The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed (1 Viewer)

[jennyfromdabloc]

The most obvious example of the complete incompetence of government at protecting us is 9/11.

Warnings from international intelligence agencies about an attack on 9/11 were ignored. After one plane had crashed into the first tower, the security agencies had an hour to react to the other highjacked planes and failed to shoot them down or intercept them.

The government couldn't even stop the terrorists from coming into their country to plan the attack and learn how to fly planes but not to land them.

The most highly funded military and intelligence organizations in the world's history, with multi billion dollar budgets were unable to protect their citizens from being slaughtered on their own territory.

Yet a $300 pistol in the cockpit of the planes could have saved the day.

 

[williamc]

The most obvious example of the complete incompetence of government at protecting us is 9/11.

Warnings from international intelligence agencies about an attack on 9/11 were ignored. After one plane had crashed into the first tower, the security agencies had an hour to react to the other highjacked planes and failed to shoot them down or intercept them.

The government couldn't even stop the terrorists from coming into their country to plan the attack and learn how to fly planes but not to land them.

The most highly funded military and intelligence organizations in the world's history, with multi billion dollar budgets were unable to protect their citizens from being slaughtered on their own territory.

Yet a $300 pistol in the cockpit of the planes could have saved the day.

Actually using a gun in an aircraft is fucking idiotic. SCARE TACTICS

 

[loquasagacious]

Actually using a gun in an aircraft is fucking idiotic. SCARE TACTICS

Mythbusters: a gun shot isn't going to cause explosive decompression.

Though I would argue that a handgun in the cockpit would not have averted 9/11.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

Though I would argue that a handgun in the cockpit would not have averted 9/11.

On balance, it probably wouldn't have. But it there is at least a reasonable chance that it may have.

Whereas the over funded military and intelligence behemoths totally failed.

At the risk of causing an uproar and a bunch of people labeling me a deranged manic, I would say that if all passengers could bring guns to to airplanes, there would have been quite a good chance that 9/11 could have been averted.

 

[David Spade]

the terrorists did not have guns did they?

so an armed guard or something would have had a good chance of stopping them or at worst it would have created a hostage situation or crashed aircraft (not into a building)

 

[jb_nc]

I am not saying I support the open carry of AK-47s (though that is commonplace in many parts of the world), I'm saying a gun used properly is no more likely to kill somebody than a car.

redmayne has no idea what she's talking about. Have you ever even handled a weapon, much less fired one? Farmers with Lee-Enfields are who were on the Kokoda track, not politicians you fucking tard.

Any adult without a criminal record should be able to own a weapon if they have the means to store it safely. (This is pretty much the status quo, so yeah). I'm not saying we should arm people but unnecessary "gun-control" doesn't achieve anything.

lol jesus christ

I am not saying I support the open carry of AK-47s (though that is commonplace in many parts of the world), I'm saying a gun used properly is no more likely to kill somebody than a car.

this is the dumbest shit.

just gonna quote it

 

[SylviaB]

fuck these people who want guns are fucking stupid

I mean, hello, if someone beaks into your house or something you don't need a gun

just ring the police and wait a few hours til they show up

ffs

 

[redmayne]

The government didn't do shit, the government sent our soldiers to die following british orders in WWI and Singapore and the American government in Vietnam. The soldiers fighting on kokoda WERE militias. They were quite literally farmers with lee-enfields.

Since then though, time and time again we have seen that motivated local insurgencies who know the area well can defeat in the long run, better supplied and organised armies. This is irrelevant though since I can't see any country in the foreseeable future invading Australia.

The point is in a free country we should be able to own and use things, even if they are dangerous.

Edit: This is off-topic as shit though. The government doesn't always know best.

Um, I don't mean to bring in the whole "well, my grandfather did this, so there", but...my grandfather fought in PNG in WWII. And sure, he was a farmer. But he was a trained soldier in the army. It wasn't some case of "Okay, farmers unite! Let's pop over and shoot us up some Japanese folk."

Exactly, no army is gonna invade Australia any time soon. So all this talk of needing to defend ourselves is utter crap.

The most obvious example of the complete incompetence of government at protecting us is 9/11.

Yet a $300 pistol in the cockpit of the planes could have saved the day.

No one could possibly have compehended the enormity of 9/11. It was the first of its kind and so unbelievably worse than anything before it. I mean sure, they had intel, but that can only go so far. If the highly trained, expert government couldn't do much about it, how the hell do you expect the average joe to?? It's just silly...

On balance, it probably wouldn't have. But it there is at least a reasonable chance that it may have.

Whereas the over funded military and intelligence behemoths totally failed.

At the risk of causing an uproar and a bunch of people labeling me a deranged manic, I would say that if all passengers could bring guns to to airplanes, there would have been quite a good chance that 9/11 could have been averted.

Yeah, I know what would make me feel safe, having guns everywhere on planes. What a safe world that would be. Wonderful.

Who needs movies on little screens, when you can have the entertainment of gun-toting bogans shooting up the Arab guy on the plane coz he looks like a terrorist. Risking the the safety of everyone on board in doing so.

Well...at least you understand it was a deranged statement to make.

Oh and mythbusters isn't the gospel, as entertaining as it is. Pretty sure guns on planes = bad idea.

 

[Teclis]

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Regulate the ones at fault.


I have no problem with people owning guns. As long as they know how to use them. How to shoot accurately so that in attempting to defend themselves they can avoid killing someone (although shooting to not kill is actually harder than it would seem, going against training).

Regulate the people, licencing. Inventory of bullets and lodging each one you use. That way gun deaths can be tracked, illegal uses can be tracked.

But honestly If you want a weapon for home defense, a paintball gun with airsoft, rubber balls, hell even paintbail from close range are more than incapacitating enough.

 

[Teclis]

In Switzerland when you turn 20 they give you an assault rifle to keep in your home.

Oh and

I loled at this pretty hard, as did my Swiss friend...

 

[Serius]

Um, I don't mean to bring in the whole "well, my grandfather did this, so there", but...my grandfather fought in PNG in WWII. And sure, he was a farmer. But he was a trained soldier in the army. It wasn't some case of "Okay, farmers unite! Let's pop over and shoot us up some Japanese folk."

Trained? for how long? some sort of crappy little weekend course on how to take orders? the vast majority of Australian soldiers that fought in WW2 were poorly trained[they still did remarkably well, not trying to put them down, but they had very little formal military training] and our army was largely made up of conscripted soldiers. Quite literally, farmer boys given a gun and sent on their way. Your grandfather might have been one of the few who had proper training, he might have been in reserves before that, i have no idea, but he was in the minority. Also, at kokoda, because of current legislation at home, a disproportionate amount of soldiers sent there were conscripts. Almost all of them infact. They were pretty much militia dressed in uniform carrying the same type of guns they shot back home on the farm.

Exactly, no army is gonna invade Australia any time soon. So all this talk of needing to defend ourselves is utter crap.

Being vigiliant isnt crap, and besides its fun to wartheory like this.

We can justify or discredit guns all day, i dont mind doing that and ive done it alot before. I thought this thread was more about morals and rights rather than statistics and what makes a safer country etc [which can be argued either way really] which i dont much care about. I dont care if a lack of guns really do make Australia safer, even if that was true i still think we should have the right to own them.

 

[Daipire]

How easy is it to (legally) get a gun in Aus?

 

[Serius]

How easy is it to (legally) get a gun in Aus?

A weekend course? i dunno, they have different classes of weapons and stuff. My cousin didnt seem to have any trouble and he now owns a le enfield. Its not "difficult" anyone normal citizen without a criminal record should be able to do it.

 

[Nereis]

I support the continued ownership of firearms by private citizens for two reasons. The first is that organised criminals can obtain firemans through illegal channels. Thus, any ban on firearms will then only affect those who obtain their firearms through legal means. Your grandma and girlfriend is then completely vulnerable to every half bit crim who can break through their window. The second is that a disarmed population is a docile population. Notice that every communist country has a complete ban on gun ownership except for... thats right, the military. Also notice how their military seems to fire on their own people when they get all wanting democracy, the nerve! Those who have kept up to date with the news may also know that the armoured van robbers all had firearms. Don't open yourself to victimisation. The world is a cruel, violent place.

PS: Those who bring up Japan and/or Hong Kong may want to look into the prevalence of organised crime there. I do not want to live in a place where the local mafia can extort anyone of their rightfully earnt money.

 

[ComingUpForAir]

I support the continued ownership of firearms by private citizens for two reasons. The first is that organised criminals can obtain firemans through illegal channels. Thus, any ban on firearms will then only affect those who obtain their firearms through legal means. Your grandma and girlfriend is then completely vulnerable to every half bit crim who can break through their window. The second is that a disarmed population is a docile population. Notice that every communist country has a complete ban on gun ownership except for... thats right, the military. Also notice how their military seems to fire on their own people when they get all wanting democracy, the nerve! Those who have kept up to date with the news may also know that the armoured van robbers all had firearms. Don't open yourself to victimisation. The world is a cruel, violent place.

PS: Those who bring up Japan and/or Hong Kong may want to look into the prevalence of organised crime there. I do not want to live in a place where the local mafia can extort anyone of their rightfully earnt money.

The concept of 'spill-overs' (or 'externalities') has obviously escaped that small little jar-head of yours.

85% of gun deaths in America are accidental home shootings, fact.

Despite a 30% increase (according to US census data 2005-2008) in the amount gun-owning homes, home break-and-enters rose 5%. fact.

Unkempt gun-nuts such as yourself, i.e skin-headed rednecks with southern cross tattos, must realise that the social cost of allowing the public to own guns drastically outweighs the percieved private benifit.
What I want to know is why dont you just go and join the military? you and this guy can salivate over crates of ammunition and machine guns all night long.

 

[David Spade]

How easy is it to (legally) get a gun in Aus?

pretty easy

safety course that goes for like 30mins and if you fail you should be locked up
then yeah send away your papers

you just need a reason to own one, such as primary producer, recreation (need permission to shoot on a property or game council) or just join a gun club.

i have 4.

the only thing that stops some people is convicted criminals cant have one for like 10yrs or something

 

[SylviaB]

85% of gun deaths in America are accidental home shootings, fact.

sauce pl0x

 

[Serius]

sauce pl0x

You wont get one, because it doesnt exist. Poor troll attempt if anything, i would say most shootings would be intential, usually street crime or gang related.

Gun laws are far too political to get good statistics about. Perfect example is anti gun proponents quoting some figure about how many children die from guns a day, i think the oftened quoted number is 9 a day. What they dont mention is that this includes anyone under 18 [even under 21 in some states], including 17yr old gang members who die in mutal exchanges of fire over turf wars, or die from police shooting them when they commit a crime and start firing at police.

The leftover "children gun deaths" are usually suicide related, as under 21 yr old males are the highest risk of suicide and have the highest rate of actually going through with it. It wouldnt matter if guns werent around in that case, they would just jump off a bridge, jump in front of a train or something equally violent.

 

[ComingUpForAir]

You wont get one, because it doesnt exist. Poor troll attempt if anything, i would say most shootings would be intential, usually street crime or gang related.

again the slightly nuanced concept of externalities escapes that little '25-push-ups, no time for questions' military mind of yours.
To think that most gun deaths arise from 'gang wars' is just hilarious, really demonstrates the abject naviety and squalidness of the foul thoughts your neo-fascist mind shits out.
(My source is the US census report (chapter 10- National Crimes statistics) for whoever wanted to know)
The unsophistcated 'surveys' you glanced over on google or whatever do show that 'homicide' is the main source of 'gun deaths', but if you had been up to date with the actual literature on the subject, you would have realised that 90% of those homicides occur within the house, between two relatives (or close associates).
The sloppy sack of soiled meat under your crew-cut will probably have a hard with the numbers, so I doubt you'll ever understand my argument, allthough this is regrettable, its very understandable considering all the conditioning you and the other pavlovian dogs are subjected to in the australian defence force.

Gun laws are far too political to get good statistics about. Perfect example is anti gun proponents quoting some figure about how many children die from guns a day, i think the oftened quoted number is 9 a day. What they dont mention is that this includes anyone under 18 [even under 21 in some states], including 17yr old gang members who die in mutal exchanges of fire over turf wars, or die from police shooting them when they commit a crime and start firing at police.

Again you've got to realise those horrorcore rap songs you froth over are not based in reality, most of these 'gang' are in fact small and dirty (and harmless) tralior-trash organisations comprised of a few individuals selling semi-illegal fireworks and drugs out of their caravan.

The leftover "children gun deaths" are usually suicide related, as under 21 yr old males are the highest risk of suicide and have the highest rate of actually going through with it. It wouldnt matter if guns werent around in that case, they would just jump off a bridge, jump in front of a train or something equally violent.

What a positively disgusting and chilling thing to say, dont you dare spew this paranoid 'goverment-taking-our-liberty' speal to the families of the 209 children (under 15) shot down since the start of this year.
revolting sadist.

 

[Venetiad]

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Regulate the ones at fault.


I have no problem with people owning guns. As long as they know how to use them. How to shoot accurately so that in attempting to defend themselves they can avoid killing someone (although shooting to not kill is actually harder than it would seem, going against training).

Regulate the people, licencing. Inventory of bullets and lodging each one you use. That way gun deaths can be tracked, illegal uses can be tracked.

But honestly If you want a weapon for home defense, a paintball gun with airsoft, rubber balls, hell even paintbail from close range are more than incapacitating enough.

IMO this is the best result. Theres no way to address both gun prohibition and self defence as there is no way to address both unemployment and inflation.