Replies

We're conservatives who understand that keeping the right to defend ourselves is the key to keeping a free society. That's who we are.

We support it here because it's written into our constitution.I haven't the foggiest idea if Australia has their own "second amendment" or not.If they don't and the majority of Aussies are happy with that then that's the way it should be....*there*.And *they've* managed to keep a free society so far...regardless of what gun laws might be in effect.

And since Australia is a key ally and a big part of the free world, we have every right to comment on their politics. Hence the existence of this thread.

Yes,one could say that we have the "right" to comment on their politics just as they have the right to comment about ours.But there's a difference between "comment" and "interference".

Driving on the wrong side of the road seems to work for the Aussies so I wouldn't say a thing about it other than that it's damn difficult for we Yanks to drive down there.And the reverse is also true.So perhaps we can keep our Second Amendment and if they want one too then I'm sure they can get it done.

Just my 2 cents' worth.

Driving on the wrong side of the road seems to work for the Aussies so I wouldn't say a thing about it other than that it's damn difficult for we Yanks to drive down there.And the reverse is also true.So perhaps we can keep our Second Amendment and if they want one too then I'm sure they can get it done.

I'm afraid I don't see the comparison. The right to bear arms is essential to liberty in a free society. It's not some cultural idiosyncrasy, like the side of the road you drive your car on. It's a basic human right. One that Australians' willingly forfeited in exchange for a cure all for their crime problems.

A series of massacres paved the way for gun control in Oz... the same way sweeping gun laws are proposed after every high profile killing spree in the states. It's not that it "works for them". It's that they're slightly ahead of us on the socialist curve when it comes to things like gun laws and socialized medicine.

And *they've* managed to keep a free society so far...regardless of what gun laws might be in effect.

The National Firearms Agreement is eleven years old. Are you suggesting that if sweeping gun control legislation doesn't completely obliterate the free state in a decade's time, it must be benign?

And *they’ve* managed to keep a free society so far...regardless of what gun laws might be in effect.
-

but Rudd was just elected...