Posted on 03/17/2021 7:14:54 AM PDT by Onthebrink
Australia instituted these strict laws following the April 1996 mass shooting at Port Arthur, in which gunman Martin Bryant took the lives of thirty-five people using an AR-10 semi-automatic rifle. Bryant’s motivation was reportedly based on the failure to buy a bed and breakfast property but also to become “notorious.”
The shooting outraged the nation, and soon Australia introduced comprehensive gun control. It was led by then Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who had only taken office six weeks earlier at the head of a center-right coalition. Howard came to the decision that firearms were simply too easy to obtain and there were just too many of them.
“We have an opportunity in this country not to go down the American path,” Howard announced, and he radically changed Australia’s gun laws. According to supporters of gun control, those efforts rid the country of gun violence on a large scale.
(Excerpt) Read more at 19fortyfive.com ...
People still don’t get it. The only reason to disarm a population is you intend to do things to them they would resist by force If they could. Making tax paying law obeying citizens into criminals is the whole point. They expect the good citizen to follow the new law just like they followed the old law and comply. Once they are disarmed the new laws will really start to put the grinder to the citizen that’s is the whole point everything else is smoke and mirrors
Yes we do. Don’t buy into the hysteria. We are not Australia which is part of the British Empire and a bunch of socialists from birth. They are nothing like us.
The most interesting thing about this is we are so engrained on the concept of federal law and power. Now is the time to get involved in State rights and power.
One of the factors in the demise of the USSR is that states became jealous of the centralized power and began to disregard it. Lech didn’t do what he did on his own. He say that the polish authorities wanted a little power and included them on his plan.
I love Jamaica, I go twice a year at least. Jamaican gun laws are draconian the mandatory penalty for a crime committed with a firearm is life in prison. People know this so it’s better to murder and leave no witnesses than to risk getting caught. The possession of a single bullet is a 2 year offense and a firearm is minimum 10. That said I went to Marley fest in 2015 for the second time. I casually mentioned to my porter at the resort across the bay from the fest that I was Texan and we always carry firearms in us concealed. He was like ya mon it’s illegal here but people do it all the time and brine the cops if caught or are politically connected and get a pass. In was like how easy is it to get a gun? $200 American mon, leave 200 in the nightstand draw. So I did and the next day I had a 38 snub loaded with 5 extra rounds wraped in a towel with a note to leave it under the bag of trash when I checked out. It was a “rental” for the fest. They had hand wants security guys but slapping them skin with a 50 folded in the hand like you knew them and they just “patted” you down and off you went. This experience has been repeated in Africa and Asia in similar manners most counties will deport a first offender if you can’t bribe your way.
"....Psychological and psychiatric assessments
Descriptions of Bryant's behaviour as an adolescent show that he continued to be disturbed and outlined the possibility of an intellectual disability. When leaving school in 1983, he was assessed for a disability pension by a psychiatrist who wrote: "Cannot read or write. Does a bit of gardening and watches TV ... Only his parents' efforts prevent further deterioration. Could be schizophrenic and parents face a bleak future with him."[5] Bryant received a disability pension, though he also worked as a handyman and gardener.[5] In an examination after the massacre, forensic psychiatrist Ian Joblin found Bryant to be borderline mentally disabled, with an I.Q. of 66, equivalent to an 11-year-old.[6][7]
There is no way this nutbar should have been near any firearm.
England may be the home of the Magna Carta, but that nation is on the way to full blown authoritarianism. Thank God for 1776!
>”Could The U.S. Ban Guns? No”<
The communists controlling ALL branches of the US govt emphatically disagrees with you.
[Paraphrase of a conversation between a gun grabber and a patriot]
Gungrabber - We will outlaw all civilian ownership of guns
Patriot - I will not comply with such laws
Gungrabber - Then we will send the police to confiscate your guns
Patriot - Bold of you to assume that I am going to wait for the police to come take them
Gungrabber - what???!!!???
Excellent points. As someone here once said”there are bunch of blowhards here” when referring to people who loudly tal about the tree of liberty, marches, and other comments that could draw scrutiny from authorities. And yes none of us is really anonymous on the ‘Net.
Nobody wants a civil war, at least those who don’t buy every half baked conspiracy theory that hits the ‘Net. I’d rather try to vote in people who represent my opinions and not threaten my neighbors just because we have different political views.
Wow.
Thanks for the personal story about the absolute fallacy of gun control
End result: a nation of 100 million felons.
+1
They stole the presidency. They can certainly steal the 2nd.
The only reason for any government to insist on disarming its subjects is so it can do things to them for which the people would shoot them.
Patriot - I will not comply with such laws
Gungrabber - Then we will send the police to confiscate your guns
Patriot - Bold of you to assume that I am going to wait for the police to come take them
Gungrabber - what???!!!???
Now is the time to identify THOSE WHO WILL GIVE THE ORDERS should that gun-grab be attempted. At the first sign of confiscation they must start having "accidents" or just disappear. Killing them horribly and publicly will only put the rest on notice and render their removal more difficult.
“The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”.- Ayn Rand
I think I see a problem with this approach. You are assuming that there is some limit to what can be considered “different political views”.
Is it a political view that men who “identify” as women should be allowed to dominate women’s sports?
Should people who “identify” as homeowners be able to take your house?
Should females of any age be allowed to kill their unborn babies regardless of parental consent? Is this just a political view? Should children, regardless of age, be able to authorize irreversible surgery for themselves regardless of parental consent?
Is wanting to disarm you just a different political view? Or is it an act of tyranny that could make you helpless in a criminal attack and result in the deaths of your entire family?
More to the point, do your neghbors agree with your assessment of what constitutes “different political views”.
The hill to die on.
“Australia does not have a constitution or 2nd amendment.”
I think we took care of the Second Amendment by listening to Lin Wood and handing the Senate to the Democrats, to pack the courts (despite Trump going to Georgia twice telling Republicans to vote).
But what the heck, we sure ‘taught the GOP a lesson’. Right?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.