topic Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion" in Community Spirit

Gun Control "documentary discussion"

softail-joanie — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 04:55:49 GMT

DISARMED: A History of Gun Control Documentary Film- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1Vu6fWro68

GUN CONTROL WORLDWIDE- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJxhc60cdHw (WARNING) Graphic Images

Gun Control in Australia- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGaDAThOHhA

British Want Their Guns Back- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKdBxpKqUvs

Gun Control - Mr. Feshamon (Official Music Video) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJXwGWAGXmI

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

creative*crisis — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 05:16:08 GMT

Sorry but I never find a set of links conducive to a discussion.

IMO you need to put forward an opinion or position on the topic to get it started.
Which could make this quite an interesting topic but I'm not going to read 5 links to get it started sorry.

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

this-one-time-at-bandcamp — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 07:34:05 GMT

The third offering, gun control in Australia is nothing but a pack of lies...........so you can be sure the rest of them are the same.............

From Fact-Check:

The e-mail says that "[i]t has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms." Actually, it’s been 13 years since Australian gun law was originally changed. In 1996, the government banned some types of guns, instituted a buyback program and imposed stricter licensing and registration requirements. Gun ownership rates in Australia declined from 7 percent to 5 percent. Another law in 2002 tightened restrictions a bit more, restricting caliber, barrel length and capacity for sport shooting handguns.

Have murders increased since the gun law change, as claimed? Actually, Australian crime statistics show a marked decrease in homicides since the gun law change. According to the Australian Institute of Criminology, a government agency, the number of homicides in Australia did increase slightly in 1997 and peaked in 1999, but has since declined to the lowest number on record in 2007, the most recent year for which official figures are available.

Furthermore, murders using firearms have declined even more sharply than murders in general since the 1996 gun law. In the seven years prior to 1997, firearms were used in 24 percent of all Australian homicides. But most recently, firearms were used in only 11 percent of Australian homicides, according to figures for the 12 months ending July 1, 2007. That’s a decline of more than half since enactment of the gun law to which this message refers.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/05/gun-control-in-australia/

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

lyne-flyn — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 08:45:53 GMT

@this-one-time-at-bandcamp wrote:
The third offering, gun control in Australia is nothing but a pack of lies...........so you can be sure the rest of them are the same.............

From Fact-Check:
The e-mail says that "[i]t has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms." Actually, it’s been 13 years since Australian gun law was originally changed. In 1996, the government banned some types of guns, instituted a buyback program and imposed stricter licensing and registration requirements. Gun ownership rates in Australia declined from 7 percent to 5 percent. Another law in 2002 tightened restrictions a bit more, restricting caliber, barrel length and capacity for sport shooting handguns.
Have murders increased since the gun law change, as claimed? Actually, Australian crime statistics show a marked decrease in homicides since the gun law change. According to the Australian Institute of Criminology, a government agency, the number of homicides in Australia did increase slightly in 1997 and peaked in 1999, but has since declined to the lowest number on record in 2007, the most recent year for which official figures are available.
Furthermore, murders using firearms have declined even more sharply than murders in general since the 1996 gun law. In the seven years prior to 1997, firearms were used in 24 percent of all Australian homicides. But most recently, firearms were used in only 11 percent of Australian homicides, according to figures for the 12 months ending July 1, 2007. That’s a decline of more than half since enactment of the gun law to which this message refers.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/05/gun-control-in-australia/

You know you shouldn't let facts get in the way of a good gun control bashing thread...

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

myoclon1cjerk — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 09:34:22 GMT

About the only thing I applaud Howard for.

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

poddster — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:06:47 GMT

If anything the "credit" should be attributed to that creep Martin Bryant. By his premeditated wilful murder of 35 innocent people and the attempted murder of a further 25 he forced a knee jerk reaction from the government in power that we have been paying for ever since

The chaos that followed with all sort of pressure groups getting on their own particular hobby horse and riding it for all it it was worth has resulted in the most ridiculous firearms laws imaginable.

Those laws encourage lawbreakers and hamstring law enforcement, sporting shooters, hunters, the rural community, pest control and they have taken away the ability for people to defend themselves and their property. All this at a huge cost to taxpayers.

The creep is still drawing oxygen at taxpayer's expense.

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

vicr3000 — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:18:44 GMT

Podd

Howard did not do Australia a service with his buy back.

What he did do was provide a huge shot in the arm for an industry that was pretty down at the time.

He provided a huge amount of money for guns which people went straight out with and purchased

3 guns for the one that was stolen by the Gov't.

The end result was, the gun / hunting industry took off and never looked back, we now have far

more shooters and hunters and many many more guns out there.

So he ended up helping put more guns in the community.

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

softail-joanie — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:49:08 GMT

Sorry but I never find a set of links conducive to a discussion.

i did a search on gun control, and used the most relivant examples i could find. also, i gave you a choice to watch all or one. really don;t matter if you watch any, it isn't vital to the discussion.

IMO you need to put forward an opinion or position on the topic to get it started.

i think most here knows my opinion or position on the topic, i thought i would answer the replies as they come. just so you know, i'm always gonna side with personal freedom, human rights, and God's will.

Which could make this quite an interesting topic but I'm not going to read 5 links to get it started sorry.

no one is forcing you to read, or rather watch 5 videos, it's not required to contribute to this discussion to watch any, just fuel to fire the thought process.

--------------------

i'm against any gun control for the reason listed above,

1- it's a direct attack on personal freedom

2- gun related deaths don't even make it into the top 10 on the actual causes of death

3- guns in the right hands actually prevent the damage from guns being in the wrong hands

4- gun control almost always if not always, puts guns in the wrong hands and takes guns out of the right hands

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

poddster — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:52:35 GMT

The target shooting club I was a member of prior to Bryant had a membership of well over 400 and events were attended by 70 t0 100 members. The attendance these days is 5-6 on a good day.

The club has only 2 shooters under 25.

New members are put off by the stupid regulations in place by the current firearms legislation.

I now takes around 10 months and around $1000.00 outlay before even being able to participate in a match. That is BEFORE you can even own a firearm.

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

vicr3000 — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:56:03 GMT

Is that pistol ?

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

poddster — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:03:44 GMT

Either /or if you are a serious target shooter.

Hand gun is a bit more difficult than rifle, but on the whole the time and fincial outlay remain the same.

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

jimmy*part4 — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 12:32:20 GMT

Is that pistol ?

Nah, he was just happy to see you.

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

iapetus_rocks — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 13:41:40 GMT

The argument that public gun ownership can protect people from a tyrannical govt is false.

The govt will always win because they have better and bigger guns, and let's face it, they have a whole Army, Navy and Air Force at their disposal, not to mention an armed police force.

Govt. 1 : People. 0

Guns are liable to be stolen and used against the general public.

Kids steal them and shoot their teachers or their classmates or their parents or their brothers or sisters. People break into your house and steal them and shoot You.

Guns cannot protect you against things like a home invasion if you are obeying the law and keeping a licensed firearm unloaded in a locked gunsafe. (time/availability factor)

They are more of a liability to the gun owner than they are worth. people living in the country on farms might need them, but truth be told, a knife would also suit the need that is so often specified (dispatching sick or injured livestock in an humane fashion.)

There can really be very few actual Needs of the average citizen which would or could justify them owning a gun.

And then we are left with the naked Desire to own a gun. What kind of people who have no need to own a gun Desire to own one?

And this need-less Desire to own a gun is, I believe, a Red Flag which flags those people as being of really unsuitable character to own one in the first place.

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

poddster — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 14:54:01 GMT

@iapetus_rocks wrote:
The argument that public gun ownership can protect people from a tyrannical govt is false.

The govt will always win because they have better and bigger guns, and let's face it, they have a whole Army, Navy and Air Force at their disposal, not to mention an armed police force.

Govt. 1 : People. 0

Guns are liable to be stolen and used against the general public.

Kids steal them and shoot their teachers or their classmates or their parents or their brothers or sisters. People break into your house and steal them and shoot You.

Guns cannot protect you against things like a home invasion if you are obeying the law and keeping a licensed firearm unloaded in a locked gunsafe. (time/availability factor)

They are more of a liability to the gun owner than they are worth. people living in the country on farms might need them, but truth be told, a knife would also suit the need that is so often specified (dispatching sick or injured livestock in an humane fashion.)

There can really be very few actual Needs of the average citizen which would or could justify them owning a gun.

And then we are left with the naked Desire to own a gun. What kind of people who have no need to own a gun Desire to own one?

And this need-less Desire to own a gun is, I believe, a Red Flag which flags those people as being of really unsuitable character to own one in the first place.

The best way to treat a tyrannical government is to vote them out, simple as that. I have no idea where you got the notion that gun ownership is fo protection against governments. It could be a Leftie thing.

If a firearm is in a secure location, as it should be, and is required by law, there is not much Chance of them being stolen or misused by an unauthorised person, especially kids.

Once again, firearms are not for protection against home invasion. unless of course you happen to have come home from the range and you are about to clean your firearm before locking it away in its safe.

Firearm ownership in not a liability and once again I have no idea where you clutched that notion from, that notion is unfounded, obviously you have never owned a firearm.

A knife to humanely put down an injured animal? What a ridiculously suggestion. Imagine an injured enraged bull or perhaps a large dog or even just a cat, and you get out your whatever knife and end its misery. Good luck with that.

Average citizen? There is no such thing as an average citizen. Would yo call an owner of a tractor, bulldozer, racing car, aircraft, yacht, speedboat, golf club or any other device average?

By the way all the above can be lethal as well, how about a motor vehicle?

My chosen recreational sport justifies my ownership of a firearm.

Oh yes I desire the requirement that allows me to take part in my chosen recreational activity, and by the way I have a genuine need for a fire arm to pursue my chosen sport, umm like a cricketer needs a bat (that to can be lethal) or a golfer needs golf clubs (can be lethal), spear fisherman, and a plethora of other activities that use potentially lethal tools or accessories.

Red flag you say, yes the colour is appropriate. There are many more people who do untold damage with a keyboard.

Remember this guns don't kill or people , people do.

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

poddster — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 15:03:05 GMT

I forgot to add target shooting is an Olympic sport 🙂

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

poddster — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 15:11:22 GMT

Furthermore there are more deaths and injuries attributed to football than there have been attributed to target shooting, in my club there has have no accidents ever since it has been in existence that is over 60 years.

I have to wonder how many golf clubs can boast of a matching record?

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

iapetus_rocks — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 15:28:32 GMT

(I was replying to joanie)

I have always argued that if one doesn't want a tyrannical govt, one should use one's vote more considerately. (I was referring the the USA's 2nd amendement)

Advocates for the personal right to own guns often argue that they need them for protection.

Firearm ownership is a proven historically verifiable risk-factor. it increases one's risk of being shot.

Nobody in a truly civilised society Needs to own a gun for self-protection.

Like I said, the desire of someone to own a gun for the pursuit of "recreation" calls into question the character of that person. Guns are designed to kill.

it's not much of a physical sport or a physical demand to pull a trigger. it's not much of an intellectual excercise to aim at a target. I have fired guns at targets. i found it boring in the extreme. and bored people want to not be bored so what do they do? they invent exciting ways to use their otherwise boring guns by firing at live, moving targets.

For sport. for pleasure. it's a poor sort of character who cannot devise more emotionally and spiritually or artistically (not to mention, physically) satisfying ways of obtaining pleasure.

And those sorts of characters who derive "pleasure" from a boring activity (which has the potential to endanger the lives and safety of others if they become bored enough or drunk enough on the perceived power it endows them with) are people who I would rather not choose to live close to, like next-door or in the same street.

I did say that some people might be able to demonstrate a real need to own a gun.

But for those who just desire to own and to shoot a gun, then there is a case for having their psychological make up examined rather closely.

Yes, guns do kill people. especially if in the hands of people who are so mentally unbalanced that they feel an overwhelming urge to shoot their guns (thus realising the Power that they feel they otherwise lack in their daily lives)

if you want target practice, then play with darts.

There's a whole literature on the psychological significance of guns in the minds of those who otherwise feel frustrated and disempowered in society.

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

softail-joanie — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 15:58:39 GMT

Diffrence of opinion is good, and good that we can all voice our own here. Whatever your opinion, or reasoning behind why one should carry or own guns if your is the opinion that one should be able to, or shouldn't be able to, is welcome in this topic. I believe the fauct that we are discussing this is good, it's how we learn.

Valid points made aganst my points, yes, a gun can be a liability to the owner or holder, that should never be forgotten, gun ownership is a far cry from overthrowing a tyranical government, but you have to admit it makes the tyrant's job harder, why do you think they always try to disarm the people before getting too tyranical?

There also is the other reason of the bad guy, or gal, with a gun. they are for gun control because what do they care with obaying laws? if their victims have been disarmed, makes their job mucher easyer and safer. All laws aganst guns do is take them from good people, true criminals being left unrestrained, unstoppable.

But even a better reason against gun control, freedom. it takes freedom away from one who might want to have that simple tool, or might want to protect themselves or their family. Even if all the bad things said about guns is true, (it's not) but if it were, it wouldn't justify that infringment on freedom alone. The founding fathers of America valued freedom far more than saftey.

Not that gun control makes us more safe, quite oppisite is true, these gun laws only serve to take guns away from good people who make an effort to follow laws. Personally, i don't have much confidence in the band or criminals known as the police, AKA, responders, to take guns away from those that would use them for terible things.

Police are smart, government is smart, they know all this i'm saying. their reasons for gun control, is they want to tear down scicioity, the community, humanity. We are comming to the realization as humanity, that we might no longer need police, or some, most or all of government. they see their end nearing. if they can make work for themselves, we might actually see a need for them, even trade our freedoms for their protection.

I have been abused by these corrupt sadistic people, i can tell you it's no fun. i been in their jails, been their victim, and been sold to the public by these attackers as the aggressor actually having victims.. I am NV, I practice non violence like a religion, i go outta my way not to harm anyone, these cops will tell you i have victims, am dangerious, and need to be dealt with. they will tell you i'm up to no good, and should be banned from public places. they are smart, good salesmen, and if those traits don't work, they can intimidate.

Are we gonna allow for guns only in the hands of people like that ?

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

iapetus_rocks — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:14:47 GMT

Best thing is to become politically aware and refuse to vote for despots and tyrants and oppressors of the public welfare.

Best thing is to engineer a society where there are no such desperately poor people that they would need to rob and steal from those who have more.

Best thing would be to engineer and to build a society in which the people would have no need to own guns to protect themselves against anyone.

A utopian world-view? maybe, but let's not stop trying to aim to make it come true.

Re: Gun Control "documentary discussion"

softail-joanie — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:22:58 GMT

Best thing is to become politically aware and refuse to vote for despots and tyrants and oppressors of the public welfare. Best thing is to engineer a society where there are no such desperately poor people that they would need to rob and steal from those who have more. Best thing would be to engineer and to build a society in which the people would have no need to own guns to protect themselves against anyone. A utopian world-view? maybe, but let's not stop trying to aim to make it come true

The best system for checks and balances, can be undermined when the ability to enforce it is taken away from the people and handed over to group of police, military, or otherwise. the 2ed amendment, is vital to the 1st, the 4th, and all other freedoms.

Let he who is without a sword SELL HIS GARMENT AND BUY ONE ...

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jesus, the author of liberity and the manifestation or truth