Kodiaz
member
Remind me not to post at 4 A.M. anymore.
Rebecca Peters Trumpets Universal Gun Control
- Thread starter sm
- Start date
- Status
She and her organization are probably the single biggest threat we face, because they are working on a global scale to eliminate guns. Eventually we'll have a president who completely disregards the Constitution and will accept UN demands that our free citizens disarm.
geekWithA.45
Moderator Emeritus
And when that happens, then we will learn the answer to many questions concerning the state of the character of the American people at that time and place.
Many have taken laid plans and taken actions, betting that the American people have no stomach for a fight, fully expecting us to roll over, throw in the towel, and call it a day.
Lemme see....King George, Santa Anna, Tojo, Krushcev, Osama Bin Laden, Sadaam Hussein....
There will always be someone willing to add their name to the list. Maybe, someday, they'll be right.
But not on MY watch.
mordechaianiliewicz
Member
"The only currency that you can purchase freedom back with is blood!"
I don't know which Aussie said this, but I very much like it. Unfortunately, the Aussies seem to have not stayed good to this promise. Granted, I do know that there are alot of SKS, AR-15, etc. buried under the ground in Australia, but as has been posted here before, the time you feel the need to bury you're guns, is the time you should be using them.
I'm not afraid to say this. Australia needs a violent, bloody revolution. They need it now, before it is too late. Before they become a nation of slaves. Right now, there are plenty of 20 something and 30 something men who can fight, and who remember how it was. In twenty more years, that won't be the case.
Now is the time. They don't seem to see it there though. Idiots like this Rebecca Peters say any lie, tell any tale they feel they need to. They try to make every gun owner "Martin Bryant" (who probably didn't do what they said he did, look at the massacre, research it, and ask yourself if a severely retarded rather weak man did that). If action is not taken now, there will be no chance. These people cannot be reasoned with. So, disposing of them can only make Aussies situation better.
There is no legal redress of grievances. They said that quote is why arms should be controlled. I say the statement at the beginning of this rant is an expression of liberty denied, and the real reason for arms control was obviously stated. To control liberty.
I don't know which Aussie said this, but I very much like it. Unfortunately, the Aussies seem to have not stayed good to this promise. Granted, I do know that there are alot of SKS, AR-15, etc. buried under the ground in Australia, but as has been posted here before, the time you feel the need to bury you're guns, is the time you should be using them.
I'm not afraid to say this. Australia needs a violent, bloody revolution. They need it now, before it is too late. Before they become a nation of slaves. Right now, there are plenty of 20 something and 30 something men who can fight, and who remember how it was. In twenty more years, that won't be the case.
Now is the time. They don't seem to see it there though. Idiots like this Rebecca Peters say any lie, tell any tale they feel they need to. They try to make every gun owner "Martin Bryant" (who probably didn't do what they said he did, look at the massacre, research it, and ask yourself if a severely retarded rather weak man did that). If action is not taken now, there will be no chance. These people cannot be reasoned with. So, disposing of them can only make Aussies situation better.
There is no legal redress of grievances. They said that quote is why arms should be controlled. I say the statement at the beginning of this rant is an expression of liberty denied, and the real reason for arms control was obviously stated. To control liberty.
G36-UK
Member
I have a strong feeling that the Gun Control Network and the UK branch of Mothers Against Guns give funds to IANSA.
Technically, it could be said that the Home Office funds IANSA, since they fund the aforementioned groups.
Anyone got a link or something to the debate with Wayne LaPierre?
Technically, it could be said that the Home Office funds IANSA, since they fund the aforementioned groups.
Anyone got a link or something to the debate with Wayne LaPierre?
warriorsociologist
Member
Remember that some in the US once succeeded with this type of self-righteous misguided idealism by banning liquor once....and in doing so CREATED an organized crime network (as well as many other problems) like no other before.... Hell and that was just taking away a beverage...not the keys to free government BY the people...
Well, we know how that amendment ended...
Well, we know how that amendment ended...
mordechaianiliewicz,
It's my fear that it's already too late. Australia was starting down the tubes when I lived there 30+ years ago. In Queensland, unregistered handguns were already illegal. The 20 and 30 somethings of today are too young to remember how it was when it was less restrictive. They are the ones who have already been brainwashed into believing that only the police (and sometimes not even them) and the military should have guns. The Australians, by their nature, tend to obey their government's edicts. The Aussie society is so liberal and obedient that it's hard to believe. Their libs make ours look like Rush Limbaugh. If you think "multiculuralism" is rampant here, you should see it in action there.
They have outlawed SLINGSHOTS, for pity's sake. In most states, you cannot carry a pocket knife. I have read, but don't know for a fact, that one is required to have a doctor's certificate in order to have/use a cane.
My wife and I were last there in 2005 and I couldn't believe the anti gun sentiment was so widespread and so misinformed. In addition, the criminals are so mollycoddled that they'd darn near have to murder and dismember & barbecue Mother Teresa to earn any prison time. I personally know one prison guard there who has a markedly sympathetic view of criminals. He realizes that many belong in prison, but is of the opinion that it was merely "bad breaks" that led them there.
It's heartbreaking to see how the country has evolved. It's truly a beautiful place (especially Queensland, my favorite). I fervently hope someone can establish a movement that will reverse current trends, but the anti-gun societal pressures are awfully powerful - neighbors will report other neighbors. (One poor soul was reported to the police because somebody overheard him say that, sometimes, he got so frustrated that he "just felt like shooting someone". He lost all his guns, including his pellet rifle, and the public perception was that he deserved it. Never mind that his comment was taken entirely out of context.) The people seem to have bought in to the anti's arguments wholeheartedly. Sad.
I really hope that things can be changed, but I'm increasingly of the opinion that the change will have to be cataclysmic rather than orderly.
Bloody hell.
Rick
JohnBT
Member
"So you really, seriously think that a bunch of late 80 to 90-something year old WWII vets could stand a freakin' chance against a well-armed pack of determined Cub Scouts?"
My father is an 84-year-old WWII vet with 2 Honorable Discharges and can probably outshoot you. I know I'd be betting on him.
In other news, I didn't know all us older folks had it so easy. I suppose I've been hanging with the wrong crowd. In any event, I think somebody is overgeneralizing the reality of the good old days. Actually I think things are just now getting back to normal after a decade of unprecedented dot.com (and stock market) boom.bust and the overinflated expectations it brought. From what I've been told about the Great Depression by my parents and grandparents, we're still living in a land of plenty.
John
My father is an 84-year-old WWII vet with 2 Honorable Discharges and can probably outshoot you. I know I'd be betting on him.
In other news, I didn't know all us older folks had it so easy. I suppose I've been hanging with the wrong crowd. In any event, I think somebody is overgeneralizing the reality of the good old days. Actually I think things are just now getting back to normal after a decade of unprecedented dot.com (and stock market) boom.bust and the overinflated expectations it brought. From what I've been told about the Great Depression by my parents and grandparents, we're still living in a land of plenty.
John
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Land of plenty? I'd say WAY more than "a plenty"! My view of our society is that for about 90% of us, we have so much, so easy, that we're mostly a bunch of spoiled brats! Mostly, though, what I see as missing is the ability to tell the difference between what one needs vs. what one wants.
, Art
, ArtMolon Labe
Member
+1.
If guns are banned in America, I pray it happens sooner rather than later.
Molon Labe
Member
No. This noteworthy title is reserved for our fellow citizens who cherish safety more than liberty.
geekWithA.45
Moderator Emeritus
+1.
The greatest immediate threat to our lives are the Jihaddis, who promise and deliver death and mayhem as the opportunity presents.
The greatest immediate threat to our liberty and pursuit of happines are our own countrymen, especially those who throw in with the toxic children of Roussea and his merry bad of collectivists.
There most certainly are paranoid, hate-filled people in our society.
One of them is Rebecca Peters.
She hates anyone who participates in shooting sports. She hates anyone who would have the gall to defend him/herself against rapists and murderers.
She is afraid of law-abiding, moral people who want liberty. She is afraid of anyone she can't control.
One of them is Rebecca Peters.
She hates anyone who participates in shooting sports. She hates anyone who would have the gall to defend him/herself against rapists and murderers.
She is afraid of law-abiding, moral people who want liberty. She is afraid of anyone she can't control.
Carl N. Brown
Member
Who is Rebecca Peters?
Carrie Nation on gunpowder.
I may be politically incorrect here, if you have the DVD of the
King College London Great Gun Debate between Rebecca Peters
of IANSA and Wayne LaPierre of the NRA, do not keep it in your
video chest: PASS IT AROUND. My DVD copy transferred to VHS
very well.
Rebecca Peters represents the internationalist approach of UN
lovers: "Americans should be subject to the same rules as
everyone else in the world." The rules of Rebecca Peters and
George Soros, enforced by the UN, disregarding the US (or any
other) national constitution. Rebecca would allow us to keep
single shot rifles with a maximum range of 100 meters. ??? But
only if we were nice. By her standards.
Carrie Nation on gunpowder.
I may be politically incorrect here, if you have the DVD of the
King College London Great Gun Debate between Rebecca Peters
of IANSA and Wayne LaPierre of the NRA, do not keep it in your
video chest: PASS IT AROUND. My DVD copy transferred to VHS
very well.
Rebecca Peters represents the internationalist approach of UN
lovers: "Americans should be subject to the same rules as
everyone else in the world." The rules of Rebecca Peters and
George Soros, enforced by the UN, disregarding the US (or any
other) national constitution. Rebecca would allow us to keep
single shot rifles with a maximum range of 100 meters. ??? But
only if we were nice. By her standards.
Carl N. Brown
Member
to repeat myself (somewhat)
I recently re-watched--
The Great Great UN Gun Debate
from the Library of King's College, London, 2004
Rebecca Peters, International Action Network on Small Arms,
and
Wayne LaPierre, National Rifle Assocoation of America,
debate the motion:
"Should the United States Senate support the proposed
United Nations treaty that bans private ownership of guns?"
When LaPierre challenged Peters over "should a woman shoot
a rapist?" Peters denounced self-defense for women: women
should rely on courts and police for defense against rape;
when women defend themselves, it only escalates the problem.
In four incidents of armed self defense by women known to
me, the men threatening the women backed off or fled from
the armed female. That to me is de-escalation of the problem.
Peters said she might allow US hunters to own single shot
hunting rifles--if their maximum range was under one hundred
meters, if we could prove a need to her UN bureaucracy.
Peters was the engineer of the confiscation of 640,000 registered
guns from lawabiding Australians and is proud of her part in
that; but it was not a ban, you see, it was an adjustment in
regulations. IANSA is not talking about bans, that is an NRA
lie: Rebecca hates the USC 1A for protecting "lies" about IANSA
as political speech. Then she admits that handguns were basically
prohibited in UK and 640,000 registered firearms were
confiscated and destroyed in Australia, but calling those
"adjustments in regulation" bans is an "NRA lie" allowed by
that pesky US BoR 1A. Her double-speak and double-think would
make 1984 Party Official O'Brien proud; what colour sash is
worn by the Oceania Anti-Gun League?
I recently re-watched--
The Great Great UN Gun Debate
from the Library of King's College, London, 2004
Rebecca Peters, International Action Network on Small Arms,
and
Wayne LaPierre, National Rifle Assocoation of America,
debate the motion:
"Should the United States Senate support the proposed
United Nations treaty that bans private ownership of guns?"
When LaPierre challenged Peters over "should a woman shoot
a rapist?" Peters denounced self-defense for women: women
should rely on courts and police for defense against rape;
when women defend themselves, it only escalates the problem.
In four incidents of armed self defense by women known to
me, the men threatening the women backed off or fled from
the armed female. That to me is de-escalation of the problem.
Peters said she might allow US hunters to own single shot
hunting rifles--if their maximum range was under one hundred
meters, if we could prove a need to her UN bureaucracy.
Peters was the engineer of the confiscation of 640,000 registered
guns from lawabiding Australians and is proud of her part in
that; but it was not a ban, you see, it was an adjustment in
regulations. IANSA is not talking about bans, that is an NRA
lie: Rebecca hates the USC 1A for protecting "lies" about IANSA
as political speech. Then she admits that handguns were basically
prohibited in UK and 640,000 registered firearms were
confiscated and destroyed in Australia, but calling those
"adjustments in regulation" bans is an "NRA lie" allowed by
that pesky US BoR 1A. Her double-speak and double-think would
make 1984 Party Official O'Brien proud; what colour sash is
worn by the Oceania Anti-Gun League?
Carl N. Brown
Member
(yeah, I should have my second thoughts first)
Why did Rebecca Peters not crow about her and IANSA's latest
announced "victory" in Brazil?
THR > Social Situations > General Gun Discussions
> Brazilian Gun Ban Soundly Rejected!
(Well, Peters announced it as a victory until the votes were counted.)
Why did Rebecca Peters not crow about her and IANSA's latest
announced "victory" in Brazil?
THR > Social Situations > General Gun Discussions
> Brazilian Gun Ban Soundly Rejected!
(Well, Peters announced it as a victory until the votes were counted.)
the pistolero
Member
Even if he did, though, we all know that facts and logic mean nothing to the gun-grabbers. And neither, for that matter, do common sense, the laws of nature, or natural (or God-given, depending on your perspective) rights, "among these...Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." The only things Rebecca Peters and her merry band of statist goons care about are power and the concentration of it in the hands of the Almighty State. It makes me glad we have people like John Bolton representing us, but still, though, it's enough to keep one awake at night...
cbsbyte
Member
I have not seen the debate, but a few NRA friends of mine have, and they all agree that she won the debate even though they don't agree with her. They said she was a technicaly better debater than LaPierre.
AlaskaErik
Member
Funding
America and freedom hating George Sorus is her sugardaddy. Most of her funding comes from him.
America and freedom hating George Sorus is her sugardaddy. Most of her funding comes from him.
sterling180
Member
The fact of the matter is,that there is an element of mistrust towards all types of gunowners and that organizations like the GCN,Mothers Against Guns,etc,etc are hard to erase for good.The only anti organization that existed in the UK before Dunblane Massacre, was The Anti-Shotgun league-who were a bunch of cripples and didn't do well against the Conservative Party-in terms of their policies.
Quite a few Tories like Douglas Hurd owned shotguns,so the antis were kept at bay,until Dunblane.
If you noticed in the demonstrations in the UK-most of the antis there were females and the females have out-ranked the men,in terms of their hatred towards firearms.The chairpersons for GCN and Mothers Against Guns were women.
But there are quite a few female shooters in the UK as well
Quite a few Tories like Douglas Hurd owned shotguns,so the antis were kept at bay,until Dunblane.
If you noticed in the demonstrations in the UK-most of the antis there were females and the females have out-ranked the men,in terms of their hatred towards firearms.The chairpersons for GCN and Mothers Against Guns were women.
But there are quite a few female shooters in the UK as well
Spiphel Rike
Member
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2005
- Messages
- 152
"Australia needs a violent, bloody revolution. They need it now, before it is too late."
That has little chance of working. An unorganised attempt would fail miserably and that is what it would be. Most states have been beefing up SERT and any similar units, many are receiving anti-terrorist training. What chance do people have against that?
Our nearest semblance of the NRA took the canadian stance, "only for sport, don't call firearms weapons" e.t.c.
Howard's nice incentives of states taking up his "uniform gun laws" would be repeated (read: denial of funding to states key industries). Money talks and I can't think of a single government that would turn down that much money on a single issue.
There is one good point though......we don't have the BATFE
That has little chance of working. An unorganised attempt would fail miserably and that is what it would be. Most states have been beefing up SERT and any similar units, many are receiving anti-terrorist training. What chance do people have against that?
Our nearest semblance of the NRA took the canadian stance, "only for sport, don't call firearms weapons" e.t.c.
Howard's nice incentives of states taking up his "uniform gun laws" would be repeated (read: denial of funding to states key industries). Money talks and I can't think of a single government that would turn down that much money on a single issue.
There is one good point though......we don't have the BATFE
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked