Australian Politics Forum - Gun laws in Australia

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1965 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:53pm

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:28pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:24pm:

No, I haven't bothered reporting it, since the authorities already know it as well, I don't have enough details to make a difference.

So, you're just bullshitting then? Roll Eyes

Quote:

And legally owned firearms are not 'misused' in the way you're implying to any great degree. Shooting clubs do not, despite what you may believe, hold "armed robbery weekends".

Sorry, I don't believe in defending your strawman arguments, Gizmo. If you can't quote back to me where I have made such claims, I expect an apology. I have never, ever made such outrageous claims. Roll Eyes

Look up the definition of "implying', you mean you haven't made the claims in so many words....but that is what you are implying. By misuse you would mean domestic violence, or neighbour disputes etc, right?

As for the importation of illegal firearms...are you so naive that you think that the post office guys were the only people who ever thought to smuggling guns by parcel??? Remember, they were part of a 'syndicate' or group trafficking in guns. Do you think all the others just stopped importing guns when those 3 got busted, or that the 3 guys were the only import receivers????

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 43540

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1966 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 2:07pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:53pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:28pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:24pm:

No, I haven't bothered reporting it, since the authorities already know it as well, I don't have enough details to make a difference.

So, you're just bullshitting then? Roll Eyes

Quote:

And legally owned firearms are not 'misused' in the way you're implying to any great degree. Shooting clubs do not, despite what you may believe, hold "armed robbery weekends".

Sorry, I don't believe in defending your strawman arguments, Gizmo. If you can't quote back to me where I have made such claims, I expect an apology. I have never, ever made such outrageous claims. Roll Eyes

Look up the definition of "implying', you mean you haven't made the claims in so many words....but that is what you are implying. By misuse you would mean domestic violence, or neighbour disputes etc, right?

So, you admit that I have never made claims about, "armed robbery weekends"? I'll take that as an admission that you allowed your hyperbole to get the better of you, Gizmo. Roll Eyes

Quote:

As for the importation of illegal firearms...are you so naive that you think that the post office guys were the only people who ever thought to smuggling guns by parcel??? Remember, they were part of a 'syndicate' or group trafficking in guns. Do you think all the others just stopped importing guns when those 3 got busted, or that the 3 guys were the only import receivers????

I have no idea whether the "syndicate" was using one or more post offices, Gizmo and you, by your own admission have no more information to provide to the authorities, other than what you have read/hear in the MSM. I am usually very careful about what I claim. Roll Eyes

Back to top

It seems that I have upset a Moderator and are forbidden from using memes. So much for Freedom of Speech. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1967 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:38pm

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 2:07pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:53pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:28pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:24pm:

No, I haven't bothered reporting it, since the authorities already know it as well, I don't have enough details to make a difference.

So, you're just bullshitting then? Roll Eyes

Quote:

And legally owned firearms are not 'misused' in the way you're implying to any great degree. Shooting clubs do not, despite what you may believe, hold "armed robbery weekends".

Sorry, I don't believe in defending your strawman arguments, Gizmo. If you can't quote back to me where I have made such claims, I expect an apology. I have never, ever made such outrageous claims. Roll Eyes

Look up the definition of "implying', you mean you haven't made the claims in so many words....but that is what you are implying. By misuse you would mean domestic violence, or neighbour disputes etc, right?

So, you admit that I have never made claims about, "armed robbery weekends"? I'll take that as an admission that you allowed your hyperbole to get the better of you, Gizmo. Roll Eyes

Quote:

As for the importation of illegal firearms...are you so naive that you think that the post office guys were the only people who ever thought to smuggling guns by parcel??? Remember, they were part of a 'syndicate' or group trafficking in guns. Do you think all the others just stopped importing guns when those 3 got busted, or that the 3 guys were the only import receivers????

I have no idea whether the "syndicate" was using one or more post offices, Gizmo and you, by your own admission have no more information to provide to the authorities, other than what you have read/hear in the MSM. I am usually very careful about what I claim. Roll Eyes

And no, I also don't 'know' for certain that more than one post office was involved (or other methods of receipt for that matter), however, given the profits involved and the number of 'holes' in border security I'd bet the house on it. If it worked successfully through the one Post office, then it'd work through others (and avoid a bottle-neck in supply as well). After all, even if the guns are sold at a 1/3 markdown ($1000 a piece- $500 less than retail) you are still looking at over $200,000 worth of handguns.
Actually more sarcasm, or facetiousness to highlight the silliness of the 'misuse of firearms' comment

Back to top

« Last Edit: Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:43pm by gizmo_2655 »

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

Sir Eoin O Fada

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2670
New England, NSW
Gender: male

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1968 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:52pm

From OnLineOpinion:

"There have been many claims that the Gun Laws have stopped any mass shootings in Australia and that therefore they are a success.

The Lyndt Cafe and Monis proved that they are a failure.
All the ingredients were there for a massacre.

Monis had a firearm - the laws didn't stop him from acquiring it.

Monis' firearm was prohibited by the gun laws - he still got it.
his firearm was illegally modified - the gun laws didn't stop the modification.

Monis didn't have a firearms licence - he didn't comply with the gun laws.

Monis took hostages - the gun laws didn't stop him.

Monis murdered one person - the gun laws didn't stop him.

Monis had it in his power to murder many more people - the gun laws didn't stop him, he was stopped by men with guns.

Anyone care to refute the above?
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 8 August 2015 11:10:12 AM"

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17534&page=22

No refutations there, perhaps there is someone on here with the necessary cerebral capacity?

Back to top

Self defence is a right.

IP Logged

Pho Huc

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 985
Victoria
Gender: male

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1969 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:54pm

Out of mild interest what are the actual different points of view on this opinion?

Reading the thread it is very hard to tell what position people actually support because every point of contention is eviscerated to the point that the initial meaning is lost.

What do other people think? no justification for your opinions required, just a clear concise summary of your opinions.

this is my stance on this issue

I think that guns should be legal, but controlled.
I don't think handguns have a place in society other than law enforcement or target shooting*.
I don't think military style weapons have a place in society other than the military.

*I accept that when hunting large predators a secondary sidearm may be useful, but this would only apply to animals such as lion or Bear which are not game species in Australia.

Back to top

The law locks up the man who steals the goose from the common, but leaves the greater criminal loose who steals the common from the goose (convict saying)

IP Logged

Pho Huc

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 985
Victoria
Gender: male

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1970 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 7:05pm

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:52pm:

From OnLineOpinion:

"There have been many claims that the Gun Laws have stopped any mass shootings in Australia and that therefore they are a success.

The Lyndt Cafe and Monis proved that they are a failure.
All the ingredients were there for a massacre.

Monis had a firearm - the laws didn't stop him from acquiring it.

Monis' firearm was prohibited by the gun laws - he still got it.
his firearm was illegally modified - the gun laws didn't stop the modification.

Monis didn't have a firearms licence - he didn't comply with the gun laws.

Monis took hostages - the gun laws didn't stop him.

Monis murdered one person - the gun laws didn't stop him.

Monis had it in his power to murder many more people - the gun laws didn't stop him, he was stopped by men with guns.

Anyone care to refute the above?
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 8 August 2015 11:10:12 AM"

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17534&page=22

No refutations there, perhaps there is someone on here with the necessary cerebral capacity?

Nearly all the statements in your post are correct other than the assertion that Monis firearm was illegal.
His shotgun was a double barrel under and over. totally legal, I have one.
It was illegally modified however.

In relation to your statement that he was stopped by men with guns, Those men with gun also killed a hostage with crossfire. so maybe the guns were a mixed blessing Huh

Regardless, most of your points don't really argue the case for the relaxation of gun laws.

An analogy to you argument would be the following:

Drink driving laws are useless because;

People are still caught drink driving every day.

People still choose to drink drive regardless of the law.

People are killed by drink drivers all the time in spite of the law.

All these points are true, but they do not weaken the argument in favor of drink driving laws.
We do not expect everyone to obey the law, but enough do that it makes a big difference.

Therefore while the majority of the points you raise are correct, The fact is not 100% effective does not imply that gun control is a failure.

Back to top

The law locks up the man who steals the goose from the common, but leaves the greater criminal loose who steals the common from the goose (convict saying)

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 43540

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1971 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 7:08pm

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:52pm:

From OnLineOpinion:

"There have been many claims that the Gun Laws have stopped any mass shootings in Australia and that therefore they are a success.

The Lyndt Cafe and Monis proved that they are a failure.

As both concern the same person, I fail to see your point. As it involved one firearm and only one death attributable to that one person, I fail to see your point. Roll Eyes

Back to top

It seems that I have upset a Moderator and are forbidden from using memes. So much for Freedom of Speech. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Moderator

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 19159
Gender: male

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1972 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 7:49pm

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 8^th, 2015 at 6:31pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 8:45pm:

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 7:23pm:

Panther wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 5:06pm:

Simply, agree or disagree......criminals will become upstanding law-abiding citizens because of 'Gun Control' Law(s).[/i][/font][/size]

Gun control doesn't increase the number of anti social people, or change their behavior.

What is does do is reduce the supply of firearms to criminals.

In fact you could expect an increase in crime statistics for while after gun control is implemented due to new crimes like weapons possession and sale being measured for the first time.

You would also see a drop in gun related homicide, which would be partially offset by an increase in other forms of homicide.

What you would clearly see would be a drop in accidental death rate of firearms.

There are as many people murdered in the US each year as are killed by Islamic extremists in the whole world each year. 70% of people Murdered in America die as a result of a firearm injury.

If you state that America's relaxed gun laws are not related to this you better have some good data to back up your assessment.

In Australia we have quite a high rate of gun ownership but only 16% of our homicides involve a firearm. This is because its very hard to get hand guns.

Because criminals are so well know for obey laws, right??

maybe not, but there is no point in helping them along by making guns easy to access. Very few criminals is Oz use guns.

This makes a second Uzi seized in as many months, if we don't have Uzi's where did this one come from?
Quote:

WW2 machine gun,Uzi and sniper rifles seized in raids

A NSW man has been charged with serious firearms offences after a police raid uncovered a cache of guns and ammunition,including Uzi semi auto pistol and home made sniper rifle with silencer.

A 60 year old man was charged with numerous firearms and drug offences,he was refused bail.
dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/wwii-machine-gun-uzi-and-sniper-rifles-seized-in-...

A few pages back I posted a link with police saying they are picking up illegal guns every second day.
Looking at the media releases lots of firearms offences in the last 8-9 days,not a single one of them done by someone with a licence.
www.police.nsw.gov.au/news/media_release_archives

The criminals don't appear to have any supply problems, the ammo bill doesn't even stop them getting ammo.

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Moderator

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 19159
Gender: male

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1973 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 8:00pm

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:54pm:

I think that guns should be legal, but controlled.
I don't think handguns have a place in society other than law enforcement or target shooting*.
I don't think military style weapons have a place in society other than the military.

*I accept that when hunting large predators a secondary sidearm may be useful, but this would only apply to animals such as lion or Bear which are not game species in Australia.

To legally hunt the big 5 in Africa apart from paying the taxes for a permit you need a minimum .375 cal.
A 44 magnum would be the sidearm for that.

It's illegal to hunt with a pistol in Australia.

Define military style weapon, would a Target rifle like the GAP-10 be considered a military type when they have target background?

Are Ruger SR 22 or SR762 rifles military type even though the 762 uses a gas piston which ar15-10 do not?

Is the Accuracy International sniper rifle a military weapon,AI have won many target shooting comps and are very popular,i think they hold the distance record for snipers,should there be a compensated confiscation of Accuracy International rifles?

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Moderator

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 19159
Gender: male

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1974 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 8:11pm

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 7:05pm:

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:52pm:

From OnLineOpinion:

"There have been many claims that the Gun Laws have stopped any mass shootings in Australia and that therefore they are a success.

The Lyndt Cafe and Monis proved that they are a failure.
All the ingredients were there for a massacre.

Monis had a firearm - the laws didn't stop him from acquiring it.

Monis' firearm was prohibited by the gun laws - he still got it.
his firearm was illegally modified - the gun laws didn't stop the modification.

Monis didn't have a firearms licence - he didn't comply with the gun laws.

Monis took hostages - the gun laws didn't stop him.

Monis murdered one person - the gun laws didn't stop him.

Monis had it in his power to murder many more people - the gun laws didn't stop him, he was stopped by men with guns.

Anyone care to refute the above?
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 8 August 2015 11:10:12 AM"

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17534&page=22

No refutations there, perhaps there is someone on here with the necessary cerebral capacity?

Nearly all the statements in your post are correct other than the assertion that Monis firearm was illegal.
His shotgun was a double barrel under and over. totally legal, I have one.
It was illegally modified however.

In relation to your statement that he was stopped by men with guns, Those men with gun also killed a hostage with crossfire. so maybe the guns were a mixed blessing Huh

Drink driving laws are useless because;
People are still caught drink driving every day.
People still choose to drink drive regardless of the law.
People are killed by drink drivers all the time in spite of the law.

Monis had a sawn off pump action, it's illegal to shorten any firearm.

Monis shot a fist size hole in that fat womans foot and hit a cop in the face with pellets.

We don't know what happened they never released the autopsy report,my money would be a ricochet or splatter causing the fatal injury over a direct hit.

I saw some statistics on culpable driving charges, about 60 homicides a year with people using their cars to kill people.
More people are charged with using a car to kill someone than using a gun to do it.

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Pho Huc

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 985
Victoria
Gender: male

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1975 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 8:47pm

Baronvonrort wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 8:00pm:

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:54pm:

I think that guns should be legal, but controlled.
I don't think handguns have a place in society other than law enforcement or target shooting*.
I don't think military style weapons have a place in society other than the military.

*I accept that when hunting large predators a secondary sidearm may be useful, but this would only apply to animals such as lion or Bear which are not game species in Australia.

To legally hunt the big 5 in Africa apart from paying the taxes for a permit you need a minimum .375 cal.
A 44 magnum would be the sidearm for that.

It's illegal to hunt with a pistol in Australia.

Define military style weapon, would a Target rifle like the GAP-10 be considered a military type when they have target background?

Are Ruger SR 22 or SR762 rifles military type even though the 762 uses a gas piston which ar15-10 do not?

Is the Accuracy International sniper rifle a military weapon,AI have won many target shooting comps and are very popular,i think they hold the distance record for snipers,should there be a compensated confiscation of Accuracy International rifles?

I would define a military style weapon as one capable of automatic or semiautomatic fire feeding from a changeable magazine. The magazine requirement is probably surplus though.

I don't think the AI sniper rifle should be banned, its just a bolt action rifle in a AR style chassis.

Back to top

The law locks up the man who steals the goose from the common, but leaves the greater criminal loose who steals the common from the goose (convict saying)

IP Logged

Pho Huc

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 985
Victoria
Gender: male

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1976 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 9:09pm

Baronvonrort wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 8:11pm:

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 7:05pm:

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:52pm:

From OnLineOpinion:

"There have been many claims that the Gun Laws have stopped any mass shootings in Australia and that therefore they are a success.

The Lyndt Cafe and Monis proved that they are a failure.
All the ingredients were there for a massacre.

Monis had a firearm - the laws didn't stop him from acquiring it.

Monis' firearm was prohibited by the gun laws - he still got it.
his firearm was illegally modified - the gun laws didn't stop the modification.

Monis didn't have a firearms licence - he didn't comply with the gun laws.

Monis took hostages - the gun laws didn't stop him.

Monis murdered one person - the gun laws didn't stop him.

Monis had it in his power to murder many more people - the gun laws didn't stop him, he was stopped by men with guns.

Anyone care to refute the above?
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 8 August 2015 11:10:12 AM"

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17534&page=22

No refutations there, perhaps there is someone on here with the necessary cerebral capacity?

Nearly all the statements in your post are correct other than the assertion that Monis firearm was illegal.
His shotgun was a double barrel under and over. totally legal, I have one.
It was illegally modified however.

In relation to your statement that he was stopped by men with guns, Those men with gun also killed a hostage with crossfire. so maybe the guns were a mixed blessing Huh

Drink driving laws are useless because;
People are still caught drink driving every day.
People still choose to drink drive regardless of the law.
People are killed by drink drivers all the time in spite of the law.

Monis had a sawn off pump action, it's illegal to shorten any firearm.

Monis shot a fist size hole in that fat womans foot and hit a cop in the face with pellets.

We don't know what happened they never released the autopsy report,my money would be a ricochet or splatter causing the fatal injury over a direct hit.

I saw some statistics on culpable driving charges, about 60 homicides a year with people using their cars to kill people.
More people are charged with using a car to kill someone than using a gun to do it.

I didn't know it was a pump action I retract my earlier statement.

I will not the debate what happened in the Lindt siege. As you said not enough information for anyone to create an informed opinion.

What is the implied relationship between automotive homicide and firearms laws?

What do you think the Gun Laws in Australia should be?

Back to top

The law locks up the man who steals the goose from the common, but leaves the greater criminal loose who steals the common from the goose (convict saying)

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 43540

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1977 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 10:41pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:38pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 2:07pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:53pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:28pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:24pm:

No, I haven't bothered reporting it, since the authorities already know it as well, I don't have enough details to make a difference.

So, you're just bullshitting then? Roll Eyes

Quote:

And legally owned firearms are not 'misused' in the way you're implying to any great degree. Shooting clubs do not, despite what you may believe, hold "armed robbery weekends".

Sorry, I don't believe in defending your strawman arguments, Gizmo. If you can't quote back to me where I have made such claims, I expect an apology. I have never, ever made such outrageous claims. Roll Eyes

Look up the definition of "implying', you mean you haven't made the claims in so many words....but that is what you are implying. By misuse you would mean domestic violence, or neighbour disputes etc, right?

So, you admit that I have never made claims about, "armed robbery weekends"? I'll take that as an admission that you allowed your hyperbole to get the better of you, Gizmo. Roll Eyes

Quote:

As for the importation of illegal firearms...are you so naive that you think that the post office guys were the only people who ever thought to smuggling guns by parcel??? Remember, they were part of a 'syndicate' or group trafficking in guns. Do you think all the others just stopped importing guns when those 3 got busted, or that the 3 guys were the only import receivers????

I have no idea whether the "syndicate" was using one or more post offices, Gizmo and you, by your own admission have no more information to provide to the authorities, other than what you have read/hear in the MSM. I am usually very careful about what I claim. Roll Eyes

And no, I also don't 'know' for certain that more than one post office was involved (or other methods of receipt for that matter), however, given the profits involved and the number of 'holes' in border security I'd bet the house on it. If it worked successfully through the one Post office, then it'd work through others (and avoid a bottle-neck in supply as well). After all, even if the guns are sold at a 1/3 markdown ($1000 a piece- $500 less than retail) you are still looking at over $200,000 worth of handguns.

AIUI you would need someone within the Post Office agency to be crooked. While not impossible, it is unlikely to occur frequently. Whilst the potential sums may appear large, are they sufficient to offset several years in gaol?

Quote:

Actually more sarcasm, or facetiousness to highlight the silliness of the 'misuse of firearms' comment

I'll accept that as a white flag then, shall I, Gizmo? Roll Eyes

Back to top

It seems that I have upset a Moderator and are forbidden from using memes. So much for Freedom of Speech. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Panther

Gold Member

Offline

My Heart beats True for
the Red White & Blue...

Posts: 11710
Gender: male

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1978 - Aug 9^th, 2015 at 10:44pm

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 9:09pm:

......What do you think the Gun Laws in Australia should be?

Well, where does one begin?

There are so many components of the existing law that I would like to see 'Modified/Adjusted/Amended' that proposing them all here en masse would be, in my honest opinion, counterproductive in the mere fact that they would meet overwhelming criticism from the left (anti-gun camp), & even some mild opposition in the pro-gun ranks.

So, I will reserve the overwhelming bulk of my positions for future discussions. I would only like to forward two important positions at this time.

Short & sweet, for starters, I would submit self-defense as an acceptable 'genuine reason' for all firearm ownership, & if firearms are subject to inspection by authorities from time to time, I would submit that they must provide a minimum of 24 hours direct notice of a pending periodic inspection to be physically issued in person, as would a search warrant, for such a periodic inspection, to be carried out at a specific mutually agreeable time.

That should suffice for the time being, but as others will undoubtedly bring up positions that I will find quite reasonable, I will back them as surly as if I proposed them myself at a time of my choosing.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Aug 9^th, 2015 at 11:21pm by Panther »

"When the People fear government there is Tyranny;
When government fears the People there is Freedom & Liberty!"

'
Live FREE or DIE!
'

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Gun laws in Australia
Reply #1979 - Aug 10^th, 2015 at 12:32am

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 10:41pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:38pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 2:07pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:53pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:28pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 1:24pm:

No, I haven't bothered reporting it, since the authorities already know it as well, I don't have enough details to make a difference.

So, you're just bullshitting then? Roll Eyes

Quote:

And legally owned firearms are not 'misused' in the way you're implying to any great degree. Shooting clubs do not, despite what you may believe, hold "armed robbery weekends".

Sorry, I don't believe in defending your strawman arguments, Gizmo. If you can't quote back to me where I have made such claims, I expect an apology. I have never, ever made such outrageous claims. Roll Eyes

Look up the definition of "implying', you mean you haven't made the claims in so many words....but that is what you are implying. By misuse you would mean domestic violence, or neighbour disputes etc, right?

So, you admit that I have never made claims about, "armed robbery weekends"? I'll take that as an admission that you allowed your hyperbole to get the better of you, Gizmo. Roll Eyes

Quote:

As for the importation of illegal firearms...are you so naive that you think that the post office guys were the only people who ever thought to smuggling guns by parcel??? Remember, they were part of a 'syndicate' or group trafficking in guns. Do you think all the others just stopped importing guns when those 3 got busted, or that the 3 guys were the only import receivers????

I have no idea whether the "syndicate" was using one or more post offices, Gizmo and you, by your own admission have no more information to provide to the authorities, other than what you have read/hear in the MSM. I am usually very careful about what I claim. Roll Eyes

And no, I also don't 'know' for certain that more than one post office was involved (or other methods of receipt for that matter), however, given the profits involved and the number of 'holes' in border security I'd bet the house on it. If it worked successfully through the one Post office, then it'd work through others (and avoid a bottle-neck in supply as well). After all, even if the guns are sold at a 1/3 markdown ($1000 a piece- $500 less than retail) you are still looking at over $200,000 worth of handguns.

AIUI you would need someone within the Post Office agency to be crooked. While not impossible, it is unlikely to occur frequently. Whilst the potential sums may appear large, are they sufficient to offset several years in gaol?

Quote:

Actually more sarcasm, or facetiousness to highlight the silliness of the 'misuse of firearms' comment

I'll accept that as a white flag then, shall I, Gizmo? Roll Eyes

Only if you are very, very naive and/or silly.

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged