2 forum members censored on THT

[ranmar850]

Hey, noelm, looks like we got censored off that guns on boats thread in THT ::) To be fair, the more offensive of the replies got taken down, too. Geez, all I did was post a link, in your support, to the original article, showing what some had disputed as "Aussie (or Limey) propaganda.

[Andy56]

Hey, noelm, looks like we got censored off that guns on boats thread in THT ::) To be fair, the more offensive of the replies got taken down, too. Geez, all I did was post a link, in your support, to the original article, showing what some had disputed as "Aussie (or Limey) propaganda.
Hahaha, what did you say? You just cant ague with people who cant see the wood from the trees. You can identify americans by their priorities in life, guns, god and self protection. Eating yourself to death is your god given right but woe s me for crticising your gun ownership. Ah, just watch Jim Jeffries put downs. Why did you bother anyway? Boring day at the office?;D;D

[Noelm]

All I said was I saw on the news a guy in the US caught on security camera, it involved a youth who quite innocently knocked on his door to ask directions, the guy answered the door armed with a shotgun, the youth ran off and the guy shot at him, nothing really offensive, and my post was in response to another member who said if anyone approached his boat offshore, he would shoot first if they didn't answer a radio call to state their business, it then turned into an "Aussie propaganda" reply, I really meant nothing by it, simply what I saw on the news, and how it matched the guy opening the door with a gun! No skin off my nose, had plenty of debates over there, and been warned.

[Noelm]

I think it's just an ingrained gun mentality in the US, maybe a carry over from the Wild West cowboys? but it seems everyone has a gun in the car, one in their belt, a couple in the house, one in the bedside table, and one or two in the boat "just in case" we might have pretty strict, and even archaic gun laws, but it suits me just fine, my son has a couple of guns, but, they are registered, he is licensed, they are stored, unloaded in an approved safe, and the ammunition is stored separately, no one has ever told anyone they can't have a gun here, you just have to comply with the laws, but, I feel pretty confident that when I go to a shop, or sporting event, the people alongside me are not armed, and that is just how I like it.

[Fed]

Maybe they found out about your troublemaker rep noel?

[ranmar850]

yeah, when you are awash in guns, you almost need to carry one yourself. The original intent of their Second Amendment ( right to bear arms) was a hangover from the days of the the American Revolution, and has since been perverted beyond recognition. Anyway, not getting into that argument, and I'm aalways aware of the need to remain respectful on "their" forums, lots of useful knowledge there, and some genuinely good people , it seems. Their mods are redhot on the prohibition of political discussion on the forum, and rightly so, as their politics are such as cesspool of hate and bigotry. Make our lot look like a perpetual group hug.
I was in another thread there, earlier this week, that just disappeared. turns out it was sent to The Bilge. Someone commented on the return of E85 fuel, which had disappeared under Obama. I made a comment that their president was trying to get votes back in the farm belt, where he was losing ground due to his tariff war, a few other people gave their opinion, someone got heated, and off to The Bilge it went.;D

[Noelm]

I learned a long time ago to try to keep out of gun threads, but, the similarity to the guy answering the door with a gun, and a member saying how if a boat came near him, he would shoot, just seemed to rate a mention, Jesus, if I shot every boat that came up to me fishing, I would need a Navy ship just for the ammo, I guess we are just not that paranoid....yet!

[gazza2006au]

Sounds like u guys need a spank i tried to google a suitable picture but to my surprise i bet u guess what i found haha

[TheRealPoMo]

So you guys went on an American forum and commented on guns....geez....
You'll be talking E-tecs on here next.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[Noelm]

e-tecs are bullet proof aren't they? guns are useless on them!

[ranmar850]

No, we did not comment on guns per se, just a particular incident. A later post from the OP may shed a bit of light on it a quote
Basically, I will carry a firearm. Or several. I believe there is a need for me to have protection while boating to protect myself and my family. It really has nothing to do with fear. he is an ex-serviceman, and a lot of these guys carry a lot of PTSD--basically, any kind of confrontation, real or imagined, any stress, they feel naked without a gun at hand. The more honest will admit it.
You stay away from guns and politics on that forum, particularly is it is very much based in Trump country. ::) As for guns in particular, there is never anything to be gained from entering that debate--I'm here for BOATS!

[gazza2006au]

HeHeri am worried about my wallet, keys and phone this guy carries a gun wtf lol

[Dirtyfuzz]

In saying that some of those coastlines near the borders would be pretty sketchy with drug runners and what not, would hate to be seen in the wrong place at the wrong time!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gazza2006au]

Dirty Fuzz u might end up with 100 pounds of snoop dog special by accident lol

[Noelm]

three things here. 1. Survival of the fittest. 2. I don't worry about my property - we have 2 highly trained dogs and 2 alert dogs, plus a 7,000v 6' foot fence, and I'm usually home and carry my sidearm with me in the house and around the property, so I typically don't live in fear. 3. Your misquote is kinda off topic.

the above is simply a copy and paste of part of a reply from the gun thread, I just can't imagine anyone having that sort of "protection" needs, unless you live in some really bad place, and if it was that bad, I think I would be moving house!

[Dirtyfuzz]

Dirty Fuzz u might end up with 100 pounds of snoop dog special by accident lol

Ha! It would all be colombian gold around those parts!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ShaneC]

To be fair though. Guns ARE awesome

[Noelm]

I don't think that is the issue, it's all about "needing" to carry one everywhere.

[bluefin59]

three things here. 1. Survival of the fittest. 2. I don't worry about my property - we have 2 highly trained dogs and 2 alert dogs, plus a 7,000v 6' foot fence, and I'm usually home and carry my sidearm with me in the house and around the property, so I typically don't live in fear. 3. Your misquote is kinda off topic.

the above is simply a copy and paste of part of a reply from the gun thread, I just can't imagine anyone having that sort of "protection" needs, unless you live in some really bad place, and if it was that bad, I think I would be moving house!

Sounds like someone living in Johannesburg in South Africa [emoji41]
Telling Yanks about not having guns is like saying you can’t fish anymore . Matt

[Andy56]

Sounds like someone living in Johannesburg in South Africa [emoji41]
Telling Yanks about not having guns is like saying you can’t fish anymore . Matt
more like you cant shoot to kill anymore.

[TheRealPoMo]

To be fair though. Guns ARE awesomeYeah I love em. The engineering, the history, the smell of the powder and oil....it's people I don't trust.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[swof63]

Yeah guns are all very fun until one goes off when it’s pointed at you. That’ll leave a mark.


Sent from my iPad using Ausfish forums

[Crocodile]

Hello All,
the part that shocks me is that the yanks have normalised this way of thinking.
The monsterous has become mundane.
Do they not know that in most of the western world you do not need to carry guns for self protection?.
I grew up on farm, firearms were part of day to day life but to think that I would need one for self-defence give me the shivers.
I work in tourism and that is one of the many complimentary things visitors say about Oz; they feel safe and that's because Oz is one of the safest places on earth.
Do you think that the yanks ever stop to ask; Is our way the best or only way or what are other countries doing differently?

[Lovey80]

Hello All,
the part that shocks me is that the yanks have normalised this way of thinking.
The monsterous has become mundane.
Do they not know that in most of the western world you do not need to carry guns for self protection?.
I grew up on farm, firearms were part of day to day life but to think that I would need one for self-defence give me the shivers.
I work in tourism and that is one of the many complimentary things visitors say about Oz; they feel safe and that's because Oz is one of the safest places on earth.
Do you think that the yanks ever stop to ask; Is our way the best or only way or what are other countries doing differently?

This is the problem with people from other western nations commenting on American gun policy. America is not the rest of the western world and never will be. There are currently estimated to be over 330 million small arms in circulation in the states. No law is changing that to any significant degree. There is also a very high degree of violence in the states with very high levels of active shooter events (comparatively). I have several good Aussie mates that now reside in the US after marrying American women and all of them now carry almost everywhere they go that it’s legal to do so.

[Noelm]

It's pretty futile to try to get any point across to the US on guns, been on US forums for a very long time now, and know how it is, the point of this "issue" started with a simple and innocent comparison, had nothing to do with whether anyone thought guns were good or bad, necessary or not, that's the real danger in the US, everyone has a gun, and unfortunately, prepared to use it, sometimes way too soon. Just think about this for a second, how many times have you been fishing, and an unknown boat approaches, or even "circles" you? personally, for me, thousands of times, and not for one millisecond have I thought of shooting them, because they are a threat (mind you, at times it pisses you off real bad) just the same as answering the door, even if I owned a gun (and I am not anti gun) I wouldn't go to the door with it, it's just a hardened mentality issue over they that sort of self perpetuates, you have a gun, so I had better carry one too. Just to finish up, many times I have had "debates" on all sorts of stuff on US forums, and more than once it has fallen to things like "you Aussies had all your guns taken off you by the Government" when the debate was not about guns, it's just how we are perceived by them.

[Noelm]

I forgot something, this is in no way trying to put down anyone in the US, I have made many friends through boating forums over there, and met a few in person, and I have some lifelong friends that are American and are great people, one was my next door neighbor for many years after he visited here, saw what we had and moved out here almost straight away.

[EdBerg]

Hence the reason I would never visit or live in the USA, If you need that much "protection". then why the hell would anyone want and also choose to live there. That would be the same as living in Palestine or Papua New Guinea or some war zone. There are thousands of great places in the world that don't have those sort of problems. Life is about living, not surviving!
For me leaving the house to go shopping, it's do I have my car keys, wallet and mobile?, and that is enough for me, not also which firearm(s) do I take with me today to do some shopping in case I get shot at.

I suppose using their thinking in that, if every single person carried a firearm, you would be less inclined to so some harm to another person as the moment you shot at someone, every one around you would also shoot at you. So there is some logic in that but at the same time which sane person wants to live in an area like that! Not for me thanks. Just my 2 cents worth.

[GBC]

I could tell some stories about the gulf in the 80's, Le Mans style starts out of Weipa, shotties on the front deck blazing away.....those big Darwin/gulf boats thought they didn't have to give way to our little 20m east coast boat - Ha!

[scottar]

This issue has so many facets to the argument with each point raised having some merit given an individuals personal circumstance. Sure we as Aussies don't see the need to carry - but then we as Aussies are only just starting to see the sort of "don't go into that area" environment that various groups in other countries have lived with all their lives. I'm sure if we were subjected the same environmental perameters our opinions may vary. Americans do have a different mindset - from settlement forward their history is basically conflict and "if you don't get what you want - shoot first and ask questions later" - from the highest level of government down. They still to this day glorify it in every second Hollywood production. The gun control horse bolted years ago - there are way to many in circulation for prohibition to ever work and criminal elements will always manage to get them - they do here even with with better gun control. So what is the answer. The real answer is to try and change the mindset but I see that as a near impossability. There are countries in the world where a gun behind every front door is a mandate due to not having a formal military - these countries have some of the lowest gun related crime levels on the planet. Would this work in the US - probably not - too many other social issues that simmer over. I do see the gun lobby's point about having law abiding citizens guns confiscated - I was dirty when it happened to me because some other nutbag lost their shit. We are seeing more cases of cars being used as weapons on the news - we banning them too? Alcohol and ciggies kill more every year than semi auto guns in this country ever did - banning them? (can't kill the cash cow now can we). I do get some of the anti gun lobby argument - who couldn't given what has gone on but realistically - if someone is going to flip their lid and go on a killing spree, they will use whatever is at their disposal - we've seen explosives, accelerants, knives, motor vehicles - anything's a weapon under the circumstances. What is the one thing that can prevent any of them being used though - the mindset. Unfortunately though I think "good luck" is about all that can be said.

[Lovey80]

Some good points there Scott. I think one thing to remember also in Australia is the Lindt Cafe siege. Here we had an Islamist nut bag, on bail for murdering his wife via means of setting her on fire, after being on a good behaviour bond after sending disgracefully threatening the families of fallen diggers, ON A TERRORIST WATCH LIST, still managed to get hold of a weapon that was banned after 1996. If that right there doesn’t tell you the gun ban had absolutely nothing to do with the lack of massacres nothing will.

[Dirtyfuzz]

I could tell some stories about the gulf in the 80's, Le Mans style starts out of Weipa, shotties on the front deck blazing away.....those big Darwin/gulf boats thought they didn't have to give way to our little 20m east coast boat - Ha!

We had a shot gun pulled on us by a crab pro in the Fitzroy because he thought we were checking his pots!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GBC]

We had a shot gun pulled on us by a crab pro in the Fitzroy because he thought we were checking his pots!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Most pro boats have enough weaponry to start a small civil war.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[scottar]

Most pro boats have enough weaponry to start a small civil war.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Well barramundi are a bloody big fish" ;D

[stevej]

quite a large 3d archery tournament was held here, the iba worlds
some of the top American shooters wouldn't come because they couldn't bring their guns for defense.


tbh good ifshing gear comes out of asia if only they would drop the prices on minnkotas and lowrance then build a wall and close themselves.

[swof63]

Thankfully ( in Australia) it’s an academic argument only for 99.99999% of the population. It only takes one fruitcake to turn up to work one day with a sawn off 12 gauge and your day can be a real bummer. Actually it’s more than a day.
Unfortunately in America this is a real risk for school kids. And a very small percentage of us. Although the yanks seem to prefer automatic weapons as it gets better press.
I always argue that a fruitcake with a SAW does a lot more damage than a fruitcake with a paper plate. Gun control doesn’t eliminate fruitcakes it does impact the damage they can do.


Sent from my iPad using Ausfish forums

[Lovey80]

Oh dear. You don’t think you could get your hands on a semi-auto centre fire rifle right now if you wanted it?

[Noelm]

Criminals will always have access to weapons, you just can't argue with that, but, as long as the main stream population doesn't have a dozen guns for "protection" then it lessens the possibility of someone just getting pissed off and shooting the neighbour or someone who cut them off in the car, as I said, I am not anti guns, my son has a couple, and so does one of my brothers, but I am thankful for the stand that was taken on gun control. I guess the difference between using (say) a car for mass harm is, with a gun, you can do it from a long distance, hidden from view, someone with a knife or the like, has to get close, and the chances of mass destruction of life is slim, that said, it's a very emotive issue, especially in the USA.

[Andy56]

Criminals will always have access to weapons, you just can't argue with that, but, as long as the main stream population doesn't have a dozen guns for "protection" then it lessens the possibility of someone just getting pissed off and shooting the neighbour or someone who cut them off in the car, as I said, I am not anti guns, my son has a couple, and so does one of my brothers, but I am thankful for the stand that was taken on gun control. I guess the difference between using (say) a car for mass harm is, with a gun, you can do it from a long distance, hidden from view, someone with a knife or the like, has to get close, and the chances of mass destruction of life is slim, that said, it's a very emotive issue, especially in the USA.

you left out one piece of info. fishing rod is for catching fish, a gun has only one main purpose, to kill.
definition of a weapon, "a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage."

[TheRealPoMo]

Yes and for most registered weapons in this country (hunting rifles) the purpose is to kill animals for table - and I conceed in some cases for sport. Same as a fishing rod.
Not that I argue a loomis is as dangerous as a 30/30 but as a tool the intended use is the same.
Though I consider the gun laws ill thought out as anything managed by a government comittee will inevitably be, the main target of the legislation is about firearms that generally are not hunting tools...so I don't have a major issue...even though I had to hand one of mine in.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[scottar]

you left out one piece of info. fishing rod is for catching fish, a gun has only one main purpose, to kill.
definition of a weapon, "a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage."

I've killed a lot more things with one than the other - and it isn't the gun.

[Andy56]

I've killed a lot more things with one than the other - and it isn't the gun.
The exception is always trotted out to disprove or disparage the reality. How many people can you kill with a fishing rod and how many fish can you kill with a gun? I think that puts it in perspective.

[stevej]

guns are still silly easy to get in Australia

out of the people i associate with 13 have guns mainly larger caliber rifles
none hunt, none target shoot
all you have to do is go down to the lcoal gun range fire of 30 rounds from a 22 thats chained to the bench and you have fulfilled your requirements to say your a sporting shooter

its still a flawed system here
also found out i was a signed up shooters party member as my father signed me up 35 years ago, am now removed

[Noelm]

Yes true, no system is perfect, but I personally prefer what we have compared to a lot of other places, does anyone even consider the person next to them in a shopping centre has a gun?

[juggernaut]

I disagree with most of what has been said here.

Guns don't kill people.....bullets do....::).

[stevej]

and thats a load of horseshit

but hey everyones allowed an opinion

[juggernaut]

and thats a load of horseshit

but hey everyones allowed an opinion

No.....thats a fact.....well unless you use the gun as a club 8-)

[scottar]

The exception is always trotted out to disprove or disparage the reality. How many people can you kill with a fishing rod and how many fish can you kill with a gun? I think that puts it in perspective.


Too right there Andy - and the anti gun lobby have become experts at it. What percentage of legally owned semi automatic hunting / sporting rifles had been used in mass shootings in Australia and yet they are now banned to the majority of Australian shooters - and yet the crims still seem to be able to get them. To be honest mate, I've never tried to kill someone with my fishing rod (sure it's doable though) - or my gun. Maybe that's just me though hey - exception to the rule and all.

[Lovey80]

The exception is always trotted out to disprove or disparage the reality. How many people can you kill with a fishing rod and how many fish can you kill with a gun? I think that puts it in perspective.

Youre missing the point. If someone wants to go on a mass shooting spree, they’ll get a gun. If they’re willing to plan it, Lindt Cafe shows that even on a terror watch list you can get a banned gun. Hell not that long ago a cop was killed with a fully automatic weapon. They’ve been banned for donkeys. Taking guns off of law abiding citizens helps no one.

[Lovey80]

Criminals will always have access to weapons, you just can't argue with that, but, as long as the main stream population doesn't have a dozen guns for "protection" then it lessens the possibility of someone just getting pissed off and shooting the neighbour or someone who cut them off in the car, as I said, I am not anti guns, my son has a couple, and so does one of my brothers, but I am thankful for the stand that was taken on gun control. I guess the difference between using (say) a car for mass harm is, with a gun, you can do it from a long distance, hidden from view, someone with a knife or the like, has to get close, and the chances of mass destruction of life is slim, that said, it's a very emotive issue, especially in the USA.

If someone is going to lose their shit and kill the neighbour or someone that’s cut them off, It can hardly be argued that banning semi-automatic weapons is going to prevent that. Mixing these two (blown gasket and mass murder) clouds the issue.

Guns that are still allowed with very little trouble to acquire can kill from quite a distance. I have two that are good out to a mile. It’s emotive because people that aren’t “gun people” are quite happy to see the rights of other taken away. How does that quote go? First they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew......?

[Lovey80]

Yes true, no system is perfect, but I personally prefer what we have compared to a lot of other places, does anyone even consider the person next to them in a shopping centre has a gun?

Again. Stop clouding the issue with unrealistic comparisons. No one is advocating legalising concealed carry for the masses in Australia.

In the US mind you, I think anyone living there and not doing a high level concealed carry course and doing so is doing themselves a disservice.

[scottar]

Taking guns off of law abiding citizens helps no one.

Not entirely true - it helped little johnny - was the single greatest vote buying exercise executed under his leadership. Cost the Aussie tax payer a motsa and unless I am mistaken, accomplished sweet FA in controlling the number of guns in the country - gun sales increased after the buy back - they just weren't semi auto. Makes me laugh when I think about the capabilities of some of the club shooters I have shot against over the years - no semi auto needed. They could outshoot me in a rapid fire event even though they had to manually load rounds one at a time. No way in hell I could keep up with a bolt action.

[Dirtyfuzz]

I’d rather take my chance running from a person with a single shooter than someone spraying a full cartridge in a matter of seconds!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GBC]

I think our system is a pretty good compromise. Police checks, etc, controlling military grade weapons etc. If you want a rifle you can have one, just jump through some hoops. The stats on shootings in this country don’t lie and I like them. Most illegal guns have been stolen from law abiding citizens unfortunately.

[Noelm]

Maybe the issue is mentality, we (here in Aus) don't have the generational gun mentality (remember I am NOT anti gun) I would say most of our population would not have a gun even if there is no gun laws, sure plenty would, but more would not, (in my opinion) as can be seen, even here it's a very emotive issue, in a way I guess the laws were made for the majority of the population, whether that was from tree hugging wowsers, or just a wild guess I don't know, but it is a debate that will never end in almost every country.

[Lovey80]

I’d rather take my chance running from a person with a single shooter than someone spraying a full cartridge in a matter of seconds!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who wouldn’t? That doesn’t change the fact that prior to 1996 you were statistically more likely to win the big lottery than you were to ever be involved in an incident involving a semi-automatic weapon.


I think our system is a pretty good compromise. Police checks, etc, controlling military grade weapons etc. If you want a rifle you can have one, just jump through some hoops. The stats on shootings in this country don’t lie and I like them. Most illegal guns have been stolen from law abiding citizens unfortunately.

The stats on shootings prior to 1996 don’t lie either. The stats in NZ don’t lie either. They still allow semi-automatic weapons and even encourage hunters to use silencers and they don’t have a spait of mass shootings either. Australia always was an incredibly low risk of such an occurrence and gun violence was on a significant downward trend prior to Port Arther.

[Lovey80]

Maybe the issue is mentality, we (here in Aus) don't have the generational gun mentality (remember I am NOT anti gun) I would say most of our population would not have a gun even if there is no gun laws, sure plenty would, but more would not, (in my opinion) as can be seen, even here it's a very emotive issue, in a way I guess the laws were made for the majority of the population, whether that was from tree hugging wowsers, or just a wild guess I don't know, but it is a debate that will never end in almost every country.

Completely agree. Australia never really had a mentality like that of the US. Even though we did have quite the number of guns available for mass shootings they were very rare. I think the larger difference in mentality is the likelihood that an Aussie would actually resort to using a gun in an offensive manner.

Please dont get get me wrong though. I am not advocating US style laws here. Extensive back ground checks, storage requirements etc are very reasonable requirements. I do however believe a person has a right to use a firearm in self defence in their own home. Right now the Australian state and federal governments would rather see all of us die in a home invasion than to use a firearm to defend ourselves. That’s just absurd.

[Andy56]

yes juggernaut, and . Thats the dumbest arguement the rife association ever put out and people still put a great deal of store in it. Its a non sense. The bullet shoots itself ha?
My mind doesnt walk, my feet do.
My mind doesnt drive my hands and feet do.
My mind doesnt pull the trigger, my finger does. want anymore innane mantra?
Mate, never pull that arguement out cause it so patently stupid. leave it for the yanks.

[Andy56]

Lovely, two issues you touched on but didnt cover very well. Yes most criminals have guns stolen from legitimate owners or smuggled in. The stolen guns issue is easy to solve. No guns issued, no guns stolen. Obviously thats totally unrealistic but limiting the availability limits the number stolen. Same arguement for smuggling. You cannot run from the statistics on gun deaths between the two countries. Australians are earthlings and the americans are the aliens lol.

The second about self defense of their home. Unless you carry a gun 24/7 its also a nonsense. The crims are waiting for you to put your gun away before barging in, hahahaha its a laugh a minute scenario.
As others have said its mass psychosis in america which we dont have here. Most aussies have a more laidback attitude to reasonable laws. Compare the two countries and its not a hard decision for the majority. There are exceptions yea, but we dont normally go ballistic over them. " I plead my rights to the first amendmenbt" or what ever would go down real well in court here, hahahahaha

[GBC]

Who wouldn’t? That doesn’t change the fact that prior to 1996 you were statistically more likely to win the big lottery than you were to ever be involved in an incident involving a semi-automatic weapon.



The stats on shootings prior to 1996 don’t lie either. The stats in NZ don’t lie either. They still allow semi-automatic weapons and even encourage hunters to use silencers and they don’t have a spait of mass shootings either. Australia always was an incredibly low risk of such an occurrence and gun violence was on a significant downward trend prior to Port Arther.


Like 13 gun massacres in the 18 years prior to ‘96 (4 or more killed), zero (1 maybe LIndt?) since.

What is it you want now that you haven’t got?

[Andy56]

Before anyone thinks i am a total wowser, I can see a reason for owning a gun in very remote locations or dangerous regions. In australia, thats very very rare indeed. So really we are arguing over something we dont normally experience. But hey, I like all spurious BS arguements for owning a gun, it makes for interesting shouting matches.

[efc]

Pretty sure your allowed almost anything here if you get the paper work done.
Landline had a segment on .50 cal in WA and I’ve heard of people with full auto at ssaa meets.
The thought of an Australian male living in Logan with a legal semi auto gun scares the shit out of me however.

[Muzza]

Guns eh, emotional topic for some. My opinion only
First up I don't think America's laws would do well here now at all, with the current ice and suicide epidemic we have.
You can all work out why on that pretty easily, but suicide by gun a lot easier when depressed than any other method, split second decision, tragic. Ice, well anyone who has seen a seemingly normal person deteriorate so quick and have episodes on ice will know that could end badly.
I don't mind today's system, I have shot on properties out Coonabarabran way in the past, access to a property close by where rabbits and foxes are targeted. My mates have licences and guns legally and do the right thing and I believe their right to do so, it is shit easy, as mentioned before, to get into it if you are a cleanskin.
Crims will be crims and do what they want and get or steal what they want, police do their job and take care of that, will never be 100% but it's not that bad in OZ.
Many years ago as a kid I remember the old man had a 22, and sawn off shotty for a while in his bedroom wardrobe, I used to sneak in and suss them out. He was heavily involved in cycling and the shotty was the start gun lol, think the 22 was passed down.
Maybe what we have could be better, but I think we have it pretty much better than most countries.
And growing up with slug guns was pretty awesome.
Cheers
Muz

[scottar]

Pretty sure your allowed almost anything here if you get the paper work done.
Landline had a segment on .50 cal in WA and I’ve heard of people with full auto at ssaa meets.
The thought of an Australian male living in Logan with a legal semi auto gun scares the shit out of me however.

You "heard" wrong. Fully automatic weapons can not be legally owned by members of the public in Australia - unless they hold a collectors license and the firearm has been made permanently inoperable. I also suspect you just offended a lot of law abiding citizens that live in Logan too.

[scottar]

yes juggernaut, and . Thats the dumbest arguement the rife association ever put out and people still put a great deal of store in it. Its a non sense. The bullet shoots itself ha?
My mind doesnt walk, my feet do.
My mind doesnt drive my hands and feet do.
My mind doesnt pull the trigger, my finger does. want anymore innane mantra?
Mate, never pull that arguement out cause it so patently stupid. leave it for the yanks.

The actual phrase is "Guns don't kill people - people kill people". Much like any other inanimate object used as a weapon - someone has to use it but hey - never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

[Muzza]

I think the landline episode, if it is what I saw. was a landowner creating a shooting range for High Cal / long range weapons to subsidise his farming efforts? I think they have the weapons and tourists / visitors come to shoot. No idea on legalities etc
Cheers

[scottar]

Before anyone thinks i am a total wowser, I can see a reason for owning a gun in very remote locations or dangerous regions. In australia, thats very very rare indeed. So really we are arguing over something we dont normally experience. But hey, I like all spurious BS arguements for owning a gun, it makes for interesting shouting matches.

So you don't consider target shooting a legitimate sport??

Consider this - there is a pretty well funded (and some could argue growing courtesy of the leftard movement of tree huggers) group who don't consider fishing to be a legitimate sport - they consider it animal cruelty. Out of the population in Queensland as per a quick google search - 15% fish recreationally. Imagine if you will, that 51% decided the tree huggers were right because of a few bad eggs that don't do the right thing and then an opportunistic pollie (what other kind is there) took it to the polls as an election platform. See where this is headed. Sound familiar to an extent - it should. Should we be worried - yep because it is already happening.

Now before anyone goes off half cocked about but fishing never killed anyone ( hang on - Rock fishing is in the list of the most dangerous sports in Australia - not shooting - huh ) , this is the thing that I find most concerning about what happened in Australia with the gun buy back /gun laws. Simply because a voting percentage decided on an emotive issue (that a lot of them new very little about apart from what was presented / misrepresented by the media), laws were passed that basically stripped law abiding citizens of their rights. We have gone down that slope once now - the precedent is set.

[Lovey80]

Lovely, two issues you touched on but didnt cover very well. Yes most criminals have guns stolen from legitimate owners or smuggled in. The stolen guns issue is easy to solve. No guns issued, no guns stolen. Obviously thats totally unrealistic but limiting the availability limits the number stolen. Same arguement for smuggling. You cannot run from the statistics on gun deaths between the two countries. Australians are earthlings and the americans are the aliens lol.

where is this “most criminals have guns stolen from legitimate owners” information coming from?

There are more legal guns in circulation right now (and I would argue black market ones that aren’t stolen also) than there was in 1996.


The second about self defense of their home. Unless you carry a gun 24/7 its also a nonsense. The crims are waiting for you to put your gun away before barging in, hahahaha its a laugh a minute scenario.
As others have said its mass psychosis in america which we dont have here. Most aussies have a more laidback attitude to reasonable laws. Compare the two countries and its not a hard decision for the majority. There are exceptions yea, but we dont normally go ballistic over them. " I plead my rights to the first amendmenbt" or what ever would go down real well in court here, hahahahaha

What is this non-sense you are writing here?

You call this reasonable?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UV9xJIVm3mw

[Lovey80]

Like 13 gun massacres in the 18 years prior to ‘96 (4 or more killed), zero (1 maybe LIndt?) since.

What is it you want now that you haven’t got?

may want to check those stats again. There’s been 7 mass shootings since.

[GBC]

may want to check those stats again. There’s been 7 mass shootings since.
I think I’m right, we made it 21 years without a mass shooting until Margaret River this year apparently. The term ‘massacre’ (4 or more by a single shooter) is the defining constraint.


I found this interesting. There is an eerie linear correlation simply between gun ownership rates vs gun deaths over the planet. In the absence of any other influence, even America is close to the median - just a fair way up the chart. It seems we will never control that ratio given all the various political climates around the planet can’t, and can only effect change by lowering one variable which is what we are doing here.
Im not anti guns, but I do not see ownership as a basic right. I am comfortable that lives are being saved by the laws we have and that I should be vetted by society should I want one and that the type of rifle should be controlled.

[juggernaut]

yes juggernaut, and . Thats the dumbest arguement the rife association ever put out and people still put a great deal of store in it. Its a non sense. The bullet shoots itself ha?
My mind doesnt walk, my feet do.
My mind doesnt drive my hands and feet do.
My mind doesnt pull the trigger, my finger does. want anymore innane mantra?
Mate, never pull that arguement out cause it so patently stupid. leave it for the yanks.

Jesus Andy did you think I was serious....guess SteveJ and you missed the emicons.

The irony is my comment came from an American standup comedian. I also posted a similar comment on an American boating forum in a gun related thread. And the responses I got from the American boat forum were quite different.......they saw through to the humour. Pardon the pun but maybe some here are too trigger happy!

FWIW I'm neither pro nor anti gun. But i'm reasonably happy with the laws in our society as they are at the moment. Sure I played around with guns in my youth when guns laws were relaxed, including semi auto's but got tired of shooting stuff for no purpose with my uncle, brother and his friends. Sure farmers wanted wildlife controlled, but I left it for others to do in the end. My brother is still heavily into guns and is a competitor at a local regional competition shooting 303 calibre rifles over 900 and 1000 yards. Helped him load thousands of catridges over the years based on the Hornady reloading handbook.

IIRC one thing that stood out in my mind after the Port Arthur masacre gun buy back scheme was the reduction in suicides by guns. Further, a fair proportion of homicides by firearms in the US are by people known to the victims. In both these situations, it seems the easy access to guns contributed to deaths by killing of oneself or the killing of family, friends etc known to the shooter.

[Andy56]

may want to check those stats again. There’s been 7 mass shootings since.
Lovey, your banner heading about democracy says all we need to know about your outlook in life. Thats fine, i can deal with that. But please, dont put forward the exception as the rule. All your saying is my rights trample your rights. So starts the spiral downwards.
This self defence arguement is BS unless you have a gun on you 24/7. with your hand on it 24/7. Life dont work that way and crims dont think that way. No doubt in america where the Gambini run wild, it may have some benefit but again, if some one pulls a gun or knife on you, he's not going to say wait, i'll give you ten seconds get your gun out before i shoot or stab you. Its not like a western where you both stare at each other for five minutes and then race for the gun. Most gun crimes dont work that way. You posted the exception .
In any case , its just perceived fear. The stats show you are more likely to get killed in a car or heart attack than physical threats
If you want to live in paranoia 24/7, you dont need to advocate it here, america already has it for those who are keen. Between attitude and rules, we live a fairly peacefull existence here in australia. Why would you advocate to march more towards their madness?

[Lovey80]

I think I’m right, we made it 21 years without a mass shooting until Margaret River this year apparently. The term ‘massacre’ (4 or more by a single shooter) is the defining constraint.


I found this interesting. There is an eerie linear correlation simply between gun ownership rates vs gun deaths over the planet. In the absence of any other influence, even America is close to the median - just a fair way up the chart. It seems we will never control that ratio given all the various political climates around the planet can’t, and can only effect change by lowering one variable which is what we are doing here.
Im not anti guns, but I do not see ownership as a basic right. I am comfortable that lives are being saved by the laws we have and that I should be vetted by society should I want one and that the type of rifle should be controlled.

i typed out a long and detailed reply but for some reason the screen refreshed itself and I lost it. So here’s a much abbreviated version.

Ah the “gun death” chestnut. Taking into account police shootings and suicides. Correlation doesn’t always mean causation. Doesn’t really give us the detail on gun related murder (which is what so many are concerned with in this debate) does it? Japan has almost no gun deaths and almost no guns but some of the highest suicide rates in the world. If they had guns the “gun deaths” would go through the roof and still probably the same amount of people would die.

The stats still don’t stack up. A number of the “massacres” you’re talking about involved weapons that weren’t even banned in 1996, and a some were with multiple shooters.

I am sure that chart would look eerily different if it compared gun ownership with “massacres” as defined by your definition but why define the subject to “massacre” and not just “mass shooting”? Does an incident where 3 died and two people survived but were still shot make it irrelevant?

Since 1996 we’ve had around 8 mass shootings, 3 of which meet your massacre definition.

[Lovey80]

Lovey, your banner heading about democracy says all we need to know about your outlook in life. Thats fine, i can deal with that. But please, dont put forward the exception as the rule. All your saying is my rights trample your rights. So starts the spiral downwards.
This self defence arguement is BS unless you have a gun on you 24/7. with your hand on it 24/7. Life dont work that way and crims dont think that way. No doubt in america where the Gambini run wild, it may have some benefit but again, if some one pulls a gun or knife on you, he's not going to say wait, i'll give you ten seconds get your gun out before i shoot or stab you. Its not like a western where you both stare at each other for five minutes and then race for the gun. Most gun crimes dont work that way. You posted the exception .
In any case , its just perceived fear. The stats show you are more likely to get killed in a car or heart attack than physical threats
If you want to live in paranoia 24/7, you dont need to advocate it here, america already has it for those who are keen. Between attitude and rules, we live a fairly peacefull existence here in australia. Why would you advocate to march more towards their madness?

Where am I saying that my rights trample your rights?

This opinion you have regarding needing a gun on you 24/7 is just that. An opinion. One that doesn’t stack up to any real scrutiny. There are countless incidents where people have defended themselves (or didn’t really have to once they were armed) with a safely stored firearm. I’m not even making any sort of argument with reference to “self defence” being a reason for ownership ( though I think that argument can still be made easily for another time). All I am saying is: I think it’s BS that a government would come down hard on someone that is a legal firearm owner, and that firearm owner uses his or her firearms to defend themselves. Which is actually what is happening in Australia.

I am not advocating anything like a march towards the American “madness”. Go read what I’m actually writing again slowly and try to do so without making unfounded links with things I’m not actually saying. I think your point regarding perceived fear could be said about you and those on your side of the fence with regards to gun ownership. Your likelihood comparison certainly fits the bill here.

[swof63]

Of course a firearm being used to kill ( or even wound and irrevocably affect forever ) 1 person is fine. It’s only a massacre we need to get worried about. Got it.


Sent from my iPad using Ausfish forums

[gazza2006au]

As a kid 15-16 years old me and my mates use to sit outside the gun shop and to our surprise on a few occassions guys walking in would take our money and buy us slugs drop them off to us waiting outside on our bmx bikes bloody crazy stuff when u think about it but this was the 1990's

[Noelm]

I can remember when most barber shops were also a sports store, and sold everything from fishing gear to guns, even Kmart had a section with guns on display that you could pick up and "play" with, and the ammo was simply sitting on the shelf, so, in a way, we had pretty slack laws at one time too, but that said, I cannot remember anyone going to Kmart, loading a gun and shooting everyone, somehow along the way, society just went downhill, but then, maybe people did go loopy, but because no one had a camera/phone in their pocket, there was no internet, maybe we just didn't hear about it, or, I was young and didn't know?

[tunaticer]

I think I’m right, we made it 21 years without a mass shooting until Margaret River this year apparently. The term ‘massacre’ (4 or more by a single shooter) is the defining constraint.


I found this interesting. There is an eerie linear correlation simply between gun ownership rates vs gun deaths over the planet. In the absence of any other influence, even America is close to the median - just a fair way up the chart. It seems we will never control that ratio given all the various political climates around the planet can’t, and can only effect change by lowering one variable which is what we are doing here.
Im not anti guns, but I do not see ownership as a basic right. I am comfortable that lives are being saved by the laws we have and that I should be vetted by society should I want one and that the type of rifle should be controlled.

Your stat chart is entirely misleading, where is the Russian, south american and african nations?

[GBC]

Your stat chart is entirely misleading, where is the Russian, south american and african nations?

you are right. The title of the chart states ‘among wealthier nations’, which I didn’t reference correctly.

The article has quite a few other interesting stats - all referenced.

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2018/5/11/17345214/australia-mass-shooting-margaret-river-osmington

[banshee]

Gun laws didn't help the Backpackers at Childers.......or is it only a massacre if it involves a firearm?

[Lovey80]

THeres a lot of debate even among the academics on this. Sure the suicide by firearm rate has dropped considerably. But personally what do I care for the method one tops them self?

The already falling homiced rate by firearm is very much contested. We were already on such a low number comparatively that there was always going to be debate over what factors contributed. I read a paper ages ago that graphed the homiced rate and I think we peaked in the 60’s and were declining very steadily ever since.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-28/fact-check-gun-homicides-and-suicides-john-howard-port-arthur/7254880

[Moonlighter]

The chart doesnt show that the US is near the median - that line across the graph is not a median line as far as I can tell, it appears to simply be a line showing the expected trajectory of the number of gun related deaths you can generally expect as the gun ownership levels increase.

A median line would be horizontal across the graph.

As the authors themselves state, what it shows is that there is a strong correlation between the number of guns owned by the people and the number of gun deaths.

They say:
But when researchers control for other confounding variables, they have found time and time again that America’s high levels of gun ownership are a major reason the US is so much worse in terms of gun violence than its developed peers.

And they go on further:

Instead, the US appears to have more lethal violence — and that’s driven in large part by the prevalence of guns.
”A series of specific comparisons of the death rates from property crime and assault in New York City and London show how enormous differences in death risk can be explained even while general patterns are similar,” Zimring and Hawkins wrote. “A preference for crimes of personal force and the willingness and ability to use guns in robbery make similar levels of property crime 54 times as deadly in New York City as in London.”

So, what that means is when we see on the news that some spaced out crackhead in Australia robs a servo, most times he/she will have a knife or other blunt instrument. But in the US, most times he/she has a gun and the willingness to use it.

[Noelm]

Yes, I think that's the issue, and kind of what I alluded to initially, "we" (being Australians) don't seem to have that mentality (yet) I guess because we didn't grow up as a nation carrying a gun on a horse and shooting others to stay alive (the old self defense chant) it's just not us as a nation, that said, whether we need guns, whether guns were taken off us, whether our laws are too strict, or not strict enough will be debated forever.

[GBC]

The chart doesnt show that the US is near the median - that line across the graph is not a median line as far as I can tell, it appears to simply be a line showing the expected trajectory of the number of gun related deaths you can generally expect as the gun ownership levels increase.

A median line would be horizontal across the graph.

As the authors themselves state, what it shows is that there is a strong correlation between the number of guns owned by the people and the number of gun deaths.

They say:
But when researchers control for other confounding variables, they have found time and time again that America’s high levels of gun ownership are a major reason the US is so much worse in terms of gun violence than its developed peers.

And they go on further:

Instead, the US appears to have more lethal violence — and that’s driven in large part by the prevalence of guns.
”A series of specific comparisons of the death rates from property crime and assault in New York City and London show how enormous differences in death risk can be explained even while general patterns are similar,” Zimring and Hawkins wrote. “A preference for crimes of personal force and the willingness and ability to use guns in robbery make similar levels of property crime 54 times as deadly in New York City as in London.”

So, what that means is when we see on the news that some spaced out crackhead in Australia robs a servo, most times he/she will have a knife or other blunt instrument. But in the US, most times he/she has a gun and the willingness to use it.

So you agree with the content but not the wording. A median of deaths would be horizontal, a median of guns would be vertical, and a median ratio would be about where it is drawn. How about "Linear interpolation of the X and Y scatter plot", and yes, both Australia and the USA are showing roughly a multiplication factor of 8-10, ergo if you reduce or increase the number on guns per hundred, the deaths per will increase or decrease accordingly up or down the same linear relationship. We have roughly the same deaths per gun in our country as the states and every other country mentioned - we just have less guns. This can be used by both sides of the gun lobby to argue various things. I'm not here to win the internet nor rid the world of guns, I don't have an agenda, just find it interesting how it all works and how some people are adamant either way.