill people or
animals or any other living thing."

You were wrong.

You said "Unlike the issue of guns, whose sole purpose is to kill."

You were wrong.

Why were you wrong?
Because you are writing from a perspective of great ignorance.

If you still had a car would you be prepared to give up driving to save lives?

Hi Issy, I was making the point that since we have basically shut down the insidious gun industry in Australia, due to the cornoavirus, and since that shut down has had no ill effect on 99.9% of the population, we now have a golden opportunity to boot the whole bloody industry, by making the shut down permanent! A small price to pay for freedom and liberty for the 99.9%.

I know you will be the first to agree!

Firearms 'industry'? Who now produces firearms for the use of the general public in Australia? We generally import firearms; we are the world's fifth largest importer, apparently.

I believe the military Steyr is made here. Does Sportco still manufacture sporting weapons? Angel is defunct, I think.

Foxy,

"A second reason for the proliferation of handguns in the
US is the belief, deeply held by many Americans, that
gun ownership is an individual right.

For granting this liberty to the individual, American
society pays the price in the deviance of those who abuse it"

The reason is that the Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms, it doesn't grant the right it simply recognises an existing right.

Paul,

You ought to be fair and say that the SSAA shut its ranges some days before the Government's move and that the NSW SSAA shut its very profitable indoor range before any of the other ranges.

So far no one has responded to my suggestion that Canada adopts Firearm Registries as we have in Australia, I'd like to hear some thoughts on the idea.

Foxy,

It is quite legitimate to compare firearm deaths with motor vehicle deaths because both result in the deaths of fellow Australians, currently firearms account for 1 person in 100,000 whereas vehicle deaths account for 4.5 deaths per 100,000.
http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/road_deaths_australia_monthly_bulletins

Now if that figure were for gun deaths you'd be calling for the immediate ban of all firearms but you, and others of like ilk, are happy with that figure because to limit the use of cars would have an adverse effect on your lifestyle and over a thousand dead fellow citizens per year is a small price to pay for your convenience.
You've had plenty of opportunities to say if you would give up car use to save lives and your refusal to answer the question indicates a certain callousness.

Is Mise,

So, is there really a gun "industry" in Australia? I was relying on your knowledge for the answer.

ttbn,

Yes, there is a gun industry in Australia and firearms are remodelled, converted, rebuilt, have new barrels fitted and generally repaired by gunsmiths, mostly one-man operations.

Lithgow manufactures a range of sporting and military rifles
http://www.lithgowarms.com/la-101-crossover/

One man gunsmithing operations that have been shut down with vindictive unfairness in WA, Vic and Qld .
The gunsmiths' social interaction with customers is but a fraction of that of a bottle shop but the bottle shops were allowed to remain open.

ttbn,

I'll just add ADI ammunition as well as smokeeless gun powders for rifle, gun and pistol, which enjoy a worldwide reputation for excellence.
http://www.adi-powders.com.au/
and Cast Bullet Engineering whose bullet moulds are also world renowned for their excellence.
http://us.castbulletengineering.com.au/
and last but not least, Simplex reloading presses which are also exported.
http://simplexreloading.com.au/presses/

Is Mise,

Thanks. Fairly insignificant then. That and our draconian gun laws resulting form a knee-jerk reaction to a single incident, and our lack of a gun culture in Australia indicates that the gun objectors are just a bunch of ideologues who enjoy making people not like them as miserable as they possibly can. It's been said often, and it might still apply, that the first thing to go with the fall of democracy is the right to bear arms. That we have never had the constitutional right as America has, has made us easy meat for the inner city greens and the likes of a very naive John Howard who was cowered by a loud minority.

ttbn,

John Howard was cowed by a minority of one, Janette.

and applauded by a majority of millions!

Foxy said "Unlike the issue of guns, whose sole purpose is to kill."

Here we have the kiln gun whose purpose is to save money and make life easier for many workers.
http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2011/03/utility-firearms-industrial-shotguns.html

Then there is the line throwing gun which is used to save lives.
http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2011/03/utility-firearms-line-throwing-gun.html

The Flare pistol, also a lifesaver.
http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2011/03/utility-firearms-flare-gun-or-very.html

Also, there is the common log splitting gun and it was designed to make life easier for the worker and to make more profit (higher production).
http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/23145020

Hope you anti-gun freaks absorb some of this knowledge, it might save you tasting the foot; an uncomfortable position, foot in mouth.

Is Mise,

You poor deluded old man.

We're talking about lethal weapons here - lethal
firearms.

You're way off base. But then you can't argue with
crazy, or talk to them.

Foxy,

You poor deluded little librarian, all of those firearms are lethal weapons under the Australian various State laws.

Wake up and learn, then you may also learn not to shew your ignorance.

Look up Hande Gonne (the 1200s) and then compare to the log splitter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_cannon

Foxy,

You might also be interested in Airsoft guns, lethal weapons that can't hurt anyone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airsoft

"Definition
An Airsoft firearm is one that discharges a 6mm plastic pellet.

Airsoft firearms can either be electric, or operated by spring or compressed air.

An Airsoft firearm over 75cm in length is a Category A weapon.

Should the Airsoft firearm replicate a military style assault rifle (Category D) then the Airsoft weapon will also be classified as a Category D weapon.

Similarly should the Airsoft firearm replicate a machine gun or sub-machine gun (Category R) then the Airsoft firearm will also be classified as a Category R weapon."
http://www.police.qld.gov.au/weapon-licensing/airsoft-firearms
See also,
http://www.police.vic.gov.au/firearm-classifications#imitation-firearm-replica-firearms-and-other-firearm-paraphernalia-and-toys
for a good laugh.

Is Mise,

Anything else?

Your opinions are not things that should be put aside
lightly. They should be hurled with great force.

Foxy,

Yes, I do.

"Is Mise,

You poor deluded old man.

We're talking about lethal weapons here - lethal
firearms.

You're way off base. But then you can't argue with
crazy, or talk to them."

The above is worth repeating in its entirety, mainly for its obvious lack of knowledge.

Kiln guns, line throwing guns and signal pistols are all lethal as is a log splitter, it is basically the same as the earliest firearms made.

Do you not think that a gun that can blast slag apart in a furnace would not do you harm if you got hit by the steel slug?
Dou you think that a heavy weight/dart with line attached would not harm you?
Do you think that a flare, burning very very hot would not do lethal damage?

When the library opens lookup a Physics book, you'll no doubt be amazed.

Is Mise,

Gung-Ho!

Foxy,

You obviously realize that you are not up to discussing firearms and related matters, while we're on the subject though; how are you with Weary Dunlop having two pistols while a prisoner of the Japanese?

Based on your brief encounter with him, do you think that he would have used them to save the lives of his patients, or do you think that he would have just looked on as the Japs solved the prisoner problem by murdering them all?

Issy, now you must agree since the gun lock-down there has not been a serious mass shooting in Australia. Obviously if you ban the guns, you save the lives. Do you need any clearer evidence than that?

Foxy, never argue guns with Issy, he'll shoot you down every time, he's a better shot than Wyatt Earp, and that's saying something, cause WE was the best shot of the lot. issy and I have been taking pot shots at each other over the gun issue for yonks, how long now has it been Issy? The old fella will be the first to admit I've bulls-eyed him every time. You do agree me old forum buddy, do you not!

Is this Issy in action?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbBQ1mPCG7Q

My favourite spaghetti western of all times.

And the best western of all times, with Clint Eastwood.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpQMYPxRjno

Pop on over Issy, I've got em' both on DVD, we can knock off a bottle of scotch while we watch the lads in action. What do you say to that?

Paul,

"I am not suggesting a ban on police or the military holding guns."

Only law abiding private citizens; tell me why didn't you mention the criminals?
Surely as a Green you have some ideas on the subject and may even know Greens' policy on the issue.

Tell me, does the idea of Canada having a Firearms Registry/s similar to ours not appeal to you?

Not me Paul, I never load semi-automatic rimless rounds into a single action revolver.

Dear Paul,

Most of us prefer our democracy unleaded.
(smile).

And of course I'm realising that talking to the
old git - is about as effective as a fart in a blizzard.

Foxy,

Did you not read what I said about Weary Dunlop, you had a lot to say about him before?

If you are embarrassed by how you made an ass of yourself about his guns whilst he was a POW, don't worry about it, we all make mistakes.
Have you got any more to say about why Americans have the right to bear arms, don't let your gaffe worry you, just read a bit on the subject and save yourself future mistakes.

Is Mise,

Use logic about Sir Weary Dunlop.He may have had
guns in Java but certainly not in the POW camp in
Thailand.

There he is in a POW camp looking after 1,000 Australian
soldiers that were put into his charge and for whom
he felt responsible. He saw his job as a doctor to save
their lives not put them in further danger. He made a
makeshift hospital, made artificial limbs out of whatever
material they could scrounge, even made make-shift
medicines. His men were underfed and suffered diarrhea,
dysentry, and god-knows what else.

They were in Thailand - under horrible conditions. Yes Weary
stood up to the Japanese soldiers as a doctor- risking his
own life - but he would not have pulled guns on the Japs.
That would have been insane - and he'd have
risked not only his own life but those of his men. He was there to save their lives.
That mattered more to him. Pulling guns on them
would have risked everything.

Use your head.

Here's a link from one of weary's men who was one of the 1,000
in the camp:

http://www.net.au/news/2015-11-11/milton-snow-fairclough-life-and-death-on-thai-burma-railway/6927656

I'll try again:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-11/milton-snow/fairclough-life-and-death-on-thai-burma-railway/6927656?nw=O

Sorry - I meant to say that Sir Weary may have had
his own private guns - hidden in his coat pockets
in Java, but he would not have used them in the POW
camp when he and his men worked on the Thai -Burma
railway. H would not have risked his men's lives
by using the guns. He was there as a doctor - trying
to save their lives not put them at any further
danger. Yes he stoodd up to the Japanese as a doctor,
but he would not have used guns to do it.

Foxy,

Read what I said and try to comprehend.

".. do you think that he would have used them [his pistols] to save the lives of his patients, or do you think that he would have just looked on as the Japs solved the prisoner problem by murdering them all?"

His intention was, if the worst came to the worst, to shoot Japanese soldiers so that the fittest among the prisoners could take their rifles and fight to save their own lives and the lives of their fellow prisoners.

There was every likelihood that the Japanese would murder all the prisoners as it became apparent that Japan was losing the war; or do you think that the Japanese were too noble to do such a thing?

HI Foxy and Issy,

Not much point going over the "what ifs" of nearly 75 years ago. I read the story Foxy posted of Milton "Snow" Fairclough a touching story of survival, and something no one should ever have to go through. It goes to show the inhumanity of man towards his fellow man. The ending where "Snow" was able to travel to Japan with his son and other POW's and tell their story to the Japanese was heart warming. The fact he seemingly held no great animosity towards his tormentors, including the one they called "The Lizard", shows the sprite of the human being can be that strong, despite what horrors comes its way.

Paul,

There are no "what ifs" about Colonel Dunlop keeping his pistols whilst a POW and Foxy, despite being given a reference citing page and book that refers to a part of the fact, still says "... Sir Weary may have had his own private guns - hidden in his coat pockets"
Note the use of "may" as if the author, with Weary's consent, wrote a lie about him.

Well, I'm 101% sure that he had his pistols during the entire time of his captivity and after, and that he would have used them in a last-ditch attempt to save the lives of his men from being murdered en mass by their captors.

How the former prisoners regarded their Japanese captors years after the war is completely irrelevant to events during the war.

Just as a by-line it's interesting that he was recommended for an OBE for his bravery and his exploits in saving so many prisoners' lives but it was downgraded to a Mentioned in Dispatches.
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-heroes/weary-dunlop.htm

Is Mise,

The only mention of Weary Dunlop's pistols is in
the one sentence you cited earlier where he
was travelling in Java prior to the Japanese
occupation. I listed for you the logical reasons
he would not have had the pistols in the camp
or would have used them.

If you have evidence to the contrary - kindly provide it.

Weary Dunlop has been commemorated in various ways
in this country. There's statues of him - including the
famous one outside the War Memorial in Canberra.

His funeral was magnificent - with full honours.

And just like Milton "Snow" Fairclough - Sir Weary spoke
about his time on the Thai Burma Railway and the Japanese
with no hatred in his heart.

You can continue to bang on about pistols, guns, and
killings. I happen to know that Sir Weary was more
concerned with saving lives than taking them. He did not
share your mentality or obsession with guns.

If he did prove it.

I'm done!

Foxy,

"The only mention of Weary Dunlop's pistols is in
the one sentence you cited earlier where he
was travelling in Java prior to the Japanese
occupation."

Can't help getting things wrong can you? Comprehension problems?

In the sentence cited he was already a POW as it was the day after the surrender and the soldier to whom he spoke was Japanese, else why use the word 'shoko'?

However, here's what the author wrote: "Dunlop did not tread lightly around the Japanese from the start'
That was not something he was capable of. He drove around the chaos of Bandung, in Java, the DAY AFTER THE SURRENDER [my capitalization] a pistol in each pocket of his bush jacket"

The Colonel was firstly a great doctor and surgeon but he was also a very brave man and a soldier.

Here's an excerpt from 'The War Diaries of Weary Dunlop" (ISBN0 14 012861 1)
"25 July 1945 Alas I have little doubt that the crisis deepens.
The pattern seems to be a death march of 'fit' men ahead of any invasion...The rest to be bumped off...I have compromised by selecting 10 NCOs of high courage and discretion, each to select 10 men not otherwise chosen. Each man to devise a weapon such as a stone...I have plotted ur desperate breakout as frontally towards a machine gun post in the wall which can be approached with visual cover to either side from enfilading fire, by parallel hutments up to the last fifty metres." (continued)

One of Sir Weary Dunlop's famous quotes Was:

" The moral is obvious it is that great armaments
lead inevitably to war."

He provided compassionate medical care and leadership
to fellow POWs. Which made him a hero. And he did this
without the use of guns.

Here is another link on Weary Dunlop that gives clarity
to his character:

http://www.anzacportal.dva.gov.au/wars-and-missions/burma-thailand-railway-and-hellfire-pass-1942-1943/events/surviving/sir-edward-weary-dunlop

The ANZAC Portal tells us many things. It
tells us that the POW experience is remembered for
service of the medical personnel who with little
equipment or medicines cared for desperately ill
men in primitive hospitals.

Most famous of these doctors is the POW surgeon
Sir Edward Weary Dunlop. His statue now stands
outside the Australian War Memorial in Canberra,
as well as in Melbourne and Benalla.

Although Dunlop was only one of 106 Australian medical
officers, he has come to represent them all and the values
of courage and compassion that they and many Australians
manifested in captivity.

Over the years the story of atrocity and suffering has
become an affirmation of Australian courage and reilience.
Although POWs suffered the humiliation of being defeated
and captured they came to be portrayed as men who
triumphed over adversity displaying in captivity the
qualities of humour, resourcefulness and mateship.

They were able to integrate their experiences into the
dominant national memory of war since the Gallipoli
campaign of 1915, the ANZAC legend.

Its these values of courage and compassion that they and many
Australians manifested in captivity that truly shows our
national character. And it is for that and his compassion
and leadership that Sir Dunlop will be remembered.

Foxy,

I was going to continue but I now realize that to do so would be dangerous, with two feet in your mouth you might choke.

In what is perhaps the key to the immense respect
and reverence felt for Sir Weary Dunlop by so
many Australians, he combined compassion and
loyalty to his fellows with tolerance and
forgiveness of his enemies.

As one who had suffered so much and still been able
to forgive his captors, he seemed to offer a way
forward for the many others who had also endured the
trauma of war.

Is Mise,

Talking about feet being dangerous ...

Take heed.

"I will not let anyone
walk through my mind
with their dirty feet."

Mahatma Gandhi.

Issy, can you provide evidence that Dunlop had those guns in his possession 25th July 1945? That's about 3 years after his capture in 1942.

Issy, you ask; "Tell me, does the idea of Canada having a Firearms Registry/s similar to ours not appeal to you?"

A gun registry is a step in the right direction, but its not the panacea for the problems of guns, far from it. A total gun ban, with some exceptions would do the greater good.

Dear Paul,

Another question - how come Sir Dunlop, if
he had guns - never used them?
Things were after all pretty bad - right?
Was it because he didn't want to risk lives?
He was about saving them. Interesting.

Dunlop would take probably my feet over Issy's guns
any day.

Paul,

Our Firearms Registries are modelled on the Canadian Firearms Registry which the Canadians abolished because it did no good, wasted money and was a bad idea. Thought you'd never ask.

Foxy,

Wake up.
We all know of the nobility of Weary Dunlop; didn't you believe his words that I quoted from his diaries?

Seems that you are praising him one minute and calling him a liar the next.

He was prepared to lead a charge against a Japanese machine-gun post with mostly improvised and primitive weapons, fortunately the war ended before he had to try the almost impossible.
If you ever summon up the courage to read his diaries you'll find that he had made Molotov cocktails with petrol pilfered from Japanese trucks to be used in the proposed attack on the MG post.

Hi Issy,

The aim should be to get guns out of the community, not simply register ownership. Its well known those in that head office of yours down at the American NRA HQ don't want firearms registries.

EVIDENCE PLEASE! You being the one always calling for evidence from others.

Where is YOUR EVIDENCE that Dunlop had in his possession GUNS on or about 25th July 1945. You claim he did, yet can't provide any reference to that being the case. It appears you made it up on the run.

Hi Foxy,

Was it because he (Dunlop) didn't want to risk lives? Absolutely. One thing of interest is with defeat of the Japanese in SE Asia in 1945, the allies used armed Japanese as "policemen" to keep the locals under the thumb.

An example where armed residence, although noble was counter productive and cost thousands of lives needlessly.

The Warsaw Uprising 1944. Polish resistance, attempted to liberate Warsaw from German occupation. The uprising was timed to coincide with the retreat of the German forces from Poland ahead of the Soviet advance from the east. Stalin held his forces back to allow the Germans to annihilate the Polish nationals. Which allowed for Polish communists to eventually take control.

You have spoken of how your families country Lithuania? (correct me if I've got it wrong) was taken over and brutalised by Stalin. That was only possible because the western powers, particularly USA, but Britain and France as well, agreed for that to happen. Churchill's infamous napkin, showing Stalin the carve up of Europe post war. They are all guilty, there are no good guys in war.

Paul,

When the libraries open I'll be only too glad to shew you the evidence that Weary kept his pistols throughout the war'

Foxy,

You ask why he didn't use his pistols, don't be so naive.

"Dunlop would take probably my feet over Issy's guns
any day."

Well, my guns are potent but we don't know how often you wash your feet, so you may well be right.

Paul,

"..., there are no good guys in war."

I thought that you might consider Weary Dunlop to have been a good guy.

Dear Paul,

You're right concerning the plight of the Baltic
States during World War II and thereafter. They
only regained their Independence recently.

As for Sir Weary Dunlop? This conversation has gone
on long enough. I actually have signed copies of
his work. It was my great honour to present Sir
Dunlop on behalf of the Lithuanian Community in
Australia a biography of one of our most famous
freedom-fighters signed by his widow (now living in
New York). It was at a formal function at Dallas Brooks
Hall.

Sir Dunlop was highly respected and loved by so many.

And rightly so.

As for Is Mise - its too silly for words to continue
any further with this conversation

For god's sake, prisoners of the Japanese were repeatedly stripped naked over the years and often kept that way. Where was Dr Dunlop supposed to hide his guns ?

Joe

Joe,

Probably where he hid the many scraps of paper, notebooks and exercise books that comprised his diaries or maybe he hid them with his radio but hide them he did and very successfully.

Suggest that you read a few books about the POWs, you'll be amazed at their ingenuity.
The printed version of his war diaries runs to 476 pages, extrapolate this to handwriting and you have some idea of the magnitude of his problems in hiding the diary.

Foxy,

"As for Is Mise - its [it's] too silly for words to continue
any further with this conversation"

Is this your new formula for bowing out when thoroughly beaten?

Is Mise,

I can only be beaten by someone whose opinions
I respect.

Joe,

I almost forgot Weary had two Molotov Cocktails prepared for the breakout, consider where he might have hidden them.

Ref: "The War Diaries of Weary Dunlop", 25 July 1945, p.433. Penguin,1990.

Further to the above and from the same source.

"...I conferred with D officers on matters of importance - information as to buried weapons, automatics, grenades etc., plan for emergency rising and commando platoon..." page 13.

How does that sit with your romanticized imaginings, Foxy?

Hi Foxy,

Yes, unfortunately Issy made claims concerning guns and Sir Weary Dunlop which at the end of the day were nothing more than figments of his vivid imagination. HE FAILED TO PROVIDE THE EVIDENCE!

Good point from Issy concerning his local library, I to miss our Brisbane Library. What a source of knowledge the library is, and enjoyable as well. Yet we have some on this forum who don't hold with any of that fancy book learn'n stuff, the 'Usual Suspects'.

You know Foxy some of the best books are the ones that are "just a good read". I had a novel, partly based on fact, and part fiction, it was about a white man and a Nez Perce Indian girl, back in the 1870's, and their adventures and life together. I can't remember the title or the author, I think it was $2 at Vinnies, can I find it in my book collection, sadly, Noooooo!

Dear Paul,

Not sure about the novel you mentioned.

There's one however that may interest you,

"Be Brave Tah-hy: The journey of Chief Joseph's
daughter," by Jack R. Williams. The novel is set
in 1877. It's based on part fiction part fact.

Dear Paul,

There's also of course -

"Argall" by William T. Vollmann.
The story of Captain Smith and "Pocahontas."

And "The Dying Grass,"by Vollmann - both of which
are worth a read.

Paul,

"Yes, unfortunately Issy made claims concerning guns and Sir Weary Dunlop which at the end of the day were nothing more than figments of his vivid imagination. HE FAILED TO PROVIDE THE EVIDENCE!"

Sorry about that, perhaps this will help [Foxy, take note}.

The following is from the source previously cited [War Diaries], p.14.

"23 Aril 1942. One slice of bread and coffee.
Warning given last night by Oversts van Lingham re any weapons and contraband*..."

Footnote by the author.

"Contraband included wireless sets, written records, compasses, maps and anything that could be used as a weapon. Needless to say, I did not part with my pistols."

Remarkable, is it not, that Weary Dunlop and I seem to share the same vivid imagination.

I do have other evidence, which is conclusive but it can't now be verified so I won't put it forward.

Hi Issy and foxy,

Unfortunately for you Issy, a diary entry dated 23rd April 1942, over three years before the date in question 25th July 1945, is not EVIDENCE. Move about 1,000 entries later to 25th July 1945, does Dunlap still reference those pistols as being in his possession? Very simple request to provide evidence on your part.

Paul,

No, he doesn't, but as the pistols were of some importance to trusted others then its not surprising that they are not mentioned directly in the diaries, had the diaries been discovered it would have been the end for Dunlop but that would have been no reason to reveal to the Japanese the existence of the pistols.
Weary always thought ahead which you obviously do not.

"Yes, unfortunately, Issy made claims concerning guns and Sir Weary Dunlop which at the end of the day were nothing more than figments of his vivid imagination"

I just provided evidence that your statement above is wishful thinking and verbal diarrhoea.

Foxy,

"I can only be beaten by someone whose opinions
I respect."

Then you do respect my opinions, that's nice to hear.

Do you finally concede that Weary had pistols and that he hid them from the Japanese or do you think that the footnote cited from the printed edition of his "War Diaries" is a figment of my imagination?

Foxy and Paul,

Just thought that you might like to know that Weary Dunlop was capable of violence.

op.cit. pp.385-86.

In a footnote, he talks about entering the Japanese compound, in the night, to take empty drums to use in the hospital.
He was sprung by a Korean sentry whom he belted with the heavy torch that he was carrying.
Next day nothing happened over the incident so Dunlop concluded that the sentry (who had a large lump on his head) had suffered concussion and resultant 'retrograde amnesia'.

Perhaps, you think that this footnote is also a figment of my imagination.

Issy, you claimed that on or about 25th July 1945, with the capitulation of the Japanese imminent Dunlop; "would have used them [his pistols]"....."His (Dunlop) intention was, if the worst came to the worst, to shoot Japanese soldiers so that the fittest among the prisoners could take their rifles"

That is what you have invented. You can't offer any evidence that Dunlop had pistols in his possession, on or about 25th July 1945. You simply extrapolated from a reference three years earlier.

Sorry, but I'll have to give you another PORKY AWARD.

Dear Paul,

The following is a link from the Australian
War Memorial - it covers stories of
leadership in the services. Scroll down to
Sir Edward Weary Dunlop. It explains why Sir
Dunlop was so loved and highly regarded and
what he did for the men under his care.

http://www.awm.gov.au/sites/default/files/Decision.pdf

Paul,

As I told you earlier, when the libraries open again I'll get the evidence you desire.
There is no evidence that Weary dumped his pistols and he would have used them in the breakout attempt had such an attempt been necessary.

Foxy,

All the citing of praise for Weary is irrelevant, we all know what a brave and noble man he was and some of us also recognize that he was also a soldier; don't sell the man short.

Do you finally admit that he had two pistols and that he hid them from the Japs?

Do you finally admit that he had two pistols and that he hid them from the Japs?

Yes in 1942!

The court shall adjourn until such time as the defence has prepared his case properly. Return the accused to the cells.

Paul,

Let Foxy answer for herself, she's a big girl.

Issy,

I only joined the conversation to give an unbiased even handed opinion on the subject. All forumites have the right to comment on all other forumites postings, yours included, stop trying to censor me in that regard.

Concerning the Japanese, since the victors write the history do you think it might have been possible that the Japanese were far more amenable chaps than we make them out to be. If that's the case then Dunlop may have had no need for those pistols. He may have been able to persuade the Japs to lay down their weapons with simple love and kindness.

Paul,

Some of the Japanese were honourable men and a friend of mine, the late Arthur Gentle of Rockley, NSW, who was a POW on the Burma Railway, told me and others one night in the local, that he owed his life to some of the Japanese guards (he had nothing good to say about the Koreans) who shared their medicines and food with prisoners.
So, yes, there is good in all people, but don't be so stupid as to suppose that the Japanese High Command did not plan to kill all the prisoners.

See the Bataan Death March.

For an outstandingly noble and brave Japanese gentleman in WWII read "Small Man of Nanataki", Liam Nolan, Dutton. 1966.

Foxy,

Do you remember posting this?

"Is Mise,

Sorry don't buy it about Weary Dunlop and guns.
That's your gun-toting fantasy."

I absolve you from any apologizing as I think that an apology for one of your absolutely wrong observations is beyond your capabilities.

Having been so soundly beaten on the fact of Weary Dunlop keeping his pistols after capture you seem to have gone to ground; understandable, the fox does that.

It is interesting to note that Weary not on;y had to contend with the Japanese but also with some of his fellow Australian officers, of whom, some objected to his embarrassing calls for them to donate more of their pay to the welfare of the troops in hospital.

The credo 'My horse, my men, myself' was being ignored.

There is also the contempt shewn to him by Higher Command and the Australian Government in downgrading the recommended OBE to a MID.

Mentioned in Dispatches.
"A member of the armed forces mentioned in dispatches is one whose name appears in an official report written by a superior officer and sent to the high command, in which his or her gallant or meritorious action in the face of the enemy is described"

He didn't get his OBE till 1947 when public opinion was very much in his favour and there were political kudos to be won by supporting him.

Issy, just checking if you have been able to get off a message of support for Travis and Greg McMichael, a couple of the good ole' white boys from down Georgia way. Who acting as well armed vigilantes were able to shoot dead a young black jogger Ahmaud Arbery. The McMichael's action was based on their suspicion that Arbery must have committed some crime. When do YOU envisage this kind of action becomming common place in Australia? BTW, a couple of months later, following public outrage the white authorities in Georgia laid murder charges against the McMichael's. Don't you just hate that public outrage nonsense? Where is Charlton Heston with his cold dead hand when you need him?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLN4PAJEYc8

Paul,

The McMichaels, if convicted, should be executed; don't you agree?

Is Mise,

Yes, if they are found guilty.

Joe

Hi Issy,

No!

Paul,

Why ever not?

They apparently murdered an innocent man, robbed him of his future.

Why should they not lose theirs?

Typical Green, defend the criminal at all costs.

G'day Issy

I oppose capital punishment. Unfortunately the McMichael's, if proven guilty, will have to pay a penalty. Why I say unfortunately is because such crimes if a society is fair and just will never happen. The belief that these kinds of crimes end with the penalty is wrong. The penalty only masks the real problem which produces this murderous behaviour in the first place. The lead up to Ahmaud Arbery death began a long time before the killers were even born. Prejudice, hate, bigotry, disadvantage etc when that kind of injustice becomes engendered in a society, like it has in America, then this unjust behaviour is inevitable.

"Typical Green, defend the criminal at all costs." no, you defend the criminals, who although they never pull the trigger "load the gun" with hate and bigotry so these crimes take place.

Is it not gunnie policy to arm the community, tear down ALL gun controls, so citizens can "defend" themselves from wrongdoers? That is the simplistic knee-jerk approach that will "solve" these injustices. When a couple of the good ole' boys take the law into their own hands and mete out "justice" you go all funny.

Here is another one for you Issy; Australian soldier appears to murder an unarmed Afgan; Do you agree "if convicted, should be executed".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsctmCnFwp8

Paul,

Yes, if he committed an unprovoked murder just for the sake of killing.

Unfortunately, many murderers when paroled murder again, the death penalty saves innocent lives.

You've never told us why the Greens tried to get rid of sniffer dogs,
or why they think that a lone woman in a remote farmhouse should be stopped from having a firearm handy in case she needs to protect herself or her stock?

Paul,

Do you call that video evidence?

I hope you don' get jury duty.

Paul,

I firmly believe that a person has a right to use a firearm in lawful self-defence, don't you agree?

Issy please define "lawful self-defence", is there any gray area, or is it all black and white to you.

A solider in war enters a village, a young child comes running towards him, he shoots the child dead. The child could have been a trained suicide bomber. he wasn't but it has happened before in this war. Justified?

A youth has stolen your 'whipper-sniper' out of your back shed, you see the little blighter taking off, you grab your trusty old Winchester, or whatever, you can't catch him, so you give him one barrel to the back of the head. You didn't mean to, just wanted to fire over his head as a warning to stop. Justified?

Paul,

"A solider in war enters a village, a young child comes running towards him, he shoots the child dead. The child could have been a trained suicide bomber. he wasn't but it has happened before in this war. Justified?"

Probably, you only make a mistake once.

"A youth has stolen your 'whipper-sniper' out of your back shed, you see the little blighter taking off, you grab your trusty old Winchester, or whatever, you can't catch him, so you give him one barrel to the back of the head. You didn't mean to, just wanted to fire over his head as a warning to stop. Justified?'

No, discharging a firearm at a person who is running away and is no danger is never justified.

Lawful self-defence?
A couple of properties that I hunt rabbits and hares on have wild cattle and scrub bulls are a definite hazard to life if they charge so I always have a Brenneke slug in one barrel of the 12 gauge just in case I have to defend myself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrhpAZoiqxE

Tell me, and I've asked this before,
why, in that situation would the Greens prefer that the bull killed me, doesn't seem a very civilized way of looking at things.

If they don't prefer the human to be killed why do the NSW Greens have this on their website?

"Principles:

7. That personal protection should never be regarded as a genuine reason for owning, possessing or using a firearm."

See, I'm being charged by a scrub bull and running isn't an option, I'm a bit too old, so using a firearm to save my life wouldn't be justified in their myopic vision of life.

Tell me, Paul, why do the Greens have this attitude towards innocent people saving their own lives??

Issy, can you give me the stats on how many people are killed in Australia each year by these "charging scrub bulls" is it higher or lower than the number killed by rampaging rhinoceroses.

You have not given me a broad definition of what is "lawful self-defence". Otherwise a long list of specific instances might be necessary. Everything from (A) out of control Aardvarks to (Z) rioting Zebras! What do you say to that?

Paul,

"Issy, can you give me the stats on how many people are killed in Australia each year by these "charging scrub bulls" is it higher or lower than the number killed by rampaging rhinoceroses"

No, I can't but I can give you the figures on the number that I killed last year, three (3) before they had a chance to charge.

But you don't answer my question, why would the Greens prevent a person from defending themselves from a scrub bull, or for that matter, from a rutting stag or a wild boar?

Paul,

Lawful self-defence is self-defence which would be deemed lawful by a Court of Law; such as an unprovoked attack where the defender fears for his/her life and takes action to defend that life.

Why do the Greens think that a person unlawfully attacked with a firearm and in mortal fear of their life should be prohibited from using a firearm for protection?

You have avoided answering this question a number of times; don't you understand Greens' principles?

Lets cut to the chase Issy, you like so many gunnies follow the edicts from your lords and masters at NRA America who want it "Dodge City Australia". WELL YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT.

I have calculated that only 0.000000001% of the population, and that's you, are possibly under threat from "rampaging scrub bulls", so rather than legislation I suggest next time you encounter one of thee beastly creatures, you partake of the following; "a Bex, a cup of tea and a good lie down" my old granny recommended that as a cure all for all that ale's you, so go for it boy!

I certainly understand "Greens" policy far better than you do.

"That personal protection should never be regarded as a genuine reason for owning, possessing or using a firearm."

See Dodge City comment. Why you don't agree with that policy is because you want to arm 98% population with guns. You want all laws and restrictions removed, you want vigilante mobs roaming the streets in pick-up trucks with machine guns mounted on the back, blasting away at "wrongdoers".

In the past members of the SSAA have been guilty of complicity in the murder of children! Are you still a SSAA member? Do the names Jack and Jennifer Edwards ring any bells with you?

Kudos- Is Mise on sticking to the discussion.

Globalists such as Communists and Economic Liberals will want the top end to hold the power monopoly. Especially lethal power.

On registration- not a supporter- but there are always ways for the police to gather information on suspects. The power balance seems so much in the police favour it's ridiculous. But strangely in a way they seem powerless- perhaps due to management issues.

Myself I don't own firearms- but understand that despite incidents there is necessity for public ownership.

In the Port Arthur incident- I understand that the main reason it lasted for so long is because of the lack of police preparation as they didn't have sufficient range to address the threat. Perhaps police needed to have better threat management processes.

It appears that in recent years self defence in Australia has been widely curtailed- restrictions on gun ownership is one more measure- others are rape defence laws, self defence in the home, in some states self defence has been removed from common law as I understand. The only defence seems to be to put your head in the line of fire- so to speak- not a defence at all.

Sometimes the police cannot be there so you will need to defend yourself. Traditionally males have provided this assistance to women. If males no longer provided this assistance perhaps women would understand more. Perhaps women "feel" that their shrill voice will save them in the "nanny state".

People used to be trained from childhood to accept that you need to be able be self sufficient in an emergency because no one is coming to help you. Reality doesn't change because of a feeling it changes when you understand it, research it, act on it. Ayn Rand puts it well- paraphrasing- you cannot demand motive power you must move.

Also police (and the courts and the government) aren't always on the side of the innocent.

As you have alluded to- from The Declaration of Independence- some things should not be subject to permission from the government but to higher or other principles.

Porky,

Another one of your Pauls, "... your lords and masters at NRA America "
Prove it, you have been asked to before but so far zilch.

So you understand Green principles, then pray tell us what is their position on, and solution for disarming the criminals?

We know that they have a position on disarming law-abiding citizens and leaving women on farms defenceless (and a solution to all of society's other problems) but we wonder why they don't mention criminals in their quest.

//Another one of your Pauls, "... your lords and masters at NRA America "
Prove it//

Your tiresome and incessant parroting of their propaganda constitutes proof enough.

Hi Toni, welcome back to the forum, I was thinking of you the other day when putting up a comment. Hope all has been well with you.

Hi Issy, get your own line, as the originator of the "Porky Awards" only I can giveth, and only I can taketh away. You are not authorised in that capacity. One more such award and you'll be eligible to receive a "Ziggy Pop Whistle" which when blown gives out the distinctive shrill mating call of the rare, but sometimes seen "female scrub bull". Within 30 seconds of blowing your Ziggy Pop Whistle it is sure to attract the usually placid and very timid, but at this time enraged male scrub bulls. Those male bulls within a vicinity of 10 miles will descend upon you within 5 minutes. If all else fails may I suggest a red handkerchief! Waving it at an enraged scrub bull, will be most effective in your case.

Toni,

"Your tiresome and incessant parroting of their propaganda constitutes proof enough."

Example, please, and while you're at it did you ever read of Weary Dunlop's pistols.

Paul,

Your desperation is very apparent but see:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-21/man-gored-by-wild-bull-in-northern-territory/8041626
and
"A personal distress beacon has saved a man who was gored by a wild bull in north Queensland, police say.

The 66-year-old farmer was working on his Teemburra Dam property near Mackay on Monday morning when the bull attacked.

The man suffered multiple fractures and cuts to his legs, arms, and chest."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-07/gps-beacon-saved-life-of-north-queensland-farmer-gored-by-bull/7484120
and,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrYcAWYMpfY
and,
http://books.google.com.au › books
"Charles Throsby, who was an educated Englishman, arrived in Australia in 1802 as ... tour, and had reached eighty-eight when he was killed by a wild bull near the ... recorded glimpse by a white man of a part of the highest ranges in Australia."

Wild bull attacks have been going on for some years.

Bye the way, Paul and Toni, the things above starting with 'http' are references as you seem to be a little unfamiliar with them.

Question: why do the Greens delight in reading about defence deprived people being killed or murdered, or in the case of women being raped and murdered?

Have they no principles?

This add popped up on OLO

http://www.bangkoktacticalshooting.com/

Seems we are widely read.

Issy, Sydney yesterday after the lockdown was eased. That'S you in the white shirt is it not? I told you not to blow your Ziggy Pop Whistle to often.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0J-cPkVrbc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfnVkdpo4Y0

Paul,

I'm not really interested in watching you squirm.

Just tell us why the Greens think that people in fear of their lives should not use a firearm; you say that you understand the Greens' principles, so just explain Principle 7 to us so that we may share your enlightenment.

Say, while we're posing thorny moral dilemmas for each other's amusement - Is Mise, if your lone woman in her remote farmhouse gets charged by a rampaging study scrub bull and isn't quick enough on the draw, and as a result suffers a debilitatiting injuries that will result in chronic pain for the rest of her life, do you believe she has a moral right to try and alleviate that pain free from Government interference?

An no, I had never heard the stupefyingly tedious tale of Weary Dunlop and his pistols until I stumbled across it here, after which I had to skip over a number of posts because the discussion sounded almost exactly like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Rzao52ndNA

Reckon I probably dodged a bullet there.

Hi Paul, good to see you again old chap. How's lockdown treating you? I ran out of other shite to do so I came back here to wind up some of the sad old tory whingers that haunt the forum.

Hi Toni,

Glad to hear all is okay, been a slow time for us. The biggest excitement was we had our boy over from Fiji earlier this year, he was all set, staying with us, ready to start studies in graphic design here in Brisbane when the virus hit. He hadn't travelled in his life before, so it was a big deal, difficult to organise etc. Just when it was all set, with him here, the virus hit the world, and was heading our way. We read the signs, and it was best for him to return back home and lose a year rather than be stuck in Australia without family, other than us, and nothing to do. There is always next year, or the year after. Otherwise "T" has been in pickle making mode, distributing them far and wide. She's done about 6 dozen jars, everything from sweet mustard, to the latest batch of beetroot and onion chutney yesterday, and there's more to come, so I'm told, "T" has a large lot of family and friends, and a lot of jars, (hopefully the f&f are all pickle eaters).

Just deciding if I should seriously reply to Issy old chap, he's not a bad old fella most of the time, or give him a bit more of the loony tunes! Nothing upsets the hard right conservative Tory more than a bit of humour. Cause for those guys life is "oh! so serious" its nothing to smile about!

Firstly Issy, please clarify if these people are in "fear of their lives" all the time, some of the time, or hardly ever. The truth is you only bring up these extreme minority instances not because you have great concern for remote farm women, or scrub bull attacks and such like, rather just as the rest of the SS and gun crazies want, you want an American style gun culture in Australia.

Your SS organisation members trained John Edwards in the use of firearms, which enabled him to murder his two children, later their mother committed suicide. None of the grubs at the SS had the guts to ever apologise, or say sorry, for what they done. What do you say to that.

Gun crazy venues, where you hang out, are temporally closed due to covid-19, it would be in the public interest if such places were closed permanently.

BTW, I could just imagine the consequences of some 85 year old, 'old fart' on a bus with a loaded gun in his pocket, for "self protection". Who is going to protect the rest of the community from this dribbling old fool with the gun in his pocket?
"Constable I am very sorry I shot that kiddy, but he wouldn't give up his seat for me, like he should, they have no respect constable, no respect at all for us old folks these days, I don't know what the younger generation is coming to, you know, they are getting so violent as well. Back in my day, when I was a lad....."

Why the Greens oppose the needless mass arming of the community for so called "self protection" is, as the evidence shows, hundreds in Australia, would be shot each each due to accident, misadventure or through callous disregard for human life. Yes we might avoid the occasional attack by the rampaging scrub bull, now and then, but hundreds would die needlessly at the same time. Due to gunnie selfishness they are prepared for such numbers dead so they can pursue their perverted pleasure at will. THAT IS THE REAL REASON.

Paul,

Rave on; but just tell us why the Greens and you, think that a firearm should never be used in self-defence I can understand their other reasons, but why do they oppose the use, our Laws don't so why do the Greens oppose the law?

I have no desire to carry a pistol, I have my walking sticks, which are all made of wood.

Why don't the Greens mention walking sticks in their war against self-defence?

Toni,

Read all the posts about Weary's pistols, I made a remark about them and Foxy called me a liar; not a good way to carry on a discussion, and the rest followed.

Paul,

"Your SS organisation members trained John Edwards in the use of firearms, which enabled him to murder his two children, later their mother committed suicide. None of the grubs at the SS had the guts to ever apologise, or say sorry, for what they done. What do you say to that."

What I say is that you will distort the truth at every opportunity,
you know full well, from previous discussion, that the SSAA refused the doctor membership of the pistol club and that they didn't admit him until their decision that he was not a desirable person to have a pistol was overridden by the NSW Commissioner of Police.

Why don't you and the Greens have a go at the Commissioner?
No guts, perhaps?

Paul,

"Elderly man who shot home intruder will not be charged
Posted 23 FebFebruary 2009, updated 23 FebFebruary 2009
ABC News.

Police in Perth have decided not to charge a 77-year-old man who shot an intruder during an alleged burglary at his home in Herne Hill.

Police say two intruders forced their way into the home of Eugene Valenti and his bed-ridden wife last Wednesday night.

They say Mr Valenti armed himself with a shotgun, locked himself and his wife in a bedroom and warned the men he was armed.

The men forced their way in and, in the ensuing struggle, a shot was fired, wounding one of them.

Police believe Mr Valenti used reasonable force defending himself and his invalid wife and say his version of events is supported by forensic evidence gathered at the scene.

Inspector Bill Munnee says Mr Valenti discharged the shot during a struggle with the offenders.

"So it wasn't like Mr Valenti was waiting to do a pop shot as they were running away or before they even came in," he said.

"He gave them plenty of warning before they entered his bedroom that he had a firearm, please don't come in.

"When he was telling me the story it was like a scene out of a horror movie, it was your worst nightmare.

"He had a bed-ridden wife and he had nothing else to defend himself with and there was violent force used to enter his property and his door was kicked open."

Why do you and the Greens think that he should not have used the shotgun?
Is it because you think that the criminals should not have been resisted or is it because you believe that criminals have rights that override the rights of law-abiding citizens.

Or is it what?

You had to go a long way back, 2009, and a long way across town, Western Australia, to dig that one out. On balance there is no justification to arm the population Dodge City style as you would like to see. Anyway you only throw up old farts, scrub bulls and such to mask your real objective of being able to carry on your perverted pleasure while calling out "we are so concerned for the community" WHAT RUBBISH! .

Why are you bucketing on that pair of brothers in arms, fellow gunnies from Dixie, those McMichael dudes? Most likely members of your SS parent org the NRA.

It was members of the SS, your mob, at the St Marys Gunnies Club that trained John Edwards, so saying "refused the doctor membership of the pistol club" is nonsense when they trained him in how to kill with a gun.

Paul,

More lies.
"It was members of the SS, your mob, at the St Marys Gunnies Club that trained John Edwards, so saying "refused the doctor membership of the pistol club" is nonsense when they trained him in how to kill with a gun"

They didn't train him to kill with a gun they do target shooting, as you well know.
Now, on the other hand, I was trained to kill noisily with various firearms and silently with the sword, knife, garotte and bare hands at considerable expense to the Australian taxpayer; I was also trained to kill with the shovel, the axe, the steel helmet and the entrenching tool.
Why do you ignore the fact that he got a licence after special approval by the Police Commissioner; doesn't fit the agenda does it.

Regardless of how far and how remote the incidences of self-defence ane why do the Greens insist that a firearm must never be used for such defence when, obviously, the Law allows it.

Are the Greens above the Law?

Why don't they say the same about walking sticks?

//Read all the posts about Weary's pistols//

Is this a new tactic, Is Mise? Bore people into submission?

How'd you go with your moral dilemma? Do you think Mrs. Lone Farmwoman has a moral right to take measures to alleviate her pain after her unfortunate hypothetical trampling by a raging scrub bull?

On the whole, Paul, shooters owe a debt of gratitude to John Howard, the Father of the Australian Gun Lobby (and after whom is named the "JWH" pistol round, a legal round more powerful than the one banned under the weird laws).
Without "Flack Jacket' John we would not have the laws that have brought about a vast rise in the number of shooting clubs, especially pistol clubs and there are now more firearms in civilian hands than before the Great Buy-Back.
It is estimated that there are now more pistols in private hands than at any time in our history.

I think that our gun laws are pretty good, although anomalies exist.

Crime is down, so the logical conclusion is that more guns mean less crime, this is borne out in the USA and conclusively in the case of South Africa where the gun laws are far stricter than the USA but the murder rate is higher and there are fewer guns, so fewer guns means more crime.

"Across most of Western Europe, for example, less than 0.1% of deaths were the result of homicide. Across much of Eastern Europe, North Africa, Asia and Oceania, it was less than 0.5%. In the United States it was 0.7%.

But in some countries the share is much higher. We see particularly high rates across some countries in Latin America. More than 9% of deaths in Honduras were from homicide; more than 8% in Venezuela; 7% in Guatemala; and 6% in Mexico."
http://ourworldindata.org/homicides

Now digest those facts.

Toni,

Have you been practising to be an idiot while you were away?

Seems that success comes easily to you.

//Have you been practising to be an idiot while you were away?//

Is there a particular reason for your incivility Is Mise? I'm sorry I have no interest in reading excessively long-winded, dull and pointless discussions. It probably represents some sort of deep seated moral failing on my part. But for what it's worth I'm sure you were totally right about everything and your feats of reasoning were unparalelled and staggering in their brilliance because you're so much better and cleverer than everybody else, and that it's essentially my fault that I found the discussion boring which in no way reflects poorly on your almost god-like perfection. Happy now?

Do you just not care about the plight of poor old Mrs. Lone Farmwoman, being forced to live in agonising pain?

"Is there a particular reason for your incivility Is Mise?"

Yes, your's.

Talking twaddle again Issy, if a political party proposes a policy, then its not "above the law". your political wing The Shooters and Hooters Party have a host of ridiculous policies which fortunately are not law, and hopefully never will be!

//Yes, your's//

Really, Is Mise? You consider my failure to sycophantically hang off your every word to be incivility? It's not all about you, mate. And different people are interested in different things... why would you take that personally?

Is Mise- All I have to say mate is Kudos. You obviously have a lot of knowledge about firearms. Did I hear wrong about you being an ex-police officer? Maybe it was someone else.

Canen Malem

Thanks for those kind words.
No, I was never a policeman, I was in the Royal Australian Infantry and later was an armourer, both in the army and later id the Department of Defence.

O sung woo was the policeman, he had a distinguished career and still pops into OLO now and again.

An armourer- This is similar to a gunsmith as I understand- I was reading about them in Wikipedia- this appears to be a really skilled profession that covers about 4 skill sets- including machining, toolmaker, etc, etc. It seems to be one of the highest skilled professions I have come across.

Yes- O Sung Wu is the policeman- I hope he's well- I know he checks in once in a while.

I was explaining to someone yesterday about the balance of the Steyr compared to the SLR. Looks like Aussies are getting the EF88. Adding to your list of interesting "guns" I heard that an interesting guy was building guns to shoot projectiles into orbit around the Earth.

Take care Is Mise.

Issy, I didn't know you were an armourer, being in that royal business, did you ever make any armour for famous royals, like King Arthur? It was fashionable back in the day, wearing armour that is. Maybe KA was just a little after your time. Julius Cesar perhaps.

You must be glad to hear your gunnie affiliates are hotting up in Guatemala. All those decapitating tools the shovel, the axe, the steel helmet and the paper clip. Were they all used at the same time? Was it an elective subject at your school? Taxpayers pay for some odd things at times. When you were training, did you practice on human volunteers or live chickens? I myself, was trained in finer art of killing with a loaded toothbrush,

Tony, If you're going to be an idiot, you will have to study a lot harder, because you are failing badly at the moment. If Australia is ever to become an idiocracy, then Issy will be its first KING. He was in the Royal Army of Guatemala, and a dear friend of Julius Cesar didn't you know that, he's going to let us know all about it very soon.

Paul,

I've said before that I was an armourer, an honourable calling, pity that you don't aspire to be more than a crapologist.

Issy, I know you were an armourer, the armour making trade was going great guns In Aussie until Ned Kelly let the side down! I do hear there is a shortage of armourers in Guatemala, due to the high mortality rate. Are you prepared to travel to a remote location in Central America any time soon?

//Tony, If you're going to be an idiot, you will have to study a lot harder, because you are failing badly at the moment. If Australia is ever to become an idiocracy, then Issy will be its first KING.//

I look forward to the coronation. Word on the street is that in order to provide an impressive spectacle for the adoring crowds and give the illusion - if only briefly - that the sun actually does shine out of his back passage, that at the culmination of the ceremony the Archbishop of Bogan Gate will insert a small-ish thermonuclear device up His Majesty's fundament then run like hell for his reinforced bunker. I have no doubt that this will give His Majesty a great sense of satisfaction in the moments before his atomisation... none of this silly popgun stuff, H-bombs are a real man's weapon.

Canem Malum,

Yes, an armourer is highly skilled, and worked on pistols, rifles, sub-machine guns, machine guns anti-tank weapons such as the PIAT and 17 pounder A/T gun, also flame throwers, one of the drawbacks of which was that we had to test-fire the things ourselves, on a more mundane level we fixed bicycles (of which the army had thousands), we rebuilt wheels (a fun job!!) and Sturmey Archer freewheel hubs with back pedal brakes.
Also in our domain were mechanical and optical sights, instruments (such as compasses) and musical instruments, we panel beat the dings out of brass ones, packed glands on those that had them and made and fitted new keys and pads.
We were trained as fitters and machinists, woodworkers, (most arms chests were wood and had dovetail joints, (besides repairing the wood on small arms).
We were also trained as blacksmiths and, if necessary, could make gun parts from scratch.
Our tool chest was a heavy and cumbersome affair which took two men to carry.

Altogether a rewarding and very responsible job.

Issy, I'm glad to hear you were a bicycle mechanic as well, provided they were mot armoured bicycles I'm all for it. Having the skill as an armourer is commendable in itself, even if I don't agree with guns, and the purposes they are put to, but thumbs up for having the abilities and skills you possess.