It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
No, the crossbow was not designed as a hunting weapon, it was designed for warfare.
If you read this article, you'll notice the crossbow was a scaled-down version of a ballista. It was not designed for hunting, no matter what the modern usage is.
Originally posted by zorgon
Horton Ambush Crossbow
I did not say one could not use it for hunting, I just pointed out that it was originally designed to kill people. Try not to mix up what I've said, but you aren't the only one, so lets continue
I have no intention of insulting you, in the way you are trying to insult me. Since you literally know nothing about me other than I don't watch TV and I went to university, I'd stop trying to act the big man and just try reading what I write.
I don't think they were referring to governments using rocks and sticks to kill people. I think you'll find they were referring to lone nuts who go around shooting up schools and the like.
Once again you leap and vault to a point I was not making nor contesting. I did not suggest that every other death was crossbow-related nor horse-related, I was merely saying that I find it probable that there were more horse-related deaths than crossbow-related deaths.
I did not say that there are not cruel men in positions of power who will commit such atrocities, I just said that I don't believe the eradication of people is logical or reasonable.
Brilliant. You have actually quoted me and altered the above italicised word from what I actually wrote, which was:
As an avid history buff, I personally would like one day to own a crossbow. Hence banning them would be a terrible blow to that desire.
Perhaps I should avoid using recursion in my sentences? Perhaps I should write as if trying to talk to preschoolers, because I did not once claim crossbows should be banned. Perhaps everyone here should try and get off their freaking high-horses and just READ THE #ING POST.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Ownership is about 15 out of 100 people in OZ, in the states it is about 90 out of 100.
We aren't stopping anyone
Yes, atlasastro, you're stopping 15 out of 100 people from peacefully owning their crossbows. What gives you the right to want to infringe on those people owning them, peacefully?
Again we are talking about gun ownership, this group of people will not be effected by this amendment to current legislation, please read the post again. Crossbow ownership is only in the hundreds. Military style weapons, These people are collectors.
Your 'moral majority' viewpoint is a pathetic attempt to take away rights from people who want to enjoy their life and leisure their way. Fifteeen percent of the population is not an insignificant number.
Of the 459 people who have a legitimateuse for military-style weapons, most are collectors.
Many of the weapons are kept at RSL clubs.
No need to feel terrorised over a typo Tezza! I apologise.
Spell my username properly, atlasastro. Your personal vendetta and crusade against me won't work in this thread. The Moderators are watching, indeed some Super Moderators and Administrators are watching. I know that. You know that. ATS has strict decorum rules in place to stop the personal attacks and name calling.
Really. The Govt. are always in control tezza, that is why we call it a Government.
Government dictatorship has already kicked in. Pump action and Semi-Auto shot firearms were banned a long time ago. Now, a basic weapon like a crossbow is soon to be banned this September. The government is already taking control.
Well, I don't think I will ever see what you see Tezza.
I can't help it if you can't see it.
READ THE LINK IN MY POST. We currently have 15 in 100 gun ownership NATIONALLY. These people will not be effected at all, especially if you live OUTSIDE of the state of NSW.
Ahuh. You're worried about bikies with crossbows, so you want to deny 15 out of 100 people the right to own one?
Perhaps if you were to actually read my post....but Whatever dude, whatever floats your current outrage.
Hypocritical.
No admission, its an argument that people don't need crossbows to protect themselves, and the sovereignty of the nation from what i believe to be an Imagined Dictatorship as stated by you.
Is this an admission from you that crossbows are not a threat? If they're not a threat, then why ban them?
Originally posted by atlasastro
BTW, that ratio is national, the legislation you brought up is only regional and not national. You need to learn or try and understand what you are talking about.
Originally posted by atlasastro
This legislation is to deal with "illegal weapons". It is illegal to own unregistered firearms of any sort in Australia.
Originally posted by atlasastro
Again we are talking about gun ownership, this group of people will not be effected by this ammendment to current legislation, please read the post again. Crossbow onwership is only in the hundreds.
Originally posted by atlasastro
As for a "moral majority", the majority don't have a need for these weapons so morals have nothing to do with it. As it is evident in our society in Austrailia which has a vastly diferent psyche in relation to personal weapons to countries where weapons are viewed as a personal right.
Originally posted by atlasastro
I could ague that far from it being a moral majority, it is more a few extremist with irrational fears that would crave such weapons, or a minority of criminals that are simply arming themselves with weapons that currently carry little or no penalty at the moment.
Originally posted by atlasastro
Currently carrying any unregistered firearms in public can carry 10-14years, the new legislation will add some other military styled weapons to the legislation all carrying similar penalties.
Originally posted by atlasastro
I am merely highlitig this point of view particularly as the OP topic is specifically about MY state of residence. A state you have raised these issues on threads a vast number of times even though you do not live here, yet you infer that these laws are national.
Originally posted by atlasastro
I am expressing my opinion, about my state, its laws and how I percieve it will effect me and others whilst challenging your opinion, which I personally feel is extreme and totally uninformed and a mis-representation.
Originally posted by atlasastro
BTW, Can you explain to me how the Ban on Pump Action and Automatic Weapons(brought in post Port Arthur) has effected Australians who could now be using those weapon defending themselves against the Govt. Were are people being attacked by our Govt., that could use these weapons now?
Originally posted by atlasastro
Yes I am worried about the actions of Bikie gangs, arming themselves and doing whatever they want with whatever weapons they want, It is a far more rational worry than viewing the Govt. of Australia, or any regional state Govt. as a Dictatorship.
Originally posted by atlasastro
As far as I know, it is currently bikies killing people in the streets, at airports, in drive by shootings, and not my state Govt. It was bikies that were caught with miltary style weapons not covered in the current legislation.
Originally posted by atlasastro
No admission, its an arguement that people don't need crossbows to protect themselves, and the soverignty of the nation from what i believe to be an Imagined Dictatorship as stated by you.
Originally posted by MR BOB
does hairspray and a lighter taped to a broom count as a flamethrower?
Originally posted by dooper
For heaven's sake. Getting to where a man can't have any fun anymore. Just because of a few pantywaist legislators.
Originally posted by MR BOB
does hairspray and a lighter taped to a broom count as a flamethrower?