Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Hugh Mungus

Victoria Australia a Police State

191 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Golden Duck

Chins up Victoria.  Apparently, a lot people think this thing will go away with the heat.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DingoLingo
7 hours ago, Timothy said:

I know right!? I even almost had to wait to go in to the supermarket, but the line cleared before I got to the door.

And I didn’t even see a single police car in my ~2 hours. 

Hoping this at least gives some people some perspective on the situation...

 

I wont though.. it does not fit their perspective of the situation.. They have it in there mind the cops are foaming at the mouths attacking anyone.. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
14 hours ago, DingoLingo said:

heh sorry mate.. but I will disagree.. I could send my kids to school without fear of them getting shot by a unhinged teenager.. I can send my grand kids to school knowing that even though there are dealers near the school I do not have to worry about stray bullets etc.. no need to buy the kids a bullet proof backpack..  

Right, like drug dealers don't have guns just because it is against the law.  I know my grandchildren are safe and never worry about them getting shot either.  Yes, it has happened but what about knives and screw drivers?  Did you know many people are killed by those?  Should we make those illegal?  And don't tell me guns are different.  Instead of putting money into lobbying against guns we need to put money into making sure people have the mental health care they need, and making sure bullies are not ignored, not to mention abuse by parents, teachers, coaches etc.  Why do you think a teenager would get to the point of shooting up the whole school? 

I think what you say is a cop out, "let society continue to be sick, as long as my kids are safe at least in my mind".

Edited by Desertrat56
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
2 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

Right, like drug dealers don't have guns just because it is against the law.  I know my grandchildren are safe and never worry about them getting shot either.  Yes, it has happened but what about knives and screw drivers?  Did you know many people are killed by those?  Should we make those illegal?  And don't tell me guns are different.  Instead of putting money into lobbying against guns we need to put money into making sure people have the mental health care they need, and making sure bullies are not ignored, not to mention abuse by parents, teachers, coaches etc.  Why do you think a teenager would get to the point of shooting up the whole school? 

I think what you say is a cop out, "let society continue to be sick, as long as my kids are safe at least in my mind".

Can you show that drug dealers, @DingoLingo was talking about, have guns? I imagine the cohort he was referring to are from the Eshay subculture.  The cost associated with a black market firearm makes it prohibitive.

The 1996 reform came after Port Arthur, where 35 people where killed.  There hasn't been a gun massacre since.  However, the Monash incident occurred in 2005 which precipitated Category H restrictions.

Christchurch happened in NZ because it couldn't happen in Australia.

But, you raise an issue.  It's a scary prospect considering possible government overreach after the next screwdriver massacre.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
7 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

Right, like drug dealers don't have guns just because it is against the law.  I know my grandchildren are safe and never worry about them getting shot either.  Yes, it has happened but what about knives and screw drivers?  Did you know many people are killed by those?  Should we make those illegal?  And don't tell me guns are different.  Instead of putting money into lobbying against guns we need to put money into making sure people have the mental health care they need, and making sure bullies are not ignored, not to mention abuse by parents, teachers, coaches etc.  Why do you think a teenager would get to the point of shooting up the whole school? 

I think what you say is a cop out, "let society continue to be sick, as long as my kids are safe at least in my mind".

What you suggest only makes society sicker, nursing that festering twisted idea of gun love. Aussies contributed and voluntarily worked together to enact gun control. As soon as you said "when you government took away your guns" it was obvious that you too are infected by that same sickness. That's not what happened, Aussies are obviously capable of compassionate acts of community that are unfathomable to those who have had that part of their humanity destroyed by gun culture.

Americans who think we want guns, or that they were removed by force are just deliberately ignorant. It's a passive agrressive approach to belittle our choice. And that's a childish and pathetic. We made it, we are very happy with it, it has been beneficial. Live with it. 

When was the last screwdriver school massacre? That's a terrible argument. Seriously. Gun nuts say the strangest things, they really do. 

And how do you think guns would help in this situation? With tensions high at such events, with guns involved there is the opportunity to elevate the incident. Nobody wants that, and we don't want the carnage the US is seeing. The OP seems to want to, but many Aussies would tell that idiot to shut up and go home. Just like your seeing from the majority of Aussie posters in this thread. The OP is just a wannabe.

Imagine if he or Avi had a gun. I would not like to be around people with that mindset and a deadly weapon. You have unrest in the US because you can't move past your wild west thinking. It's all self inflicted by your own choices. 

I may have mentioned this earlier, but you can shove your guns where the sun doesn't shine. 

Edited by psyche101
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DingoLingo
9 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

Right, like drug dealers don't have guns just because it is against the law.  I know my grandchildren are safe and never worry about them getting shot either.  Yes, it has happened but what about knives and screw drivers?  Did you know many people are killed by those?  Should we make those illegal?  And don't tell me guns are different.  Instead of putting money into lobbying against guns we need to put money into making sure people have the mental health care they need, and making sure bullies are not ignored, not to mention abuse by parents, teachers, coaches etc.  Why do you think a teenager would get to the point of shooting up the whole school? 

I think what you say is a cop out, "let society continue to be sick, as long as my kids are safe at least in my mind".

actually they dont :D only the upper echelons of the groups do over here.. its not that easy to get a illegal gun here.. the cost is the biggest factor.. sure you will get some that make zip guns but they are one shot wonders.. and yes Guns are the difference.. sorry mate but the facts show that.. I know it does not fall into your beliefs but its the truth.. 
now the mental health side of things.. lets talk about that.. 

$9.9 billion was spend on mental health related services in australia during 2017 to 18.. 2019 had a extra $784 million added to it.. 

so ya see.. not only is australia progressive on guns but also mental health.. its something you lot over there can learn.. 

we leave the 'let society contiune to be sick' to you guys.. I mean.. seriously.. the gun mentality over there is very much.. Oh we know we could make sure the kids are safe by giving up this class of gun.. but no.. its our right to own them.. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
4 hours ago, DingoLingo said:

ctually they dont :D only the upper echelons of the groups do over here.. its not that easy to get a illegal gun here.. the cost is the biggest factor.. sure you will get some that make zip guns but they are one shot wonders.. and yes Guns are the difference.. sorry mate but the facts show that.. I know it does not fall into your beliefs but its the truth.. 
now the mental health side of things.. lets talk about that.. 

Fact Check!

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-26/source-of-illicit-guns-in-australia/6483762?nw=0

Considering the magnitude of the problem of unregistered firearms, here, the legal registered gun owners would consider the Australian solution disarming in the face of clear and present danger. 

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

Edited by Hammerclaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
3 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

Fact Check!

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-26/source-of-illicit-guns-in-australia/6483762?nw=0

Considering the magnitude of the problem of unregistered firearms, here, the legal registered gun owners would consider the Australian solution disarming in the face of clear and present danger. 

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

I'm not following. We are number 51 on the list, and importation doesn't affect the  exorbitant cost. A clean handgun on the black market here will fetch around 15k. As DL said, cost is a huge hurdle for any aspiring criminal sure to curb their ideas. If you've got 15k in your pocket, you don't need to rob someone. It's for the big time crims from who use them on each other, which is fine as far as I'm concerned.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.smh.com.au/business/black-market-guns-triple-in-price-20141013-115f08.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
17 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

I'm not following. We are number 51 on the list, and importation doesn't affect the  exorbitant cost. A clean handgun on the black market here will fetch around 15k. As DL said, cost is a huge hurdle for any aspiring criminal sure to curb their ideas. If you've got 15k in your pocket, you don't need to rob someone. It's for the big time crims from who use them on each other, which is fine as far as I'm concerned.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.smh.com.au/business/black-market-guns-triple-in-price-20141013-115f08.html

I provided facts putting everything into context. The one's wo kept undocumented guns, rather than turning them in, are a new criminal class created by the law, not black marketers peddling illegal weapons.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
1 hour ago, Hammerclaw said:

I provided facts putting everything into context. The one's wo kept undocumented guns, rather than turning them in, are a new criminal class created by the law, not black marketers peddling illegal weapons.  

I thought you advocated personal responsibility.  Now it's the law's fault.

Anyway, what do you suppose drives the cost up?  The $15,000 price is six years old, BTW.

The "fact check" article didn't give a high estimate for illicit guns used in organised crime.  And, it didn't mention petty crime at all, you know drug dealers near school.

Edited by Golden Duck
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
2 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

I provided facts putting everything into context. The one's wo kept undocumented guns, rather than turning them in, are a new criminal class created by the law, not black marketers peddling illegal weapons.  

It's still black market, not sure how that changes. Not like you can advertise them on eBay. And buyers would have to have credentials. 

But honestly, after over 20 years, how much impact can that have? The seized guns mentioned in the link were made in 1932 and 1950. That's sounding like people are desperate to get their hands on whatever they can get, and as the other link shows, at a premium.

It's supporting what DL said, it's out of reach of any but the upper levels of crime which aren't a threat to the community, more so each other.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
6 hours ago, psyche101 said:

It's still black market, not sure how that changes. Not like you can advertise them on eBay. And buyers would have to have credentials. 

But honestly, after over 20 years, how much impact can that have? The seized guns mentioned in the link were made in 1932 and 1950. That's sounding like people are desperate to get their hands on whatever they can get, and as the other link shows, at a premium.

It's supporting what DL said, it's out of reach of any but the upper levels of crime which aren't a threat to the community, more so each other.

The new class of criminal created is ordinary Ozzies who wanted to keep their guns with no other criminal intent. That's what happens, sometimes when we make something legal, illegal. Some people just won't accept it. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
7 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

I thought you advocated personal responsibility.  Now it's the law's fault.

Anyway, what do you suppose drives the cost up?  The $15,000 price is six years old, BTW.

The "fact check" article didn't give a high estimate for illicit guns used in organised crime.  And, it didn't mention petty crime at all, you know drug dealers near school.

It's a factual annotation to a post. it's yours to make of what you will. Personal responsibility is not the same as social responsibility. The one's who kept their guns chose the former over the latter. 

Edited by Hammerclaw
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
5 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

The new class of criminal created is ordinary Ozzies who wanted to keep their guns with no other criminal intent. That's what happens, sometimes when we make something legal, illegal. Some people just won't accept it. 

I'm not convinced. The article may have a point that Senator McKenzie's claims are baseless, so is their speculation that the guns used in crimes are ones never turned in. The article states it's but one possible source, and it's an old and very finite supply. Considering that, how could that be a significant contribution? 

But that still doesn't change what @DingoLingo said. The cost of firearms remains prohibitive keeping them out of the hands of common criminals. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I'm not convinced. The article may have a point that Senator McKenzie's claims are baseless, so is their speculation that the guns used in crimes are ones never turned in. The article states it's but one possible source, and it's an old and very finite supply. Considering that, how could that be a significant contribution? 

But that still doesn't change what @DingoLingo said. The cost of firearms remains prohibitive keeping them out of the hands of common criminals. 

Wouldn't know, since my post was informational and not point oriented. I prefer arguments grounded in fact instead of opinion, such as Dingo's caustic commentary.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle

Australia: More Guns Now Than Before Port Arthur

New research from the Australia Institute finds that there are more guns in Australia now than there were before the Port Arthur massacre and introduction of strict gun controls.

The Australia Institute report, commissioned by Gun Control Australia, comes off the back of research which finds the gun lobby in Australia is as large, per capita, as the NRA in the US. The new report also finds that the number of guns per gun-owner in Australia has increased dramatically, despite a drop in the number of people engaged in sport shooting overall. 

cont...

https://www.tai.org.au/content/australia-more-guns-now-port-arthur

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/5992019/more-guns-in-australia-now-than-before-the-port-arthur-massacre-report/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
2 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

Wouldn't know, since my post was informational and not point oriented.

It's really neither here nor there. They say the claims are baseless and then indicate a 24 year old source is a regular supplier? That's just not adding up. 

Quote

I prefer arguments grounded in fact instead of opinion, such as Dingo's caustic commentary.

Well, it's a loose article that doesn't really provide any facts, it just criticises a report. And honestly, I thought Dingos commentary was rather appropriate as an answer to dessertrats belittling remarks. 

Edited by psyche101
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
28 minutes ago, Michelle said:

Australia: More Guns Now Than Before Port Arthur

New research from the Australia Institute finds that there are more guns in Australia now than there were before the Port Arthur massacre and introduction of strict gun controls.

The Australia Institute report, commissioned by Gun Control Australia, comes off the back of research which finds the gun lobby in Australia is as large, per capita, as the NRA in the US. The new report also finds that the number of guns per gun-owner in Australia has increased dramatically, despite a drop in the number of people engaged in sport shooting overall. 

cont...

https://www.tai.org.au/content/australia-more-guns-now-port-arthur

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/5992019/more-guns-in-australia-now-than-before-the-port-arthur-massacre-report/

That estimate results in less guns per person, more guns per idiot. Gun nuts are stocking up. Normal people aren't.

His does that pertain to the current discussion or thread title?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

It's really neither here nor there. They say the claims are baseless and then indicate a 24 year old source is a regular supplier? That's just not adding up. 

Well, it's a loose article that doesn't really provide any facts, it just criticises a report. And honestly, I thought Dingos commentary was rather appropriate as an answer to dessertrats belittling remarks. 

No argument there: it's his condescending, stereotypical nonsense about American gunowners I was referring to. They're a different people, different culture, different history and a hell of a bigger population. We've been over this before. Most American gunowners would never line up, meekly, and hand over the manhood--which is how they see it, even the women gunowners. The Australian solution is dead on arrival, here. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
5 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Most American gunowners would never line up, meekly, and hand over the manhood--which is how they see it, even the women gunowners.

I take offense to the the theory that men having guns as an extension of their manhood. I don't have a "manhood" but I've got guns, and have had the availability to access them my entire life. It's sexist to label all gun owners as male. The number of gun permits among women has skyrocketed in the last few years in the US.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
1 hour ago, Michelle said:

I take offense to the the theory that men having guns as an extension of their manhood. I don't have a "manhood" but I've got guns, and have had the availability to access them my entire life. It's sexist to label all gun owners as male. The number of gun permits among women has skyrocketed in the last few years in the US.

 

With all do respect, it's nothing for you to take offense about; you're not a man. There's nothing theoretical about it, to a male gunowner, the responsibility of ownership of guns and the ability, if need be, to defend their love ones and their home, is part and parcel to their self esteem and manhood. They see it as an honor and a duty. You ignored my mention of women gunowners; why? I'll leave it to a woman to explain what gun ownership means to their gender. Please don't presume to define what a man is suppose to think, feel, or say about himself to me.

Edited by Hammerclaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
1 hour ago, Hammerclaw said:

No argument there: it's his condescending, stereotypical nonsense about American gunowners I was referring to. They're a different people, different culture, different history and a hell of a bigger population. We've been over this before. Most American gunowners would never line up, meekly, and hand over the manhood--which is how they see it, even the women gunowners. The Australian solution is dead on arrival, here. 

We have indeed been over this before, unfortunately it tends to start the same way, in this case, dessertrat poked the bear. That's how a lot of these arguments start. Even your response here, meek isn't an accurate description. A purge would be a better description. Americans like to paint Australians as weak for giving up guns, which is deeply offensive. We see it as the other way around, which I'm sure returns the sentiment. Small minded people like dessertrat (and of course the silly late arrival offtopic lady gun nut) don't think before they insult with that self centered superiority complex. Posters like that show to me how guns make any scumbag think they are superior and invincible with a gun in hand, which just makes the whole thing, and especially the individuals themselves look so much worse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

We have indeed been over this before, unfortunately it tends to start the same way, in this case, dessertrat poked the bear. That's how a lot of these arguments start. Even your response here, meek isn't an accurate description. A purge would be a better description. Americans like to paint Australians as weak for giving up guns, which is deeply offensive. We see it as the other way around, which I'm sure returns the sentiment. Small minded people like dessertrat (and of course the silly late arrival offtopic lady gun nut) don't think before they insult with that self centered superiority complex. Posters like that show to me how guns make any scumbag think they are superior and invincible with a gun in hand, which just makes the whole thing, and especially the individuals themselves look so much worse. 

Psyche old buddy, I've talked to enough Australian gunowners on a weapons forum to know just how much they resented having to do it. Enough with your pathetic attempts to psychoanalyze  gunowners. It makes you come across as a real weak sister with a **** of a case of penis envy.

Edited by Hammerclaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTdD3jGseNnDe8MaFK6eGN

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
16 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Psyche old buddy, I've talked to enough Australian gunowners on a weapons forum to know just how much they resented having to do it. Enough with your pathetic attempts to psychoanalyze  gunowners. It makes you come across as a real weak sister with a **** of a case of penis envy.

Not seeing them speaking out here.

I don't think you have spoken to 'enough' Aussies if that honestly is your personal conclusion. Ive seen one, maybe two Aussies on here that are enthusiastic about guns. The majority are clearly against the idea. And I've shown videos of people who resented it at the time of the ban, who changed their minds with time, and the result. I know as a resident you are referencing an insignificant minority.  Every crowd has a numbskull in it, we all know that. That would have to be the poster you are referring to. The villiage idiot.

No mate, meekly is a deliberately offensive description that shows no thought or knowledge of the Australian way. You can do better than that with your gift. I'm not even able to deconstruct your insult to understand. Penis envy? I'm not the one who needs an compensator to be able to stand in a crowd without fear. 

Saying tit for tat isn't psychoanalysis either old friend. You're not illustrating your gift with language here either, it should be obvious that if someone is going to be insulting, other will return the courtesy. Or to be more childish about it, he started it. With all due respect, you don't really have a dog in this race 

None of which has anything to do with the topic. Isn't that saying something right there? It wasn't an Australian poster that began the animosity. One idiot displayed ignorance, and some just can't help but join in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.