Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Election in Australia -- Howard and Latham on guns

Discussion in 'Legal' started by TimLambert, Sep 28, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TimLambert

    TimLambert Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    58
    Location:
    Sydney, NSW
    Prime Minister John Howard (Interview on 2GB 17 Apr 02: (listen )
    (Via John Tingle .)
    Mark Latham, Leader of the Opposition (letter to the Shooters Party):
    I strongly disagree with Howard and agree with Latham here. I think law-abiding sporting and recreational shooters should be allowed to have guns and banning such ordinary citizens from having weapons is wrong. Howard is also the architect of the 1996 gun ban which I have already said was bad policy. Now I had already decided to support Latham over Howard because of other issues, but it’s still nice to be supporting the party with the better policy on firearms issues.
    John Tingle, MLC for the Shooters Party writes:
    Some shooters are running candidates in the election to oppose Howard.
     
  2. Poodleshooter

    Poodleshooter Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,237
    Location:
    Mr. Jefferson's country
    Learn from us in the states. Make sure that your voters unite under ONE party,even if it's only incrementally better. When you're a minority viewpoint, unity is everything.
     
  3. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    But I thought this was just about "reasonable gun control" and that nobody really wanted to ban guns...:confused:
     
  4. Jim K

    Jim K Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    17,566
    The gun control people want "reasonable gun control" the same way Hitler wanted "reasonable Jew control". And their "final solution" will be death camps for anyone who ever owned a gun.

    Jim
     
  5. jefnvk

    jefnvk Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,938
    Location:
    The Copper Country, Michigan
    So, Australian politicians can ban what they want because they don't like it?

    You would have thought they would pick a group that wouldn't fight back, wouldn't you?
     
  6. tulsamal

    tulsamal Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    796
    Location:
    Vinita, OK
    I've seen photos of the mountains of guns the Aussies turned in. I would say they guessed right in the amount of opposition they would face. They were moving those collector grade guns with scoops and dozers!

    Gregg
     
  7. mountainclmbr

    mountainclmbr Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,289
    Location:
    On top of a mountain in Colorado
    Many sheep down under, aye bloke?
     
  8. P95Carry

    P95Carry Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    16,341
    Location:
    South PA, and a bit West of center!
    Well, I guess Howard (bletch! :barf: ) could be at least called up front .... ''I hate guns''!:rolleyes:

    His approach tho is so narrow, whereas at least Latham makes the distinction re criminals. Oh for some real logical decsion making ..... instead of gut driven rhetoric. I feel for you guys down under.

    I point out my prime sig line ..
     
  9. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Same philosophical principles. Same moral standards. Same general methods. Same old socialism.
     
  10. Bruce in West Oz

    Bruce in West Oz Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    290
    Location:
    Western Australia
    Frankly, I wouldn't trust Latham as far as I can kick Howard! The ALP has always had a platform of disarmament as part of its (socialist/communist) policy.

    Basically, yes. Both the government and the opposition joined forces to pass the firearms bans and new legislation virtually unopposed.

    The Federal government has NO control over firearms; that's given exclusively to the States in our Constitution. So the PM simply blackmailed the States into compliance -- if they didn't comply, he would withhold literally billions in Federal funds, which would have gone close to shutting down the States. They gave in.

    As to individual compliance -- don't forget, most of us already had full registration of our firearms -- the police (and any other authority) already knew who had what and where. Under those circumstances, there's little chance for withholding. In those States without registration, turn-in rates are estimated to be, at best, 20-25%. So not all of us are sheep.

    In Australia, there is no single, nationwide party that offers support for gun ownership. Even the two main minority parties, the Greens and Democrats, are dedicated to the total disarmament of Australia -- including the police and, ultimately, the armed forces (no, I'm not joking).:fire:

    Bruce
     
  11. SAG0282

    SAG0282 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Messages:
    941
    Location:
    Pierce Co. WA
    Haha, the American disease??? Of falling crime rates, as opposed to Austrailia's increasing rate of gun crime??


    THAT disease!
     
  12. Byron Quick

    Byron Quick Moderator In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,482
    Location:
    Waynesboro, Georgia
    Bruce,

    When it's time to bury your guns...it's time to dig them up.

    I feel for you people. I pray for all of the English speaking peoples. I'm afraid that most of them have let the opportunity to fight back pass them by.

    Here in the US we haven't let that final opportunity pass us by though we have let far too many pass by. I'm still trying to understand why people didn't rebel here in 1914-1916. Story of the frog being slowly boiled I suppose.

    The position that only the military and the police should have firearms is the position of wannabe tyrants or their wannabe henchmen. That might no even know they are such. That doesn't change the fact.
     
  13. RobW

    RobW Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    564
    Location:
    Henderson, NV
    Poor Aussies! Additional you have Kerry's sister there to mess up things even more. Perhaps you'll have Old Puple Heart at your shores after he lost the election here. Not a comfortable thought.

    I feel very bad for you because you are on a fast path to tyranny, a reminder that "Democracy" only works for a limited time, tyranny can survive infinitely. Just ask the history of mankind.
     
  14. F4GIB

    F4GIB Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,165
    Location:
    Midwest
  15. Bruce in West Oz

    Bruce in West Oz Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    290
    Location:
    Western Australia
    F4GIB

    Thanks for the heads-up.

    I knew I recognised that damn name from somewhere! I just couldn't place it! Thanks for bringing it to light.

    Also look at his other website: http://www.timlambert.org

    Common decency prevents me from saying what I really feel. :cuss: :fire:
     
  16. TimLambert

    TimLambert Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    58
    Location:
    Sydney, NSW
    To Bruce in West Oz: "bringing it to light"? I post under my real name, with a link to my web site (that's the www button on each post) and folks hiding behind pseudonyms have the gall to imply that I'm trying to hide something?

    To F4GIB: How does consistently opposing Howard's gun laws make me "anti-gun"? Well?
     
  17. agricola

    agricola Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,928
    Location:
    Office of the Holy Inquisition, Vatican City
    Well, its nice to know that the ad hominem is alive and well on this board despite my less frequent visits nowadays.

    F4GIB / Bruce, a clear and honest look at his website doesnt reveal much about whether he is pro or anti-gun; he is however clearly anti-BS with skills far beyond mine to demonstrate very simply why some of those your side champions are undeserving of that respect. As an example, the recent attacks on Lott for instance should cause people (if they werent doing it already that is) to seriously question the man's practices and his ethics.

    As I have tried to show in my own way here and on TFL for the past two years, the vast majority of what passes for "informed opinion" on the (from my point of view) UK firearms / rights issue consists of so much rubbish that even an amateur like myself can demonstrate within five minutes from first reading the article exactly what is wrong with the piece. This should cause the readers to question it, but it rarely does, as we all know.
     
  18. Byron Quick

    Byron Quick Moderator In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,482
    Location:
    Waynesboro, Georgia
    Mr. Lambert,

    Ah, yes, the anonymity of the internet. Had a man accuse me on TFL of hiding behind that cloak. My name and location was on my responding post. It's been there ever since on every board I frequent and on every email address I have.

    No pseudonym here. Real name. Real location. I'm in the phone book. Come to call.



    I'm not up on the statistics and such. These are really immaterial to me.

    Twenty years or so ago, I was attacked by a man wielding a sledge hammer handle. I moved rearward diagonally to get off his line of attack.
    While doing so, I was sweeping my jacket to reach my FN Highpower. Realizing that I was in the midst of preparing to kill his sorry butt; he released the hickory sledge hammer handle. Wonder if he would have done so if I had just said please?

    The gun I carried was legally owned and legally carried. If I had shot his butt before he ceased his attack then, in this jurisdiction, he would have been legally dead.

    People who call for gun control are actually saying that I should have been beaten to death twenty years ago. For some odd reason, I take exception to that stance.
     
  19. Bruce in West Oz

    Bruce in West Oz Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    290
    Location:
    Western Australia
    Pseudonym? My name is Bruce and I do live in Western Australia.

    I don't check on every person's profile here; hence the 'bringing it to light' comment.

    Dress it up any way you like, your postings on your blog and on the old talk.politics.guns indicate to me (my prerogative) that you are indeed implacably anti-gun. Argue all you want, I'm not interested.

    Agricola, if you're talking to me, you've been on 'Ignore' for months now, about to be joined by Lambert. I have no interest in anything you have to say either.

    Have a nice day.
     
  20. agricola

    agricola Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,928
    Location:
    Office of the Holy Inquisition, Vatican City
    hurrah for the discussion forum! especially the people who ignore what someone says in favour of what they think he said! and especially those who take part in discussions with their fingers in their ears!!

    :banghead:
     
  21. TimLambert

    TimLambert Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    58
    Location:
    Sydney, NSW
    personal attacks are prohibited?

    I checked the Rules of Conduct for the HighRoad. They state: "personal attacks are prohibited". "Bruce" and F4GIB did not address in any way the substance of my post. I provided links to my sources. Anyone can check that I have accurately quoted Howard, Latham and Tingle and accurately reported their positions. Instead of discussing this, "Bruce" and F4GIB did nothing but attack me personally and misrepresent my views.
     
  22. fallingblock

    fallingblock Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,574
    Location:
    Between Georgia and Antarctica
    Hey guys...what Tim wrote was in no way an attack....

    "I strongly disagree with Howard and agree with Latham here. I think law-abiding sporting and recreational shooters should be allowed to have guns and banning such ordinary citizens from having weapons is wrong. Howard is also the architect of the 1996 gun ban which I have already said was bad policy. Now I had already decided to support Latham over Howard because of other issues, but it’s still nice to be supporting the party with the better policy on firearms issues."
    ************************************************************


    That's quite a balanced and reasonable statement for an Australian academic to author. :)

    Thanks for that support, Tim.

    I'm not so sure we can trust Latham on the issue, as one of our group approached him at the Labour Party selection in Sydney and he had absolutely no words of encouragement for firearms owners.

    "Labour will not be the party for shooters" were his words, I believe.
     
  23. Bruce in West Oz

    Bruce in West Oz Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    290
    Location:
    Western Australia
    Against everything I believe, I went back and read your last post, Dr Lambert.

    What exactly is it with you? Because I refuse to engage in a futile debate with you, you regard it as personal attack? No one is allowed to disagree with you?

    Get a life! You are only debating the firearms issue to keep your hand in. (Sound familiar? Check your own website.) It's an academic wank to you.

    Appeal to the mods all you want, pal -- then tell me where I broke any rules.

    I refuse to debate with you because any debate with you is not genuine; it is an academic exercise, with no endpoint other than the exercise itself. Go for it; but count me out.

    I give you fair warning -- you are on my "ignore" list because I don't feel there is any value in debating this further. Understand this: I don't want to hear your bull???? any more!! Is that too hard for you to understand?

    You'll continue to try to suppress firearms ownership in Australia, and I'll work equally hard to promote it.

    Bye, bye Timmy baby.
     
  24. agricola

    agricola Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,928
    Location:
    Office of the Holy Inquisition, Vatican City
    he just did it again, remember:

    by bruce:

     
  25. fallingblock

    fallingblock Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,574
    Location:
    Between Georgia and Antarctica
    Did I miss something, Bruce?

    Tim certainly has a problem with John Lott.

    I made the attempt to investigate that issue a while back and reached the conclusion that it was between Dr. Lott and Dr. Lambert.

    John Lott seems quite open to data sharing and appears to have done so freely with Tim.

    Bruce, I agree that Labour is not trustworthy on the firearms rights issue.

    Tim's statement would appear to be genuine concerning his sense of injustice done to 'ordinary citizens' who wish to own firearms.

    Why the heated rhetoric?:confused:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page