« Contact point for letters to the editor | Main | Article on self-defense and CCW laws »
Australian antigunners seek still more controls
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
How 'bout "Because we paid for our guns WITH OUR OWN MONEY, you jerk-off!!"
'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?
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?
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.
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.
"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."