Australia's ahead of the U.S.,,,,

[freewheeling]

To me, this indicates that they have gone completely mad as a culture. It's truly frightening.

Well, it's at least something that's potentially self-correcting, unlike same-sex marriage. We make that mistake and it's a little like the consequences of a light-hearted brain surgery. The miscreants in the case of the English self-protection paradigm (or lack of it) are recognizably anti-social "clockwork orange" types. Plenty of time to reverse direction, and there's even a political will in that direction (much as it's ignored). SSM would literally change the brain chemistry of a generation. Heck, it would change the basic neurological wiring. And there's no evidence that it would change for the better. (Sorry about veering. Just forget I said anything.)

 

[Radagast]

Just a few thoughts.
I'm an Aussie, I represented IPSC at the ministerial level in my home state when the latest round of confiscation (handguns over .38 cal are banned, revolvers with barrell length less than 4 inches are banned, pistols with barrel lenghts less than 4.7 inches are banned, magazines with capacity greater than 10 rounds are banned).

At one of the ministerial meetings the Sporting Shooters Association's representative brought up the arbitrary application of safe storage laws. They had just had to fund a legal defence for a member who's safe wasn't bolted down. As the safe weighed more than 150kg it didn't have to be legally bolted down. The inspecting officer charged him and siezed his firearms and licence. The gun owner then had to get some mates to manhandle it out of the house and down to a public weigh bridge to get proof of it's weight.

After that meeting I attended an indoor range to brief the members there on what was occurring on the legislation. They had the local licencing sargeant in there talking about 'safe storage.'

Lo and behold, it was the same cop. He brought up the story and was pissed that the SSAA had helped that shooter out.

He held up the Firearms Act and Regulations and stated that this wasn't the law, that what he said was the law, because if the shooters didn't comply with what he wanted he would charge them. He also made it quite clear that he was paid to go to court and his legal representation was as well. The shooters would have to pay for their own and take time off work, so it would be simpler to comply with him. Of course, if he charged them then their firearms are confiscated on the spot and their licence cancelled, so they have to go through the six month process of obtaininga new licence if they are cleared. The licence may not be reissued anyway of the police decide he is not a fit and proper person to own a firearm (having resisted the licencing section this is a strong possibility). There is no appeal from this either.

The police are now 'auditing' firearms when they do an inspection in other words they are physically inspecting all firearms in possession to check their records. The legislation only allows for an inspection of security arrangements, so an illegal search is being carried out over 190,000 times in NSW alone.

Under the new legislation I was forced to surrender, under threat of 14 years jail, 1 x S&W640, 1 x S&W60, 1 x Glock 19, 1 x Para Ordnance P16-40, 1 x S&W 66. 1 x Beretta Tomcat, 1 x Beretta Elite II, 1 x Bul M5 and around 50 hi cap magazines. None had been used to threaten another.

I was forced to sell off three ruger .22s because I could not meet the competition requirements for them.

The cost of insurance for firearms on a business licence has now exceeded $28000 per year, so the few that can justify a firearm for business reasons generally cannot afford the licence requirements.

If you are a friend of the police commissioner or wealthy you can still carry a firearm. The law specifically states that 'licences' cannot be issued for self defence. This dosn't stop the commissioner issuing 'permits' to those with connections. Semantics is a wonderful thing.

9 police in NSW in recent years have lost their firearms or melted them after sticking them in the oven at home (no safe installed), none have been charged.

Australia's largest Media owner and richest man, Kerry Packer, had his Glock stolen form his desk. It was on his self defence permit. He surrendered his rifle licence in return for not being charged. AFAIK he still has the pistol permit.

One of the police officers running the handgun confiscation van was asking shooters if they were surrendering everything and getting out of the sport. Those who told him they where buying new guns were not given the full value for their firearms.
I know an army Colonel who was given double the value on his by the same guy, because he was involved in training the SPG (SWAT team).

Self defence is a the only truly valid reason to own a firearm, even if the law dosn't allow it. There have been 9 shootings within a mile radius of my house here in Sydney in the last 5 years. I live in an expensive suburb. All of the shops on the main strip have been the victims of armed robberys in the last two years. My car was broken into 6 times in six weeks. The local police will not respond to shot's fired.
I have had to chase a man out of my house at 2 AM, he was trying to get into my sisters bedroom.

Sports can be restricted if they create a danger, just as boxing is regulated. The means to defend life and liberty are a different matter again. Which is why the Government and media are working hard to seperate the idea of self defence and defence of property and loved ones from firearms.

My fellow Australian's who feel that the Government has a right to enter your home, to search and sieze your property, to assume that you have no right to defend yourself or your home, to count the wealthy or politically connected as more important or valuable than you and yours, go and lick the boots that hold you down. Just remember, a cur can propitiate to it's master, but it will still be kicked when it's owner feels like doing so.

Ken Robson

 

[Route666]

Are you serious? You mean there are no people over there who own guns just in case their country, or area of the country, decends into chaos? There aren't people who are concerned that they may need to defend themselves and family against certain death? No one is concerned at all that the government could be taken over by goons?

There may be some, I don't know, but they probably joined a gun club, and have guns. Not many people want guns here, probably a smaller percentage than in the US, and since our country has about 10 times less people, then that amount is rather small. I would be ok with self defense being a reason to own a gun here, but I don't think it is necessary.

Sure, it is very possible you may live your entire life without needing them. And most of the people I know who keep a stockpile of guns and ammo certainly don't want to have to use them. But you'd be naive to think that you will certainly never need them. It is the exception for a country to go on forever without any periods of war, rioting, or civil unrest. If your entire country is actually disarmed as you say, down to the recreational shooters, then whenever the tyrant or conqueror comes along, they will have quite the easy time. It'll be either servitude or out to the outback for you. That is, unless you're one of the bad guys...

I'm not sure what world you live in, but the threat of invasion here is rather small. Couple that with the fact that we have a good army, not the largest, but certainly very good, a large police force (who are also people with guns), a percentage of recreational shooters, security personell, and hunters with guns, and they won't just own one either, if you own guns, you own LOTS of guns, and so can give them out in a time of need, and of course allies, we seem pretty covered. Allies are a by-product of the maturity of the world, and so is the risk of invasion by some group of neanderthals.

Oh and out to the outback wouldn't worry me, I grew up in the bush, I loved it, so quiet, and SOOO many less idiots (not meaning you, meaning knobs here).

Why is a firearm, the most useful tool for defending oneself across the spectrum of different age groups, physical ability groups,sex, etc, specifically named as a no-no for using in self-defense? Do they assume that no law abiding person would ever have a legitmate self-defense situation in which the firearm is the best tool available?

I think the reason is derived from the nature of storage. Since it must be locked up and dismantled (a little) then reasonably using it as a self defense tool is pretty hard, as it takes too long to unlock, find bullets, put the gun together, etc. So it would most likely just be the breach of firearms laws if you did use it, because you must not have been storing it properly. You may be able to however argue that you had just finished oiling it, and had time to go load a mag to protect yourself, but more than likely it won't work. If the situation is life and death, and you can reasonably get your gun working quick enough, I WOULD DO IT! The saying "It is better to be tryed by 12 than carried by 6" is true to me as well. The chance of a life-threatening situation erupting in Australia is small, and is most likely a by-product of your own arrogance and stupidity, in which case, natural selection may be in order for both you and your killer. The chance of being able to get your gun working once you realised that you're in said situation is another multiple of very small.

 

[MicroBalrog]

At one of the ministerial meetings the Sporting Shooters Association's representative brought up the arbitrary application of safe storage laws. They had just had to fund a legal defence for a member who's safe wasn't bolted down. As the safe weighed more than 150kg it didn't have to be legally bolted down. The inspecting officer charged him and siezed his firearms and licence. The gun owner then had to get some mates to manhandle it out of the house and down to a public weigh bridge to get proof of it's weight.

Here's your reasonable regulation!

In your own words...

I think the reason is derived from the nature of storage. Since it must be locked up and dismantled (a little) then reasonably using it as a self defense tool is pretty hard, as it takes too long to unlock, find bullets, put the gun together, etc. So it would most likely just be the breach of firearms laws if you did use it, because you must not have been storing it properly. You may be able to however argue that you had just finished oiling it, and had time to go load a mag to protect yourself, but more than likely it won't work

And that's REASONABLE regulation?

 

[Route666]

Radagast, you need to report such offenders like that officer, if he doesn't know the law, he shouldn't be an officer. Get an inquiry going. You have some evidence to back it up, the previous event with the unbolted safe. If you don't report him, don't complain about it.

And that's REASONABLE regulation?

I find it reasonable in that it is legislation, so if you don't obey it, expect to lose your guns. I don't make the laws, I just live happily. Unlike some, I don't bitch and winge about not being able to own a gun just for the sake of it. Sure I'd like that too, but this way suits me as well. You guys will never be satisfied with any laws, it seems to be some people's nature to constantly see the bad in everything and not appreciate the good.

 

[MicroBalrog]

Radagast, you need to report such offenders like that officer, if he doesn't know the law, he shouldn't be an officer. Get an inquiry going. You have some evidence to back it up, the previous event with the unbolted safe. If you don't report him, don't complain about it.

Back in the 1970's IIRC my father still lived in the USSR. Anyways, he got beaten up by two KGB "officers". Suffice it to say it hurt. A lot. After a friend of Dad's discovered him in his freshly beaten up state, he (the friend) said: "This is horrible! We should file a complain with the Regional Committee! These men must get punished!"

Dad always smiles when telling that particular part of the story...

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

Let's face it folks. The U.S. is the last best hope for liberty. If we go down the drain, it's all over. Most of these guys (I except Radagast and Micro) don't even know what the word means. It's like they have a mental block on the subject. Probably no point in talking to them about it. The whole notion seems to be missing in them.

 

[MicroBalrog]

You guys will never be satisfied with any laws

Of course not. Neither was Martin Luther King, Thomas Jefferson, or Ben-Gurion.

 

[Deadman]

I fail to understand why people think that law, government opinion or society's opinion is more important than their right to self defence.

That doesn't mean that I, as a licenced firearm owner in Australia, do not keep my firearms secured. However ( as unlikely as it would be ) if my life is threatend, or if the lives and safety of my family is threatened, I won't let a 'law' prevent me from doing what I deem necessary to stop that threat.

 

[Route666]

Dad always smiles when telling that particular part of the story...

Yes it is good when things get put right.

Of course not.

I prefer to get over it, and be happy, but whatever works for you...

Let's face it folks. The U.S. is the last best hope for liberty. If we go down the drain, it's all over. Most of these guys (I except Radagast and Micro) don't even know what the word means. It's like they have a mental block on the subject. Probably no point in talking to them about it. The whole notion seems to be missing in them.

Liberty:

The condition of being free from restriction or control.
The right and power to act, believe, or express oneself in a manner of one's own choosing.
The condition of being physically and legally free from confinement, servitude, or forced labor.

By definition, the US' liberties are already down the drain. You have laws, or rather "restrictions" or "controls".

 

[Route666]

That doesn't mean that I, as a licenced firearm owner in Australia, do not keep my firearms secured. However ( as unlikely as it would be ) if my life is threatend, or if the lives and safety of my family is threatened, I won't let a 'law' prevent me from doing what I deem necessary to stop that threat.

That's what I believe.

 

[MeekandMild]

Australia was founded as a penal colony and it appears that the government has never forgotten it. AFAIK it is one of the 'traditions' of English law that children can inherit the punishments of their parents. I think in the US that encumbrance only applies to laws pertaining to architects.

Yes but they're far behind the Workers' Paradise in Communist China. Despite gun control, some "peasants" still have black powder shotguns.

In the Phillipines, Brasil, Pakistan (and Chicago?) I hear you can buy an illegal weapon which is entirely handmade. The Pakis and Brazilians are so good their guns rival factory made, but the market is so good in the PI people will accept inferior weapons.

 

[MicroBalrog]

Liberty = Right to do as you wish as long as you do not harm others (definition from French Declaration of the Rights of Man), and you're right
when saying the US isn't totally free. But it's more free than any other nation on the planet, by a looong stretch.

America is a place where people don't put you in prison for having "six handguns and seven rifles with telescopic scopes", don't search your son's schoolbag when he goes to school, don't beat you up when they didn't like your testimony at a trial of some dissenter, don't anally probe 9-year old tourists and then deport them, and DON'T go around people's houses checking if their gun is "stored right". That's what liberty is about.

And this is why I hope to one day become an American.

 

[Route666]

But why is it such an infringement on your liberties to have your guns checked? If you're doing things legally, who cares? I don't see it as an infringment to have another person come to my house and check to make sure I'm abiding by a law. The law is already there, infringing my liberty. Being checked to make sure I'm abiding this law in no more of an infringement on my liberties. It just isn't a big deal, it's just like having your power meter checked, except they bill you for that one no matter what the outcome lol.

 

[MicroBalrog]

But why is it such an infringement on your liberties to have your guns checked?

My problem is not with having people to come and check if I have my guns locked up or not.

My problem is with having a law FORCING me to lock my gun up in the exact particular way chosen for me for someone else.


I am ME. The situation in my house is UNIQUE, as I am UNIQUE, and I demand the right to store my guns whichever way I see a proper, and not have it decided by someone else, regardless of what actually may be best for ME in MY house with MY guns.

 

[P95Carry]

The law is already there

The ''law'' is itself the infringment .... of what should be normal rights for a trusted law abiding citizen. As we often say .. why should you trust a government when it obviously does NOT trust you .... that is why ''subject'' status is evident rather than citizen.

A government should be there to serve .. these days that seems to have flown out the window .... but more so some places than others. Plus ... the more laws they make the easier it is to make more and more people criminals .. again, it is all about ''control''.

The inspection of storage facilities is merely the manifestation of the infringing law .. but seemingly it is being taken too far sometimes. Most of us have nothing to hide .. and are law abiding but should not need ''inspections'' to have to prove that.

It is in part allied with ''no cause'' traffic stops ...

''We are just checking. You have nothing to fear if you are legal. Papers please''.

 

[freewheeling]

And that's REASONABLE regulation?

I find it reasonable in that it is legislation, so if you don't obey it, expect to lose your guns.

Remember folks, the event that defined the Australian character was not a revolution from England, but Gallipoli. The fact that the above sort of circular logic never quite finds its way back to individual sovereignty may be understandable, in that context. Gallipoli was undeniably heroic, and monumentally foolish.

Let's face it folks. The U.S. is the last best hope for liberty. If we go down the drain, it's all over.

I visited Seymour Martin Lipset (the author of The First New Nation and American Exceptionalism: A Double-Edged Sword) in the hospital shortly after a massive stroke had severely crippled him. He hadn't spoken more than one word at a time in several months. He was staring intently at an image of the World Trade Center collapsing into dust on the TV, and said so clearly he sounded like his old self: "They know that if they defeat the US, no one stands in their way. That's why we are their first priority."

Another element of this that simply hasn't sunk in with our Aussie friends, and many others, is that assuminng the responsibility for the means for your own self defense as well as the means for contributing to the last line of defense of your civilization--bearing that burden on your own shoulders--changes the very nature of your relationship with the civilization you live within. In short, it makes you the sort of citizen who honors liberty with enough passion that you will stand in the breach, and refuse to let the abomination pass, and will also take the initiative to avoid pointless sacrifice. This is what the founders meant by "a well-ordered militia." Had they merely been concerned with "training," that could have been accomplished by a mere statute. What they were interested in was creating the only type of person that the tyrant and the criminal really fear.

 

[Route666]

I am ME. The situation in my house is UNIQUE, as I am UNIQUE, and I demand the right to store my guns whichever way I see a proper, and not have it decided by someone else, regardless of what actually may be best for ME in MY house with MY guns.

That is true. I agree that I should be allowed to store my guns however I want in my house. Having a law saying you must store them securely isn't all that bad though, as I would rather lock them up, so they don't get stolen or tinkered with.

In short, it makes you the sort of citizen who honors liberty with enough passion that you will stand in the breach, and refuse to let the abomination pass, and will also take the initiative to avoid pointless sacrifice.

I've never had the chance to vote on any regulation passing, everything gets decided in the parliment, by all the pollies. Yes it is a little crap, having no automatic weapons, etc, but you work with what you have, and I don't really feel automatic weapons should be made available to the public.

Oh, and about the police checking you're abiding the storage law, it really is the only way they can uphold that law. If they didn't check, that law may as well not exist, as there is no way to know if it is being abided by. (abid by?) I don't think it's that silly of a law, as most people would do it anyway. This just takes the guesswork out of whether or not guns are going to get stolen.

 

[MicroBalrog]

Having a law saying you must store them securely isn't all that bad though, as I would rather lock them up, so they don't get stolen or tinkered with.

And I'd prefer them not being disassembled when I keep them.

I've never had the chance to vote on any regulation passing, everything gets decided in the parliment, by all the pollies.

MLK never was a Congress member. He made a difference. You can, too.

This just takes the guesswork out of whether or not guns are going to get stolen.

Really?

If they didn't check, that law may as well not exist, as there is no way to know if it is being abided by.

Exactly. That's what's problematic with such laws. That they enable people to poke around other people's houses to check if their gun safe is bolted down.

Now, why not check register your adult magazine collection? (if you have one)? I mean, you don't somebody to have a bunch of Hustlers lying around where kids will find them?

and I don't really feel automatic weapons should be made available to the public.

I think there never was any rational proof that they should be banned.

 

[Route666]

And I'd prefer them not being disassembled when I keep them.

Most guns can be re-assembled rather quickly. They don't have to be totally dis-assembled, and remember, this law only really applies when there is someone making sure it is being upheld. (once every blue moon)

MLK never was a Congress member. He made a difference. You can, too.

How?

Now, why not check register your adult magazine collection? (if you have one)? I mean, you don't somebody to have a bunch of Hustlers lying around where kids will find them?

Because pornography is more natural than shooting yourself dead. I wouldn't mind if my kids read porn mags. Maybe not hustler (I've never read it but I assume it's one of the X rateds?) but there's nothing wrong with learning about life. I see your point though, but guns have potential to cause much more severe, irreversable damage than boobies.

 

[Stand_Watie]

Microbalrog

And this is why I hope to one day become an American

Good. We need about 100 million more just like you. Let us know when you decide to apply so we can write our representatives and see if we can get you bumped to the front of the line.

Radagast

Just remember, a cur can propitiate to it's master, but it will still be kicked when it's owner feels like doing so.

Nicely said.

 

[GoRon]

But why is it such an infringement on your liberties to have your guns checked? If you're doing things legally, who cares? I don't see it as an infringment to have another person come to my house and check to make sure I'm abiding by a law. The law is already there, infringing my liberty. Being checked to make sure I'm abiding this law in no more of an infringement on my liberties. It just isn't a big deal, it's just like having your power meter checked, except they bill you for that one no matter what the outcome lol.

There seems to be confusion between liberties and privilages. You have been granted a privilage, we are trying to hold on to our rights.

The power of the state is violence. If you refuse to obey a "benign" rule, law or ordinance long enough somebody with a gun from the government will come and take you away.

The fewer laws regulating your rights the freer you are.

Priviliges are granted by man, rights are from God and/or are part of our very human nature.

 

[WonderNine]

What in the world is wrong with sensible storage laws?

Define "sensible".

Unless you want to go out, buy me a safe and drag it in here for me, I'm not sure what your point is. And what good is a gun if it's stored away?

 

[MicroBalrog]

Most guns can be re-assembled rather quickly. They don't have to be totally dis-assembled.

OK, ever tried to do that when somebody is out to kill you?

How?

http://www.jpfo.org/

http://www.seangabb.co.uk/pamphlet/guns3.htm

MLK made a difference.

Sean Gabb makes a difference.

Oleg makes a difference.

I can make a difference, and so can you. It doesn't take a million-dollar NRA budget - but it takes believing you can make a difference. As the old Israeli song goes: "You and I will change the world, just me and you, and then everyone else will join in..."

You can make a difference, Route. Just pitch in. There's an empty space in the ranks of the freedom-fighters, where you are supposed to be. It is all we need to win the war for freedom - people like you and me must realize they can make a difference.

Because once the gun-controllers, the freedom-haters, the politicians persuade you that you can make no difference - they have won. Once they can persuade Team Freedom not to get out on the playing field, Team Politician just wins on a technicality.

"Don't say you don exist. You Do."

 

[Crikey]

I moved from Sydney to Texas. I have a CHL. My family and I are safer here than in Sydney as far as I am concerned in part due to the difference in gun laws.

At the time I left Sydney, 'home invasion' crimes were getting to the point of being almost common place. You don't have too much of that in Texas because it is a good way to get shot.

Cheers,
Mike.