How much can an Australian Bear?

[Radagast]

Sterling, the AR15 battle is over, for now. Other issues are in the pipeline. Currently I'm not directly involved in lobbying, so it's not my place to be yapping about what may or may not be discussed with the various govts.

.22 semiautos are banned because the Prime Minister wanted a clean sweep, banning all semi auto rifles. The restrictions on shotguns was the trade off made by the state govts so farmers and cullers could still access semi autos rifles. There was no logic to the PMs position, just his personal animus towards the shooting sports and the right to self defence.

 

[Spiphel Rike]

Vairochana, how long did the aforementioned politician go to pucka?

 

[Aussieseek]

Progun posters incapable of an Answer

Re: Progun posters incapable of an Answer
Hi there this is Aussieseek and for those interested. Here
is the Latest ! Anyone who has an issue with cardigan can take it up at

http://aaamatilda.proboards67.com/index.cgi


Today at 5:47am, Cardigan wrote on the Matilda Gunboardrogun posters incapable of an Answer


--------------------------
Dear Readers

As you can see from the following,all of the pro gun posters (probably all being members of the lying dickheads party) who have posted here know they can not answer the questions the general community I represent on these Aussieseek and Matilda forums require.


They posted

Tom's Proposals
« Reply #2 on Yesterday at 5:19pm »

----
Thanks Mud, that's excellent.

So tom's proposal number 1 has been trialled in Britain and from a community safety viewpoint has been a total failure.

Anyone interested in looking at tom's other proposals?

--------------------

Cardigan says, Their ploy has been to run away,or not answer,or malign the forum using any excuse they can being uncapable of even answering a question.

Here is a classic (sic) case where their star represenative " the troll"
posted on Matilda their usual manfactured exaggeration about the UK Gun situation.

Their lazy or deliberate use of incorrect statistics has contributed to a situation in which they automatically describe gun crime in Britain as “rocketing out of control”. We remedied this by posting The correct statistics from the UK Home office which show that this is not the case.
plus making a personal reply.

The Result ? rkbausa said

so they promote censorship? Makes you wonder what they are trying to hide.
rkbausa« Last Edit: Today at 12:44am by rkbausa »
----------------------------------------------------

Cardigan says to rkbausa NO Makes you wonder what YOU are trying to hide. As for censorship all facts are on the net for all to see.

Our 2 Return posts follow below so all can see.


Tom said


In response to your post no thats a spin by the pro gun lobby
which is just not true.
Of course no country is in the same situation with effective gun control
.
The UK is a different situation to Australia where the Gun Buyback has reaped rewards.

There is a much larger ilegal and black market in the UK which contributes to all figures, but theyre working on it.!!!!

You are happy about that ? I can"t imagine any human being would be happy to see gun deaths worsen.

The figures are overal. In many regional areas of the UK there has been already been a marked improvement.

Contrary to public perception, the overall level of gun crime now in the UK is very low – less than 0.5%* of all crime recorded by the police

In the year ending 31 March 2005 provisional figures show a:

16% reduction in the use of handguns
9% reduction in robberies involving firearms
6% reduction in serious injuries from firearms offences

For more info go to

http://www.connected.gov.uk/

---------------------------------

I also saw and posted


the UK Gun Control Network is concerned about the frequency with which some journalists, commentators and correspondents quote incorrect data when writing about gun crime in Britain.

In some cases this may be due to poor research. In certain instances, however, it appears to be a deliberate attempt to portray a misleading and more alarming picture of gun crime than actually exists.

GCN uses the figures released by the Home Office (for England and Wales) and the Scottish Executive (for Scotland) and takes note, not only of the overall number of incidents, but also of the contributions made to the total by different categories of weapon. We suggest that others do so as well.

Recently it has been claimed that gun crime has risen three-fold since 1996, the year before the post-Dunblane handgun ban was introduced.

Ross Clark in an opinion piece in The Times (14 March) quoted a figure of 7,753 gun crimes in 1996 rising to 24,094 in 2003-04. Any careful check would have revealed that the correct figure for all gun crime in 1996 was 13,876. The mistake is not even explained by the exclusion of airgun incidents from the earlier but not the later total.

Furthermore, this was not a one-off. Graham Lane, writing to the Sunday Herald letters page (12 March), asked for an explanation for the “massive threefold increase in armed crime and murder by use of firearms since this ban.”

GCN believes that it is no coincidence that Clark and Lane used similar exaggerations in pieces in which they both argued for a reversal of the handgun ban. Such incorrect statistics ought to have been challenged before publication.

Whilst gun crime has risen in England and Wales since 1996 the official figures reveal that this is largely owing to big increases in the number of incidents involving airguns, imitation guns and other weapons such as paintball guns for which there are few controls.

Total gun crime, and handgun crime in particular, has fallen significantly in Scotland since the mid-1990s. In England and Wales handgun crime has fallen for the last two years, as has the total number of crimes, if those involving airguns and imitation guns are excluded.

The lazy or deliberate use of incorrect statistics has contributed to a situation in which too many journalists automatically describe gun crime in Britain as “rocketing out of control”. The correct statistics show that this is not the case.

Britain has a low rate of gun crime, but we must not be complacent.

Additional measures can be taken to reduce it further, and GCN supports those contained in the Violent Crime Reduction Bill to tackle problems involving airguns and imitation guns, two categories of weapon which have been used increasingly in crime.

However, any exaggeration of the overall level of gun crime will lead to an unnecessary increase in fear among the general public.

The media should ensure that it does not contribute to this by failing to challenge those who wish to mislead in a partisan cause. GCN therefore urges editors to keep a close check on the selective and incorrect use of statistics in any discussion of UK gun crime.
---------------------------------------------------


rkbausa has a new avartar showing himself bashing sadam. He is about as effective in promoting and making sense for the gunnas as the
Americans have been in IRAQ.





and in response to AussieSeek feral brat johninmelb

Who said to me cardigan

You are a nasty little grub, your actions with regard to Lennie were beneath contempt.

I say.. The usual diversion johninmelb .

I am not distracted. Enjoy your
revolving barrel and door.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shooters ! Join the Lying Dickheads Party*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'
"O Timothy, guard what was committed to your
trust, avoiding the profane and vain babblings
and contradictions of what is falsely called
knowledge ‹ by professing it, some have strayed
concerning the faith." 1 Timothy 6:20-21
*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'

 

[Zen21Tao]

 

[Diomed]

Suggest that henceforth Aussieseek be known as Aussiespam.

All in favor?

 

[Vairochana]

Pukka Pollie

Spiphel Rike the story was that he did the full course but as I recall this would have been in the good old days before they shortened the training (another thread topic) so I imagine they would have given him a shortened version- the point is at least he gave it a go as Defence minister-unfortunately he is now leader of the Opposition and they are a bit anti gun too-seeing as how popular it is with the media etc.

 

[45s save lives]

***?

Why on earth people are so darned sure that banning guns will end gun crime is totally beyond me. Gun laws do not affect crime rates (if you disagree go to any large american city and walk through an alley at 2am). And these cities have the strictest gun laws in the country. The U.K. is another prime example. Guns dont affect suicide rated either, if someone is dead set on killing themselves they will accomplish it. I think some people are just afraid to take their own safety and fate into their own hands.

Also, I once thought of immigrating to Australia, because of the climate and big game hunting, but with gun laws like theirs, ill stay at home.

I am a little ignorant on Aussie gun laws. Are thery really as bad as I hear?

 

[Radagast]

Re aussie laws, this is a cut and paste form a thread on Canadian Gunnutz:

Anyway, from the right side of the planet I shall attempt to educate my Canadian cousins.

States control the firearms laws, as the Feds have no power under the constitution. The federal government controls taxation however, so he who has the gold makes the rules. Our current Liberal Party prime minister (funny that, eh?) is on record as stating he hates guns and has spent close to a billion dollars doing his best to ban them, basically bribing the states to enact his laws. Wether they will go along with him again is an interesting question as he got too smart for his own good last time, agreeing to pay the compensation bill for the latest round of confiscations and then cutting the same amount from the state hospital budgets as soon as it was over.

Current laws are as follows, with some differences from state to state:

Full auto: Cops and dealer samples.

Semi auto centrefire rifles: Restricted to professional cullers, cops and the odd land owner with a million acres who shoots from a helicopter.

Semi auto & pump shotguns, semi auto rimfore rifles: Restricted to professional cullers, cops and farmers who actually make a living off their farm. Some exemptions for sporting purposes in some states with semi auto shotguns.

Centrefire manual action rifles: hunting or target shooting. Must have permission from a land owner or be a member of a target or hunting club. Target and hunting clubs have minimum range attendances per year. Some states restrict pump action patrol rifles cause they look evil.

Rimfire manual action rifles: Hunting or target shooting, same as above.

Pistols: Restricted to security guards, cops and members of target shooting clubs. Restricted to .38 calibre or below (9mm, .38 super, 357 sig, .357 magnum are all OK) for target shooting, all permits to purchase require club endorsement, there is aproximately a 9 month wait from joining a club to being allowed to purchase a pistol. Minimum barrel length 120mm and maximum 10 round mag capacity for target shooting. Cals up to .45 allowed for IHMSA & SASS. No barrel length or magazine restriction on cops or security guards, calibre usually restricted to .40. Minium of six competition shoots per year to keep a licence.

All guns must be locked in a safe at home, ammunition stored seperately.
Some states require trigger locks to transport.
Storage is subject to random police checks.
All guns, even BBs, are registered.
All shooters are licenced.
Self defence is not a reason to own a gun. (Security guards are issued guns to defend property, however use of lethal force to defend property is prohibited. Go figure).
A permit to purchase and 28 day waiting period is required for any firearm purchased. We don't have ATTs, a condition of your licence is the right to take a gun to a range or a dealer.

Other stuff:

All globes of the earth are installed the wrong way up.
The Aussie Constitution lists New Zealand as the second state of Australia, they are just a little bit backward and haven't come around to ratifying it in the last 100 years, so when Russell Crowe makes a hit movie, he is an Aussie, when he throws a phone he is a Kiwi. We don't throw shrimp on the Barbie, they are Prawns. Fosters is not an Australian beer, it is a chemical warfare weapon intended to bring down America. Our politicians are as corrupt as yours. Instead of freezing cold we get drought, water restrictions and the worlds highest rate of skin cancer. We like to poke people with sticks to make them jump, so any Canadian visiting can expect to be asked if he is an American. Americans are told to beware of drop bears. Skippy tastes a little like Bambie, but drier. Thumper is still abundant after a century of bio and chemical warfare, and still tastes good. Crocodile really does taste like chicken. We have feral goats, pigs, water buffalo, banteng, six or seven variety of deer, horses, cats, dogs, foxes, camels and donkeys to shoot at. Most native animals are protected, including the Kangaroo, but a million culling permits are issued each year. Go figure.

 

[Radagast]

Re Aussieseek:

On the Australian Firearms Discussion Forum, Keith has been banned from cutting and pasteing threads from his own forums. He has also admitted to having multiple users (personalities?) and that he seeks to drive traffic to keep his advertising banners.

Again, I suggest not visiting his sight, that is why he is spamming this forum.

 

[sterling180]

The UK is a different situation to Australia where the Gun Buyback has reaped rewards.

No,No,No, if Cardigan or any other delusional antis honestly believe any of that crap about the benefits of the UK handgun ban,then they are seriously in need of a shrink-big time.

Handguns were banned,not because of increasing gun crime,not because it would prevent conventional gun crime,not because criminals are or could be license holders,etc,etc-but because the Conservative government was pressured by the GCN and Ann Pearsons Snowdrop Campaign-to ban handguns because they were responsible for the massacre in Dunblane and that a similar one could have occured in the future-unless those types of weapons wern't outlawed sooner,rather than later-and suffering the consequences of handgun misuse.

Nine years previously,handguns were spared when centrefire SLRs were banned in 1988,following the Hungerford massacre and the antis in the GCN and from the Snowdrop Campaign,used this to their advantage against the Conservative governments pro-gun policies-by stating the fact of,"why were they not banned back then?".

The GCN published their rubbish about gun crime,whilst Ann Pearson and her organization collected 700,000 signatures in Scotland,In favour of banning handguns,and asked the Tories to take such action.So in November/December 1996,Prime Minister,John Major and the then Home Secretary-Micheal Howard,from the Conservative Party-decided to publish the 1997,Firearm Ammendment Act,banning all centrefire handguns,from private purchase and use.

The Tories did this because at the time,they were a weak party and they saw this ban as a way to repair the damage and to win hearts and minds-but it never stopped them from being booted out though in 1997.

So I can conclude,that the bans have done nothing to solve general gun crime,but to resassure paranoid individuals that there are 60,000+ former-handgun owers out there,who don't own pistols anymore-so they can be safe from their guns.But later on in 1997,the same persons objected,when they discovered that the ex-handgunners,bought lever-action rifles,.22 semi-automatic rifles,pump-action and semi-automatic shotguns-to replace their destroyed handguns.

Then a couple of years after the ban,long-barrelled revolvers appeared and these guns were similar to a standard revolver,exept for the fact that they have a long-barrel and a counter-balance rod fitted onto the pistol-grip.
So I can conclude,that the bans have done nothing to solve general gun crime,but to resassure paranoid individuals that there are 60,000+ former-handgun owers out there,who don't own pistols anymore-so they can be safe from their guns.But later on in 1997,the same persons objected,when they discovered that the ex-handgunners,bought lever-action rifles,.22 semi-automatic rifles,pump-action and semi-automatic shotguns-to replace their destroyed handguns.

Also if you want the truth on the GCN,read G36-UKs posts-he will tell you that they are a buch of bloody-liars,whose information consists of half-truths,exaggerated facts, and finally just blatent lies,about guns-which in simple terms translates as:"A load of bollocks."

 

[Spiphel Rike]

I thought basic was run out of Kapooka NSW? Or was this a REALLY long time ago?

 

[Aussieseek]

Ive had you Lott

ah cardigan creates another exodus...

 

[John-Melb]

So the matilda board is now the "Matilda ANTI Gun Messageboard".

OK, and what have I been saying for some time, and no-one ever listens to the fat bald bloke do they.

I note the new moderator on Matilda ANTI Gun Messageboard is none other than "cardigan". Enuff said.

After Cardigan's abuse of Lennie, and his statements of 25th April, giving him a Moderator's position is inexcusable.

 

[nramember2]

thats it for me. i am done. i have deleted my membership on matilda and aussieseek.

 

[Spiphel Rike]

How disappointing. So much for those places being a "friendly castle". and Aussieseek, would you care to link to that report you referenced?

 

[myrmindon]

I might be reading this wrong and taking this out of context.....
But Am I reading the bottom of Aussieseeks signature block right where it says

" AUSSIESEEK DOT COM
AUSTRALIAS ANTI GUN SEARCH ENGINE"

No need to reply to me as this will be the last time I read this thread.

 

[Zen21Tao]

So as of today its the

Matilda ANTI Gun Messageboard http://aaamatilda.proboards67.com/

And we will jumpstart it off with this cutie from the LA Times.

The resolve you have given me is to now fully support
the anti gun lobby for the rest of my life and if
I can change some minds I will.
And I know a few.

Have a nice day .

You've finally come out of the closet and admited you are an anti and that your forums are geared towards advancing the anti-gun agenda.

Kind of Ironic that you are willing to ban any pro-gunner who makes a good arguments undermining you antis' poor Brady Campain spin yet you have been allowed to continue to spam and troll on THR.

It is a testiment to the fairness of the pro-gun community that you have not been banned by a THR mod for trolling and spamming for you anti-gun website/forums here on THR.

I am convinced you are a pathetic joke and you belong in the association with other antis who are only able level arguments with the use of deception, logical fallicies, and emotional appeals.

 

[John-Melb]

I've bailed too after posting the following
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith, you said
"I have a gaurantee from cardigan to be fair,so I will leave it all to who has the most convincing case"

You accepted a guarantee from Cardigan to be fair, and left it to who has the most convincing case?

OK, your board, your call.

Farewell.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Stand_Watie]

thats it for me. i am done. i have deleted my membership on matilda and aussieseek.

+1

Looks like I got suckered by an anti gun troll.

 

[sterling180]

"Matilda ANTI Gun Messageboard".

The resolve you have given me is to now fully support
the anti gun lobby for the rest of my life and if
I can change some minds I will.
And I know a few.

Oh look,this is interesting considering the fact that it was called the Matilda Messageboard-originally anyway.Posting to you and your stupid,ignorant,antis was a waste of typing -time,effort,thought,and creativety-because all anti's believe in one thing and one thing only,which is:"gun control",or in more obvious words,"the banning of all guns,irrespective of type,capacity,calibre,length,etc,etc.

As for Cardigan,well Cardigan is an arsehole-enough said.I think that John,Spiphel Rike,Cortez and Radagast,will agree with me on this.

So if you decided now,to finally admit that you are as anti as those dickheads,that seem to inhabit your forum,why the hell didn't you admit that you were genuinely anti-gun in the first place?

You obviously joined this forum to engage in mature discussions with the pro-shooting communities in North America,Europe and in Australia-so why the hell didn't you take my advice and actually participate in shooting,to get a sensible opinion on guns?Or was it to use as propaganda,like saying:"Check out THR,there are a bunch of American and European turds,cranks and general morons, who love guns-and how pathetic of them to do so.

If that is the case,then guess who is definately pathetic and biased? Well,that obvious-you and your messageboards are-so bugger off.If the previous sentences,didn't apply to you-then ignore it.You still have time to make ammends here,so reply soon.

Did I ever say to you,don't try shooting sports-no I didn't,you have chosen to be an anti-gunner,because you wanted to be one,not because you had to-due to the actions of some pro-gun posters on this forum,that had offended you-thus making you change your mind.All you need is an open mind and you will be alright on this forum.Narrow-mindedness will only make you become completely unstuck-in the end.

All you had to of done was,say that you appreciated and respected other peoples views from your country and from the rest of the world and make this obvious to everyone on THR.Changing your messageboard to "anti" only makes you look like a giant prat and will only reinforce- what the more sceptical and cynical posters- have,interms of their existing views on you,which happen to be somewhat negative-at present.

Posters on THR will always analysize one anothers posts and will critisize them-that is part of being a poster-we will always be nitpicked.I have been critisized before on this forum-for posting posts,that others have disagreed with.

Now I don't agree with the non-licensing of firearms,but others do,so I have to tolerate and respect their views-or I could find myself in dire-straits.

If you think that your messageboards are balanced,then you have definately had your head up your arse,for far too long my friend,because believe me-they are not in reality-only in your head they might be.

A

ngry guys with Guns right?

I wasn't angry with you,I was angry at the level of ignorance,that your posters-especially Cardigan-have displayed to the Australian shooting-community,as well as foreign pro-shooters-as well.However like you,I am changing my opinion on you,if you have decided to throw in the towel and join the antis.That my friend is a cowardly way to exit a gun debate,if that was your initial intention-to do so.

If you state that you are open-minded,some of the pro-gunners,will start to lay-off of you-and more importantly,you won't be treated like an annoying-troll,who should be an outsider.

Thats not the situation at all

However after due thought I guess its a good idea then to give you what your want.

Ive received so much hate mail about allowing cardigan and other anti gunners to post which any editor would do ( as well giving equal space to pro gunners) so ***

Why should you give a stuff about what others have posted to you for? Converting to an anti only make you look weaker here-on this forum.Besides not all gunowners approve of sending hate mail to antis-I mean what is the point?
There are better things to do in life,than to waste precious typing-time and effort sending hate mail,to an alledged anti-whom may or may not apply in return.


You have to understand that in America they value firearm ownership differently to how they do in Australia and the Uk,-and there are people who believe that a gun is an individuals freedom.In the UK and in Australia,we don't have the same values in our countries-but we do want firearms for shooting-sports.

This is why there are different views on gun-ownership,which makes this forum so great,to interact in.

To be an anti because of hostility shown by the pro-shooters,will mark you as a bloody idiot and I don't actually think that you are one-personally-but you would be if you change your opinion.

 

[John-Melb]

Here's the latest from Matilda

"Gun owners claim By Protecting the innocent Guns save Lives
There are very few examples
This Board is moderated by a person who knows the truth


Moderator: tom"

For those who don't know "tom" is the leading light of the anti-gun posters on AussieSook and Matilda,

It was tom who previously set up the matilda "anti-gun" castle and denied membership to pro-gun posters,

 

[sterling180]

Here's the latest from Matilda

"Gun owners claim By Protecting the innocent Guns save Lives
There are very few examples
This Board is moderated by a person who knows the truth


Moderator: tom"

For those who don't know "tom" is the leading light of the anti-gun posters on AussieSook and Matilda,

Well Tom doesn't know what he is talking about anyway-at least it is not Keith.Maybe Tom might eat his words,if he is ever attacked by a nutcase,if such an individual breaks into his house-armed with a gun and Tom has nothing more than a spatcheler-for personal protection.

How does he know the truth,anyway? Port Arthur might have been a set up,because Martin Bryant was semi-retarded and not intelligent enough to have carried out those shootings.Whats more,how can a moron like Bryant,kill 35 people-if he isn't co-ordinated enough and couldn't get a driving license,to drive an automatic-transmission car?

As far as Im concerned,I find individuals like him offensive,because they continue to castigate innocent shooters-for no reason.Try coming over to Buckingham Palace and telling that to Prince Philip-Im sure he will retain his composure.

 

[NineseveN]

I really don't understand why Aussieseek is allowed to continue posting on this board, it's not like he's part of the discussion, he only seeks to promote his poor excuses for websites that are very anti-gun. Oleg and company, would you allow Sarah Brady to get some ad time in on here too? You might as well, at least her editor would fix up her grammar and we might be able to understand her.

I understand your thoughts about this whole "the high road" thing, but I think it's being taken a little too far. If Aussieseek wanted to join the discussion, fine, let's talk, but to go to such lengths to simply advertise those sites (which they get ad revenue from) when it is clearly against the rules is flat out wrong and in my opinion, it needs to be stopped.


...or is it okay for me to stop posting on THR except to promote my forum too? I mean, at least my forum is very pro gun. Can I pop on over here and let everyone know what interesting threads have popped up on my site about survival each week? I doubt it would be tolerated, and I don't think it should be anyway, that's not right. It's gracious enough of the THR staff to allow those of us with our own sites to link our sites and forums in our signatures; I think that should be enough for the obvious anti-gun spammer and troll that is Aussieseek.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Well Tom doesn't know what he is talking about

My understanding is that "Tom" on aussieseel and matilda is
an American woman whose postings read like Brady campaign
hand-outs.

 

[John-Melb]

Carl, you are correct, actually, tom's postings are mostly copy and pastes of Brady Bunch releases.

As an example of the sort or anti-gun garbage that is permitted on AussieSook and Matilda, I wandered in and lifted this fine example of the literary arts this morning, it is written by none other than Cardigan, the anti-gun moderator who assured Keith he would be fair when he was appointed moderator of the site. You wil note that abuse is not permitted on Matilda or AussieSeek, but an anti referring to pro-gun posters as "pro-gun whackjobs" is not considered abuse, apparently.

To all you pro-gun whackjobs.

LESS guns = MORE lives saved. Gun laws do work.

At the end of the day the survival rate of violent crime is higher when guns are not used by the human garbage that litter our streets.