Are Australia's Gun Laws Childish?

 
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
This idiot appears to think so: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-06/fox-news-anchor-claims-australians-have-no-freedom/6831618

He said: "But they have no freedom, you can go to prison for expressing unpopular views in Australia and people do," Carlson argued, without citing any examples.

I find it amazing that Americans seem to think they have a monopoly on 'freedom', yet the average American does not know where Australia is, much less having visited here. In fact most of them have never been out of the US and would not have any knowledge of what freedoms are enjoyed by the rest of the world.

Sponsored advertisement

  LancedDendrite Chief Commissioner

Location: North Haverbrook; where the monorail is king!
That bloke is a talking head on Fox News. Did anyone actually expect wisdom to vomit forth from his lips?
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
That bloke is a talking head on Fox News. Did anyone actually expect wisdom to vomit forth from his lips?
LancedDendrite
No, but even less from Trump. The second part of that article quotes Trump as saying gun-free zones are disasters. Yet, can anyone name a mass shooting where someone, other than the attending police, was able to produce a gun and use it to stop the shooter? I can name one. Just one. Yet there have been 45 shootings in US schools so far this year.
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

Fox News. What more needs to be said?
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Americans have less overall freedom's than Australian's who have never faced bans by their govt to travel to legitimate countries of buy goods from such countries they are banned from. Americans cannot work or live for extended periods OS without paying tax back home and even trying to cancel your US citizenship is not straightforward and can cost thousands. I also don't believe US citizens are entitled to Dual citizenship (but I don't see that as a bad thing either, makes it easy for someone to commit a crime in one country and if they can get to the airport before being identified they have a Plan B).

The issue with guns and the argument for pro-gun ownership is simple.

- What is a gun designed to do?
- Why do you want a gun that can shot lots of people in a very short space of time?
- Why do you need a gun that is accurate from over 1000m?
- Why do you need a gun that is lethal at over 1000m?
- Why do you need a weapon that is concealable?
- Why do you need so much ammunition and number of weapons?

The self defense argument is BS
- Most people who are murdered by gun have little or no warning to retrieve a rifle/shot gun and minimal for a hand gun.
- A hand gun is of limited use for self defense unless at close range and you are well trained to shoot with one, ask the police.
- At best they could maybe reduce the head count if someone had a gun to use in defense.
- Having large numbers of weapons in the community increases the leakage rate to criminals.
- Having guns at home increases the "friendly" death rate due to accident and emotional factors.

The "Swiss do it right" argument is BS, yes better than USA their murder and suicide rates far exceed the rest of Europe and Australia. What actually happens in Switzerland compared to what many people think actually happens with gun ownership are two different things.  

And the 5th amendment (or what ever number) argument. Give me strength! Back then it was a single shot muscat that took 20-30sec to reload and barely accurate across a kids soccer field (smooth bore).

The Israelis, even with their history issue a fix amount of ammo for life and its not much!

Not surprising the OECD countries with the tightest gun ownership laws have the lowest death rates using a gun. Again, why do you need a gun and who do you plan to kill? In Singapore I believe (could be wrong) the penalty for being caught with a gun is life and with a loaded gun the death penalty as you were obviously going to commit murder.
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
At least our conservative commentators have a clue about other countries and what they're actually like.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
At least our conservative commentators have a clue about other countries and what they're actually like.
don_dunstan
Found Singapore

http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=DocId%3A%227659a792-18f3-43d8-a6ac-463e3ff2453a%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0

Penalty for being in unlawful possession of arms or ammunition
3.
[25/84]


(2)  Subject to subsection (4), any person who unlawfully carries any arm shall be guilty of an offence and shall on conviction be punished with imprisonment for a term of not less than 5 years and not more than 14 years and shall also be punished with caning with not less than 6 strokes.
[25/84]

—(1)  Subject to subsection (4), any person who is in unlawful possession of any arm or ammunition shall be guilty of an offence and shall on conviction be punished with imprisonment for a term of not less than 5 years and not more than 10 years and shall also be punished with caning with not less than 6 strokes.
(3)  Where any person at the time of his committing or at the time of his apprehension for any scheduled offence has on his person any arm, he shall be guilty of an offence and shall on conviction be punished with imprisonment for life and shall also be punished with caning with not less than 6 strokes.
(4)  Where any person convicted of an offence punishable under subsection (1) or (2) is proved to have been previously convicted of a scheduled offence, he shall on conviction be punished with imprisonment for a term of not less than 5 years and not more than 20 years and shall also be punished with caning with not less than 6 strokes.
[25/84]



Using or attempting to use arms
4.—(1)  Subject to any exception referred to in Chapter IV of the Penal Code (Cap. 224) which may be applicable (other than section 95), any person who uses or attempts to use any arm shall be guilty of an offence and shall on conviction be punished with death.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME
  The Vinelander Minister for Railways

Location: Ballan, Victoria on the Ballarat RFR Line

I find it amazing that Americans seem to think they have a monopoly on 'freedom', yet the average American does not know where Australia is, much less having visited here. In fact most of them have never been out of the US and would not have any knowledge of what freedoms are enjoyed by the rest of the world.
TheBlacksmith

There are ill-informed and poorly educated people all over the world and this is certainly not limited to citizens of USA.

In my extensive travels over that country I've found their people to be well informed and educated about basic information of Australia.

It could also be that as I always travel by AMTRAK wherever possible, the locals I meet on those long distance trains are well travelled, educated and informed people, some retired...some not who are taking the time to travel by train where possible in their country. They invariably are in despair of the NRA (National Rifle Association) and its political lobbying, particularly its support of the Republican party.

Mike.
  Brianr Assistant Commissioner

Location: Dunedin, New Zealand

I find it amazing that Americans seem to think they have a monopoly on 'freedom', yet the average American does not know where Australia is, much less having visited here. In fact most of them have never been out of the US and would not have any knowledge of what freedoms are enjoyed by the rest of the world.
There are ill-informed and poorly educated people all over the world and this is certainly not limited to citizens of USA.

In my extensive travels over that country I've found their people to be well informed and educated about basic information of Australia.

It could also be that as I always travel by AMTRAK wherever possible, the locals I meet on those long distance trains are well travelled, educated and informed people, some retired...some not who are taking the time to travel by train where possible in their country. They invariably are in despair of the NRA (National Rifle Association) and its political lobbying, particularly its support of the Republican party.

Mike.
The Vinelander
While I tend to agree, I guess I choose my American friends carefully. However, I was greatly shocked when (on an Amtrak train) an Elementary (primary) teacher asked me if Australia was near Alaska. I told her only in the dictionary Smile.
However another good friend of many years now, who does travel and has visited Australia asked me soon after first connection if I wanted help in gaining a Green card to move to the US. I quickly told her I liked visiting the States but no way would I ever want to live there. They do tend to think the USA is vastly superior to all other countries. They may like Aussies and Kiwis but consider us to be "quaint".
  apw5910 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Location: Location.
And the 5th amendment (or what ever number) argument. Give me strength! Back then it was a single shot muscat
RTT_Rules
Single shot muscat? Is that stronger than tequila?

I once went to a talk about detecting and using nerve impulses on arms and legs that had amputations, in the eventual hope of controlling prosthetics electronically. The presenter showed stats about how such dreadful injuries occurred in the first place and apologized for using US figures, because they showed the most common cause was from gunshot wounds. But he was an Australian working in the USA, and said that cause would not even be a blip on the graph in Australia...
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
I also have spent considerable time in the US, and in the main, the people I have been in contact with are more educated and have more conservative views. I correspond every work day via email with a well educated friend in LA, and he loves to find news items similar to that which I posted in the opening of this thread.

AS part of my work though, I come in contact with quite a number of Americans with red-neck views. In particular one who said he likes our country but would never visit here if he could not bring his guns with him. Initially I told him he can't take his guns to the majority of places in the world, and his response was 'Well, I guess I better stay home where I can legally defend myself'.

My response was 'Australia thanks you for that'.
  Brianr Assistant Commissioner

Location: Dunedin, New Zealand
My response was 'Australia thanks you for that'.

TheBlacksmit
Laughing
One day while volunteering on the Taieri Gorge railway meeting cruise ships, an obvious Texan with large hat etc began talking to me about Australia. He had just arrived from there and Dunedin was his first landfall in NZ.  I always introduced myself as an Aussie who has chosen to live in NZ.  At first I was fearful of what he would say but he was full of praise that in Sydney there was no need for so much obvious police presence on the streets as in his home city. He was even more amazed when I told him that in NZ the police did not usually carry guns.
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
My response was 'Australia thanks you for that'.

Laughing
One day while volunteering on the Taieri Gorge railway meeting cruise ships, an obvious Texan with large hat etc began talking to me about Australia. He had just arrived from there and Dunedin was his first landfall in NZ.  I always introduced myself as an Aussie who has chosen to live in NZ.  At first I was fearful of what he would say but he was full of praise that in Sydney there was no need for so much obvious police presence on the streets as in his home city. He was even more amazed when I told him that in NZ the police did not usually carry guns.
Brianr
Which brings another incident to memory. I was once stopped by a police car in Redwood city, just south of San Francisco, and it was the full drama, standing at the rear quarter with guns drawn and yelling at me to get out and place my hands on the roof. As it turns out it was a case of mistaken identity, but the point is US cops approach every car with the view that the occupant could be carrying a gun.

Over here, they don't, and that is much less scary.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
My response was 'Australia thanks you for that'.

Laughing
One day while volunteering on the Taieri Gorge railway meeting cruise ships, an obvious Texan with large hat etc began talking to me about Australia. He had just arrived from there and Dunedin was his first landfall in NZ.  I always introduced myself as an Aussie who has chosen to live in NZ.  At first I was fearful of what he would say but he was full of praise that in Sydney there was no need for so much obvious police presence on the streets as in his home city. He was even more amazed when I told him that in NZ the police did not usually carry guns.
Which brings another incident to memory. I was once stopped by a police car in Redwood city, just south of San Francisco, and it was the full drama, standing at the rear quarter with guns drawn and yelling at me to get out and place my hands on the roof. As it turns out it was a case of mistaken identity, but the point is US cops approach every car with the view that the occupant could be carrying a gun.

Over here, they don't, and that is much less scary.
TheBlacksmith
Which is why you don't get out of your car in USA and they strongly recommend that if pulled over you leave you hands at all times on the top of the steering wheel unless asked otherwise. If you have a passenger. He or she should also keep their hands clear and obvious and not make rash moves. Once they have established you are not a threat and an Aussie accent will do most of that, everyone can relax.

On the war stories.

I worked with a bunch of partly southrn US Project Managers and highly qualified and well paid commissioning guys in Dubai. I thought they were normal until he started quoting the 5th Amendment and reasons why they should all have guns so as to keep the govt in control as they had to do it once before (revolution 200 years ago) and that Obama was going to cause them to have to do it again. They had a Doomsday bunker with friends and trained his kids to shoot. I tried to ask, why other OECD countries don't have the need to have such gun ownership, including like cultured Canada and as a result have a fraction of the deaths. I gave it up as lost cause.

On a similar note they defend the right to bare arms, but when another country wants their equivalent in owner Weapons of Mass Destruction, such as nuclear, oh no no no....
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

The right to keep and bear arms is the 2nd Amendment of the US constitution, not the 5th which is relation to guaranteeing due process in criminal law.

That due process had to be added as an amendment instead of being in there from the start is an excellent example of how the US constitution has never been fit for purpose.

Interestingly, the text of the 2nd Amendment reads...

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
America, fµ¢k yeah!

I would like to know why guns can be bought by citizens who have not completed the basic training associated with this well-regulated militia, and what is stopping the President from telling the members of the militia to go home and pick up their guns for a trip to Syria.
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I would like to know why guns can be bought by citizens who have not completed the basic training associated with this well-regulated militia, and what is stopping the President from telling the members of the militia to go home and pick up their guns for a trip to Syria.
justapassenger
Probably because the 2nd. Amendment has been re-interpreted over the years to suit the purpose of whoever is quoting it. And I woulds also suggest that a bunch of Yankee rednecks swanning around in Syria would serve no purpose other than to boost viewing of 'Idiots - Fail' on Youtube.

Another ironic titbit is that the NRA does not permit firearms to be taken into their headquarters building, yet they espouse the idea of armed guards in schools and churches.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The right to keep and bear arms is the 2nd Amendment of the US constitution, not the 5th which is relation to guaranteeing due process in criminal law.

That due process had to be added as an amendment instead of being in there from the start is an excellent example of how the US constitution has never been fit for purpose.

Interestingly, the text of the 2nd Amendment reads...

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I would like to know why guns can be bought by citizens who have not completed the basic training associated with this well-regulated militia, and what is stopping the President from telling the members of the militia to go home and pick up their guns for a trip to Syria.
justapassenger
Like all old documents, including the Koran and the Bible, they get twisted over time as the context and language structure of the day is lost with time.
  LancedDendrite Chief Commissioner

Location: North Haverbrook; where the monorail is king!
The United States Constitution was intended to be (and still acts like) a living document. That's the point of constitutional amendments - to change or add things as circumstances change. Worshipping the Constitution and its early amendments is religious nonsense. If an amendment is stupid, it should be changed. Remember that Prohibition was bought in with a constitutional amendment and then taken out when it was proven to be a silly idea.

Australia's gun laws are eminently sensible and quite appropriate to our cultural and economic situation.
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
Like all old documents, including the Koran and the Bible, they get twisted over time as the context and language structure of the day is lost with time.
RTT_Rules
What are you talking about, I'm constantly putting people to death for disobeying Leviticus...
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The United States Constitution was intended to be (and still acts like) a living document. That's the point of constitutional amendments - to change or add things as circumstances change. Worshipping the Constitution and its early amendments is religious nonsense. If an amendment is stupid, it should be changed. Remember that Prohibition was bought in with a constitutional amendment and then taken out when it was proven to be a silly idea.

Australia's gun laws are eminently sensible and quite appropriate to our cultural and economic situation.
LancedDendrite

RE: US Constitution.

Agree, but talk to many American's and they will tell you its faultless the way it is and the foundation for which their society is built on and should not be changed.

Talk to many Muslims and they will tell you the Quran as its stands is perfect and cannot be questioned.

The difference between the two, about 500years. The number of amendments in the US Constitution in the last 50 years is only a few and minor issues more to do with internal govt. No law is perfect for ever, times change. Problem is when the Constitution becomes as valued as the Quran, making changes becomes even more difficult.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Australian Constitution is more easily changed from a public opinion perspective as most of us wouldn't have a clue about what is in it, however the process to change is complex.

Back to the gun laws, agree with LD above, however I do fear that with time they will be watered down and with increasing acts or random terrorism like in Paramatta last week, public opinion may change rapidly over coming years as I doubt this is going to stop any time soon.
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
Australian Constitution is more easily changed from a public opinion perspective as most of us wouldn't have a clue about what is in it, however the process to change is complex.
RTT_Rules
Actually, like England, Australia does not have a constitution as such. Both countries have an 'uncodified constitution', meaning one that exists as part of a set of laws, but is not written down in the form of a document.
  Brianr Assistant Commissioner

Location: Dunedin, New Zealand
Australian Constitution is more easily changed from a public opinion perspective as most of us wouldn't have a clue about what is in it, however the process to change is complex.
Actually, like England, Australia does not have a constitution as such. Both countries have an 'uncodified constitution', meaning one that exists as part of a set of laws, but is not written down in the form of a document.
TheBlacksmith
Sorry you are wrong. True the UK does not have a constitution (unless they have created one since I studied Government in the 60's) but Australia does.
http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/Constitution.aspx

You are perhaps confusing a bill of rights. Australia does not have one while eg NZ does.
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

Australia does not have a constitution as such.
TheBlacksmith
You can read the Constitution of Australia at https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2013Q00005/Download

True the UK does not have a constitution ...
Brianr
Still the case.

England … does not have a constitution …
TheBlacksmith
England doesn't even have its own government.

Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales all have their own legislative assemblies (equivalent to state governments) in addition to representation in the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The people of England have a democratic deficit in that MPs from the three other 'home nations' can vote on laws affecting many topics in England which they (and MPs from England) cannot vote on if those matters are under the remit of the devolved assemblies.
  lsrailfan Chief Commissioner

Location: Somewhere you're not
I don't pretend to know much about gun laws in the U.S, but to me the 2nd amendment needs to be rewritten, and brought into line with today's society, I think the 2nd amendment is absurd, and it applied way back when, not in today's society, citizens do not have a "Right to bear arms" the people that should bear arms are shooters maybe, police, other law enforcement officials. not everyday citizens

Kind Regards

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: RTT_Rules

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.