Could a Aussie tell us how your Government confiscated your guns?

[weedpharma]

Thanks for confirming my thoughts. I was beginning to think I was alone!

 

[zonta223]

Thanks for confirming my thoughts. I was beginning to think I was alone!

No not alone.....actually can only think of one use for an automatic or semi automatic rifle.......to shoot someone......you can hunt control vermin etc with a bolt action gun.

 

[kenmac]

No not alone.....actually can only think of one use for an automatic or semi automatic rifle.......to shoot someone......

You're correct. That's why I have mine.. Must be nice not to have the criminal element there like we have here. Someone here always wanting what some else has worked hard for and don't mind using what ever means necessary to take it . Some cities have a gun buy back deal. You turn in old guns , get money so, you can use it toward a new gun.No telling how many illegal guns come across our border (south of us) every day.If the goverment would control our borders, they would control the illegal guns comming into the country

 

[QRTRHRS]

I would argue that our guns are tied to the history of our county. We may have come far enough to agree to disagree but we know better than to lie down and turn our backs completely. One look at what is going on with our so called fiscal cliff should tell you that we cannot trust our elected leaders. Save all the cliche's for those craving to be in the headlines. It is unfortunate that the bully pulpit is so easily accessable. The truth is, we have laws on our books. We need to enforce them. We also need to hold accountable those who profit by offering carnage without accountabliity. The home I grew up in had a loaded gun in many corners. I knew better than to touch them. I also suffered abuse from my peers at school yet the thought of teaching them a lesson never entered my mind.

 

[CDN Farm Boy]

Could you gun advocates clarify something for me?

To my understanding, there is nowhere else in the civilized world than the US that has such lax and open-ended gun (un)regulation as "permitted" by your beloved 2nd Amendment and at the same time there is nowhere else in the civilized world than the US that has mass shootings that happen in the frequency that they do in the US?

At some point, shouldn't reason prevail over the "my stick is bigger than your stick"?

Living in Canada, I have ZERO worries about not having a gun in my house.

 

[TripleR]

Could you gun advocates clarify something for me?

To my understanding, there is nowhere else in the civilized world than the US that has such lax and open-ended gun (un)regulation as "permitted" by your beloved 2nd Amendment and at the same time there is nowhere else in the civilized world than the US that has mass shootings that happen in the frequency that they do in the US?

At some point, shouldn't reason prevail over the "my stick is bigger than your stick"?

Living in Canada, I have ZERO worries about not having a gun in my house.

Good for you, but I don't live in Canada nor would I want to. Here is an excellent post from another thread written by someone living in a foreign country:

"Can I suggest that what happens in the US should not be influenced in any way by statistics and gun regulations in other countries? I am British, have lived there in two spells (the first from birth) totalling 45 years in both England and Scotland, plus I have had 13 years in Australia and more recently 10 in Portugal. I have never lived in the US, but believe the cultures about guns are so dissimilar that comparisons amongst the countries are of no value whatsoever.

There is some erroneous information in a few threads too. British police do not carry guns at any time on duty except under express conditions of requirement in individual situations, and a limited number of officers may be permitted to be armed. If a gun is carried by police in a vehicle the vehicle must be fitted with a special compartment in which the gun(s) are placed. My brother in law fits them for one force. I owned a shotgun in Britain (as many, if not most farmers do, and generally for pest control only) and took it to Australia with me where I bought a 3000 acre sheep and cattle station. I then bought a .243 and a .22 because the pests were much more numerous - and different to the UK. On returning to Britain I took the shotgun and .243 and had no difficulty in obtaining permission to keep them, despite not owning any land when I first arrived back. I bought 22 acres only and was able to renew the licence to have both guns. Note I had nowhere else to use them. I obtained a European "passport" for the guns, meaning I could take them anywhere in the European Union, and I brought them with me to Portugal where I am semi-retired on 16 acres. I knew many people in Australia and Britain who had guns, and I never met anyone who had any difficulty in obtaining their licences. I did not know anyone who owned a rapid fire gun of any description, they are not really pest control weapons in the farmers' sense. I knew station owners in Australia who carried a pistol in order to be able to shoot their own livestock that needed to be culled.

Rules on handguns in Britain changed whilst I was there after being in Australia and rules on semi-automatics in Australia changed after I left. I would say that amongst non-farmers it is unusual for people to own guns in either place. In Britain there is little land available for shooting, and what there is is very expensive shooting, so rich people who are non-farmers are the ones most likely to have legally held guns, plus a very few who target shoot. There is more scope in Australia, and some people in rural towns will have guns and the availability of land on which to shoot.

Neither place has a history of widespread gun ownership, and as a consequence the number of guns per head of population is miniscule compared with the US. Perhaps, just perhaps, this gives rise to less criminals using guns too, because they have not been accustomed to having them around and their victims will almost certainly not have a gun. They do make mistakes when robbing farmhouses and the odd one has been shot. Of course criminals will obtain guns if they want them. Triple R gave me a link on another thread that showed one million violent gun crimes a year are committed in the US. Britain has about one fifth of the US population so, on the same per capita ratio would have 200,000 similar crimes. Statistics are published to September each year, the latest currently available, 2011, gave just over 6,000 such crimes, a drop on the previous year of (from memory) somewhere over 7,000. There are statistics available for Australia both pre and post the automatic ban.

I would not now walk alone at night (and some parts in daytime) in any major UK city except along a brightly lit major thoroughfare with lots of people around. I saw a statistic recently that 50% of all crime in the UK is committed in the Greater London area.

What you decide to do, if anything, about further gun control is up to you, the people of the US, and foreigners should keep their nose out of what is your business. It has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with politicians or so-called celebrities from other countries."

 

[CDN Farm Boy]

So in short: I don't live there so I don't get to ask a question or have an opinion?

 

[KYErik]

About the Australian gun buyback- what was the payout per gun?

Was it the average price of an old used gun (real value) or was it a a relatively large amount (at least two or three times the actual value)?

Was it the same payout for a cheap mass produced well worn semiauto .22 rimfire rifle as a mint condition high end .223 semiauto rifle? I am just curious about how the payment system worked.

 

[hchxoom]

CDN Farmboy - Well, you stepped a good bit beyond a simple question or opinion with your condescending comment. I suspect you'd be testy if aomeone made a comment about Canadians benefiting from the umbrella of US protection.

Nevertheless, giving the benefit of doubt that your intent was not to be inflammatory and intolerant (that you just made a bad choice of words) I'll give you my thoughts.

First, you seems to be under the impression that this is a frivolous folly (your beloved 2nd amendment). Rather, most of us see the second amendment, on studying history, as a central tenet, and just as important as freedom of speech and freedom of religion. In our view, our governmental structure and constitution would be worthless without these critical rights (if we can't speak out freely against our government or protect ourselves from a tyrannical government or make our own choices about religion and association, then there is not realy life, liberty and pursuit of happiness). It should be noted that these "rights" do have costs and can be subject to abuse and misuse, but they are "foundational" for us and without them the whole house of cards topples (over time). It should also be noted that, to play on your words, nowhere else in the civilized (or uncivilized) world do citizens have the level of individual and collective freedom and opportunity as they have in the US. Indeed, the few countries that offer freedom approaching ours can generally thank US intervention at some point or another. So, it isn't a simple matter, but a core belief... we put freedom above the cost of freedom.

Now, I will be among the first to say that I see growing challenges to our culture and form of government. To succeed, it absolutely requires personal responsibility and accountability on behalf of every citizen. As our country becomes more reliant on the government than on self, family, and neighbors (accountability and responsibility to and among each other), we are losing some of the glue that hold our system together. I pray that we haven't crossed a "tipping point" where we can't reclaim what we had, but with 30+% of citizens receiving some level of govt assistance and our current and growing nat'l debt and apparent lack of will to make tough decisions to change those facts, I'm not confident. Once gov't protection becomes more important than individual and collective freedom to a majority, then things will have to change and, I suspect, core foundational rights will be among them (if the govt takes care of us, we have no more "right" to the means to protect ourselves and each other, we have no more "right" to speak out against the govt we asked for, etc.).

That said, the changes will not likely be easy. First, there are many to whom these freedoms and ideals are still very, very important. In my opinion this is the polarization we're seeing accelerate in the US - the shift from personal freedom, achievement, and opportunity to govt assistance and protection is approaching a point where there are fewer and fewer "fence sitters", and those that are on the "old school" side of the fence feel a responsibility to their family, friends, and neighbors (and their predecessors) to protect foundational rights (even if that means taking up the arms which they can have under 2A). Second is history and tradition. Most of us that are zealous protectors of 2a (along with the other constitutional rights) have grown up around guns and had them all our lives. I can't remember a time without gun awareness, and holding one for the first time at age 5 or 6 is still a fond memory. I'll never forget getting knocked on my but the first time I fired Dad's 12g shotgun, nor the discipline I learned (and earned) about gun handling. I couldn't wait to give my son hist first gun (a 410 my granddad had given my dad), and a group of friend's and I combined resources to get a really nice gun for my god-son shortly after his birth. They live 10+ hours away, but his dad and I make sure we find time every year or so to get our boys together... often centered around hunting/fishing and just "plinking". This probably sounds extremely odd to those "in the rest of the civilized world" that aren't among the gentry or ruling classea (where gun ownership and utilization are much more comparable to our experience), but my point in sharing the above is to simply point out that for many of us this isn't about wanting guns... it's that they are just as much a part of the fabric of our lives as trucks, tractors, boats, fishing poles, whatever you consider part of your history and being.

I'll close by saying I'm not a "gun nut", just a pretty typical southerner. I don't own any military-style guns (90% of what I own are sporting shotguns) but I don't begrudge those who do. I respect their right to own and use them, for as long as they do so legally and responsibly they aren't any more dangerous than I am with my shotguns or you are with the axe you use to split firewood.

 

[hosspuller]

Hchxoom ... Well done .