Gun Control – Sometimes Action Speaks Louder Than Words

All this talk of banning “assault rifles” is put down humanely by Jessie Duff, a target shooter:

That’s gun control done right, hitting the target. She does a lot of shooting and hasn’t murdered anybody. Gun control hurts the good guys and the bad guys go on with what they’re doing.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to Gun Control – Sometimes Action Speaks Louder Than Words

  1. bw says:

    “The bad guys can rob people even with an empty firearm.”

    But such physically empty guns could kill someone in the course of such a robbery.

    “Banning stuff merely drives up the suppliers’ profits by making the product more desirable.”

    A product is desirable or it isn’t. Scarcity in general reduces desirability of a product due to the buyer’s inability to satisfy his desire and the resulting increase in his frustration level. Also the mental trade-off of satisfaction vs effort lowers the appeal of such a limited product.

  2. bw wrote, “What about ammunition? Would they need to find an unemployed chemist to mix up some gunpowder?”

    Again, there needs to be a distinction between the good guys and the bad guys. The bad guys don’t spend days at “the range” sending thousands of rounds downrange to get a better group. The bad guys can rob people even with an empty firearm. The bad guys can use really cheap and inaccurate firearms. Their needs are easily met in the back room or basement machine-shop or smuggling.

    Banning stuff merely drives up the suppliers’ profits by making the product more desirable. Supply is very flexible and the demand is obviously huge.

  3. bw says:

    “There are plenty of unemployed machinists who could supply the trade.”

    I would wager that, if it became necessary to find an unemployed machinist in order to obtain a fire arm, the problem would be 99.999% solved! What about ammunition? Would they need to find an unemployed chemist to mix up some gunpowder?

    “Tightening laws merely increases what the suppliers will charge.”

    Putting these guns out of the economic reach of all but the most fanatical, I would say. Such people are likely to stand out more clearly and thus be easier to apprehend, too.

    “Several countries have the death penalty for smuggling drugs and it still happens.”

    I imagine the recidivism rate is quite low there, though.

  4. bw wrote, “Hoodlums in Chicago simply take a short trip over the state line into Indiana”.

    No matter how tight the law becomes, bad guys will find a way to get a firearm. There are plenty of unemployed machinists who could supply the trade. Remember prohibition (of alcoholic beverages)? It didn’t work because the market was there. Tightening laws merely increases what the suppliers will charge. Several countries have the death penalty for smuggling drugs and it still happens.

  5. bw says:

    “Too bad the criminals by definition don’t follow the law…”

    This is a good example of how state and local laws are ineffective and how Federal laws are needed to cure the problem. Hoodlums in Chicago simply take a short trip over the state line into Indiana to freely purchase weapons and ammunition without any regard to such paperwork as needed in Illinois. They can even take a cab. Doubtless there are enough entrepreneurial folk willing to buy guns in Indiana on speculation for sale in Chicago as well. We have to put a stop to that sort of trade.

  6. oiaohm wrote, “all guns in Armoury are fully insured for replacement with new if the Armoury has to be destroyed.”

    Most of the firearms I have ever seen are not replaceable. e.g. there are many models/versions no longer made and antiques. These are priceless to many.

    I would not accept a new Remington 700 or whatever they make these days for a good old Mauser ’98. Millions were made by Germany but “surplus” government stocks were sold out by the 1970s. There are a few companies still making modern versions but they are just not the same. They don’t feel the same. They don’t smell the same and they don’t look the same. Some people are more loyal to their firearms than to their wives.

  7. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson one of the thing that make Armoury destruction fully acceptable is that all guns in Armoury are fully insured for replacement with new if the Armoury has to be destroyed.

    The plans for the gun registry were in place before the port arthur massacre. We had a nasty problem happen. A stack of cheap junk barrels had been produced. So the nice exploding barrel problem when fired after 10 or 20 rounds had been used.

    This resulted in how could we back trace this faster before people die. This is why the Australian weapon certificates list all parts and why all repairs are logged with central database. Since if a weapon malfunctions it is possible the owner will not be alive to tell you where the error happened so other weapons with the same bad alteration might not be find able.

    This is why I see working registry as important. It does provide advantages to people buying second hand weapons because you do have what mechanical maintenance has been offically done on the weapon.

    Robert Pogson for weapons people love most of those end up disabled at home in Australia. Like place the firing mechanical and magazines in the armoury take the rest of the gun home. If someone picks up like a bolt action rifle without its bolt its not very much use. So yes if you do really like the weapon it still goes home in Australia just not in a working state.

    That is the other problem about hitting the armouries the complete guns might not be there. A disabled weapon is no longer a threat. Some armouries are magazines and firing mechanical parts only.

    Robert Pogson the armoury allows you to break your weapon into parts. You don’t have to put the full weapon in the armoury. Magazines are consumables they do wear out. Firing mechanical parts are consumables as well. To the Australian who have weapons they like if the armoury is destroyed its a great time to do weapon maintenance.

    Commission Rifle no bolt it is a paper weight. You have kids you want to make sure they cannot use it. You place bolt in your club/group armoury where they cannot get it back from the armoury since the owner of the weapon on the certificate is the only one that can get the part back. If armoury is destroyed you just get a new bolt made and a few new Magazines. What is the problem.

    Robert Pogson
    Gun laws in Illinois one line
    “Non-residents who may legally possess firearms in their home state are exempt from this requirement.”
    Yep stupidity. So Non-residents come across boarder by ammo an give to local criminals.

    Gun laws in Illinois is more extreme than the Australian but its missing the important bits to work. Firearm registration. Firearm registration is critical to back trace where criminals are getting guns.

    When you read and know what is required Illinois laws are toothless and pointless.

    Australia did its registry Australia wide. This is what is required. This is important to reduce boarder size. Gun registration only inside “The city of Chicago” How far of drive is it to a point you can buy a weapon without having to register it.

    Criminals mostly will be acquiring there weapons by legal channels that are not being tracked. This came very clear in Australia when New South Wales implemented a gun registry and the gun sales in Canberra our capital and its own legal zone went threw roof. Up 40 times on normal. Run the video camera from the Canberra gun stores take note of who is non local go track them down hello criminals who have been doing the robberies in New South Wales. Robert Pogson examples like this is why I back full weapon registration. We know criminal acquire most of their guns from legal channels or stealing them from legal owners. Criminals in the USA have as many guns as what they do because guns are not tracked country wide.

    Robert the big thing to remember lot of guns collected from crimes by police are destroyed. So criminals to keep there firearms always have to be getting new guns. Legal and above board people don’t go through a large number of weapons. They lose them very rarely. Our registry starts tracking from production or entry into country all the way to final owner.

    If you can block off criminals fresh supply of guns they will run out. This is what happened here. There was no increase in crimes involving guns. Crimes using guns have decreased because the number of guns free for criminals to use are reducing. We now have more knife and baseball bat crimes than guns. So when the security of the store pulls out a pistol they are kinda screwed.

    Australia gun laws have not dropped the crime rate you still have the same number of desperate people. It has dropped how many crimes are successful. Yes the old saying about bringing a knife to a gun fight. Its also resulted in a few criminal being beat up by shop attendants. Knife vs Broom/mop with solid handle is not a nice outcome for criminal with knife. Impact force breaks a few bones.

  8. eug wrote, “Chicago murders top Afghanistan death toll”.

    Yeah, those guys need some gun-control laws… Wait a minute. They already have some of the toughest in the USA. Too bad the criminals by definition don’t follow the law…

  9. bw wrote, “There are similar articles to be found and the exact percentages vary somewhat but consider that Obama didn’t have such favorable demographics percentages in the last election and he turned it into a rout.”

    Obama turned the “electoral college” thing into a rout because many states are “winner takes all”. There is no electoral college to manipulate in the Congress. Obama cannot even intimidate members of his own party. Suppose Obama does create a “grassroots” phone-in campaign that swamps NRA. NRA just keeps its list of naughty and nice legislators and tips the balance in the next election. Because votes are mostly ~ 50-50% NRA can tip the balance of Congress in 2014 and undo whatever Obama manages to put in place. If he vetoes everything, there may well be a super-majority to overrule him then. You see, firearms owners do care that much. They will never forget. In Canada, it took 17 years to undo the damage because the “right” was split but it still happened.

    The difference between firearms and other things people care about is that firearms last centuries and are like members of the family. From one generation to the next people care about the right to keep and bear (fire-)arms. People joining an anti-gun movement see the thing as momentary. They have many other things in their lives that are more important.

    Here’s an example:

    That’s a “Commission Rifle” one of the first firearms designed to fire a modern bottle-necked cartridge. Some are still in use by hunters, having been rebarreled to ammunition available today. I have used one and they are still a joy to hold and to shoot. Those rifles are over 100 years old and beautiful. Families who own one are proud of them and pass them on to their children. The “ugly” assault rifles Obama seeks to ban are similarly loved by real people who will not easily see them locked up or destroyed.

  10. bw says:

    “In a country with nearly everyone owning a firearm favouring firearms-ownership is not seen as crazy.”

    It is not so overwhelming a situation upon closer examination:

    There are similar articles to be found and the exact percentages vary somewhat but consider that Obama didn’t have such favorable demographics percentages in the last election and he turned it into a rout. The very same grassroots machine is gearing up to quash the gun lobby. Do you really think it will not meet with success? You could join Mitt Romney down at the Denial Café, if he is accepting any visitors, that is.

  11. oiaohm wrote, “Yes armouries final level security is destroy building with all weapons.”

    That would never be acceptable in North America. I can see gun-grabbers would love it. They would probably figure out how to trigger the explosions…

    It seems Australians do not love their firearms as much as Canadians.

  12. oiaohm says:

    Remember Canada law that implemented was not like Australias the certificate did not allow for multi barrel weapons or other things that made the process more complex than it should have been in Canada.

    Bureaucrats around firearm tracking are in fact the same ones that do car tracking in Australia. We did not create a special new pool of Bureaucrats. In fact weapon transfer policy follows our car transfer policy. There is not the overhead you are talking about if it done right lets just say Canada need to look at how Australia pulled it off without high cost.

    –Have you even considered what would happen if organized criminals/terrorists raided an armoury?–

    Robert Pogson yes breaching the armouries have been considered. There are quit high security requirements for an armoury. Due to the fact no one lives in an armoury full time you can use very proactive defence. You cannot use Thermite charges in a persons own home. You can in armouries. You cannot use expanding foam in homes that fill all space to prevent movement and prevent items being taken. You can in armouries.

    Basically the list goes on and on with security options and traps you can use in armouries.

    Australian armouries for gun clubs and the like are allowed demolition charges built into walls.

    Yes armouries final level security is destroy building with all weapons.

    There are quite a few legal requirements on armoury construction and storage of weapons in armouries.

    The simple point is an Australian armoury is a weapon in its own right. Criminals/Terrorists breaching an armoury risk being terminated by the Armoury itself.

    Yes there have been a few Armoury robberies in Australia resulting in required security of armouries beefed up. Number of weapons stolen over the time frame is still down.

    Robert Pogson a proper built armoury is a man death trap. You are legally not allowed to build a death trap into a house. Mil armouries use items like C4 clearance charges as there last resort.

    To be correct the only building allowed to contain a man death trap in Australia is an armoury of some form. Basically its the only form of death sentence in Australia is attempt to breach an armoury.

    An armoury security system kill you because you breached it is classed as self defence.

    Robert Pogson basically you need to drop the idea you need firearms to protect stuff. Armouries are protected by everything bar firearms. Explosives, Foam, Smoke, traps. Armouries don’t need armed guards. Since if something has gone wrong its press the panic button and run.

    Only way for armouries to be breached is normally someone on the inside who knows how to disarm the armoury.

    There is a reason why any gun club can register many armouries to break up weapon stock piles.

    Raiding one armoury is not a problem.

    Robert Pogson
    –Even owners who were forced to register would keep their necessary firearms off the grid and just register one or two.–
    Good idea until you read the Australian legal response if caught.

    Please note we worked out how to catch up with most of the off the grid weapons. All repairs, ammo, parts require weapon certificate. You can only keep a weapon of the grid here if you can repair it yourself and pack all your own ammo unless one of your registered guns take the same ammo.

  13. bw wrote, “the money from the NRA is not sufficient to be branded as a crazy gun nut who supports weapons that murder school children.”

    The NRA money is almost inconsequential. The NRA’s lever is the report card and endorsement of candidates from either party. Anyone up for election in 2014 will be keen to toe the line. Since everything is near 50-50 split, even a small push is effective.

    In a country with nearly everyone owning a firearm favouring firearms-ownership is not seen as crazy.

  14. bw says:

    “Nothing like NY will happen federally.”

    I think that it will. The NRA represents less than 10% of the voting public and surveys show that a majority of the NRA members themselves do not agree in many ways with the NRA directors. A number of senators and representatives are now seen to be in the pay of the NRA in terms of contributions made and tit-for-tat legislative support. With a lot of exposure of those links being made by Obama’s grass roots organization, that support will mostly go away. Congressmen fear nothing worse than being caught up in a scandal, real or imagined, and the money from the NRA is not sufficient to be branded as a crazy gun nut who supports weapons that murder school children.

  15. oiaohm wrote, “If you were looking for a common thread between all the USA school shootings is the fact that the house hold that the offender come from had a huge collection of actively usable guns with extra magazines.”

    He also wrote, “Armouries turn out quite workable. The major armouries here are open 24/7 but 24 to 48 hours before trip you are allowed to remove the weapons you need from the armoury as long as you have safe storage for them.”

    Uh-huh, and bureaucracy will save us from bureaucrats. Have you counted the cost of all these extra layers beyond personal responsibility? Making bureaucrats bottlenecks for routine operations in peoples’ lives is silly. That system was considered in Canada and rejected out of hand. Even the bureaucrats here realized it would not work, would not accomplish any goals and would dramatically increase the costs. Canada tried merely to register all firearms and had to shut that down. Even owners who were forced to register would keep their necessary firearms off the grid and just register one or two.

    Have you even considered what would happen if organized criminals/terrorists raided an armoury?

  16. bw wrote, “given the current polling on gun controls and weapons/magazine/ammunition bans, substantial controls are likely to be put in place.”

    I guess the queues at gun-shows/ranges last weekend were just illusions. I guess the NRA is not growing rapidly. I guess the NRA is not keeping a list and checking it twice. I guess the NRA is not in the face of legislators. I guess a bunch of states are not moving to permit firearms on school grounds.

    Whatever tightening there will be will be mostly irrelevant and not substantial. Nothing like NY will happen federally.

  17. oiaohm says:

    Der Balrog the leak is interesting thing HP lost the supply contract as well to Munich. Eden misses that the installed OS has been upgraded every year to current with almost zero disruption using Linux.

    Problem here Munich has on public record there operational costs. Its not 60.7 million EURO for 10 years for Linux.

    Cost of Munich migration for 10 years is under €23 million (£18 million) for operating costs this include licenses.

    17 million euros for just supporting windows is HP claim. That means you only have 6 million euros over 10 years for software purchase for 13000 machines. Sorry that does not fly.

    FUD documents are so simple to spot when the correct values are on the public record.

    Der Balrog its Microsoft normal operation to leak a fud piece to by being a leak to magically try to give it credibility.

    Since 10 years of the migration has only spend 24 million euros in operations.

    Training cost does not end just because you have new OS in place. Training cost is on going for new staff as well as old. At worst all the Linux migration and on going training costs is under 50 million euros. Public record numbers 60.7 million is not possible for the 10 years.

  18. bw says:

    “any gun-lover in the Senate can block anything.”

    Only if there are at least 40 of them. The question, as I posed, is whether or not there will be that many who want to stand up to the grassroots campaigns that will be waged in the near future. Standing against public opinion on this issue and having one’s connections to NRA funds being aired out with election-style TV ads can be fatal to one’s re-election.

    As it was said in song years ago, “Each Congressman has two ends – a thinking end and a sitting end – and, since his future depends on his seat, why bother friend?”

    “It’s not a winning strategy in a democracy to rule without the consent of the ruled.”

    Exactly, and, given the current polling on gun controls and weapons/magazine/ammunition bans, substantial controls are likely to be put in place.

  19. Der Balrog says:

    Hey, Pogson, to cool your head here’s something interesting (perhaps you should implement a contact form or something, so that one doesn’t always have to abuse articles for that):

    HP was contracted by Microsoft to create a “study” whose subject is Munich’s migration to Linux. This study is — unsurprisingly — not public, but it was leaked to the German news magazine Focus. The study — also unsurprisingly — is a smear campaign and claims that Munich’s Mayor has deliberately lied to the public by hiding the real migration costs. The — again: non-public! — “study” also concludes that going with Microsoft would’ve been much cheaper.

    Here’s the article in Focus:

    Has Ude wasted millions for Linux computers? (German)

    Here’s a ludicrous PR statement by Microsoft:

    TCO study regarding Munich’s Linux migration (German)

    Here’s a reply by Pro-Linux:

    Putting gloss on migration costs for beginners (German)

    All in German, sadly. But Google Translator will hopefully give you the gist of it.

  20. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson reduction of stolen weapons is key to reducing normal street crime access to weapons.

    With mass murders in schools reducing weapons stored at home is also key. Even if you pick the weapons and magazines you need for hunting trip up from armoury day before and return them the day after you return this still removed those items from sitting around house in non used state. Particularly near children and others that are not fully mentally developed.

    Non used state you can get complacence about locking them up as well.

    Look at most of the school cases of kids killing kids in mass numbers. Most come from house holds that have large number of weapons sitting around with large number of magazines sitting round for that once in blue moon hunting trip.

    Just look at problem. Robert Pogson. How often does a miss used firearm happen on a hunting trip. Extreamaly rare right. How often do criminal get hands on guns left at home when people go on holiday quite a bit. How often to you have school shooting offenders from houses that are over armed quite a bit. Every single one in fact. If you were looking for a common thread between all the USA school shootings is the fact that the house hold that the offender come from had a huge collection of actively usable guns with extra magazines. This is the fact you have to change. The types of weapons used have been all different. Only way I know to change this is Armouries with legal force that mandates you use them.

    Armouries turn out quite workable. The major armouries here are open 24/7 but 24 to 48 hours before trip you are allowed to remove the weapons you need from the armoury as long as you have safe storage for them.

    Armouries is one of the most effective way to reduce mass killings. Its no longer single think process you have to side track your mind from wanting to kill a group of people to how in heck am I going to get armourer to give me weapon. Remove access to the firearms when you don’t need them. Works.

    Put it this way Robert having a stock pile of weapons at your house for 2-4 days extra a year compared to 300+ days of the stock pile sitting there with no use. What is a greater risk that something will go wrong. Yes the 300+ days. Since the armourer would have read the riot act about security of weapons those extra days you would be more on your guard.

    A stock pile of weapons sitting not in use is prime candidate for a person todo mass murder or to steal them. Lets be truthful going on a hunting trip are you going solo. Normally not. So the rule of at least 2 independent people must be there to open and access armoury is not a major problem.

    For a solo shooter planing mass murder the 2 people requirement to open armoury is a major problem for them. By effect of armouries large clips and effective mass killing guns comes off limit.

    This even can slow down multi gunmen because armourer who is giving giving out weapons will be checking out where those weapons are going.

    Armouries are about giving somewhere for the weapons and magazines not required at current time to be placed out of harms way.

    A sport shooter does not need there gun at home every day of week. All ranges here have an armoury. So there is no need for sports shooters to bring there guns home most of the time since they can leave it at the range.

    We do have portable gun-safes and other items for camping and hunting. This also reduces risk of issues and by law armourer will check you have them before letting gun leave the armoury storage.

    Robert Pogson basically step back and look at when mass kills happen. They don’t happen from hunting trips or sports shooting events. They are happening due to weapons being left insecure(ie might be secured but the person who could go unstable knows how to bypass the security) with people who could turn mentally unstable.

    Adolescence is a time in a person life when they should not be left with free access to all types of firearms. Particularly when the stress and frustration of school is on top of them. Because there is a risk they will go off the deep end. No amount parenting can prevent this problem other than parent removing chance to use firearms. Schools can assist by targeting bullies. But there is only so much even the best school can do.

    Robert Pogson the lack of armouries is the biggest fault. This is resulting in people storing too many weapons at home. Since where else do they have to store them.

    Please note I say armourer running armouries. This is also important they are people who do undergo the training to detect signs of weapon failure and do weapon repairs. This has reduce cases of harm due to weapon failure.

    Robert Pogson Australian gun laws have had a lot of planing put into them. If a country wants to do the smallest part of Australian gun law to get results it is the following.

    1) Proper certificate tracking of all weapons with the certificate listing all parts that own to the weapon including spare barrels.
    2) Armouries to store weapons that are currently not required. This would remove AK and other automatic weapons from most homes. House Self defence does not require like large semi automatic weapons with 50 shot chips.

    The weapon bans are a extra layer to the Australian system.

    Before the Port Arthur massacre there were plans to bring in gun laws in this more moderate form due to harm that had happened from defective barrels being used.

    Australia did not just have one problem when its gun laws were written. Being forced to place the weapons into storage the storage can have ultrasound and other tools to inspect weapon for damage and hopefully detect it before you gun fails on you.

    Our gun laws are not just about preventing mass shooting. They are about prevent many other issues that come up from lack of maintenance of firearms. Also really a person with 1 or 2 firearms cannot afford to have the tools to inspect them fully.

    Club system is about having enough gun owners in groups to afford good gear to make sure there weapons will not harm them. With the extra bonus of taking stock piles of weapons away from children.

    Robert Pogson the simple fact here something has to change to reduce how often school killing happen. Armouries with law requiring you use them are about the most min alteration you can do it change the outcomes.

    Restricting firearm types will work to a point but if a person at home has like 50 double barrel shot guns. Its still a big problem if the kid can move them all. If there is only 3 weapons in the house and they are A or B Australian grade those are good enough to use against intruder. But they will not be that useful against a crowd.

    Yes people in Australia are still allowed the double barrel shot gun.

    Robert Pogson using volunteers for security has the same problem as giving guns to teachers. Students will always out number the security.

    Take a close look at how prisons work. Gun wearers don’t mix in with general population of a prison this is critical. Once a gun wearer mixed with general population the weapon risks being stolen.

    Yes schools need security. Volunteers with guns is not the answer. Because it will only be a matter of time before a Volunteer loses their weapon or does a shotting. Security systems monitoring building to inform police if gun shots happen. Police in this case have the advantage.

    Robert Pogson
    –Banning any category of firearm is likely to make crime more profitable and more violent.–
    Every firearm ban has never caused this. Normally make crime less violent. Why those banned weapons if you have them on street is like a hey that is a crock sign. Criminals like to hide they are criminals until they do the crime.

    This is fear talking not stats.

  21. bw wrote, “Obama is gearing up the same grassroots organization that got him re-elected to pressure the senators and representatives to agree to his legislative program.”

    In principle, Obama could do that if his cohort ( unions, minorities, gays, liberals etc.) were united on the subject of gun-control. Gun-control is quite a different issue. Women, youngsters, minorities and old white guys like to shoot. It’s fun and useful. Lobbying is another matter, however. Likely he could get a big bunch of lobbyists to pester the legislative branch but I doubt he can get more people phoning legislators than the NRA does.

    We shall see whether history repeats. The last time the Democrats pushed gun-control seriously they lost a bunch of seats. Fear of that is what gives the NRA half of its power.

    The Senate of the USA is a stumbling block. Unless the Democrats can get a super-majority there, any gun-lover in the Senate can block anything.

    Whatever Obama manages to do will be strongly resisted by citizens. If he pushes hard enough they will push back harder. It’s not a winning strategy in a democracy to rule without the consent of the ruled. Banning any category of firearm is likely to make crime more profitable and more violent. War on Drugs II?

  22. I am not sure teachers are the ones who should be “carrying” in schools. Students might have opportunity to steal a piece. I am not sure it is possible for a teacher to hide a firearm in a classroom securely without a safe. Using volunteers does make sense however.

  23. oiaohm wrote, “The Australian armouries of gun clubs address the biggest problem.”

    Here, in Canada, with big predators and hunters who go out on the land sometimes with family in tow, “armouries” do nothing. They don’t work. I have gone hunting far away from home. Is the armoury going to be open when I depart? Is the armoury going to be open when I return?

    It’s unworkable except it might reduce theft.

  24. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson it is not that irrational. Exactly what good reason does a semi-automatic weapon need to be in a house with children. The Australian armouries of gun clubs address the biggest problem.

    Lot of people own guns they don’t use regularly because they just want them for odd now and again usage. Gun club armouries address this since they can hold ownership on many weapons and sign them in and out like a public library.

    You are security or sport that need a semi-automatic you are not storing it home with your children where they can get there mits on them when they are not around with a club/professional armouries to store them.

    Also it now means criminals wanting to steal a semi-automatic weapon will not target your house.

    Weapon collectors keeping a large number of weapons in a house are required to disable them. This include removal of firing pins.

    Virginia solution for school security is insane risk.

    Robert Pogson I do think there is a bug in the USA proposed law compare to the Australian. No armouries requirement in the USA at this stage and no armouries special exception for mil and other non normal weapon storage. Of course the armouries special exception comes with a higher requirement of security compare to home storage. Since they are built to be armouries not human living areas the defence systems that can be used can be vastly more pro active.

    The Australian gun buy back really was an over reaction. Lot of semi automatic weapons still exist in Australia today in fact almost as many as before the buy back. Difference is the security around those weapons is now vastly better. A child getting hands on a semi automatic weapon without supervision is not going to happen in Australia. An solo Adult getting hands on a semi automatic solo is not going to happen either. unless its illegal. Armouries require two people to unlock them to get the firearms.

    Same with wanting a huge number of clips they are not allowed to be stored at home. Police find a huge number of clips they can take you in on the spot. It is a lot harder to pull of a school yard mascara.

    All home stored weapons have to have a reason or disabled you can fairly well bet max number of operational guns a kid from a house could get is 3. A and B class only with a max of 2 clips per gun. Reloading clip is a very slow process. It would take a group effort to get a large number of clips or guns. Even if kid knows how to use semi automatic this does not help kid wanting to use it in Australia since the kid would have to trick the club armourer to get it and even so armourer is require to contact parent because kid is under age before allowing usage for even target shooting.

    Remember most school yard killers don’t come from families with criminal histories. Reason most of the kids with parents with criminal histories get left alone at schools. So when it comes school yard killings you can forget criminal element supply of weapons.

    Also the criminal element is not that stupid. You ask for a SKS or some other semi automatic rifle they get worried and want to know more about what you are going todo with it. USA due to huge number of semi automatic pistols they don’t ask many questions it was the same here.

    Criminal element does worry about being over powered. Human nature criminals and non criminals both don’t like semi-automatic guns that much once they drop out of general circulation.

    If you look at your own home country I law attempt I think they missed armouries as well.

    Harvest of deer in Australia and England does not use semi-automatic weapons. 2 action firearm is fast enough in skilled hands for deer. Normally not bold but lever action.

    There are very limited creatures that need the speed of reload semi automatic offers. Wild pigs for one need the speed of reload. Kangaroo culling is another. Other than that in Australia there is no other prey that is non human that requires an semi-automatic.

    I know the a lot of people don’t like Kangaroo culling due to killing joeyes. The reality with Kangaroos females are always pregnant. They can breed faster than rabbits. Man made extra sources of water is the problem that leads to over population of kangaroos. Good supply of water equals breed to a kangaroo base logic.

    Most people think of Kangaroos as cute. Kangaroo in close combat with human can kill human. Yes creatures don’t need teeth to kill if creature have highly powerful back legs you use to kick you target off your feet them proceed to jump up and down on you until you are dead.

    Australian kangaroos don’t get called boxing kangaroos for no reason. Take them on with close hand to hand combat the kangaroo will win. Even if you have a knife or club. They can hit harder.

    Really it would be interesting to do a list of USA creatures what one is a threat to humans and do require semi-automatic.

  25. bw says:

    Time will tell what is irrational and what is not and, more importantly, whether any such logic actually matters to anyone. Obama is gearing up the same grassroots organization that got him re-elected to pressure the senators and representatives to agree to his legislative program. The financial links to these reps from the NRA and other special interests is going to be aired out all over the country and we will see just how well the various politicians will stand up to the specter of losing their seat in the next election. I think that some of the information is rather shameful and that may cause a shift in the votes in Congress. Certainly the polling shows that many of the rules protecting the gun lobby are unpopular with the general population and the reps who resist are certainly going to be saddled with the burden of convincing the voters that they are worthy of re-election in spite of their stands contrary to public opinion.

    That will all be happening fairly soon, I think, and the matter will be a done deal. You can’t be associated with the murder of these children and get away with it by splitting hairs over the distinction between automatic and semi-automatic or by showing how other guns can make even bigger holes in people.

    Early reports are that these same sort of assault rifles are now involved with yet another mass murder in New Mexico. Do you think that will fan the flames? I do.

  26. bw wrote, “The public does not care whether the assault rifles are automatic, semi-automatic, or anything else. They want them eliminated from their collection of daily fears.”

    That’s irrational. “Them” is undefined. What is to be banned, whether it should be banned and what benefit should come from banning are all real issues that need to be considered thoughtfully. Piers gives no thought to that at all.

  27. bw says:

    “Piers Morgan does that.”

    There you go again, trying to frame an argument based on misuse of technical terms for guns. The public does not care whether the assault rifles are automatic, semi-automatic, or anything else. They want them eliminated from their collection of daily fears. Address that concern and you will begin to be effective.

    Piers Morgan understands that, no one in the NRA appears to be intelligent enough to do the same. They only fear the loss in revenues that would follow banning of these weapons, magazines, and ammunition in general commerce.

    From the description above, I think that Australia has it the right way. Legitimate users of firearms at various levels, including sportsmen. Keeping the arms in a safe environment is exactly what is needed here.

    One interesting element of the Fox clip was the mention of the “harvest” of a deer which seems to be a euphemism designed to soften the ire of animal rights activists. It is a pit they do not show the same concern about killing school children.

  28. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson I have not said that the law has stopped crime as such. The interesting thing is restricting and requiring proper secure of semi-automatic weapons has resulted in criminals using them less.

    –Suppose magazines holding more than x rounds are banned. Who is going to compensate hundreds of millions of instances of larger magazines that have to be destroyed/modified?–

    Australia does have means to handling this. Every gun owner has to own to a gun club/group here. Every gun club/group has to have an armoury. This armoury is allowed to store items that are not allowed in home storage or even storage of items your license currently don’t cover. Like if your firearm license has been revoked for lack of correct storage setup.

    The armoury allowance in the Australian gun laws deal with the issues of sport shooters and larger magazines. You are not allowed to store X weapon at home but armoury is allowed to store in most case mil grade weapons. Yes there have been a few robberies of armouries. Most cases complete failures due to items like expanding foam and other anti theft tech. Yes expanding foam in a normal house is not exactly a good idea.

    –Still, in Australia, any criminal who wants something can figure out a way to get it.–

    Illegal production of weapons has happened. Not illegal importing that much. Reason there is a limited number of addresses that can receive firearms in Australia. A new firearm has to either go to your local police station or your gun club or a registered seller of weapons. Then you have to collect it from there with photo id. Drivers licenses/over 18/firearm license here a central database. So a fake photo id is not going to work.

    Really the Australian gun law is many faced. Criminals using a gun in a crime will have longer jail term. Illegal use of a firearm of course. They add extra charge to themselves for using a firearm in a crime.

    Result from the Australian full requirement of gun registration and tracking has it turned up that most criminal guns enter Australia by legal means. Most are reported stolen before ending up in criminal hands.

    I would suspect same gun laws with certificate of own-ship as we have in Australia for firearms would work. Please not certificate of own-ship has to list the firearms barrels serial numbers not just the low receiver. So yes these certificates track firearm parts.

    Result is like the usa pink slip system for cars except with a central database of changes.

    Australian law does not put normal gun owners in prison for normal level firearm offences like incorrect storage. The result is loss of right to have firearms for a set amount of time.

    Australia is very much treating the right to have a gun as the same as the right to have a drivers licenses you are responsible you can have it. You are not responsible you have to make do without it.

    Robert Pogson in fact by implementing full and proper tracking of firearms inside Australia many legal weapon factories producing clone weapons were found. Since now the police knew if they had a firearm that had not be registered as entering or being made in Australia legally.

    There are many facets to the Australian firearm law. The armories, the weapon tracking… Note its an offence not to report a weapon stolen if it has not been detected in 7 days as stolen. Since all gun owners in Australia has to be club members if they are going away on holiday they can place the weapons in the clubs armorers care. This reduces number of weapons criminals gets hands on from robberies of people who are not home.

    There was a lot of thought put into the Australia laws based on how criminals were getting there mits on firearms. Particularly to make sure criminals got less chances to. Yes requirement of gun clubs to have formal design armory is one of the big important changes.

    The big problem I have in the usa is how many weapons go straight out the firearm factories over there and into criminals hands. There is no good tracking to show if it happening.

    Importation is not Australia worse issue with Firearms. Criminals setting up factories to copy weapons from overseas is the biggest problem.

    Like a large number of what appear to be Soviet-made SKS semi-automatic rifle are in fact Australia criminal made copies. Only found by the register waking up the weapons had never entered the country. So leading to that plant being found. These plants were well into operation before Australia brought in it firearm laws. Due to lack of tracking the existence of those factories went undiscovered.

    So sorry the idea that us being an island that customs is the control factor is wrong. Does not take much of a machine shop to make an AK or SKS class rifle from scratch.

    So you could say we have a leaking boarder problem as well. Just its different Australia clone production by criminals. You stand a chance of catching yours shipping something over the boarder they should not.

  29. bw wrote, “Fox has taken that position and is now doing their standard rounds of preaching to their choir by suggesting that the only problem is that the fools who oppose guns simply need to be educated, this time by showing that the AR-15 is not as capable of making holes in people as some alternate choices and none of these guns are “automatic”, rather “semi-automatic”.”

    The demonstration is clearly for the masses, not people already familiar with firearms. The news media constantly use auto when they should use self-loading or semi-auto. The news media sometimes even call semi-autos machine-guns. Piers Morgan does that.

  30. Der Balrog wrote, “What the heck has target shooting to do with this? In the direct sense: nothing! Because nobody wants to deprive target shooters of their precious ‘sport’.”

    Correct! Citizens owning firearms of all kinds is not a problem. It has nothing to do with mass shootings. Still the gun-grabbers figure that banning this and that will stop crime but it won’t. It will only harm the good people and the criminals will still find ways to get what they want.

    The gun-grabbers do want to deprive target shooters, hunters and citizens of firearms. That’s their goal. They exploit bad news to fire up the legislators at every opportunity. Every day I hear things like, “no target shooter needs a firearm like…”, “no one needs an …” or “if it saves one life, it’s worth it” and those are all specious arguments. The USA is fortunate to have the Second Amendment. Canada does not. Canada has the English BIll of Rights of 1603 which is ignored. The real criminals who should be locked up are those who would take away from good people the right to life/self-defence.

    Particular example. Suppose magazines holding more than x rounds are banned. Who is going to compensate hundreds of millions of instances of larger magazines that have to be destroyed/modified? Many magazines cost $30+. That’s $billions for a government already in deficit. Further, that will create a black market where organized criminals get another revenue stream with larger margins. The war on drugs is an utter failure simply because citizens want drugs and will pay for them whether or not drugs are criminalized. Firearms have the same characteristics as drugs as far as crime and punishment.

    In Canada, the recent wave of “gun-control” laws banned .32 calibre firearms outright as having no use in Canada. Immediately the target shooters were up in arms because they owned expensive Hammerli and Walther .32 target pistols that the gun-grabbers wanted treated the same as “Saturday night specials”. So, no harm done by firearms laws is just in the imagination of the ignorant.

  31. bw says:

    No one is going to be swayed by this sort of hair-splitting information. It only appeals to those who have already decided that gun control is wrong. Fox has taken that position and is now doing their standard rounds of preaching to their choir by suggesting that the only problem is that the fools who oppose guns simply need to be educated, this time by showing that the AR-15 is not as capable of making holes in people as some alternate choices and none of these guns are “automatic”, rather “semi-automatic”.

    None of that matters one hoot. If you look to recent history, you might notice that Fox did pretty much the same sort of thing in regard to the Romney-Ryan campaign, belittling the Obama message and suggesting that the Obama people were off-target and the polls were all either inaccurate or deliberately misleading. You can see how well that strategy worked!

    The law on the books now makes it illegal to sell a firearm to a felon or mentally incompetent person. The NRA has managed to rig the system to where a sale on-line or at a show can bypass any background check which puts a sort of “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell” factor on the law that lets anyone get around the law by claiming ignorance of the background for the buyer. That is where the biggest leak is and that is going to be plugged.

    If you look at the “assault rifle” specifically, I feel that the case can be made that anyone who wants to buy one of these fake M-16s in order to parade around pretending to be Rambo is, by definition, mentally incompetent and so there is absolutely no legal market for these weapons and so they should be banned.

    I think the same is true for anyone who maintains that the second amendment guarantees people the right to arm themselves in order to stave off a tyrannical government. If you believe that can happen, then you are mentally deficient by definition as well and should therefore not be allowed to have a gun.

  32. Australia is “special” in that it is a big island and if importation is controlled everything can be controlled. USA has a long border with Mexico and Canada. USA has strong “states rights” and they each do things differently meaning no state can effectively ban anything. Canada has a similar cultural/historical background to Australia but it’s hard to keep USA customs/practices from crossing the border.

    Still, in Australia, any criminal who wants something can figure out a way to get it. Law may influence criminals but it cannot control them. Legislation alone cannot eliminate crime. USA, for instance, does not have universal medical insurance and 50million are without medical insurance, making a huge alienated population. There are even more impoverished people including homeless. That generates a constant supply of disorganized violent criminals. OTOH there are plenty of wealthy educated organized criminals who employ the alienated people to work for them. There are also a number of psychos who exploit a free society to have their way. The result is a society within a society bent on ignoring laws to get what they want. Fixing the social problems would have a much larger effect than putting millions of people in prison through firearms laws. Already USA has a war on drugs and a war on terror and overseas adventures instead of curing their problems at home. Firearms laws are the least of their problems.

  33. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson simple little fact here most criminal weapons come from the people who buy them legally.

    So removing Assault weapons from general public will reduce number of criminals with Assault weapons.

    I can pull the Australia stats on the matter since the ban on Assault weapons here. Yes criminals mostly don’t buy guns they steal them.

    Gun laws have reduced cases of children finding non secured guns and shooting self or friends.

    All of those weapons in video are semi-automatic. Under our laws they are all Category D except the shotgun in that example is category C. Professional Shooters only. Also since category D have to be stored in a professional armoury cannot legally be stored at home. Category C is farmers only. So security personal are forbid from using them.

    Repeating rifle that are Category B those are bolt or leaver or pump action are very popular here. Again this is double action per shot.

    The Australian cat system is broken down quite well.

    You start with A-B then go to H if you are not professional. You don’t start out with semi-automatic here. You have to work threw correct handling in amateur classes to get semi-automatic for professional usage.

    Funny enough vertebrate pest animals includes human criminals. Humans an animal and the criminal form is a pest. Hello to Australian law creativity.

    Mind you type C is farmers only and only if it can be proven a single shot or double shot shot gun will do the job. So in Australia security personal are not allowed to walk down street packing pump or automatic 5 shots or less shotguns.

    Really Robbert have a close look at the Australia cats. Yes it forces Australian secuirty to use items like the AR weapons ahead of shotguns. So reducing public harm from security personal.

    You don’t see Australian police breaching with shot guns any more where you still use USA police doing this.

  34. Der Balrog says:

    Oh yeah, Fox News! Such an unbiased source!

    Anyway, why do you shift the goalposts, Pogson? What the heck has target shooting to do with this? In the direct sense: nothing! Because nobody wants to deprive target shooters of their precious ‘sport’.

    But do note that some German amok runners were enabled to do so because target shooters are legally allowed to buy weapons and store them at home. Erfurt and Winnenden come to mind. In the case of Erfurt the shooter, Robert Steinhäuser, was himself member of a shooting club. In the case of Winnenden the shooter’s father kept guns at home.

    And what’s this? Oh, look! Another shooting with five dead. This teenager probably took the NRA’s propaganda to heart and in practice defended the second amendment. Good job, my boy!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *