quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

I said it was illegal to hunt with a full auto rifle, if I implied that no one did, I was wrong to do so, the five instances I know in Texas over the last 25 years have resulted in prison time, forfeiture of guns, heavy fines.

Considering the number of hunters in Texas, that is a percent of a percent, very close to zero.

Now I agree, a civilian owning a full auto weapon is just nuts. I mean what are they going to use it for other than target shooting?

Now, as for a full ban of the AR rifle, considering the versatility of the gun, and the multiple configurations available, I am leaning more to a "intent of use" purchase restriction with a residence rider on the weapon. Some cities already have ordinances banning certain weapons within city limits, why not make it federal and mandatory?

Of course, there are add ons that make the rate of fire of the AR higher, not full auto, but close, I would suggest those be banned.

Collapsible stocks come in handy, and I have two rifles with that set up, but honestly I could live without them.

NFA permitted silencers or suppressors, what ever you wish to call them, I know of only one civilian application for one, but that advantage is negligible to be honest, so I have no clue as to why John Q Public needs one except for illegal use, add to that there are instructions on making them on the internet, so how many illegal suppressors are on the streets?

Laws need to be passed that put the teeth back into the ATF so they can enforce the laws already on the books.

Stricter background checks up to and including a psyche eval.

Mandatory storage regulations.

And I am still thinking

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

You might change your mind about the fourth amendment.

fourth amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Nup; we've already got all that here, too.

There are no secret police kicking doors in, or spontaneous search and seizures, Jo Public is not required to have "his papers" on his person at all times; there is freedom of speech and you can publically declare the Prime Minister to be the embarrassing nitwit she clearly is.

Frankly, in comparison and esp since 9/11, the "land of the free" ain't so much the US anymore.... Think you've lost your crown... lol And hell, if there's even 1% truth in how Hollywood portrays the CIA and their dirty tricks or anything to do with national security.... Then there's Guantonamo....

quote:

As for Australia, it is not primitive or backwards, IMO, and the amount of developed land is small compared to the US, since the only undeveloped land are in national forests and other areas that are protected.

Well yeah, Oz is roughly the same area of what you call the "lower 48", if I'm understanding that to mean what I think (not incl Alaska or Hawaii?). But we only have about 1/15th your population.

While there are significant national parks (size & quantity), there's even more of what's called "crown land". IE, belongs to either state or federal goverment (the people) and can be leased for approved purposes or is generally held for future development (housing estates etc) or preservation, too.

And then there's "the Outback". That's for tourists and fanatics, IMO. Hell, there are those who choose to live in Alaska, too. lol Stupid tourists (the Outback), they have no concept of driving for 2-3 days without seeing another human being. You just can't seem to tell them to take *plenty* of water, just in case...!

Also explains (Outback) why some 90% of Australians live within about 200k's of the coast - Australia's "dead heart". It's not that dead but - great shooting - just BE equipped, like you're going to the moon (almost).

Focus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
Semantics. I have never said anything indicated in your post.

Hyperbole, actually... There's a difference.

You are wrong again, actually.

quote:

The presumption there is that gun deaths are primarily due to criminal activity - they're not. In the USA, most handgun homicides are instances of civilians using guns as a mediating force in a dispute with other civilians. More than 50% are suicides.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

http://www.aussielegal.com.au/informationoutline~nocache~1~SubTopicDetailsID~819.htm

According to people who are actually licensed to practice law in those parts, Australians have the same rights against unreasonable searches and seizures as Americans do under the 'irrelevant' 200 year old 4th amendment...

No xenophobia there at all, at all...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

I live in a biggish city (pop 2-300,000) but on the fringe - lotsa bushland (crown land) north and west. There was a time (pre Port Arthur) where I'd kill an hour or two with some local shooting. I'd mostly look to shoot feral cats (including the odd pet that strayed - oops) but often hadta settle for ratbits (rabbits but orta be declared rats). So I'd simply sling my Ruger .22 semi-auto over my shoulder and wander down the end of my street and into the bush.

But I wouldn't do it now. Just the sound of a gunshot would likely have me explaining myself to the Police. Probably just waking down a residential street with a rifle would, too. Of course, all semi-autos are now banned (except, I think, to *licensed* professional hunters carrying out their occupation). So my beloved Ruger is long gone but I still wouldn't, anyway. Don't need the drama....

That's not to say cats are off the hook. Now I trap them and despatch them back home. For that, I have an old Brno .22 single shot. Ancient, low tech, but highly affective for the purpose. But there was still the matter of noise.

I was gonna make a silencer (blanket ban on them here, even pre Port Arthur) but a mate suggested different ammo. Winchester .22 long Z. Hell, makes less sound than my air rifle but 5 times (probably) the stopping power. At a range measured in inches, fixes 'em right up - one in the head; one in the heart. Not that freakin' cats seem to know when they're dead, what with all that kickin' and a jerkin' - must be where people got that "9 lives" bizzo....

Point is guns have a purpose but specific gun types don't. The blanket ban on all semi-autos (here) is going too far. It's because (IMO) that that's what Martin Bryant used at Port Arthur.

And another truth is that if full autos are legally available there, no matter what the special approvals or circumstances, then you can bet dollars to dirt there's also a black market for criminals to access them illegally.

I think even you're now conceding there's room for improvement with your gun laws and regulations as they stand? Maybe even the 2nd?

Focus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
Semantics. I have never said anything indicated in your post.

Hyperbole, actually... There's a difference.

You are wrong again, actually.

Yes, I am wrong about the intention of my own post.
You know what I meant better than me...

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

I am not the one that accused you of trying to write laws. Again, you're assuming the details of the average Aussie burglar are the same as the average American burglar. I'm not saying you're wrong (because I don't know), but I can't say you're right, either.

You're arguing the difference anyway - while conceding you don't know if there is one. Some might think you're just going out of your way to be difficult....

quote:

And, here I am, discussing this with you, accepting that there should be requirements on gun security, and only having an issue (which was my only original issue with requiring gun security) in what level of security is going to be required. Reasonable leaves too much space for abuse. You've already stated that the Aussie rules were knee-jerk and over the top. I'm not questioning that, but does the Aussie Government have a history of increasing regulation once it's in the books? The US does, and I even gave examples.

Then, you take Tazzy, who is a gun owner and a huntress. I assume you could consider her a "pro-gunner." She's all about requiring secure storage of firearms being required. So, right here, on this board, you have two people who are pro-gun, that are willing to talk about and support (if not push for) regulations that go further than background checks and gun classes.

quote:

It does not perpetuate shit, except the the misguided stereotype of an American gun owner. Of that 30k+ gun deaths, 2/3 are suicides. Without putting words into your mouth, are you more worried about the deaths, or the tool that caused the death? Is it better to have 20k+ knife suicides vs. 20k+ firearm suicides? Typically, people who commit suicide aren't driven so much by the tool, but by the situation that has put them into the frame of mind to commit suicide.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
Semantics. I have never said anything indicated in your post.

Hyperbole, actually... There's a difference.

You are wrong again, actually.

Yes, I am wrong about the intention of my own post.
You know what I meant better than me...

Dont be such a crybaby, you were wrong about my correct use of Semantics.

I was wrong about my own post, You knew what I meant better than me.

See how that works ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Actually, I argued against complete bans, Something I am steadfastly against. The problem is that, here, the bans on specific weapons really do not work.

I'm gonna take a slightly different tack in disagreeing with you here....

I think (even pre Port Arthur reforms) that some weapons simply don't belong in the public's hands, and have said as much a number of times.

Full autos (rifle or pistol) being one. So yeah, I'm in favour of blanket bans on specific weapon types. Btw, this particular ban was in force here decades before Port Arthur, anyway. If you wanna fire a full auto in Oz, you join one of the armed services or qualify for the Police Force's Tactical Response Group (TRG - like your SWAT).

Thing is, when I suggest that in gun topics, all I ever get is a whole bunch of "it's already illegal to own/possess full autos in the US - EXCEPT". Much like being "a little bit pregnant", there's no such thing! They're illegal to have, or they're not - which? If just one member of average Joe Public can navigate whatever forms and pass whatever background checks and pay whatever fees etc to legally obtain a working full auto no matter what vintage, then no, they're not illegal in the US.

So what's the problem with a blanket ban, here? You and BAMA apparently know *for a fact* that no-one in the entire United States would ever go hunting with one....

Again, I'm arguing from a perspective of reining in an out-of-control gun culture and not the frequency with which full autos contribute to homicides or crime etc. ie, you start *somewhere*. And no, I'm certainly NOT advocating the US adopt our gun laws, either. I'm talking "middle ground", too.

Focus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I am not the one that accused you of trying to write laws. Again, you're assuming the details of the average Aussie burglar are the same as the average American burglar. I'm not saying you're wrong (because I don't know), but I can't say you're right, either.

You're arguing the difference anyway - while conceding you don't know if there is one. Some might think you're just going out of your way to be difficult....

quote:

quote:

And, here I am, discussing this with you, accepting that there should be requirements on gun security, and only having an issue (which was my only original issue with requiring gun security) in what level of security is going to be required. Reasonable leaves too much space for abuse. You've already stated that the Aussie rules were knee-jerk and over the top. I'm not questioning that, but does the Aussie Government have a history of increasing regulation once it's in the books? The US does, and I even gave examples.
Then, you take Tazzy, who is a gun owner and a huntress. I assume you could consider her a "pro-gunner." She's all about requiring secure storage of firearms being required. So, right here, on this board, you have two people who are pro-gun, that are willing to talk about and support (if not push for) regulations that go further than background checks and gun classes.

Yeah, but you did get all hung up on "reasonable"....
I gave you an example of the Aussie requirements (secure gun storage). I called them "reasonable" because the new regulations (from Port Arthur) were pretty much how I store my guns, anyway.
At NO time did I present them as being what the US should adopt. I did not presume to make law there. I'm here discussing - I gave *examples*. "Reasonable" is not yours to define, either, so let it go. It's up to your law-makers to frame laws and a general public consensus will ultimately brand them reasonable or not, not the individual.
And probably all governments have a history building on whatever's begun. Hence we get the term, "remember the good ole days...."

quote:

quote:

It does not perpetuate shit, except the the misguided stereotype of an American gun owner. Of that 30k+ gun deaths, 2/3 are suicides. Without putting words into your mouth, are you more worried about the deaths, or the tool that caused the death? Is it better to have 20k+ knife suicides vs. 20k+ firearm suicides? Typically, people who commit suicide aren't driven so much by the tool, but by the situation that has put them into the frame of mind to commit suicide.

I presented a link in the other gun thread showing that in 2010 (I think) there were 231 gun deaths in Australia (population approx 23 mill) and 160ish were suicides. Your 2/3rds suicide rate amounts to about 20,000. That's about 125 times the rate here - do you have 125 times our population (about 2.8 bill)? Or is there a gun culture difference....
I do agree, suicide is not about the means (such as guns, for examp). But I have mentioned this numerous times - *opportunity* - the easier availablility of guns in the US. Bringing opportunity under some semblance of control with reasonable reforms would have an impact on suicide by gun, thus bringing the gun death rate down, and the flak with it. And no, I'm not implying you'll bring the suicide rate down too - the topic is guns, afterall.
You've got 15 times our population. Based on the Aussie figures, your suicide by gun rate should be closer to 2400, not 20,000. Yeah, different cultures blah blah - but they ain't THAT different.
Focus.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

Our main problem isn't the prevalence of guns. It's our consumptive lifestyles that leads people to do things illegally to get what they want, but can't get through legal means. We solve that shit, and an awful lot of these stats will drop precipitously.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

Our main problem isn't the prevalence of guns. It's our consumptive lifestyles that leads people to do things illegally to get what they want, but can't get through legal means. We solve that shit, and an awful lot of these stats will drop precipitously.

Hell's bells, DS - you *are* going lefty these days!

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


May I point out that Focus had no clue as to what the fourth amendment covered. And I tend not to research anything concerning laws in other countries when I make a statement concerning laws in their country, in fact, no one seems to check what anyone from any country is talking about with the exception of your doing it on this post.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim

All I know is Mr. DomYngBlk can't handle the truth.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk

All I know is Mr. NRA looked like a moron yesterday in front of the whole country.