International Response - Australia Has the Answer

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just a question, should we ban cloth too? Or hey even better, why dont we ban Koreans or just all foreigns, im sure then it would never happend.
Why does media attack guns and not the fact he was korean? Oh wow, i forgot thats racism. If he would not had a single gun he would had bombed the place. He was willing to kill himself, he had the idea wayyyyy before shooting people. Someone that is willing to kill himself it impossible to stop or predict. If someone wants to kill himself and wants to take people with him not 1 single law is going to prevent that. The only solution would had been that someone with a gun would had killed him before. If he would had bomb the place its even worst since you will never know there was a bomb. Guns dont kill, people kill. In this case this south crazy ugly korean. Im glad he died, such trash doesnt deserve to live, im sorry for all the persons he took, and how people of course will blame guns not him. They will say such nice things about him and such ugly things about guns. Thats how people handle this thigs, instead of hate to the person that did the act its easier to hate guns. Guns cant talk back, they cant defend themselfs, but the korean is human, he as a mother and a father and he was such a nice guy, Guns had the fault, this evil guns. Im wondered how stupid people actually are. I pray good that such an act happens on the most gun control place on earth (im sorry for the victims) just so politicals see how stupid and dumm the laws are. Laws are nothing, its a piece of paper, a rule, this guy wanted to kill themself, do you think he would had say, ahh noo, i will not shoot people because there is a gun ban. What a joke. I hope he burns in hell for this. If he would had love guns he would not had done such a thing, he would just had killed himself. People should be educated about guns.
 
More people die in the UK every year due to accumulated plaque in their arteries from eating "Fish and Chips" than there are firearm related deaths in the US but I don't hear anyone calling for a ban on "Fish and Chips".....


DO IT FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!!


Sorry...I couldn't resist....just getting tired of the Euro Nanny State approach.
 
More people die in the UK every year due to accumulated plaque in their arteries from eating "Fish and Chips" than there are firearm related deaths in the US but I don't hear anyone calling for a ban on "Fish and Chips".....


DO IT FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!!
Click to expand...

Because Fish and Chip,as unhealthy as it is,from buying it from your local chippie shop,isn't classed as a deadly weapon,nor are the Scottish favourites,battered Mars and Snicker bars,or Marathon bars.But something that goes boom and is designed to kill,has to be severely controlled.

If you used your statement on fish and chips,as an argument,against the liberals,they would think that you were nuts and were severly retarded.They certainly do over here,in the UK.
 
I'll be moving to Sydney, probably next year, since that is where my wife is at the moment. While I will undoubtedly pine for my firearms that I will be leaving, I'm comforted by the fact that the ussie government is always there to keep me safe, 24/7. :barf:

Seriously, as soon as I am able to, I am going to join a trap/skeet/target shooting club jus tto get my hands on some cold steel. Just to add one more gun lover to their populace. :evil:
 
the simple lie of the Australian position is this: The gun ban did not reduce overall violent crime. So they started banning swords and machetes.

Violent crime has gone up, not down. All they did was make damn sure the single moms, kids and the elderly are at a greater disadvantage when confronted with criminals.

Australia's answer is the same answer as the UK: ban the weapons and ignore the overall increase in violent crime of ALL types later.
 
G'day
Again for the record: Handguns are NOT banned in Australia.
You can not however, as a sports shooter have anything over.38/9mm in calibre unless you are a Cowboy Action shooter or shoot long range pistol.
Revolvers must have a minimum 4" barrel length and self loading pistols a 5" barrel.
magazines over 10 rounds are prohibited with no grandfather clauses for those who possessed them prior to the new legislation.
Muzzle loading black powder handguns are not subject to caliber and barrel length restrictions
Oh and if you have a G cat collectors licence you can have what you like. But aren't legally allowed to shoot it.
Pump action and self loading shotguns are generally prohibited unless you are a prime producer (ie farmer) or have a medical exemption.
Pump action rifles are however legal although the police in NSW don't like the Remington 7600 that takes the M16 magazine
 
The Prime Minister made it clear that hand guns were not banned in Australia... yet. But certainly is something that needs to be looked at.

Oh and if you have a G cat collectors licence you can have what you like. But aren't legally allowed to shoot it.
Click to expand...

It is laws like this that just boggle the mind....
 
a few misconceptions to clear up...

Swords and machetes are not banned here. Handguns are not banned here - however only about 1-2% of the total population own handguns (legally). Longarms are much more common however. I know that the story of a pallet of glocks going missing is an urban myth. The conspiracy theories of the Port Arthur massacre are difficult for me to believe.

Howard made this comment for internal consumption although it has been quoted internationally. He is perceived as a pro-US lackey here so this was a way for him to score some easy political points with the anti (US/war/etc) lobby here - especially since he will never have any support from the pro-firearms lobby here :fire: no matter what he says or does.

The lead headline of ABC news here last night was "America pays another heavy price for its liberal gun laws". To 80% of the people here it is an uncontestable truth that US firearms laws were to blame for what happened.

Learn from what happened here.
 
I think the PM will use this if he is able to make a move on handguns down under. If 80% of the population down there is giving the up down that lack of control caused this than it is possible.
 
On the note of the buyback; it's very frustrating when the media brings up the "success" of the buyback here (Australia).

I remember when my mate's dad had to hand in firearms that had been made illegal. He simply took the money he was paid and went and purchased new firearms that were still legal (i.e, ones with the new minimum of barrel length). Plenty of other sporting shooters did the same thing, rendering the buyback useless.

I love my country but the ignorance of some people and the media disgusts me.
 
Look at the questions surrounding the massacre in Australia. There are too many questions left unanswered in my opinion. And, this is one of the few times I've donned a tin foil hat, but the evidence points to the government covering up (if not actually perpetrating) a massacre to simply get gun control on the books there that wouldn't have passed without this sort of incident.

No one in Australia is really investigating what happened because the media calls you a cook there for simply asking the questions.

And, you have Rebecca Peters coming from Australia now with the UN attempting to limit weapons to the government.

In Australia you have not only motive (the government and NGOs), you also have the incident of Port Authur simply not being feasible. (Retarded men don't pull head and neck shots on 29 people with no misses).

You have the chain of possession hidden by the government. You have the evidence (the cafe it happened in) destroyed and burned by the government.

You have multiple witnesses saying a man with a pock marked face and black hair was walking out of the cafe with an AR-15 when Martin Bryant had a clear face and blonde hair.

You finally have the Aussie government sealing the records on this event for (I believe it was 60 years).

Because of these things, I cannot believe anything the Aussie government says. They are willing to step on bodies to advance a political agenda even if Bryant did do it.

But, search out the truth for Port Arthur. You'll discover some very uncomfortable truths about the Aussie government.
 
Does Australia have an equivalent to the Bill of Rights? Are Aussies guaranteed (in any way) the right to keep and bear arms?
 
-terry,

We don't have a Bill of Rights, and we certainly don't have the right to keep and bear arms. We pretty much have no rights when it comes to self defence. We have an expansive list of prohibited weapons, including: tasers, OC/mace, knives and batons. We then have expansive regulations regarding firearms.

Yesterday, a woman was mugged by a man in Sydney with a screwdriver. She handed over her valuables immediately. According to what police and authorities tell us all the time, the mugger should then have run off with her belongings seeing as though she did as her mugger demanded. But no, he then smashed her head on a tree and tipped over her baby's pram (baby inside). See here for details: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21583903-1702,00.html

How the hell can authorities expect us to defend ourselves against attacks like this? Obviously, the age old advice of "Do what they say and they won't hurt you!" is a bunch of crap. I'm big guy and feel confident to protect my self and those near me to the best I can. But what about my girlfriend? If she was being assaulted by a bloke my size then she wouldn't possibly stand a chance.

It makes me incredibly mad when I know the government doesn't care for its people.
 
Seriously, as soon as I am able to, I am going to join a trap/skeet/target shooting club jus tto get my hands on some cold steel. Just to add one more gun lover to their populace.
Click to expand...

Look on the not so bright side:you could always have your pistols shipped over there and you would have an opportunity to freely own handguns in that country.In some states semi-auto/pump-shotguns,have been making a comeback,from what I have read on an earlier Australian gun-law thread,last year.You could also try and attempt to get a straight-pull rifle or carbine,or both,that bears a uncanny resemberlance to the M4A1/M16A2 or the Colt 9mm smg,but in some states they prohibit the importation of these particular guns,because they visually resemble the "Black rifle",types.

If you own any semi-auto rifles,you could have them permanently converted,into a straight-pull configuration.I have heard about this,on a thread on this forum,about an M1 Garand,being converted,into a manual-repeater.I don't know about the .22 rimfire semis,being coverted,but I should think that it isn't really worth it.But you could always try it and see.

Not perfect by any means,but where there is a loophole,there is an almost positive, way around things,that is ready for the crafty shooters,to take advantage of.
 
I don`t think John Howard in Australia is Qualified to talk about gun control when the Port Arthur massacre was a set up, something stinks anyway.
Click to expand...

No he isn't,he is a biased,jumped-up little prat,who is so full of his own anti-crap,he is too bloody blind,to see that his laws are ineffective and inefficient,against crime.Personally ,his buyback scheme was designed to strip Australians of their rights to certain guns,because he didn't approve of them and didn't think that they were nessecary-much in the same way that the polititions did after the Hungerford Massacre,20 years ago,when they and the BDS(British Deer Society.)said that pump and semi-auto centrefires were un-nessecary.But we lost these types,because of the pompousness of some shooters and that they wern't popular guns to own,etc,etc.But they liked rimfires,though.Come on,is there a difference between a pump,lever and a bolt-action rifle?I think not.
 
Pump action and self loading shotguns are generally prohibited unless you are a prime producer (ie farmer) or have a medical exemption.
Pump action rifles are however legal although the police in NSW don't
Click to expand...

Why is it that pump rifles are legal and pump-shotguns aren't,except under almost exceptional,reasons?Just as logical as the UKs laws.
 
Who cares what they think? They should mind their own business. I hope there are no shootings in Australia, but the whole country is a gun free victim zone.
 
I was just wondering.....

Are there any handicapped, old, weak, infirm people left in Australia? Or perhaps they've all been killed by now. Without a cop on every city street corner how on earth do you expect these people to believe they are safer without any effective means of self defense? I am astonished that this could be sold to a majority of Australians under any circumstance. :scrutiny:
 
I have only ever really known one Aussie. This was about a year or two before the ban. He was in the Army but did not have much of an opinion on guns.

From what I gather the US and Australia are quite different in culture, politics, economy, history and mentality of the people, although English is widely spoken in both countries. I am concerned not so much about the loss of rights in Australia (although that is sad) but more that a leader of another country feels the need to politicize a tragedy in our country that was not even well understood at the time he was commenting.

It worries me that any leader of another country would be concerned about US gun laws as they have zero net impact on his country (other than to make some of his citizens jealous). From media that I observe from other countries other than the US normally is pretty consistent that the US is always meddling in the affairs of other nations. Yet, those same nations are concerned about the rights of our citizens... being limited?
 
Australia says they have the answer....the problem is we didn't ask them any questions.


Liberal pollys, here, in Britain, in Australia or anywhere else react to events.
The bigger the event is or the bigger the media makes us believe the event is
the more likely the pollys are to get involved. And getting involved invariably means...."we need a law to prevent...". Will banning guns in massive quantities prevent a repeat of the carnage at VT? Maybe.

No one can know the future and no one can ever know what event did not occur due to some action taken at an earlier time. What we all know instinctively is that a blanket prohibition and confiscations ala G.B. and Australia will lead to massive increases in violent crime at the one on one level. But these types of crimes don't get the national and international headlines that a mass murder event garners and therefore are not of any importance in the strategy of a liberal polly.

Banning all guns is a feel good response that they hope will prevent future mass murders and will have the benefit of accomplishing the liberal agenda....disarming citizens so as to render them into subjects. The individual deaths that will occur as a result of this agenda are irrelevant and a small price for a society to pay in order to achieve "true civilization" through
total disarmament of the populace.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
2006: Howard says yes NEW gun restrictions
Replies
4
Views
700
Wyndage
W
A
  • Locked
Travel Warning: Australia
2
Replies
48
Views
3K
fallingblock
F
3
  • Locked
this isn't supposed to happen in australia - shooting in melbourne
Replies
5
Views
574
jimmy
J
M
  • Locked
Australian Report Says Gun Laws Work
Replies
17
Views
1K
Jim K
J
D
  • Locked
Gun Confiscation in Australia Not Shown to Reduce Mass Shootings
Replies
0
Views
344
Dean Weingarten
D
Back
Top