Australian Politics Forum - How do you define liberty?

Lafayette Senior Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 316 Gender:	Re: How do you define liberty? Reply #210 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:14pm Aussie wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:00pm: Rubbish. In every State, the Law on this stuff is codified by Statute. Errrr... No.. Self Defence comes under Common Law, not Statutory Law.
Back to top	IP Logged

Lafayette

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 316
Gender: male

Re: How do you define liberty?
Reply #211 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:16pm

Neferti wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:11pm:

Murder is Murder. You kill another person it is a Homicide. It is the Lawyers that get you off doing LIFE. Why Americans kill/murder their spouse to avoid Divorce Settlements is beyond me. Then try to cover it up .... PATHETIC.

Yes, when you kill another person it is a homicide. Every murder is a homicide but not every homicide is a murder. Simple Common Law.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: How do you define liberty?
Reply #212 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:20pm

BigOl64 wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 2:57pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 1:58pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 10:34am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 10:14am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 25^th, 2015 at 11:11pm:

There is no evidence the gun laws are responsible for decline in firearm deaths

But Baron you just admitted it:

Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 7:46pm:

We bought back 640,000 shotguns and rimfires for around a billion dollars to reduce our firearm homicides by 15-30 a year.

And we have replaced every single one of them since, with a continued reduction in gun deaths.

So how does that happen, increase in guns and a decrease in gun deaths.

Must be magic, because the hysteria states more guns = more death when that is patently untrue.

Sounds like BS to me bigol.

Can you show me any data that indicates there are more guns in Australia now than just after the buyback?

I wish geniuses would learn to google instead of demanding other people do it for you. Being an ignorant and petulant adult is no way to go through life.

A study has found Australians now own as many guns as they did at the time of the Port Arthur shootings in 1996.

More than 1 million guns were destroyed in the aftermath of the massacre, but research shows Australians have restocked over the past 10 years, importing more than 1 million firearms.

Despite that, the number of gun-related deaths has halved since the gun buyback.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-14/australians-own-as-many-guns-as-in-1996/44...

But feel free to remain a hysterical little b1tch if that suits your personality

No need to be rude.

The study is misleading, as the author himself pointed out:

Quote:

But Alpers tells Crikey population should be factored into the numbers.

Alpers said the estimated number of firearms at the time of the Port Arthur massacre was 3.2 million. Australian Bureau of Statistics data shows the number of guns per 100 people in 1996 would have been 17.3, based on the 3.2 million figure. Today that number is estimated at 13.9 guns per 100 people, making the number of guns per capita significantly less than it was in 1996. (Australia’s population has grown by more than 4.4 million since 1996.)

http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/01/16/cause-for-alarm-australia-has-more-guns-but-...

Importantly, guns per household is much lower today. Thats the first point. The second point is that you have to look at the type of weapons in circulation today compared to pre-1997: around 1 million automatic and semi-automatic guns were handed in, and these guns were replaced with single shot guns. Thus the overall firepower in circulation today is a lot less.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39698
Gender: male

Re: How do you define liberty?
Reply #213 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:20pm

Lafayette wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:14pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:00pm:

Rubbish. In every State, the Law on this stuff is codified by Statute.

Errrr... No.. Self Defence comes under Common Law, not Statutory Law.

Oh....okay. 33 years as a practicing Lawyer in Queensland (half of which was in criminal jurisdiction) and I have no idea. Fair enough.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: How do you define liberty?
Reply #214 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:21pm

Lafayette wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 2:38pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 2:12pm:

If you want to put it that way - then yes.

But a more honest way to put it is simply stating the established fact that reducing the number of guns in society makes innocent people safer from gun crime.

But if you really need to rationalise this in the terms you prefer to see it in - think of it like this: giving guns to innocent people who would only ever use them to defend themselves from armed criminals, makes it a) more likely a law-abiding "innocent" person will "flip out" and resort to gun crime b) easier for a person with criminal intent, but who has no criminal record, to acquire a gun for their sinister purposes and c) more likely a criminal will be able to steal or otherwise acquire illegally the legally acquired gun of a law-abiding person.

So long story short - yes, absolutely, arming innocent law-abiding citizens so they can defend themselves against criminals, will in the end make them more vulnerable to becoming victims of gun crime.

Arming innocent people and giving them the training to defend themselves will mean that they're more likely to be able to defend themselves against an criminals armed with knives, guns and a disparity of force that would justify using self defense, such as multiple attackers.

You literally just ignored my entire point, and regurgitated the exact same crap I had just refuted.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Lafayette Senior Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 316 Gender:	Re: How do you define liberty? Reply #215 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:27pm Aussie wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:20pm: Oh....okay. 33 years as a practicing Lawyer in Queensland (half of which was in criminal jurisdiction) and I have no idea. Fair enough. So are you saying that Common Law is irrelevant with regards to self defence and it is all statutory law?
Back to top	IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39698
Gender: male

Re: How do you define liberty?
Reply #216 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:30pm

Lafayette wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:27pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:20pm:

Oh....okay. 33 years as a practicing Lawyer in Queensland (half of which was in criminal jurisdiction) and I have no idea. Fair enough.

So are you saying that Common Law is irrelevant with regards to self defence and it is all statutory law?

You are the expert on Australian Law. Why ask me now?

Back to top

IP Logged

Lafayette

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 316
Gender: male

Re: How do you define liberty?
Reply #217 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:35pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:21pm:

You literally just ignored my entire point, and regurgitated the exact same crap I had just refuted.

Because your points are stupid and irrelevant. When a person is being faced with criminals that are an imminent threat of grievous bodily harm or death to them or another person then they have the right to defend themselves or that other person. Your statistics and preponderances don't mean jack because at the end of the day the innocent person has the right to defend themselves and jerks like yourself, on your goddamned high horse have no right to demand that the innocent have no means of defending their lives and the lives of their families when they'll be faced with criminals who don't give a damn about the law and who will attack in a manner that creates a disparity of force.

Have you ever had to listen to a person being murdered on the other end of a phone line, begging for help against someone that is stabbing them to death and all the while you know that the police are maybe 5-10 minutes out and this person has no means to defend themselves. I have had to hear that and it is why I believe that people should have the means to defend themselves against criminals.

Do you think people like me carry guns because we want to shoot people? No, that's not the case at all, in fact people that carry firearms here in the US are less likely to be in a fight or commit a crime than people that don't carry firearms simply because they understand the serious consequences and the responsibility that comes with firearms ownership. I've been in several situations where if I were someone like, say, George Zimmerman, I'd have taken the opportunity to use deadly force against another person but I didn't, not because I couldn't justify it, because I was well within my rights to do so, but because I abhor violence and was thankfully able to de-escalate the situation without using my gun.

Back to top

IP Logged

Lafayette

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 316
Gender: male

Re: How do you define liberty?
Reply #218 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:38pm

Aussie wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:30pm:

You are the expert on Australian Law. Why ask me now?

Maybe you need to trade your law degree in, mate for something else because it sounds like it's worth little more than toilet paper if you're suggesting that Self Defence isn't also Common Law. Statutory law in self defence is quite new and Common Law defences and cases still stand.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: How do you define liberty?
Reply #219 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:39pm

Lafayette wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:35pm:

Because your points are stupid and irrelevant.

My points are based on facts, yours are based on emotion.

You cannot refute me - the more you arm a population, the more susceptible they are to gun crime. Thats not just some personal ideology of mine - thats based on the actual data, which you haven't even attempted to challenge.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39698
Gender: male

Re: How do you define liberty?
Reply #220 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:41pm

Lafayette wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:38pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:30pm:

You are the expert on Australian Law. Why ask me now?

Maybe you need to trade your law degree in, mate for something else because it sounds like it's worth little more than toilet paper if you're suggesting that Self Defence isn't also Common Law. Statutory law in self defence is quite new and Common Law defences and cases still stand.

Not in Australia. You are just as dangerous as Lisa Jones by posting this crap. Every Australian State has codified (i.e. replaced) common law with Statutes.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: How do you define liberty?
Reply #221 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:50pm

Lafayette wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:35pm:

jerks like yourself, on your goddamned high horse have no right to demand... blah blah blah

Why is it that whenever we get a pro-gun American debating here they end up hysterical and resorting to personal attacks?

Calm down pal - I'm not abusing you, have the decency to afford me the same respect.

Lafayette wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:35pm:

Your statistics and preponderances don't mean jack because at the end of the day the innocent person has the right to defend themselves

You are admitting the point that I made from the beginning: your argument can only be that the increased risk to the public that indisputedly comes with the right to arms - is worth the price for your liberty. You said it yourself ' the statistics and preponderances don't mean jack". Its an ideological position, in which case I can't argue against it.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Lafayette

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 316
Gender: male

Re: How do you define liberty?
Reply #222 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 5:00pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:39pm:

My points are based on facts, yours are based on emotion.

You cannot refute me - the more you arm a population, the more susceptible they are to gun crime. Thats not just some personal ideology of mine - thats based on the actual data, which you haven't even attempted to challenge.

Your point is irrelevant though because ultimately, if I ban cars less people will be run over intentionally, but they still serve a purpose. The purpose a law abiding person will buy a car is to travel lawfully.

The purpose a law abiding person will buy a gun is to defend themselves or for sport or hunting.

Just because criminals will misuse something it doesn't mean we should make it illegal.

Lest you believe we ban Islam because terrorists use it to commit terrorism?

Back to top

IP Logged

Lafayette

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 316
Gender: male

Re: How do you define liberty?
Reply #223 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 5:26pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:50pm:

Why is it that whenever we get a pro-gun American debating here they end up hysterical and resorting to personal attacks?

Calm down pal - I'm not abusing you, have the decency to afford me the same respect.

No, you're high horse attitude where you act as if people don't have the right to defend their own lives is incredibly offensive to me. It's just like saying to me that my life isn't worth as much as a police officer's life.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 4:50pm:

You are admitting the point that I made from the beginning: your argument can only be that the increased risk to the public that indisputedly comes with the right to arms - is worth the price for your liberty. You said it yourself ' the statistics and preponderances don't mean jack". Its an ideological position, in which case I can't argue against it.

I don't care if there is increased risk to the public because at the end of the day, the public should be armed to defend itself as police are always minutes away when seconds count. They primarily come to investigate the crime after it occurs and very rarely arrive in time to save your butt.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 39698 Gender:	Re: How do you define liberty? Reply #224 - Dec 26^th, 2015 at 5:34pm Quote: I don't care if there is increased risk to the public QED. Abandon ship. We are talking to NRA Central.....and nothing will change them.
Back to top	IP Logged