Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.3
Site Design by Sekimori

« Contact point for letters to the editor | Main | Article on self-defense and CCW laws »

Australian antigunners seek still more controls

Posted by David Hardy · 26 April 2006 07:58 PM

ABC News reports that the Australian PM wants stricter gun laws. There is a telling interview with a spokesman for their National Coalition for Gun Control.

He begins by saying that ten years ago ""I think the perception was that there was reasonable regulation over handguns," but they needed a ban on semi-auto rifles and shotguns.

Today, that's not enough. He wants a ban on semi-auto handguns, which apparently can still be owned by licensed targetW-shooting club members. "We really need the Commonwealth to explain why target shooters with handguns in clubs are better armed than our police. We really need an explanation as to that and they haven't provided one."

[UPDATE: the Daily Telegraph has word on gun law changes in New South Wales. They've eliminated a monopoly one company had on giving tests for rifle and shotgun licenses -- a monopoly that made it millions -- but made the tests more difficult. The PM says "I think there's always more that can be done at a state level," and "we really must resolve as a nation never to go down the American path." In the meantime, The Australian disputes whether all the antigun measures have done anything worth doing.

· non-US

6 Comments | Leave a comment

Rudy DiGiacinto | April 26, 2006 8:17 PM | Reply

"We really need the Commonwealth to explain why target shooters with handguns in clubs are better armed than our police. We really need an explanation as to that and they haven't provided one."

That question was answered in America on June 12, 1776: "That all power is vested in, and consequently derived, from the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all time amenable to them."

emdfl | April 27, 2006 7:51 AM | Reply

How 'bout "Because we paid for our guns WITH OUR OWN MONEY, you jerk-off!!"

Chris | April 27, 2006 8:34 AM | Reply

'target shooters with handguns in clubs are better armed than our police'

Good for them. Why is that a problem? Storage requirements and the legal hassles you have to go through to join these clubs ensure that criminal types _aren't_ members... Why do these law abiding citizens of Australia do that threatens the security of the country? Is there a single case where a member of a handgun club committed a criminal act with a club-registered handgun? (no... there's not)

I'm thankfull for the Australian gun banners. It's a clear demonstration to the USA what can happen if we let our anti-gun nuts get in a position to implement their agenda. Of course, if Australia jettisoned the entire gun control program, and their crime statistics improved as I suspect they would, _that_ would be a good example too!

Funny how it's easy to come up with a good example of a position that's based on truth, isn't it?

Doug In Colorado | April 27, 2006 11:06 AM | Reply

Yes, and Target Shooters are not bloody likely to use their guns in an unlawful way, mate...so why shouldn't they be armed with whatever they deem necessary and useful to them in the pursuit of their sport? Do you think that a Target shooter would refuse to come to the aid of a policeman?

The Mechanic | April 27, 2006 4:57 PM | Reply

Well Mr. Howard, the American Gun Culture doesn't admire you back also. Of course you wouldn't want to emulate the American example where we are sovereign citizens not subjects. What's left of ur tattered freedom is still envied by the rest of the world. Another reason not to base cases on foreign law. We aren't other countries. We need to make sure we stay that way.

Rudy DiGiacinto | April 27, 2006 6:53 PM | Reply

To be honest Australian gun control has helped. That's right and I have proof. I have 800 rounds of Australian 7.62 x 51 ammuntition at a price of $110 dollars and it is great stuff. By law they had to export the stuff and not sell it in the Commonwealth. Gun control is good for something, as long as it isn't here.

Leave a comment