Obama Dreams Of Gun Confiscation

originally posted by: six67seven
a reply to: buster2010

And there Is plenty of public outcry regarding the brutality and deadly force used by Australian police...who...wait for it....

are armed with firearms.

Nothing to see here.

And how many citizens have been murdered by the Australian police?

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: xuenchen

The Australians had a mass murder occur when a truck driver ran into a night club.... after the gun ban.

Factually wrong - it was in 1983 - 13 years before the 1996 buyback.

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
Hiya, where do you get all these fake news from, and how much time a day do you pass posting these.
Obama is going to be gone soon, your going to have to find a new ennemy.

The new enemy will have the same agenda.
Orders come from up top, not from the POTUS.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: six67seven
a reply to: buster2010

And there Is plenty of public outcry regarding the brutality and deadly force used by Australian police...who...wait for it....

are armed with firearms.

Nothing to see here.

And how many citizens have been murdered by the Australian police?

According to the Australian Institute of Criminology, 105 people were fatally shot by police between the fiscal years 1989–90 and 2010–11.

Not sure if they are all citizens - source is Library of Congress

ETA: and there is concern over the number in recent times - especially about the number of mentally ill people being shot - Google search - "Australian police shootings"

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: spygeek

i'm all for stricter gun control. makes perfect sense.

You know what I am all for stricter controls on abortion, free speech and other rights you might actually value. Just because you don't care about my rights doesn't mean I am going to cede them to you without a fight.

free speech and abortion are not really comparable to weaponising the population.. abortion should always be available, safe, and legal. i kinda agree on the free speech point, freedom of speech should not include freedom of hatespeech or freedom of bigotry..

its not about whether i care about your right to own a gun, its about me caring about the population as a whole.

as i said before, i don't see how stricter gun control means ceding your right to own a gun. the point would be to prevent firearms from getting into the wrong hands with more thorough vetting of firearm licensing, perhaps also limiting the types of firearms available to the public, and limitations on the scale of personal arsenals..

giving everyone in a society a gun does not make the society safer, effective legislation around who is able to access a firearm and the conditions of its storage and usage make a society safer.

a reply to: xuenchen

If you're going to blatantly lie in a thread title, at least be a little more clever about it.

Obama doesn't dream of gun confiscation, he dreams of a country where the laws protect people from mass shootings by mentally ill and delusional citizens who can easily get a gun, thanks to the insanity of the right wing who deem everything sensible as being some kind of conspiracy against them.

All he did was point out the situation in Australia, and you manufacture this into "He wants to take our gunzzzzz!!!!!!!111111"

As you alluded to "the left" in your post, I feel justified in my alluding to your manipulation of the facts as being typically "right wing" paranoia about the "big bad liberals".

Can I ask, how do you type while waving a printout of the Constitution in one hand and a Bible in the other?

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: six67seven
a reply to: buster2010

And there Is plenty of public outcry regarding the brutality and deadly force used by Australian police...who...wait for it....

are armed with firearms.

Nothing to see here.

And how many citizens have been murdered by the Australian police?

The police in Australia have killed about 105 people between 1989 to 2011.

Don't get me wrong, if you get on the wrong side of the jacks, then you'll probably cop a flogging. They can be thugs at times. But they don't tend to go around shooting people at a drop of a hat.

originally posted by: buster2010

Fascism is a right wing ideology.

Yet it is a Left Wing reality.

a reply to: Rocker2013

The end results of Australia-style gun laws in the US would be mass gun confiscation. If those are the kinds of measures Obama desires, then he does indeed want mass gun confiscation.

The argument here isn't about what those measures may or may not do as a protective measure. The discussion is over whether or not Obama wants firearms confiscated on a large scale as part of those protective measures, even as a side effect.

You cant be serious...the man gets on tv and states it outright. Peoples ignorance of the natural world and the necessity of tools for defense baffles me.


a reply to: buster2010

Double sorry

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: buster2010

Fascism is a right wing ideology.

Yet it is a Left Wing reality.

Sure - the left wing does know fascism is real right wing ideology

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

It was a seige, not a mass shooting. To be defined as a mass shooting, 5 people or more have to be killed. We had 14 mass shootings in the 18 years before the strict run regulations were enacted, but we've had zero mass shootings since.

btw, guns aren't banned here either. Most country blokes own guns and love to hunt.

I hope this does not appear confrontational Sub, I enjoy your input.

Not at all man.

I'd still like to know whether that guy obtained his shot gun legally or illegally. It seems TPTB still aren't releasing to the public how it was obtained.

He was a legal gun owner at one stage. But he'd been charged with a very serious crime and should have had his guns confiscated. Personally, I think the NSW police stuffed up and didn't take his gun from him. But that's just conjecture on my part.

I think we are all old enough and ugly enough to know that "left & right" is BS and therefore we can extrapolate that fascism is an across the board ideology!

originally posted by: Metallicus
If Obama could get away with it he would absolutely turn us into a defenseless, European, socialist country. It is sad that he spends all his time devising new ways to destroy the Constitution and subvert the population so he can run his liberal, fascist utopia.

He is doing it. Remember him whispering to the Senator that got shot that time ? That he was going to do something even if it meant "doing it under the table" ? Every time something happens everyone screams "gun control" . What about people control ? People kill people , not inanimate objects.But he did promise to "fundamentally" change this country and the world. This he has done and is still doing.

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: buster2010

Fascism is a right wing ideology.

Yet it is a Left Wing reality.

Sure - the left wing does know fascism is real right wing ideology

To ascribe fascism to the right is simply a means of saying "neener, neener." In reality, it's simply another oligarchical system of control where the few at the top control the rest of us, just like both socialism and communism.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Rocker2013

The end results of Australia-style gun laws in the US would be mass gun confiscation. If those are the kinds of measures Obama desires, then he does indeed want mass gun confiscation.

not really. australia instituted a "buy back", hardly confiscation.

The 1996 reforms made gun laws stronger and uniform across Australia. Semi-automatic rifles were prohibited (with narrow exceptions), and the world's biggest buyback saw nearly 700,000 guns removed from circulation and destroyed. The licensing and registration systems of all states and territories were harmonised and linked, so that a person barred from owning guns in one state can no longer acquire them in another. All gun sales are subject to screening (universal background checks), which means you cannot buy a gun over the internet or at a garage sale.

The argument here isn't about what those measures may or may not do as a protective measure. The discussion is over whether or not Obama wants firearms confiscated on a large scale as part of those protective measures, even as a side effect.

he would never want a mass confiscation. it would be impossible and possibly spark a civil war. america has about 80 million gun owners and they have the feds and cops outgunned 79 to 1.

Australia's screening process serves to block dangerous or irresponsible candidates, but also underscores for applicants and their families that bringing home a gun is a serious decision which affects the entire household, and indeed the entire community. Many applicants abandon their request during the waiting period – dissuaded by family members, or simply because the momentary enthusiasm for gun ownership passes.

Australia also requires a justifiable reason for the type of weapon the applicant wants to own. If you say you plan to hunt rabbits, your license doesn't allow you to a high-powered rifle. And if you already have a couple of guns suitable for hunting rabbits, it becomes increasingly difficult to justify acquiring more. This is a measure against the accumulation of private arsenals. A significant legal and cultural difference between our two countries: Australia doesn't accept anticipation of killing another person (self-defence) as a reason for owning a gun. To qualify for a handgun license, you must belong to and regularly attend a target shooting club.

a "buy back" similar to what was instituted in australia and law changes of a similar nature would be far preferrable to confiscation and within the realm of possiblity, if only americans would stop their knee-jerk reaction of "tighter controls? they must want to take all our guns away!"

Australia didn't ban guns. Hunting and shooting are still thriving. But by adopting laws that give priority to public safety, they have saved thousands of lives.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

That would be good to know...

Although it's a bit of a conflicting tidbit in either case...

Either it's proof that restrictions aren't always perfect...
Or worse, restrictions weren't applied to the man in question.



As it happens that we are primarily discussing the States and the 2nd...
As much as I think it would be a wise decision to cease trading/giving arms to the mentally ill, with or without a badge...

That does appear, going by the constitutions terminology, to be an illegality...
And a blatant infringement of the 2nd.


This debate will never go away.

a reply to: spygeek

Oh, he could very definitely want it. Just because you want something doesn't mean you actually attempt it.

a reply to: spygeek

Thousands of lives??

no - I don't think so.

Looking at homicide stats in Australia the graphs appear to show about 20-30 fewer homicides per annum in Australia since the early 2000's, with gun homicides droping from about 30-35% of the total to about 20%.

So maybe the buy back and law changes have "saved" 2-400 people.

Not an inconsiderable amount....but not quiet thousands!!