Posted on 03/01/2006 12:40:25 PM PST by neverdem
Prime Minister John Howard says he tightened gun laws after the Port Arthur massacre because he did not want Australia going down the same path as the United States.
Mr Howard, on the eve of his 10th anniversary in office, said the nation's grief over the 1996 Port Arthur massacre had been a great opportunity to tighten Australia's gun laws.
"I would call that very definitely an extraordinary outpouring of amazement and grief in this country and I knew out of that there was an opportunity to grab the moment and think about a fundamental change to gun laws in this country," he told the Nine Network.
Mr Howard said he did not want Australia to adopt the American stance on guns.
"I did not want Australia to go down the American path," he said.
"There are some things about America I admire and there are some things I don't.
"And one of the things I don't admire about America is their ... slavish love of guns. They're evil."
Note to criminals. Move to Australia. Easy pickin's. Try my place and you're just going to get some buckshot or .45 ACP for the trouble.
It's cultural. We never had the wild west frontier, never had indian wars, our history is different. Y'all can keep your guns, it's fine with me. I think Mr Howard only made one small mistake, and that's when he said, 'slavish devotion' - it was just too personal and quite unlike him. And certainly not worth the bucketing a loyal ally and 'mate' has been given on this thread. It's like he tickled a bear with a sore tooth. What's the matter with y'all?
The US isn't the standard for the entire world - we are allowed to have a different opinion are we not?
Lighten up! There are numerous nations with the same attitude toward automatic and military style weapons in private hands.
NO ONE TOOK ALL OUR GUNS AWAY! WE CAN OWN A FIRE ARM. WE ARE SIMPLY EXPECTED TO OBTAIN A LICENCE AND KEEP IT IN A SAFE PLACE.
What Arab Civilization?
This letter was sent to Carly Fiorina, CEO of Hewlett Packard Corporation, in response to a speech given by her on September 26, 2001.
Heck, I don't care about the whole world. But they (you know the amorphous "they") aren't gonna get my guns and rifles.
I actually thought Australia was kind of similar...but if not, my weapons are still mine and I will defend the right to own and use (if necessary)...
"So, enjoy your unpaid for freedoms, while they last."
I can't believe anyone could be so ignorant. Australia has been there beside you in every conflict I can think of since World War one.
You disgust me.
Holy moses, no one is planning to come over there and take them off you!
But one thing I can assure you of, the Left HATES the fact that Howard and Bush have a common purpose and will try anything they can to try to divide them. (And us!)
Can't you see through this report? How naiive are you?
Sorry, Freddie...I didn't read the article...I was just chatting with you. Go insult someone else!!!
BTW, everything was much more complicated than that. The Umayyad Dynasty's incursion into Spain resulted in something entirely different from what was going on in the East.
It is noteworthy that the MONGOL conquest totally destroyed the previous Arab Empire and they've not been right for nearly a thousand years.
Go insult someone else!!!
Yeah right. I'm in that frame of mind. There are Freepers here calling Aussies cowards. And another extolling the virtues of islamic rule in Spain. There are patent lies about increases in the crime rate...to which I have posted official stats refuting the assertion. Have a nice day. I'm outa here.
Prime Minister Howard, if guns are evil, why do you let your bodyguards carry them?
And because I am a people...that applies to me.
You forever seem to paint me with that brush...I have stood up for Howard and Costello more than you have...and you displace your anger agaist me.
WTF?
Go kick your poor cats!
On top of that, what do the police and military in Australia carry?
Cotton candy?
This 'divide and conquer' business works, doesn't it? You could have stood up for the Aussies, but you jumped in on the bandwagon too. ( And didn't even read the article!) Naughty naughty.
Raids of Muawiyah
Raids on Iraq
After the failure of Muawiyah's mission in Basra, he decided to undertake raids on Iraq with a view to create a sense of insecurity among the people of Iraq in general, and the people living in the border areas in particular. Muawiyah organized raiding parties under different commanders, and these parties were commanded to undertake raids in the territory of Iraq all along the border. A party under the command of No'man b Bashir was asked to ravage Ayn Tamr. A party under Sufyan b Auf was required to operate against Hit and Anbar. The third party under Abdullah b Masa'ada al Fazari was commanded to operate in the Taima section. Another party under Zohak b Qais raided Upper Mesopotamia. The purpose of these raids was to ravage and plunder. As a result of these raids, the Syrians gathered considerable booty. These parties appeared as a whirlwind and after striking blows, and ravaging the countryside they withdrew to their territory. Ali strengthened the border security guard force. As a result of these raids, the Syrians were not able to occupy any area in Iraq, but such inroads had a considerable nuisance value, and proved to be a great drain on the meager financial resources at the disposal of Ali. Even when there were disturbances along the border, the people of Kufa remained indifferent, and they did not respond to Ali's call to rise en masse in defense of their territories. It was with great difficulty that Ali managed to raise some force to defend the border, but its strength was very small as compared with the extent of the danger that faced the State.
http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Articles/companion/73_ali_bin_talib.htm
SUNNI, ARE YOU?
Call me a slave; but when they try to take away my free speech at least I can take a few of them out.
Thanks Eric. I haven't heard that term before, but it's right on target. To all the America haters here in country and any outsiders who dare come in, know this: "We have guns, and we're ready, willing and able to use them."
But I do have a limit as to how much I will put up with.
Ah, you kinda beat me to the punch.
And Fred, there was a case in California of a gun kept in a safe according to law and the teenage daughter who was trained in its use AND her brother were killed by a psycho with a pitchfork because she couldn't get the safe open.
And many laws like those in Australia make it so you can't keep it loaded.
The POINT of having a gun is being able to use it. Criminals, rapists and killers are not going to wait patiently while you assemble your firearm, load it and aim.
So, essentially, firearm ownership and usage is banned if you cannot keep and BEAR them in an EFFECTIVE and SPEEDY manner.
Imagine telling soldiers or police to lock up their arms and assemble/load them when they need them!
Bet you Howard's guards are armed and loaded.
BTW, Muawiyah was able to raise enough money to finance a payroll for large segments of the Byzantine Army who had not been paid for nearly a century.
This enabled him to drive the Persians out of the Eastern Mediterranean ~ much to the relief of everyone.
When I first read about this guy I was amazed that one of the early Caliphs could so easily betray the "revolution". That's always a mark of a great leader.
Guess he didn't succeed in disarming all his enemies.
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.