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

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:-72dnYRX7ah31ArSnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:jn7daj$vhq$1@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:RdSdnbD8f_FIqQrSnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:jn5qdh$ch4$1@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cISdnUtiDZj1jQvSnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"F Murtz" <haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5olr.6130$%E2.1787@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:

"F Murtz" <haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:SVmlr.6034$v14.1894@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:
Would pre Howard gun laws done anything to stop the current
violence?


The current ones have not, so why were they changed?

You forgot to answer the question. Haven't seen any long arm
massacres
since Port Arthur iirc


the total homicides are not decreasing by any appreciable amount.

keep squirming


Don't need to, statistics beats phobic paranoid rhetoric.

Main statistic is no massacres using long arms since Port Arther,
rather
destroys your pov don't you think

people who seem to think that removal of the method of homicide that
they have a phobia about without altering the total homicides just
demonstrate their irrational fear about that particular inanimate
object.
What we have to do as a people is concentrate on the real causes of
homicide not what is used to commit them.

I totally agree with you. As a gun owner I am happy enough with the
current gun law but actually think that the "ban" on semi automatics
is a bit silly. Lets face it most people in Australia don't need guns
so licensing should be on a needs basis as it is now. One group who
should never be allowed to own guns imho is the "self defense lobby".

I see. So you are stating that self defense wouldn't be a legitimate
need?

In the vast majority of cases yes and those needs are covered by current
laws

I see....so in the vast numbers of cases in which someone is legitimately
in fear for their lives or serious injury....nothing happens?

Yep
Cite
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pZqdnQ5a9KXv1wrSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
The problems caused by having the population wandering around outways
the risks of an individual benefiting from defensive gun us

Ok....let's see your evidence for that then.

----> Insert facts, figures, other evidence, and cites for all of it
here.

US verses Australia overall homicide rate and injury and death by gunshot
Sorry, at best that establishes a correlation, and a cherry picked one at
that.

Let's throw Mexico in there and see if your claims hold up.

Nope?

Looks like your theory is wrong then.
 
On 4/25/2012 4:14 AM, Bert wrote:
In news:RMednYlT4vJRlQrSnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@westnet.com.au Rheilly Phoull
rheilly@bigslong.com> wrote:

Don't forget the dum dum's !!

Impossible; the newsgroup's full of 'em.
Touche !!
 
"Rheilly Phoull" <rheilly@bigslong.com> wrote in message
news:RMednYlT4vJRlQrSnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
On 4/25/2012 3:32 AM, SaPeIsMa wrote:

"Rheilly Phoull" <rheilly@bigslong.com> wrote in message
news:sY2dneUBWq_NYQvSnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
On 4/24/2012 11:56 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
Rheilly Phoull<rheilly@bigslong.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

On 4/24/2012 4:28 PM, dechucka wrote:

"Rheilly Phoull"<rheilly@bigslong.com> wrote in message
news:vYSdnT-wx62VvQvSnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
On 4/24/2012 5:01 AM, dechucka wrote:

"Rheilly Phoull"<rheilly@bigslong.com> wrote in message
news:xI-dna1zJveMJQnSnZ2dnUVZ_vCdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
On 4/22/2012 3:35 PM, dechucka wrote:

"Rheilly Phoull"<rheilly@bigslong.com> wrote in message
news:bPydnYXHCvDk1w7SnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
On 4/22/2012 7:30 AM, John-Melb wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:33 am, Trevor
Wilson<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au
wrote:

**No, we do not. Handguns are unnecessary in modern society
(despite
the
delusions that afflict your good wife). The sooner they are
banned
completely and possession laws can then be stengthened, the
better.
Naturally, semi-auto and auto handguns must be banned
immediately.

--
Trevor Wilsonwww.rageaudio.com.au

With apologies to the Reverend Neimoller.

First they come for the semi-auto's, I didn't speak out, I
didn't
own
a semi-auto.
Then the come for the pump-actions, I didn't speak out, I
didn't
own a
pump-action.
Then they come for the handguns, I didn't speak out, I didn't
own a
handgun.

I think we all know the rest.


Yeah, what a political knee jerk that one was. "I know, why
don't we
take all the licensed weapons 'cause we can find those and
give all
the crims a better advantage ??".

Guns in general are not licensed for self defense in Australia

That's true and with the increase in armed invasions I reckon it
should be reconsidered.

You really want to walk around in your home all the time with a
loaded
gun? Should it be compulsory?

It should be up to the individual to have that choice should they
feel
the need.

No it shouldn't because by feeling the need they automatically show
themselves to unsuitable to hold a gun license

It's not for me to judge but I really think you should get out more.

Of COURSE it's for you to judge. You're the government!

You don't have any problem deciding if someone "needs" a gun, so why
would you have a problem deciding if someone "needs" to get out more?

Isn't that the government's FUNCTION? To decide what we all "need?"

How are we supposed to decide that by ourselves? We're not experts. We
"need" government help.



OK, everybody get out more. That's an order from me, the government.

Wait
Give me a moment.
Need to check that my gun is loaded and then put on my holster.
OK. I'm ready..


Don't forget the dum dum's !!
Dum-dums ??
Don't need lollipops
http://www.spanglercandy.com/candy-store/dum-dum-pops?WT.srch=1&WT.mc_id=g_dumdums&gclid=CJSV_f6Qz68CFSQCQAodt3aXIw


I carry HP ammo specially loaded for snubbies instead.
Goes in .357", comes out ,53"

Used the same bullet last fall, with a tad more powder in a Marlin lever
action, to knock a deer down at 60 yards.

Didn't have any lollipops then either
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:T7udncDlfvkQqQrSnZ2dnUVZ_jWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
#######
#>UN snip
##>> dechuklehead is a stupid and ignorant troll
##>> It's only use is for you to use it as a foil, to show how stupid some
##>> posters actually are, and also as a means to educate the lurkers
##>> Otherwise, it's wise to just ignore it.
#>
#> resorting to the ad hom attack I see, a sure sign that you have no
logical
#> arguments
#
#
#What "ad hom" are you babbling about, chucklehead ?
#1) I wasn't responding to you
#2) I was describing you to a third party
#3) There was NO argument on your part that I ignored
# Ergo - NO "ad hominem"
#
#Apparently you're not even smart enough to understand the difference
between
#a simple description and an ad hominem
# Try using a dictionary BEFORE you come back to prove you're an idiot
############
3) There was NO argument on your part that I ignored
Ergo - NO "ad hominine"

Apparently you're not even smart enough to understand what a ad hom attack
is.

Google is your friend
Apparently Google is not yours, since you can't even look up what an Ad Hom
actually is.
Since you keep proving your ignorance

So let's make it simple for the simpleton
A) Insulting you IN LIEU of an argument is an Ad Hom
B) Insulting you while making an argument is NOT an Ad Hom
C) Insulting you while describing you to a 3rd party is NOT an Ad Hom

IN the above case, I was doing C)
Insulting you while describing you to a 3rd party.
Ergo
NOT an Ad Hom..


On the other hand, when a loser like you tries to FALSELY invoke an Ad Hom,
it's a sign that you are running away with your tail between your legs and
are trying to salvage as much face as possible, which in your case is a very
minimal amount anyway, to make the effort highly questionable.
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:q5mdnZ6q6MoGqwrSnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:v8SdnYtzP4DCAAvSnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cISdnUtiDZj1jQvSnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"F Murtz" <haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5olr.6130$%E2.1787@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:

"F Murtz" <haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:SVmlr.6034$v14.1894@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:
Would pre Howard gun laws done anything to stop the current
violence?


The current ones have not, so why were they changed?

You forgot to answer the question. Haven't seen any long arm
massacres
since Port Arthur iirc


the total homicides are not decreasing by any appreciable amount.

keep squirming


Don't need to, statistics beats phobic paranoid rhetoric.

Main statistic is no massacres using long arms since Port Arther,
rather
destroys your pov don't you think

people who seem to think that removal of the method of homicide that
they have a phobia about without altering the total homicides just
demonstrate their irrational fear about that particular inanimate
object.
What we have to do as a people is concentrate on the real causes of
homicide not what is used to commit them.

I totally agree with you. As a gun owner I am happy enough with the
current gun law but actually think that the "ban" on semi automatics is
a bit silly. Lets face it most people in Australia don't need guns so
licensing should be on a needs basis as it is now.

Yup
Most people around the world don't "need" guns UNTIL the shit hits the
fan
And then it's usually far too late to get guns
Just look at ANY countries history.
Sooner or later the shit will hit the fan, and those who will survive
will usually be those who quickly figure out how to keep the goblins from
killing them.

more and more you are showing yourself to be a wacko. Do you have an "I
fear my Goverement" car sticker
Nope
But then I do NOT "fear my government"
And you have far more to fear from YOUR government, since it's turning you
from a freeman to a subject/slave
After all when your government has all the guns and the citizens have none,
they are in no position to stand up to their government
Here in the US, the world's largest army of armed citizens is fielded
annually, every fall.
They're called hunters.
And they outnumber by a VERY LARGE margin, all the police and military.
And the police and military know it.
Can you say the same where you are ?


One group who should never be allowed to own guns imho is the "self
defense lobby".

No big surprise that you would believe that.
So you would much prefer to have someone defenseless against a criminal
attack.
How considerate

The problems caused by having the population wandering around outways the
risks of an individual benefiting from defensive gun us
TOTAL IGNORANT BULLSHIT (as usual)
In the US there are over 300,000,000 guns in the hands of over 60,000,000
households (note the word households not citizens- There can be multiple
adults per household).
And yet there are less than 800 accidental deaths and 8000 injuries
annually.
Compare that to cars in the US, that cause 43000+ accidental deaths,
6,000,000+ injuries, and $10+billion in damage annually.
Then there is the fact that over 2,500,000 people AVOID being the victims of
criminals annually because they are armed.
Are you stupid enough to claim that adding 2,500,000 extra victims to the
crime rolls outweighs 800 accidental deaths ?



I would suggest that you read the material on JPFo_Org
Start here:
http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/about.htm
ANd then go here to read about how successful gun-control has been in the
killing of over 100,000,000 in the previous century
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM

But a fatuous fool like you would naturally choose to ignore such with
the false argument that it can not happen where you are.
Go ask the Abos in your backyard, how true that notion is..
They are your prime example of a people who were NOT able to stand up
against the thugs who came to take their land and for all intents and
purposes enslave and destroy them.

You should also ask why the Romans and Greeks defined the difference
between slave and freemen was simply based on who could be armed, and who
could not.

You are a proponent to enslaving yourself, chuckles
How stupid is that ?

It now comes out you are a paranoid gun nutter
LOL
Being called a "paranoid gun nutter" by an ignorant dolt is not insult.


Back to your rocking chair and banjo outside side your trailer Boy
And the ignorant bigot surfaces..
Sonny, I'm fluent in 3 languages and taught University in 2 of them
You've demonstrated that you're just a minor league player, with no hope of
rising higher.
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:RdSdnbD8f_FIqQrSnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:jn5qdh$ch4$1@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cISdnUtiDZj1jQvSnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"F Murtz" <haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5olr.6130$%E2.1787@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:

"F Murtz" <haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:SVmlr.6034$v14.1894@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:
Would pre Howard gun laws done anything to stop the current
violence?


The current ones have not, so why were they changed?

You forgot to answer the question. Haven't seen any long arm
massacres
since Port Arthur iirc


the total homicides are not decreasing by any appreciable amount.

keep squirming


Don't need to, statistics beats phobic paranoid rhetoric.

Main statistic is no massacres using long arms since Port Arther,
rather
destroys your pov don't you think

people who seem to think that removal of the method of homicide that
they have a phobia about without altering the total homicides just
demonstrate their irrational fear about that particular inanimate
object.
What we have to do as a people is concentrate on the real causes of
homicide not what is used to commit them.

I totally agree with you. As a gun owner I am happy enough with the
current gun law but actually think that the "ban" on semi automatics is
a bit silly. Lets face it most people in Australia don't need guns so
licensing should be on a needs basis as it is now. One group who should
never be allowed to own guns imho is the "self defense lobby".

I see. So you are stating that self defense wouldn't be a legitimate
need?

In the vast majority of cases yes and those needs are covered by current
laws
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pZqdnQ5a9KXv1wrSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
The problems caused by having the population wandering around outways
the risks of an individual benefiting from defensive gun us

Ok....let's see your evidence for that then.

----> Insert facts, figures, other evidence, and cites for all of it
here.

US verses Australia overall homicide rate and injury and death by gunshot
Most HOMICIDES are CRIMINAL acts

If you want to compare
Criminal use of guns, then do so
But you had better separate out LAWFUL use of guns from that data

By conflating it all together, you are effectively lying by
misrepresentation

So let's do A REAL Comparison
1,500,000 criminal use of guns (including murder)
2,500,000 LEGAL USE of guns for self-defense
that's a 5:3 ratio in favor of having guns as a defensive tool against
criminals
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:RdSdnbD8f_FIqQrSnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:jn5qdh$ch4$1@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cISdnUtiDZj1jQvSnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"F Murtz" <haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5olr.6130$%E2.1787@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:

"F Murtz" <haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:SVmlr.6034$v14.1894@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:
Would pre Howard gun laws done anything to stop the current
violence?


The current ones have not, so why were they changed?

You forgot to answer the question. Haven't seen any long arm
massacres
since Port Arthur iirc


the total homicides are not decreasing by any appreciable amount.

keep squirming


Don't need to, statistics beats phobic paranoid rhetoric.

Main statistic is no massacres using long arms since Port Arther,
rather
destroys your pov don't you think

people who seem to think that removal of the method of homicide that
they have a phobia about without altering the total homicides just
demonstrate their irrational fear about that particular inanimate
object.
What we have to do as a people is concentrate on the real causes of
homicide not what is used to commit them.

I totally agree with you. As a gun owner I am happy enough with the
current gun law but actually think that the "ban" on semi automatics is
a bit silly. Lets face it most people in Australia don't need guns so
licensing should be on a needs basis as it is now. One group who should
never be allowed to own guns imho is the "self defense lobby".

I see. So you are stating that self defense wouldn't be a legitimate
need?

In the vast majority of cases yes and those needs are covered by current
laws
LOL
A weasel response.
<chuckles is dancing around like a devil in holy water>

DO tell us which laws are those...
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:LoCdnbJ8A-HRqgrSnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"kreed" <kenreed1999@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0605ed38-bf6f-4924-9f3d-4d728fc764de@t2g2000pbg.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 24, 12:30 pm, "dechucka" <dechuc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
"F Murtz" <hagg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:b5olr.6130$%E2.1787@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...









dechucka wrote:

"F Murtz" <hagg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:SVmlr.6034$v14.1894@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:
Would pre Howard gun laws done anything to stop the current
violence?

The current ones have not, so why were they changed?

You forgot to answer the question. Haven't seen any long arm
massacres
since Port Arthur iirc

the total homicides are not decreasing by any appreciable amount.

keep squirming

Don't need to, statistics beats phobic paranoid rhetoric.

Main statistic is no massacres using long arms since Port Arther,
rather
destroys your pov don't you think

people who seem to think that removal of the method of homicide that
they
have a phobia about without altering the total homicides just
demonstrate
their irrational fear about that particular inanimate object.
What we have to do as a people is concentrate on the real causes of
homicide not what is used to commit them.

I totally agree with you. As a gun owner I am happy enough with the
current
gun law but actually think that the "ban" on semi automatics is a bit
silly.
Lets face it most people in Australia don't need guns so licensing should
be
on a needs basis as it is now. One group who should never be allowed to
own
guns imho is the "self defense lobby".


Just wondering why, as adults, people seem to think it to be ok not be
allowed the right to make their own decisions, instead want to pay a
group of officials (mostly corrupt/criminal types who do NOT represent
them) for permission as to whether or not they can own or use
something ?

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

I don't know it is just that society seems to work better with some rules.
"Some rules" ???
Why you little fascist hypocrite, you....
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:rrSdnTVG9PlsqgrSnZ2dnUVZ_o-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"atec77" <"atec77 "@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:jn5p64$4u6$1@dont-email.me...
On 24/04/2012 6:28 PM, dechucka wrote:

"Rheilly Phoull" <rheilly@bigslong.com> wrote in message
news:vYSdnT-wx62VvQvSnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
On 4/24/2012 5:01 AM, dechucka wrote:

"Rheilly Phoull" <rheilly@bigslong.com> wrote in message
news:xI-dna1zJveMJQnSnZ2dnUVZ_vCdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
On 4/22/2012 3:35 PM, dechucka wrote:

"Rheilly Phoull" <rheilly@bigslong.com> wrote in message
news:bPydnYXHCvDk1w7SnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
On 4/22/2012 7:30 AM, John-Melb wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:33 am, Trevor
Wilson<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au
wrote:

**No, we do not. Handguns are unnecessary in modern society
(despite
the
delusions that afflict your good wife). The sooner they are
banned
completely and possession laws can then be stengthened, the
better.
Naturally, semi-auto and auto handguns must be banned
immediately.

--
Trevor Wilsonwww.rageaudio.com.au

With apologies to the Reverend Neimoller.

First they come for the semi-auto's, I didn't speak out, I didn't
own



It should be up to the individual to have that choice should they feel
the need.

No it shouldn't because by feeling the need they automatically show
themselves to unsuitable to hold a gun license
Liar , the desire to protect ones self and family IS the very reason to
own small arms , passing a fair test for carry is terribly difficult
and determines well that the permit holder is reliable and safe in
ownership

So those who don't pass this test don't have the right to protect their
families? That is sick.

You just blew your original position out of the water, chuckles
After all YOU are the one claiming that
" feeling the need (to be armed for self-defense)
they automatically show themselves
to (be) unsuitable to hold a gun license"
By your definition ANYONE who feels the need to prepare to protect their
families are
"unsuitable to hold a gun license"(your words)


Kid down my way nearly got abducted should he have the right to carry for
protection?
More intellectual dishonesty from chuckles
There is a difference between adults and kids
Although your false argument basically ignores that


Come on it is all in if guns are for protection
What is that nonsense phrase supposed to mean
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:-72dnYRX7ah31ArSnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:jn7daj$vhq$1@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:RdSdnbD8f_FIqQrSnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:jn5qdh$ch4$1@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cISdnUtiDZj1jQvSnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"F Murtz" <haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5olr.6130$%E2.1787@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:

"F Murtz" <haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:SVmlr.6034$v14.1894@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:
Would pre Howard gun laws done anything to stop the current
violence?


The current ones have not, so why were they changed?

You forgot to answer the question. Haven't seen any long arm
massacres
since Port Arthur iirc


the total homicides are not decreasing by any appreciable amount.

keep squirming


Don't need to, statistics beats phobic paranoid rhetoric.

Main statistic is no massacres using long arms since Port Arther,
rather
destroys your pov don't you think

people who seem to think that removal of the method of homicide that
they have a phobia about without altering the total homicides just
demonstrate their irrational fear about that particular inanimate
object.
What we have to do as a people is concentrate on the real causes of
homicide not what is used to commit them.

I totally agree with you. As a gun owner I am happy enough with the
current gun law but actually think that the "ban" on semi automatics
is a bit silly. Lets face it most people in Australia don't need guns
so licensing should be on a needs basis as it is now. One group who
should never be allowed to own guns imho is the "self defense lobby".

I see. So you are stating that self defense wouldn't be a legitimate
need?

In the vast majority of cases yes and those needs are covered by current
laws

I see....so in the vast numbers of cases in which someone is legitimately
in fear for their lives or serious injury....nothing happens?

Yep

And you base this claim on WHAT DATA ?
Or is it just more of your ignorant shit ?
 
"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:jn7mp2$b8n$1@dont-email.me...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pZqdnQ5a9KXv1wrSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
The problems caused by having the population wandering around outways
the risks of an individual benefiting from defensive gun us

Ok....let's see your evidence for that then.

----> Insert facts, figures, other evidence, and cites for all of it
here.

US verses Australia overall homicide rate and injury and death by gunshot

Sorry, at best that establishes a correlation, and a cherry picked one at
that.

Let's throw Mexico in there and see if your claims hold up.
Why do you want to compare the US to some 3rd world shithole unless you
consider the US that? Why don't you compare it ap[ples with apples to a
country like Canada which shares your culture and values ecept for the gun
laws

I'd prefer apples with apples

Looks like your theory is wrong then.
no just compare it with your culurally alike northern neieghbour
 
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:1I6dnXTime1AEwrSnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@bright.net...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pZqdnQ5a9KXv1wrSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
The problems caused by having the population wandering around outways
the risks of an individual benefiting from defensive gun us

Ok....let's see your evidence for that then.

----> Insert facts, figures, other evidence, and cites for all of it
here.

US verses Australia overall homicide rate and injury and death by gunshot

Most HOMICIDES are CRIMINAL acts

If you want to compare
Criminal use of guns, then do so
But you had better separate out LAWFUL use of guns from that data

By conflating it all together, you are effectively lying by
misrepresentation

So let's do A REAL Comparison
1,500,000 criminal use of guns (including murder)
2,500,000 LEGAL USE of guns for self-defense
that's a 5:3 ratio in favor of having guns as a defensive tool against
criminals
data from where?
 
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:IsKdnRQxNveRDQrSnZ2dnUVZ_jEAAAAA@bright.net...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:LoCdnbJ8A-HRqgrSnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"kreed" <kenreed1999@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0605ed38-bf6f-4924-9f3d-4d728fc764de@t2g2000pbg.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 24, 12:30 pm, "dechucka" <dechuc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
"F Murtz" <hagg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:b5olr.6130$%E2.1787@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...









dechucka wrote:

"F Murtz" <hagg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:SVmlr.6034$v14.1894@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:
Would pre Howard gun laws done anything to stop the current
violence?

The current ones have not, so why were they changed?

You forgot to answer the question. Haven't seen any long arm
massacres
since Port Arthur iirc

the total homicides are not decreasing by any appreciable amount.

keep squirming

Don't need to, statistics beats phobic paranoid rhetoric.

Main statistic is no massacres using long arms since Port Arther,
rather
destroys your pov don't you think

people who seem to think that removal of the method of homicide that
they
have a phobia about without altering the total homicides just
demonstrate
their irrational fear about that particular inanimate object.
What we have to do as a people is concentrate on the real causes of
homicide not what is used to commit them.

I totally agree with you. As a gun owner I am happy enough with the
current
gun law but actually think that the "ban" on semi automatics is a bit
silly.
Lets face it most people in Australia don't need guns so licensing
should be
on a needs basis as it is now. One group who should never be allowed to
own
guns imho is the "self defense lobby".


Just wondering why, as adults, people seem to think it to be ok not be
allowed the right to make their own decisions, instead want to pay a
group of officials (mostly corrupt/criminal types who do NOT represent
them) for permission as to whether or not they can own or use
something ?

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

I don't know it is just that society seems to work better with some
rules.


"Some rules" ???
Why you little fascist hypocrite, you....
you an anarchist are you?
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ZvCdnVGG9vhHMArSnZ2dnUVZ_tydnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:IsKdnRQxNveRDQrSnZ2dnUVZ_jEAAAAA@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:LoCdnbJ8A-HRqgrSnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

"kreed" <kenreed1999@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0605ed38-bf6f-4924-9f3d-4d728fc764de@t2g2000pbg.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 24, 12:30 pm, "dechucka" <dechuc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
"F Murtz" <hagg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:b5olr.6130$%E2.1787@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...









dechucka wrote:

"F Murtz" <hagg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:SVmlr.6034$v14.1894@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
dechucka wrote:
Would pre Howard gun laws done anything to stop the current
violence?

The current ones have not, so why were they changed?

You forgot to answer the question. Haven't seen any long arm
massacres
since Port Arthur iirc

the total homicides are not decreasing by any appreciable amount.

keep squirming

Don't need to, statistics beats phobic paranoid rhetoric.

Main statistic is no massacres using long arms since Port Arther,
rather
destroys your pov don't you think

people who seem to think that removal of the method of homicide that
they
have a phobia about without altering the total homicides just
demonstrate
their irrational fear about that particular inanimate object.
What we have to do as a people is concentrate on the real causes of
homicide not what is used to commit them.

I totally agree with you. As a gun owner I am happy enough with the
current
gun law but actually think that the "ban" on semi automatics is a bit
silly.
Lets face it most people in Australia don't need guns so licensing
should be
on a needs basis as it is now. One group who should never be allowed to
own
guns imho is the "self defense lobby".


Just wondering why, as adults, people seem to think it to be ok not be
allowed the right to make their own decisions, instead want to pay a
group of officials (mostly corrupt/criminal types who do NOT represent
them) for permission as to whether or not they can own or use
something ?

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

I don't know it is just that society seems to work better with some
rules.


"Some rules" ???
Why you little fascist hypocrite, you....

you an anarchist are you?
LOL
To a statist "slave" like you everyone must appear an anarchist.
I'm a Jacksonian
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:wbOdnXDFhoEPMArSnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:jn7mp2$b8n$1@dont-email.me...


"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pZqdnQ5a9KXv1wrSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
The problems caused by having the population wandering around outways
the risks of an individual benefiting from defensive gun us

Ok....let's see your evidence for that then.

----> Insert facts, figures, other evidence, and cites for all of it
here.

US verses Australia overall homicide rate and injury and death by
gunshot

Sorry, at best that establishes a correlation, and a cherry picked one at
that.

Let's throw Mexico in there and see if your claims hold up.

Why do you want to compare the US to some 3rd world shithole unless you
consider the US that? Why don't you compare it ap[ples with apples to a
country like Canada which shares your culture and values ecept for the gun
laws


Nope?

I'd prefer apples with apples


Looks like your theory is wrong then.

no just compare it with your culurally alike northern neieghbour
Been done.
Go read:
The Samurai, the Mountie, and the Cowboy:
Should America Adopt the Gun Controls of Other Democracies
David B. Kopel
Blow you and your implication right out of the water
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:sZqdnTdn9JwyMArSnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:1I6dnXTime1AEwrSnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@bright.net...

"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pZqdnQ5a9KXv1wrSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
The problems caused by having the population wandering around outways
the risks of an individual benefiting from defensive gun us

Ok....let's see your evidence for that then.

----> Insert facts, figures, other evidence, and cites for all of it
here.

US verses Australia overall homicide rate and injury and death by
gunshot

Most HOMICIDES are CRIMINAL acts

If you want to compare
Criminal use of guns, then do so
But you had better separate out LAWFUL use of guns from that data

By conflating it all together, you are effectively lying by
misrepresentation

So let's do A REAL Comparison
1,500,000 criminal use of guns (including murder)
2,500,000 LEGAL USE of guns for self-defense
that's a 5:3 ratio in favor of having guns as a defensive tool against
criminals

data from where?
Gunfacts.info
That's another website you should read from end to end, before spouting
more if your ignorance.


You see chuckles, many people on this group were even more ignorant than you
are.
But unlike you, they did their homework and got educated...
You should try it.
 
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:p4OdnVPbAbbiIw7SnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"atec77" <"atec77 "@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:jn0cp9$hu7$1@dont-email.me...
On 22/04/2012 1:44 PM, Rheilly Phoull wrote:
On 4/22/2012 11:31 AM, B J Foster wrote:
On 22/04/2012 1:27 PM, John-Melb wrote:
On Apr 22, 12:31 pm, B J Foster<bjfos...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

Hey Twevor,
What's your plan for taking the weapons away from the crims?

He doesn't, anti-gun zealots have previously admitted they don't have
a problem with criminals owning guns illegally.


So their plan is to confiscate guns from law-abiding citizens?

WHAT ON EARTH FOR???

The plan was implemented some time ago and some very nice semi-auto's
were destroyed so the governments of the day could be seen to be
taking stern and rapid action after a nutter shot up a city centre.

Considering the murders scattered across the country this last month
implemented with illegally obtained weapons it's very obvious whoever
decided to take legal guns has no fcuking idea how to stop the crims and
personally I think they should fall on their sword immediately after
repealing these silly fcuking gun laws , The police have failed miserably
and need to lift their game instead of revenue raising at the call of
greedy unscrupulous state govco's on threat of fiscal penalties for
failure

Would pre Howard gun laws done anything to stop the current violence?
Probably not.

Your desire to continue interfering in the lives of law-abiding citizens is
noted.

Fucking fascist arsewipe.

--
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not
want merely because you think it would be good for him".

Robert A. Heinlein.
 
<ozarkheart@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7k5ep713ius9gsibpp7fppsr6mk5duabf1@4ax.com...
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 12:31:29 +1000, B J Foster
bjfoster@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

On 22/04/2012 10:01 AM, Rheilly Phoull wrote:
On 4/22/2012 7:30 AM, John-Melb wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:33 am, Trevor Wilson<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au
wrote:

**No, we do not. Handguns are unnecessary in modern society (despite
the
delusions that afflict your good wife). The sooner they are banned
completely and possession laws can then be stengthened, the better.
Naturally, semi-auto and auto handguns must be banned immediately.

--
Trevor Wilsonwww.rageaudio.com.au

With apologies to the Reverend Neimoller.

First they come for the semi-auto's, I didn't speak out, I didn't own
a semi-auto.
Then the come for the pump-actions, I didn't speak out, I didn't own a
pump-action.
Then they come for the handguns, I didn't speak out, I didn't own a
handgun.

I think we all know the rest.


Yeah, what a political knee jerk that one was. "I know, why don't we
take all the licensed weapons 'cause we can find those and give all the
crims a better advantage ??".

Hey Twevor,
What's your plan for taking the weapons away from the crims?

Notice he doesn't respond......
Yes, like the Greens, he has no plan other than to take them away from the
soft targets who are the Licenced firearm holders.
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top