Trevor Tosspot admits he seeks a total ban on the private ow

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:J4WdnQe50tc1yS7SnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:1aadnbCRnorGgS7SnZ2dnUVZ_qsAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:itWdnSrMZ7jOYy_SnZ2dnUVZ_oOdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:h9udnTkPGIdHAy_SnZ2dnUVZ_ukAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:doidnVRlZqTfWCzSnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA053B2B42A8B2hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:l4ydncUEldnrEyzSnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:2KadnVW-xtRUdC3SnZ2dnUVZ_oUAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1p-dnRcw7JsrPy3SnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:Q6udncFo2d80ITHSnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5t6dnZI4rJfDrzHSnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:yuydnexmB-StyDbSnZ2dnUVZ_qkAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hrCdnbIL7JCZYTfSnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E929F2F8BChopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xfadnaUAL5puRTfSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:bMGdnUgXmLFx8TfSnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S7KdndPBOcbvWjTSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
snip


Isn't the 2nd amendment all about the militia ;-)

Get back under your rock you stupid troll

it is isn't it :)

Get back under your rock, you stupid AND ignorant troll.

must suck for an aussie to point out to you what your
constitution
states

However, he is wrong. There is no requirement for militia
membership for
the right to keep and bear arms. Yes, the Second Amendment
addresses the
state militias (the national militia is addressed in
ArtI(8)(16)) but
what it is is a statement that gives *a* reason for the
protection of
that right.

I agree and understand that the courts have taken a very
liberal
view of what a militia is

No they have not

yes they have

That's just YOUR ignorant (as usual) interpretation

no that is the courts.

Must suck to have an Aussie telling you about the constitution
as
you are to ignorant


The definition of the militia has NOT been done by the Courts,
dummy It was made by STATUTE.

read the rulings and learn

I did

comprehension not your strong point?

What's your point? What are you looking at to develop that point?

that the supreme court interprets law ie Wade V ? DoC V ?

Well DOH !
Are you really this stupid ?
The Supreme Court of the US is the FINAL ARBITER of the law and it's
meaning and its applicability..
The same should be true for the Supreme Court in Australia.
(And if it's not, then you're still a colony of England).

WOW so you finally agree with me

Only because like a stopped clock, you can occasionally be right
Although in your case, it's not twice a day, but more like once in a blue
moon.

And your claim that " the courts have taken a very liberal view of what a
militia" remains TOTAL ignorant cant on your part.

rather fucking stupid for you to argue against me than agree
Click to expand...
Why should I agree with an ignorant idiot who is wrong ?
That would be stupid.
But then, that does demonstrate how stupid you are.
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:DMKdndHGL5F7yS7SnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:YpKdnW3S0ooUgC7SnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:AI2dndwCCo6pYi_SnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:eek:42dncXMvOKXPS_SnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1tOdnTkb2swrEyzSnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:2KadnVS-xtRXdC3SnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:FPOdnSEOIv9JPy3SnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0506A6E4C8B3hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:5t6dnZI4rJfDrzHSnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:yuydnexmB-StyDbSnZ2dnUVZ_qkAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hrCdnbIL7JCZYTfSnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message
news:XnsA04E929F2F8BChopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xfadnaUAL5puRTfSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:bMGdnUgXmLFx8TfSnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S7KdndPBOcbvWjTSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
snip


Isn't the 2nd amendment all about the militia ;-)

Get back under your rock you stupid troll

it is isn't it :)

Get back under your rock, you stupid AND ignorant troll.

must suck for an aussie to point out to you what your
constitution
states

However, he is wrong. There is no requirement for militia
membership for
the right to keep and bear arms. Yes, the Second Amendment
addresses the
state militias (the national militia is addressed in
ArtI(8)(16))
but what it is is a statement that gives *a* reason for the
protection of that right.

I agree and understand that the courts have taken a very liberal
view of what a militia is

No they have not

yes they have

That's just YOUR ignorant (as usual) interpretation

no that is the courts.

Must suck to have an Aussie telling you about the constitution as
you
are to ignorant




Part of the problem in communicating is that your definition of
liberal
is different from ours when it comes to politics.

liberal is a word not a political party

Mmmm
Tell that to the Canadians.

big L verse little l


Both "liberal" and "Liberal" are words,

WELL DONE YOU RECOGNISE THAT, now try comprehending the difference

I probably knew that long before you came along.

"probably" ?
Click to expand...

Well there is a small chance that I may be wrong..
About the knowing part.
But definitely a small chance.
Since you think and act like an adolescent, the odds are good that I'm olde
than you.
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8_KdnR8WuO-Fyy7SnZ2dnUVZ_qidnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05481DEECFD9hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:abidnRwg_ay1VSzSnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:joqbrv$21h$4@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Ib6dnf_Bfdj9OS3SnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:192dne4J3KLMYjHSnZ2dnUVZ_rAAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:G5WdnawiB_1lKjHSnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:C6KdnfTcLuNdKzHSnZ2dnUVZ_ukAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:I4qdnU7Wj5ejqDHSnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04F6CBA2B719hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:hrCdnbIL7JCZYTfSnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E929F2F8BChopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xfadnaUAL5puRTfSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:bMGdnUgXmLFx8TfSnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S7KdndPBOcbvWjTSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
snip


Isn't the 2nd amendment all about the militia ;-)

Get back under your rock you stupid troll

it is isn't it :)

Get back under your rock, you stupid AND ignorant troll.

must suck for an aussie to point out to you what your
constitution
states

However, he is wrong. There is no requirement for militia
membership
for the right to keep and bear arms. Yes, the Second
Amendment addresses the state militias (the national militia
is addressed in ArtI(8)(16)) but what it is is a statement
that gives *a* reason for
the protection of that right.

I agree and understand that the courts have taken a very
liberal view
of what a militia is

Actually, the militia is defined in federal and state statutes.
Here is
the federal definition of its militia. It is in 10 USC 311:

CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

-MISC1-
Sec.
311. Militia: composition and classes.
312. Militia duty: exemptions.

-CITE-
10 USC Sec. 311
01/03/2012 (112-90)

-EXPCITE-
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

-HEAD-
Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

-STATUTE-
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all
able-bodied
males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in
section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or
who have made
a
declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United
States and of female citizens of the United States who are
members of
the
National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the
National
Guard
and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the
members of
the militia who are not members of the National Guard or
the Naval Militia.

-SOURCE-
(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 14; Pub. L. 85-861, Sec.
1(7),
Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1439; Pub. L. 103-160, div. A, title
V, Sec. 524(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1656.)

Now, the different states may have different definitions of
their state
militias but, in general, they will agree with the federal
statute.



Additionally, our Supreme Court has said that militia
membership is NOT
required and has nothing to do with the right to keep and bear
arms.

as I said they have taken a very liberal view

A statute is NOT written by the courts, stupid

but it certainly is interpreted by the Courts.


Feel free to cite the cases where it was
Take as many screens as you need

The abortion cases, religion in schools

I do not believe that either of those have anything to do with
militias and what you claim is the "liberal view" they have for what
the militia is.

Care to try again without attempting to change the subject?

They have to do with the Supreme Court interpreting legislation and i
should add the death penalty laws. These have been legal or not
dependent on the supreme courts interpretatation

Only if there is a case challenging them on constitutional grounds. The
courts do not review legislation or interpret it unless there appears to
be a problem that is coming up through the court system.

They do interpret it because opinions on the same bit of legislation
change i.e. death penalty and Wade v?
Click to expand...
Oh do cite us when "opinions on the same bit of legislation changed"
Take as many screens as you need
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:pt2dnZ6ksPEbny7SnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@westnet.com.au:

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA054783BA94FFhopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:856dneCBlPhXVSzSnZ2dnUVZ_radnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05363841CBB3hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xuudnRpinKcUOS3SnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05069FC737E8hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:I4qdnU7Wj5ejqDHSnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA04F6CBA2B719hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:hrCdnbIL7JCZYTfSnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message
news:XnsA04E929F2F8BChopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xfadnaUAL5puRTfSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:bMGdnUgXmLFx8TfSnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S7KdndPBOcbvWjTSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
snip


Isn't the 2nd amendment all about the militia ;-)

Get back under your rock you stupid troll

it is isn't it :)

Get back under your rock, you stupid AND ignorant troll.

must suck for an aussie to point out to you what your
constitution
states

However, he is wrong. There is no requirement for militia
membership
for the right to keep and bear arms. Yes, the Second
Amendment
addresses the state militias (the national militia is
addressed
in ArtI(8)(16)) but what it is is a statement that gives *a*
reason for the protection of that right.

I agree and understand that the courts have taken a very
liberal
view of what a militia is

Actually, the militia is defined in federal and state statutes.
Here
is
the federal definition of its militia. It is in 10 USC 311:

CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

-MISC1-
Sec.
311. Militia: composition and classes.
312. Militia duty: exemptions.

-CITE-
10 USC Sec. 311
01/03/2012 (112-90)

-EXPCITE-
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

-HEAD-
Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

-STATUTE-
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all
able-bodied
males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in
section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or
who
have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of
the
United States and of female citizens of the United States who
are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National
Guard
and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the
members
of
the militia who are not members of the National Guard or
the
Naval Militia.

-SOURCE-
(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 14; Pub. L. 85-861, Sec.
1(7), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1439; Pub. L. 103-160, div. A,
title V, Sec. 524(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1656.)

Now, the different states may have different definitions of
their
state
militias but, in general, they will agree with the federal
statute.



Additionally, our Supreme Court has said that militia membership
is
NOT
required and has nothing to do with the right to keep and bear
arms.

as I said they have taken a very liberal view



On what? What the militia is (your first statement)? It has been
defined pretty much the same since 1792.

Or do you mean the Supreme Court in the Heller decision? That
came
about in 2008, but was basically what has been claimed for
decades.

yes


To which? Or to both?

sorry, both



What do you think that they got wrong or should change?

not my role to critisise your highest court
Click to expand...
Then why even bring it up? You stated that you thought their opinions
were too liberal. How did you mean that?

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:VvSdnXe3OemUZi_SnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d@westnet.com.au:

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0547C9093001hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:s8qdnci3hphrXizSnZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA053AE0A74584hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:m56dnc06u9fPECzSnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0535F9DC2281hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:XYqdnY8EC4FyPC3SnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:

snip

Sorry and should add that if these figures are correct
than
surely police data would back them up

Why ?
In most cases the incidents are NOT reported to the police for a
variety of reasons
1) It's not worth the addintional bother and waste of time

you've been so threatened you draw your gun but don't report it.
Interesting

In most cases, that is true. You may not draw it.....you may just
it
be
known that you are armed. Have I been there? Yep.

did you report the crime

Nope. No need....it was over.

or just let the perp run free?

I had no need to get hassled by the police over a crime and
descriptions
that they would really do nothing with. In many cases, they won't
even
show up.

not very community spirited are you


Why should I sit and wait for someone who probably won't show up? And
even if they do, they won't be able to do much with a vague
description.
It is not like describing your next door neighbor who you see every
day.

let the perp roam free, good idea
Click to expand...
He will probably roam free no matter whether I call it in or not unless I
shoot him. Is that what you are suggesting? ;)

You have never been in such a situation have you.

yes I have been robbed while working at a servo, so what
Click to expand...
What'd he (or she) look like? Let's have a description that police could
operate on. Go for it.



--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:ssmdnaGDGs4EYS_SnZ2dnUVZ_uednZ2d@westnet.com.au:

snip

Most of the time here it is a waste of time. They have other
things to do and active crimes going on.

Probably is but it may help and does help the cops target crime.

They are already targetting crime. They often don't wish to get
interrupted at that unless the crime you are reporting is of higher
importance. It the incident is over, no one got hurt, the perps are
gone...that isn't very high priority.

so crime prevention isn't important in the Us


If I
was so scared I produced a gun I'd be telling the authority for the
simple reason it may help the community

You have not been in that position and you don't know the conditions
in the US. Let me ask you this about OZ. Assume you are carrying a
firearm for self defense. A couple guys try to mug you. You scare
them off with the gun. Are you going to call the police? And face
questions about why you are carrying a gun when it is obvious you
aren't hunting, you are in a strange town and carrying a gun in OZ
for the purpose of self defense is illegal. You call the police to
report a crime that most likely be put in the wastebasket....face all
those questions....possibly spend some time in a cell yourself while
the police sort things out and there will be no followup? You will
call the police? I don't think so.

but carrying a gun in the US for self defense isn't illegal so your
argument is null and void
Click to expand...
Actually, no, it isn't. In some localities it IS illegal to carry that
gun concealed without a permit and open carry is not allowed. In some
localities, local police simple frown on those who carry and will hassle
them. The scenario I gave you is as close to that as you twits in OZ can
get. I see you don't have the balls to answer it. That rather makes any
further communication with you moot.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:3L6dnRLiGOIAZi_SnZ2dnUVZ_qadnZ2d@westnet.com.au:

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0547F4AF5E62hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in news:4tydndNahO-
KWSzSnZ2dnUVZ_ridnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA053B26ADD6FBhopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:EZidnTZECbUXECzSnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
message news:joqbrt$21h$1@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:NeGdnWgW37HfPy3SnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA0506BFDD5B39hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:eek:oWdnR6JY6sg1zHSnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04F938AEA2Bhopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:vNSdnZU7RcH6rTHSnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04F6892E61A7hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:bZudnapp8ew5aTfSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E90C996F17hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:rK-dnQBqZ- XwTTfSnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote
in message
news:XnsA04E5FE98F640hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:m7adne2oxu3wLzTSnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:h4-dnUd6eenmzz7SnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:X62dnRCZRYHxqD7SnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@westnet.com.au..
.

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:d8qdnZZqRe_FrT7SnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:z9qdnXzjO_q9lz7SnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:q_6dneF1ZoQo8T_SnZ2dnUVZ_rudnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
message

news:UsmdnWMdjZHsITzSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au..
.

snip

Dealing with a 5 stupid year old is easier
Which current gun licensing laws in Australia
Be SPECIFIC, instead of trying to weasel
with vague
generalizations.

that is specific as one can get

I'll accept that as an admission you don't know

as a gun owner I do and those are the laws

fyi

http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/fullhtml/inforce/su
bord le g+
512+
2006+FIRST+0+N

LOL
You need a permission to own a paint-ball gun
You need a permit to stage paint-ball games
Talk about a nanny state.
Ironic that since gun control was clamped down
post Port Arthur, things have gotten worse.

have they?

Yes they have
http://gunowners.org/sk0703.htm
* Australia: Readers of the USA Today newspaper
discovered
in 2002 that, "Since Australia's 1996 laws
banning most
guns
and making it a crime to use a gun
defensively,
armed robberies rose by 51%,
unarmed robberies by 37%,
assaults by 24%
and kidnappings by 43%.
While murders fell by 3%,
manslaughter rose by 16%."
Dr. John R. Lott, Jr., "Gun laws don't reduce
crime,"
USA Today (May 9, 2002).
See also Rhett Watson and Matthew Bayley,
"Gun crime up 40pc since Port Arthur,"
The Daily Telegraph (April 28, 2002).

I'll stop there because that statement is BS

Prove it, false weasel-boi
But remember
If you get punished for keeping a loaded gun for
self defense,
you
have
effectively made it illegal to use a gun defensively,
by making it IMPOSSIBLE UNLESS you already have a
loaded
gun
at hand.
In which case the government can come after you
for using that
gun
defensively.


it is not illegal to use a gun defensively in
Australia, most guns in Aus were not banned post 1996

While that is true, it is illegal in Oz to purchase or
to carry one
for
the stated purpose of self defense.

correct in all but very limited cases

With a few million citizens, "all but very limited"
doesn't help much.

but not really needed in Aus

Ahhhh, no one is ever murdered or a victim of violent crime
in OZ? Methinks you are full of shit.

and the consequences of "carry for
protection" laws in the US can be seen by the mess they
are in.

What mess is that?

Interestingly it is very hard to find info on defensive
gun use in the US, one figure put around is 2.5 million
per year but the crimes that led to guns being drawn don't
seem to be reported to the authorities

You can look at Gary Kleck's study.....that is where the
.25 million number
comes from.
You can look at the NCVS (National Crime Victimization
Study) it comes up with 80,000 to 108,000 per year and
never asks about DGUs. You can also look at the following
surveys:

Field 1976 3,052,717
Burdua 1977 1,414,544
DM1a 1978 2,141,512
DM1b 1978 1,098,409
Hart 1981 1,797,461
Ohio 1982 771,043
Mauser 1990 1,487,342
Gallup 1991 777,153
Gallup 1993 1,621,682
LA Times 1994 3,609,682
Tarrance 1994 764,036

so it isn't really that big a safeguard



Oh, I don't know. I would much rather be part of those in
the surveys above than one of the 10-12,000 who die from some
street scab with a gun.

Sorry and should add that if these figures are correct
than surely police data would back them up



When even as you suggested, most of these involve no shots
fired
or
the police? How would the police generate data if they are not
involved?

People are so threatened they draw a gun but don't report it
thus letting crims run free. bizarre argument

Perhaps, but police are often no longer your friends and justice
is just a empty noise.

Those that blame the victim....people like you...are greatly to
blame
for why people no longer seek out the police.

now you are just being paranoid

In some communities we have reason to be.

thank god I'm in Aus



IN my part of the country, we have freedom. I can openly carry a
firearm, carry one concealed with or without a permit. A permit to
carry concealed allows me to dine in a restaurant that serves
alcohol. Some folks like to drink some wine with dinner. The only
restriction there is that if you are armed, you cannot drink. Seems
fair to me. The other reason for having a permit to carry concealed
is reciprocity with other states.

In urban areas, I may be stopped and questioned by the local police
if I am openly carrying. In rural areas or small towns, no problem.
I will usually carry concealed, however, so that I don't frighten
little old ladies of either sex.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!

thank god we don't need to carry here
Click to expand...
And, thank God, you are not here sticking your nose into our politics.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:SOqdnR09tcqRYS_SnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0547FDA5117Ehopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:Z5GdnYSkEInBWSzSnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA053B28F72090hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:p_-dnXj0qYRRECzSnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:2KadnVq-xtRUdC3SnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:NeGdnWgW37HfPy3SnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA0506BFDD5B39hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:eek:oWdnR6JY6sg1zHSnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04F938AEA2Bhopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:vNSdnZU7RcH6rTHSnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04F6892E61A7hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:bZudnapp8ew5aTfSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E90C996F17hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:rK-dnQBqZ- XwTTfSnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote
in message
news:XnsA04E5FE98F640hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:m7adne2oxu3wLzTSnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:h4-dnUd6eenmzz7SnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:X62dnRCZRYHxqD7SnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@westnet.com.au..
.

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:d8qdnZZqRe_FrT7SnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:z9qdnXzjO_q9lz7SnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au
.. .

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:q_6dneF1ZoQo8T_SnZ2dnUVZ_rudnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
message
news:UsmdnWMdjZHsITzSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.
au .. .

snip

Dealing with a 5 stupid year old is easier
Which current gun licensing laws in Australia
Be SPECIFIC, instead of trying to weasel
with vague
generalizations.

that is specific as one can get

I'll accept that as an admission you don't know

as a gun owner I do and those are the laws

fyi
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/fullhtml/inforc
e/ su bord le g+
512+
2006+FIRST+0+N

LOL
You need a permission to own a paint-ball gun
You need a permit to stage paint-ball games
Talk about a nanny state.
Ironic that since gun control was clamped down
post Port Arthur, things have gotten worse.

have they?

Yes they have
http://gunowners.org/sk0703.htm
* Australia: Readers of the USA Today newspaper
discovered
in 2002 that, "Since Australia's 1996 laws
banning most
guns
and making it a crime to use a gun
defensively,
armed robberies rose by 51%,
unarmed robberies by 37%,
assaults by 24%
and kidnappings by 43%.
While murders fell by 3%,
manslaughter rose by 16%."
Dr. John R. Lott, Jr., "Gun laws don't reduce
crime,"
USA Today (May 9, 2002).
See also Rhett Watson and Matthew Bayley,
"Gun crime up 40pc since Port Arthur,"
The Daily Telegraph (April 28, 2002).

I'll stop there because that statement is BS

Prove it, false weasel-boi
But remember
If you get punished for keeping a loaded gun for
self defense,
you
have
effectively made it illegal to use a gun defensively,
by making it IMPOSSIBLE UNLESS you already have a
loaded gun at hand.
In which case the government can come after you
for using that
gun
defensively.


it is not illegal to use a gun defensively in
Australia, most guns in Aus were not banned post 1996

While that is true, it is illegal in Oz to purchase or
to carry one
for
the stated purpose of self defense.

correct in all but very limited cases

With a few million citizens, "all but very limited"
doesn't help much.

but not really needed in Aus

Ahhhh, no one is ever murdered or a victim of violent crime
in OZ? Methinks you are full of shit.

and the consequences of "carry for
protection" laws in the US can be seen by the mess they
are in.

What mess is that?

Interestingly it is very hard to find info on defensive
gun use in the US, one figure put around is 2.5 million
per year but the crimes that led to guns being drawn don't
seem to be reported to the authorities

You can look at Gary Kleck's study.....that is where the
.25 million number
comes from.
You can look at the NCVS (National Crime Victimization
Study) it comes up with 80,000 to 108,000 per year and
never asks about DGUs. You can also look at the following
surveys:

Field 1976 3,052,717
Burdua 1977 1,414,544
DM1a 1978 2,141,512
DM1b 1978 1,098,409
Hart 1981 1,797,461
Ohio 1982 771,043
Mauser 1990 1,487,342
Gallup 1991 777,153
Gallup 1993 1,621,682
LA Times 1994 3,609,682
Tarrance 1994 764,036

so it isn't really that big a safeguard



Oh, I don't know. I would much rather be part of those in
the surveys above than one of the 10-12,000 who die from some
street scab with a gun.

Sorry and should add that if these figures are correct
than surely police data would back them up



When even as you suggested, most of these involve no shots
fired or the police? How would the police generate data if
they are not involved?

People are so threatened they draw a gun but don't report it
thus letting crims run free. bizarre argument

Silly dedummy.
Presumes that making a police report automatically results in an
arrest.

strawman arguement. If you report the crime there is a better
chance of an arrest


In some areas that would mean the chances would go from less than
1% to just over 1%.

a great benefit. I'm more and more believing that DGU figures by
survey are complete and utter BS

You may feel free to believe what you want. As am I. I find my gun
to be of a great benefit and, guess what? It is always there, it is
always ready, I don't need to dial 911 and I don't have to wait. I
have been in situations before and it has never failed me or failed
to show up.


yet you don't report these crimes
Click to expand...
The police HAVE failed to show up.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:JridnWHeLakSYy_SnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05480155FD16hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:doidnVRlZqTfWCzSnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA053B2B42A8B2hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:l4ydncUEldnrEyzSnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:2KadnVW-xtRUdC3SnZ2dnUVZ_oUAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1p-dnRcw7JsrPy3SnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:Q6udncFo2d80ITHSnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5t6dnZI4rJfDrzHSnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:yuydnexmB-StyDbSnZ2dnUVZ_qkAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hrCdnbIL7JCZYTfSnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E929F2F8BChopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xfadnaUAL5puRTfSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:bMGdnUgXmLFx8TfSnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S7KdndPBOcbvWjTSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
snip


Isn't the 2nd amendment all about the militia ;-)

Get back under your rock you stupid troll

it is isn't it :)

Get back under your rock, you stupid AND ignorant troll.

must suck for an aussie to point out to you what your
constitution
states

However, he is wrong. There is no requirement for militia
membership for
the right to keep and bear arms. Yes, the Second Amendment
addresses the
state militias (the national militia is addressed in
ArtI(8)(16)) but
what it is is a statement that gives *a* reason for the
protection of
that right.

I agree and understand that the courts have taken a very
liberal
view of what a militia is

No they have not

yes they have

That's just YOUR ignorant (as usual) interpretation

no that is the courts.

Must suck to have an Aussie telling you about the constitution
as
you are to ignorant


The definition of the militia has NOT been done by the Courts,
dummy It was made by STATUTE.

read the rulings and learn

I did

comprehension not your strong point?

What's your point? What are you looking at to develop that point?

that the supreme court interprets law ie Wade V ? DoC V ?



Yep, but that law was legislated by the Congress not the Court.

but interpreted by the Court
Click to expand...
Not unless there is a case that requires interpretation. The judiciary
does not sit around and interpret laws.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:SeCdnSI7QJy_ny7SnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05480BD1C10Ehopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:y8CdndkSktgzVSzSnZ2dnUVZ_qidnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA053635D8B98Bhopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:OY-dnf-Ocb_sOS3SnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0506A34B6425hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:G5WdnawiB_1lKjHSnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:C6KdnfTcLuNdKzHSnZ2dnUVZ_ukAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:I4qdnU7Wj5ejqDHSnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04F6CBA2B719hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:hrCdnbIL7JCZYTfSnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E929F2F8BChopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xfadnaUAL5puRTfSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:bMGdnUgXmLFx8TfSnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S7KdndPBOcbvWjTSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
snip


Isn't the 2nd amendment all about the militia ;-)

Get back under your rock you stupid troll

it is isn't it :)

Get back under your rock, you stupid AND ignorant troll.

must suck for an aussie to point out to you what your
constitution
states

However, he is wrong. There is no requirement for militia
membership for the right to keep and bear arms. Yes, the
Second Amendment addresses the state militias (the national
militia is addressed in ArtI(8)(16)) but what it is is a
statement that gives *a* reason for the protection of that
right.

I agree and understand that the courts have taken a very
liberal view of what a militia is

Actually, the militia is defined in federal and state
statutes. Here is the federal definition of its militia. It
is in 10 USC 311:

CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

-MISC1-
Sec.
311. Militia: composition and classes.
312. Militia duty: exemptions.

-CITE-
10 USC Sec. 311
01/03/2012 (112-90)

-EXPCITE-
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

-HEAD-
Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

-STATUTE-
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all
able-bodied
males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in
section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or
who have made a declaration of intention to become,
citizens of the United States and of female citizens of
the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the
National Guard
and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the
members of
the militia who are not members of the National Guard or
the Naval Militia.

-SOURCE-
(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 14; Pub. L. 85-861,
Sec. 1(7), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1439; Pub. L. 103-160,
div. A, title V, Sec. 524(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat.
1656.)

Now, the different states may have different definitions of
their state militias but, in general, they will agree with
the federal statute.



Additionally, our Supreme Court has said that militia
membership is NOT required and has nothing to do with the
right to keep and bear arms.

as I said they have taken a very liberal view

A statute is NOT written by the courts, stupid

but it certainly is interpreted by the Courts. Must suck to have
to have your own system explained by an Aussie

That is why we have the courts. Our system works off of a system
of counter balances with three equal branches of government. The
executive, the legislative and the judicial.

my point



was???
that the courts interpret the laws/constitution e.g. abortion, death
penalty


Yes, but they interpret them from the words in the statutes or
legislation. It is very rare when legislation is developed by the
judiciary. That only happens when a law is declared unconstitutional
but changing a few words in it will make it OK. The decision will
say what is unconstitutional about the law....the legislature may
look at that and reword some of it to get by that complaint.


as I stated originally the courts interpret the legislation
Click to expand...
You make it as a blanket statement like the judiciaries job is sit and
review legislation. It isn't. Only SOME legislation gets reviewed and
that is only if there is a case that reached the Supreme Court.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:QZCdnfCKWcYOnC7SnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05480E622EEChopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:V7KdnYLg7vw_NyzSnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:joqbru$21h$3@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1sadnZBkP7ZvPi3SnZ2dnUVZ_oqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:Q6udncBo2d80ITHSnZ2dnUVZ_tQAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OuWdnTLrhZZkrjHSnZ2dnUVZ_oOdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
message news:jog8do$fal$1@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hrCdnbIL7JCZYTfSnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E929F2F8BChopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xfadnaUAL5puRTfSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:bMGdnUgXmLFx8TfSnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S7KdndPBOcbvWjTSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
snip


Isn't the 2nd amendment all about the militia ;-)

Get back under your rock you stupid troll

it is isn't it :)

Get back under your rock, you stupid AND ignorant troll.

must suck for an aussie to point out to you what your
constitution
states

However, he is wrong. There is no requirement for militia
membership for
the right to keep and bear arms. Yes, the Second Amendment
addresses the
state militias (the national militia is addressed in
ArtI(8)(16)) but
what it is is a statement that gives *a* reason for the
protection of
that right.

I agree and understand that the courts have taken a very
liberal
view of what a militia is

Really? So what exactly do you think a militia is?

an organised military force of civilians

Funny how the USC as a section defining the "UNORGANIZED militia"
Must suck to be an ignorant Assie like you


does "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a
free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not
be infringed" sound familiar but the district of Columbia v. Heller
took a liberal view of what a "well regulated militia" is

Really?

Please cite exactly where in DC vs Heller where SCOTUS took a
"liberal view" of what a "well regulated militia" is. I expect
specific quotes and cites from the ruling.

they ruled basically that a militia doesn't need to be "well
organised" as stated in the 2nd amendment

No, they didn't. Perhaps you should read the actual decision:

http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/07-290.html

rather than a video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNN7_TOvaUo

sorry regulated
Click to expand...
Makes no difference. You are still wrong. They did not rule on that.
Go read what thewy actually ruled on and what they said in the opinion.
You have the cite right up above. You don't even need to go search for
it.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:8_KdnR8WuO-Fyy7SnZ2dnUVZ_qidnZ2d@westnet.com.au:

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05481DEECFD9hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:abidnRwg_ay1VSzSnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:joqbrv$21h$4@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Ib6dnf_Bfdj9OS3SnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:192dne4J3KLMYjHSnZ2dnUVZ_rAAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:G5WdnawiB_1lKjHSnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:C6KdnfTcLuNdKzHSnZ2dnUVZ_ukAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:I4qdnU7Wj5ejqDHSnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04F6CBA2B719hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:hrCdnbIL7JCZYTfSnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E929F2F8BChopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xfadnaUAL5puRTfSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:bMGdnUgXmLFx8TfSnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S7KdndPBOcbvWjTSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
snip


Isn't the 2nd amendment all about the militia ;-)

Get back under your rock you stupid troll

it is isn't it :)

Get back under your rock, you stupid AND ignorant troll.

must suck for an aussie to point out to you what your
constitution
states

However, he is wrong. There is no requirement for militia
membership
for the right to keep and bear arms. Yes, the Second
Amendment addresses the state militias (the national
militia is addressed in ArtI(8)(16)) but what it is is a
statement that gives *a* reason for
the protection of that right.

I agree and understand that the courts have taken a very
liberal view
of what a militia is

Actually, the militia is defined in federal and state
statutes. Here is
the federal definition of its militia. It is in 10 USC 311:

CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

-MISC1-
Sec.
311. Militia: composition and classes.
312. Militia duty: exemptions.

-CITE-
10 USC Sec. 311
01/03/2012 (112-90)

-EXPCITE-
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

-HEAD-
Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

-STATUTE-
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all
able-bodied
males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in
section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or
who have made
a
declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United
States and of female citizens of the United States who are
members of
the
National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the
National
Guard
and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the
members of
the militia who are not members of the National Guard or
the Naval Militia.

-SOURCE-
(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 14; Pub. L. 85-861,
Sec.
1(7),
Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1439; Pub. L. 103-160, div. A,
title V, Sec. 524(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1656.)

Now, the different states may have different definitions of
their state
militias but, in general, they will agree with the federal
statute.



Additionally, our Supreme Court has said that militia
membership is NOT
required and has nothing to do with the right to keep and
bear arms.

as I said they have taken a very liberal view

A statute is NOT written by the courts, stupid

but it certainly is interpreted by the Courts.


Feel free to cite the cases where it was
Take as many screens as you need

The abortion cases, religion in schools

I do not believe that either of those have anything to do with
militias and what you claim is the "liberal view" they have for
what the militia is.

Care to try again without attempting to change the subject?

They have to do with the Supreme Court interpreting legislation and
i should add the death penalty laws. These have been legal or not
dependent on the supreme courts interpretatation

Only if there is a case challenging them on constitutional grounds.
The courts do not review legislation or interpret it unless there
appears to be a problem that is coming up through the court system.

They do interpret it because opinions on the same bit of legislation
change i.e. death penalty and Wade v?
Click to expand...
What bit of legislation was interpreted in Roe v Wade? Please be
specific and show that interpretation of that legislation was the
deciding factor in the decision. Take all the screens you need.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:hIqdnRjrzY7KZi_SnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@westnet.com.au:

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:p-ednRKu4sFJES_SnZ2dnUVZ_sYAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:m56dnc06u9fPECzSnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0535F9DC2281hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:XYqdnY8EC4FyPC3SnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:

snip

Sorry and should add that if these figures are correct than
surely police data would back them up

Why ?
In most cases the incidents are NOT reported to the police for a
variety of reasons
1) It's not worth the addintional bother and waste of time

you've been so threatened you draw your gun but don't report it.
Interesting

In most cases, that is true. You may not draw it.....you may just
it be known that you are armed. Have I been there? Yep.

did you report the crime or just let the perp run free?


What crime was that, dummy ?
Scaring off a would be goblin before it does anything is not a
crime in
EITHER direction.
Click to expand...
It is an attempted one.

so Sandman is just randomly using his gun defensively when not being
threatened, scary
Click to expand...
I am? Interesting....particularly when coming from someone who has
absolutely no idea what he is talking about.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in
news:47OdnVZ-MtRghC7SnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d@bright.net:

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hIqdnRjrzY7KZi_SnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:p-ednRKu4sFJES_SnZ2dnUVZ_sYAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:m56dnc06u9fPECzSnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0535F9DC2281hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:XYqdnY8EC4FyPC3SnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:

snip

Sorry and should add that if these figures are correct
than surely police data would back them up

Why ?
In most cases the incidents are NOT reported to the police for a
variety of reasons
1) It's not worth the addintional bother and waste of time

you've been so threatened you draw your gun but don't report it.
Interesting

In most cases, that is true. You may not draw it.....you may just
it be
known that you are armed. Have I been there? Yep.

did you report the crime or just let the perp run free?


What crime was that, dummy ?
Scaring off a would be goblin before it does anything is not a
crime
in EITHER direction.

so Sandman is just randomly using his gun defensively when not being
threatened, scary

There you go being stupid again
You don't need to have someone else "make threats" to be threatened.

I once faced a brown bear at about 10 yards across a berry patch,
while hiking.
It was just as surprised as me.
It stood up, arms akimbo, but made no other move.
Did the bear behave threateningly ?
No
Was I in danger ?
Yes
Did I feel under threat ?
Absolutely
Click to expand...
Did you threaten it with a 9mm pistol? Or did you just watch it move
away from you?

The only "confrontation" I ever had with a bear, I was gathering firewood
in Northern Minnesota and returning down the trail to the campsite. I
felt something behind me and turned to see a fairly big black bear about
50 feet behind me. It could have been further away but, as you know, time
blurs the distance (BG). Anyway, I was carrying a .357 S&W Highway
Patrol on my hip. I turned my back to the bear so I wouldn't appear as a
threat, and slowly set down the wood I was carrying. When my hands were
empty, I slowly drew the revolver and turned around. No bear.
Apparently, he or she satisfied their curiosity and moved on to go eat
some berries or something. All I got out of it was this story. Somehow,
I think the bear and I both came out ahead.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:suGdncTegP64Yy_SnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:WpednYMYQcwxAC_SnZ2dnUVZ_tUAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:iLOdncQP-o-oEyzSnZ2dnUVZ_omdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05360EB74283hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1-
mdnW0K_MgYPy3SnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05069A1B90B2hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:GaidnXMHAb-orDHSnZ2dnUVZ_h-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04F69242959Dhopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:A9OdnXCHY4tLaTfSnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E90FFE5066hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:16mdncDRcKK2TzfSnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E6036743Ehopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:A86dne2R4LNmLzTSnZ2dnUVZ_q-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:sIudnQNUsKQg0D7SnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Cq-dnV7xR5V9vT7SnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:Ge2dnVBiE_GshT7SnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xpCdnXiP96o9Yz_SnZ2dnUVZ_hednZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:58idndmDU99fED_SnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:88CdnY7ZZMv2mz_SnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@westnet.com.au..
.

"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net
wrote in message news:jnss73$gm1$21@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ptSdnZRih-L-BzzSnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au
...

I think the armed forces given their experience
may know about these
dangers

They may know about them, but since they rely on
the local suppliers to supply them, how long do
you think they will last if the turn on the very
people they are supposed to protect ?

come on a capitalist society like the US they'll
always be able to buy supplies

From whom?

How will they get it to where it is needed?

Do you think they can protect EVERYTHING 24/7/365?

I think they stand a better chance than some
comparatively
lightly lightly armed militia

LOL
Tell that to the Swiss who have successfully done
exactly that for centuries
Tell that to the Fins when the stood up the Soviets
in the Winter War. Tell that to the Americans who did
that to the Brits at the beginning of their
Revolution. Tell that to Castro in Cuba
Tell that to the Costa Ricans in 2 if not 3 of their
revolutions.

do you want to go through the differences :)

Why don't you start with the similarities, moron.

there aren't any

Actually they are, but clearly you're not smart enough to
recognize
them

coming from a bloke who compares the US with Mexico but
discounts Canada that is hilarious


Well, the difference is mostly demographics. Think that
might have
a
tad to do with the differences?

I agree with you that there are differences but are you
suggesting
that demographically the US is closer to Mexico than Canada?


Many parts of it are. Most of the US doesn't have a heavy
duty
problem
with crime. Problem is that you only need to be a victim
once to die.


that is not true of being a victim in Aus



What isn't true? They don't die? It takes more than once?

because the most crime in Aus does not result in death.

Most crime in the US doesn't result in death. What's your point?
That
most victims do not suffer death or injury? Okay.....

you said "Problem is that you only need to be a victim once to
die."

Which is true. basically. You could be killed anytime you become a
victim.

BS in Aus most victims don't end up dead


They don't
Cite please

well there is a lot of crime in Aus and very few victims end up dead
Click to expand...
As you have seen in the stats, that is also true of the US. What's your
point?

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:y7-dnePL-Zj8yS7SnZ2dnUVZ_vudnZ2d@westnet.com.au:

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:1aadnbGRnorHgS7SnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:suGdncTegP64Yy_SnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:WpednYMYQcwxAC_SnZ2dnUVZ_tUAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:iLOdncQP-o-oEyzSnZ2dnUVZ_omdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05360EB74283hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1-
mdnW0K_MgYPy3SnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA05069A1B90B2hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:GaidnXMHAb-orDHSnZ2dnUVZ_h-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04F69242959Dhopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:A9OdnXCHY4tLaTfSnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E90FFE5066hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:16mdncDRcKK2TzfSnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message
news:XnsA04E6036743Ehopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:A86dne2R4LNmLzTSnZ2dnUVZ_q-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:sIudnQNUsKQg0D7SnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Cq-dnV7xR5V9vT7SnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:Ge2dnVBiE_GshT7SnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xpCdnXiP96o9Yz_SnZ2dnUVZ_hednZ2d@westnet.com.au..
.

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:58idndmDU99fED_SnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:88CdnY7ZZMv2mz_SnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@westnet.com.au
...

"Scout"
me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net
wrote
in message news:jnss73$gm1$21@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
message
news:ptSdnZRih-L-BzzSnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@westnet.com.
au...

I think the armed forces given their
experience may know about these
dangers

They may know about them, but since they rely
on the local suppliers to supply them, how long
do you think
they will last if the turn on the very people
they are
supposed to protect ?

come on a capitalist society like the US they'll
always
be able to buy supplies

From whom?

How will they get it to where it is needed?

Do you think they can protect EVERYTHING
24/7/365?

I think they stand a better chance than some
comparatively
lightly lightly armed militia

LOL
Tell that to the Swiss who have successfully done
exactly
that for centuries
Tell that to the Fins when the stood up the Soviets
in the
Winter War. Tell that to the Americans who did that
to the
Brits at the beginning of their Revolution.
Tell that to Castro in Cuba
Tell that to the Costa Ricans in 2 if not 3 of
their revolutions.

do you want to go through the differences :)

Why don't you start with the similarities, moron.

there aren't any

Actually they are, but clearly you're not smart enough
to
recognize
them

coming from a bloke who compares the US with Mexico but
discounts Canada that is hilarious


Well, the difference is mostly demographics. Think that
might have
a
tad to do with the differences?

I agree with you that there are differences but are you
suggesting
that demographically the US is closer to Mexico than
Canada?


Many parts of it are. Most of the US doesn't have a heavy
duty
problem
with crime. Problem is that you only need to be a victim
once to
die.


that is not true of being a victim in Aus



What isn't true? They don't die? It takes more than once?

because the most crime in Aus does not result in death.

Most crime in the US doesn't result in death. What's your
point?
That
most victims do not suffer death or injury? Okay.....

you said "Problem is that you only need to be a victim once to
die."

Which is true. basically. You could be killed anytime you become
a victim.

BS in Aus most victims don't end up dead


They don't
Cite please

well there is a lot of crime in Aus and very few victims end up dead

LOL
And there is quite a bit of crime in the US, and a lot of our
criminals
end up dead.

do they figures and cites please


I call that a good thing.
Why don't you just admit, that you're just afraid of losing family

why? we are safe I'm not so paranoid that I need to carry.
Click to expand...
I am not paranoid either. If something should happen, I simply have one
more option than you do.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
 
"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0556AC04FBF3hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:pt2dnZ6ksPEbny7SnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA054783BA94FFhopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:856dneCBlPhXVSzSnZ2dnUVZ_radnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05363841CBB3hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xuudnRpinKcUOS3SnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05069FC737E8hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:I4qdnU7Wj5ejqDHSnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA04F6CBA2B719hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:hrCdnbIL7JCZYTfSnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message
news:XnsA04E929F2F8BChopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xfadnaUAL5puRTfSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:bMGdnUgXmLFx8TfSnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S7KdndPBOcbvWjTSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
snip


Isn't the 2nd amendment all about the militia ;-)

Get back under your rock you stupid troll

it is isn't it :)

Get back under your rock, you stupid AND ignorant troll.

must suck for an aussie to point out to you what your
constitution
states

However, he is wrong. There is no requirement for militia
membership
for the right to keep and bear arms. Yes, the Second
Amendment
addresses the state militias (the national militia is
addressed
in ArtI(8)(16)) but what it is is a statement that gives *a*
reason for the protection of that right.

I agree and understand that the courts have taken a very
liberal
view of what a militia is

Actually, the militia is defined in federal and state statutes.
Here
is
the federal definition of its militia. It is in 10 USC 311:

CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

-MISC1-
Sec.
311. Militia: composition and classes.
312. Militia duty: exemptions.

-CITE-
10 USC Sec. 311
01/03/2012 (112-90)

-EXPCITE-
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

-HEAD-
Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

-STATUTE-
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all
able-bodied
males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in
section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or
who
have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of
the
United States and of female citizens of the United States who
are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National
Guard
and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the
members
of
the militia who are not members of the National Guard or
the
Naval Militia.

-SOURCE-
(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 14; Pub. L. 85-861, Sec.
1(7), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1439; Pub. L. 103-160, div. A,
title V, Sec. 524(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1656.)

Now, the different states may have different definitions of
their
state
militias but, in general, they will agree with the federal
statute.



Additionally, our Supreme Court has said that militia membership
is
NOT
required and has nothing to do with the right to keep and bear
arms.

as I said they have taken a very liberal view



On what? What the militia is (your first statement)? It has been
defined pretty much the same since 1792.

Or do you mean the Supreme Court in the Heller decision? That
came
about in 2008, but was basically what has been claimed for
decades.

yes


To which? Or to both?

sorry, both



What do you think that they got wrong or should change?

not my role to critisise your highest court
Click to expand...
Then you shouldn't have done so. But since you have, maybe you should show
where they did as you claim.


Then why even bring it up? You stated that you thought their opinions
were too liberal. How did you mean that?
Click to expand...
I think he realizes there's nothing in there to support any rational excuse
so he's just trying to make this whole thing go away.
 
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:e8idnZaJHpOlWy7SnZ2dnUVZ_uednZ2d@bright.net...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:waednZ3tcP8azi7SnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:eek:Nadnf10tYrpiy7SnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:CZCdnUtVBPg7Zy_SnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:p-ednROu4sFMES_SnZ2dnUVZ_sadnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:FYGdnbxy7L2SECzSnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:puKdnWIP_ZMGdS3SnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:XYqdnY8EC4FyPC3SnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
snip

Sorry and should add that if these figures are correct than
surely police data would back them up

Why ?
In most cases the incidents are NOT reported to the police for a
variety of reasons
1) It's not worth the additional bother and waste of time

you've been so threatened you draw your gun but don't report it.
Interesting


Next time read through all the way BEFORE responding to avoid
showing your ignorance

i did, you made a very stupid arguement


You're the one assuming a gun was drawn
SO it's really your "stupid argument" (sic)

how else do you use a gun defensively?


I'll leave you to ponder that

you can't explain? Your argument is like you MORONIC

Couldn't figure it out ??
No big surprise there
Here's a clue
Look up the definition of "Defensive Gun Use"
Start with this one
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10881&page=107
Click to expand...
thankyou for that and thanks for proving my point
 
"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0556C2732CE9hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:VvSdnXe3OemUZi_SnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0547C9093001hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:s8qdnci3hphrXizSnZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA053AE0A74584hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:m56dnc06u9fPECzSnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0535F9DC2281hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:XYqdnY8EC4FyPC3SnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:

snip

Sorry and should add that if these figures are correct
than
surely police data would back them up

Why ?
In most cases the incidents are NOT reported to the police for a
variety of reasons
1) It's not worth the addintional bother and waste of time

you've been so threatened you draw your gun but don't report it.
Interesting

In most cases, that is true. You may not draw it.....you may just
it
be
known that you are armed. Have I been there? Yep.

did you report the crime

Nope. No need....it was over.

or just let the perp run free?

I had no need to get hassled by the police over a crime and
descriptions
that they would really do nothing with. In many cases, they won't
even
show up.

not very community spirited are you


Why should I sit and wait for someone who probably won't show up? And
even if they do, they won't be able to do much with a vague
description.
It is not like describing your next door neighbor who you see every
day.

let the perp roam free, good idea

He will probably roam free no matter whether I call it in or not unless I
shoot him. Is that what you are suggesting? ;)
Click to expand...
the US is more stuffed than I thought, it is the wild wild west on your
street

You have never been in such a situation have you.

yes I have been robbed while working at a servo, so what

What'd he (or she) look like? Let's have a description that police could
operate on. Go for it.
Click to expand...
as it was 25 odd years ago my memory is a bit vague but yes a decent enough
description was give at the time. One that match well enough that the perp
was found guilty of that robbery
 
"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0556CD291428hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:3L6dnRLiGOIAZi_SnZ2dnUVZ_qadnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0547F4AF5E62hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in news:4tydndNahO-
KWSzSnZ2dnUVZ_ridnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA053B26ADD6FBhopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:EZidnTZECbUXECzSnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
message news:joqbrt$21h$1@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:NeGdnWgW37HfPy3SnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA0506BFDD5B39hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:eek:oWdnR6JY6sg1zHSnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04F938AEA2Bhopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:vNSdnZU7RcH6rTHSnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04F6892E61A7hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:bZudnapp8ew5aTfSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E90C996F17hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:rK-dnQBqZ- XwTTfSnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote
in message
news:XnsA04E5FE98F640hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:m7adne2oxu3wLzTSnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:h4-dnUd6eenmzz7SnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:X62dnRCZRYHxqD7SnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@westnet.com.au..
.

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:d8qdnZZqRe_FrT7SnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:z9qdnXzjO_q9lz7SnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:q_6dneF1ZoQo8T_SnZ2dnUVZ_rudnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
message

news:UsmdnWMdjZHsITzSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au..
.

snip

Dealing with a 5 stupid year old is easier
Which current gun licensing laws in Australia
Be SPECIFIC, instead of trying to weasel
with vague
generalizations.

that is specific as one can get

I'll accept that as an admission you don't know

as a gun owner I do and those are the laws

fyi

http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/fullhtml/inforce/su
bord le g+
512+
2006+FIRST+0+N

LOL
You need a permission to own a paint-ball gun
You need a permit to stage paint-ball games
Talk about a nanny state.
Ironic that since gun control was clamped down
post Port Arthur, things have gotten worse.

have they?

Yes they have
http://gunowners.org/sk0703.htm
* Australia: Readers of the USA Today newspaper
discovered
in 2002 that, "Since Australia's 1996 laws
banning most
guns
and making it a crime to use a gun
defensively,
armed robberies rose by 51%,
unarmed robberies by 37%,
assaults by 24%
and kidnappings by 43%.
While murders fell by 3%,
manslaughter rose by 16%."
Dr. John R. Lott, Jr., "Gun laws don't reduce
crime,"
USA Today (May 9, 2002).
See also Rhett Watson and Matthew Bayley,
"Gun crime up 40pc since Port Arthur,"
The Daily Telegraph (April 28, 2002).

I'll stop there because that statement is BS

Prove it, false weasel-boi
But remember
If you get punished for keeping a loaded gun for
self defense,
you
have
effectively made it illegal to use a gun defensively,
by making it IMPOSSIBLE UNLESS you already have a
loaded
gun
at hand.
In which case the government can come after you
for using that
gun
defensively.


it is not illegal to use a gun defensively in
Australia, most guns in Aus were not banned post 1996

While that is true, it is illegal in Oz to purchase or
to carry one
for
the stated purpose of self defense.

correct in all but very limited cases

With a few million citizens, "all but very limited"
doesn't help much.

but not really needed in Aus

Ahhhh, no one is ever murdered or a victim of violent crime
in OZ? Methinks you are full of shit.

and the consequences of "carry for
protection" laws in the US can be seen by the mess they
are in.

What mess is that?

Interestingly it is very hard to find info on defensive
gun use in the US, one figure put around is 2.5 million
per year but the crimes that led to guns being drawn don't
seem to be reported to the authorities

You can look at Gary Kleck's study.....that is where the
.25 million number
comes from.
You can look at the NCVS (National Crime Victimization
Study) it comes up with 80,000 to 108,000 per year and
never asks about DGUs. You can also look at the following
surveys:

Field 1976 3,052,717
Burdua 1977 1,414,544
DM1a 1978 2,141,512
DM1b 1978 1,098,409
Hart 1981 1,797,461
Ohio 1982 771,043
Mauser 1990 1,487,342
Gallup 1991 777,153
Gallup 1993 1,621,682
LA Times 1994 3,609,682
Tarrance 1994 764,036

so it isn't really that big a safeguard



Oh, I don't know. I would much rather be part of those in
the surveys above than one of the 10-12,000 who die from some
street scab with a gun.

Sorry and should add that if these figures are correct
than surely police data would back them up



When even as you suggested, most of these involve no shots
fired
or
the police? How would the police generate data if they are not
involved?

People are so threatened they draw a gun but don't report it
thus letting crims run free. bizarre argument

Perhaps, but police are often no longer your friends and justice
is just a empty noise.

Those that blame the victim....people like you...are greatly to
blame
for why people no longer seek out the police.

now you are just being paranoid

In some communities we have reason to be.

thank god I'm in Aus



IN my part of the country, we have freedom. I can openly carry a
firearm, carry one concealed with or without a permit. A permit to
carry concealed allows me to dine in a restaurant that serves
alcohol. Some folks like to drink some wine with dinner. The only
restriction there is that if you are armed, you cannot drink. Seems
fair to me. The other reason for having a permit to carry concealed
is reciprocity with other states.

In urban areas, I may be stopped and questioned by the local police
if I am openly carrying. In rural areas or small towns, no problem.
I will usually carry concealed, however, so that I don't frighten
little old ladies of either sex.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!

thank god we don't need to carry here


And, thank God, you are not here sticking your nose into our politics.
Click to expand...
pleasure
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top