Telling It Like It Is On “Gun-Control”

The riotous “debate” on gun-control in USA is actually about “people-control”, not saving children. One editor gets it.
Protected by a hundred supersonic fighter jets, ten thousand armored vehicles with machine-gun turrets, and twenty million fully functional military tanks (many of them equipped with really cool-looking flamethrowers and some awesome newfangled sonic crowd-control technology), Senator Dianne Feinstein boldly rode her bulletproof limo into Washington DC yesterday and called for a new ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

see Uncle Sam, Give Us Your Guns – Taki's Magazine.

The bottom line? The editor writes it might be reasonable to expect citizens to give up their firearms when the government does… As if that will ever happen. This is above and beyond other uses of firearms like hunting, collecting and target-shooting where firearms of many kinds make sense one way or another. Most of the debates engaged by the politicians don’t seem to make sense. The politicians seem to love to ignore other arguments, beg the question or make unreasonable leaps of logic.

On a related note, see “Disarming the Slaves” on the same site. Refreshing.

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 firearms and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Telling It Like It Is On “Gun-Control”

  1. ram says:

    It should surprise no one that international arms dealers act in their own interests and undermine the governments of every country in which they operate.

    Among those ‘pillars of integrity’ Thales really stands out:

    Since Thales does far more business with China than Australia, who do you think they’ll side with when ‘push comes to shove’?

    What oiaohm doesn’t seem to realize is that Australia’s so called “laws” are worth jack since they are not enforced against the rich, powerful, well connected, feared, politicians, arms dealers, power brokers, …

    In practice, the Australian public is now more heavily armed than probably anytime in the past. Just now they distrust the police, have no confidence in State and Federal politicians and government officials, and only have thin veneer of respect left for some City governments.

  2. Nut-case conspiracist. It’s hard to believe that such an irrational person, prone to grand leaps of illogic, is actually employed. Sure, one can develop a plot that fits a few of the facts of the situation but that doesn’t make the invented plot reality. Certainly a conspiracy involving hundreds of diverse people is unlikely to hold together. So, the nut-case goes for the improbable line…

  3. oiaohm says:

    ram Funny there is more than one weapon maker in Australia.

    Australian largest supplier is these days

    Australian Defense Industries is now the Thales Australia. Has to bid against other Australian and British weapon makers.

    Yes there are many Australian weapon makers. Like the makers of the AR-15s

    Factory and production location of firearms inside Australia are on a need to know base. This is part of the problem with Australian Defence Industries there factory location had become public knowledge so was no good to Australia in case of invasion.

    Ram there are still Australian Mil controlled weapon production. Once a factories location is known the tactical advantage to Australian Mil is gone. Yes Australian Defence Industries was sold off because new factories had to be made.

    BAE is bring a stealth class drone with air to air combat ability to the Australia for testing and development.

    –Now Australian made arms are used by hundreds of thousands of mercenaries around the world, mostly in the Middle East and Africa.–
    In fact no. Australian made semi automatic weapons are not allowed to be exported other than with Australian Mil Forces. All Thales Australia, Lithgow Facility weapons stay in Australia Mil. Simple legal lock.

    The Steyr Mannlicher and SME Ordnance don’t have the same weapon sales limitations and those Steyr are not identical to the ones out the Lithgow Facility. They cannot take the Australian special round that gives a Steyr longer range. Using Steyr from either Mannlicher or SME up against Australian made Steyr with Australian ammo does not have the range. So Australian forces can be shoting them and they cannot shot the Australian forces because there bullets drop short. Yes the Australian Steyr can use parts from the Mannlicher or SME Steyr. Unless you get up really close and personal on them you cannot tell the difference. Also the Australian mil bullet for Steyr is a double sided thing insert it into a Mannlicher or SME and fire it you break barrel.

    Thales does not make any Steyr weapons outside Australia that take the Australian Mil round. Yes its a different make of barrel. This is why the weapons look so identical yet combat they are so different. They are not allowed to make Copies of Australia Mil weapons in any other country condition of acquirement.

    Ram Australian Defense Industries was not the only game in town in Australia. Now that Thales owns them they are still not the only game in town. Problem is now the factory locations are now better hidden.

    Ram in fact the reason why most of Australian Defense Industries staff was laid off is the fact the production line went robotic. Not that the production line reduced production in Australia for Australian forces.

    In fact most of those with weapon designer have moved into smaller productions for Movie usage. In fact more profitable. Yes there are a lot of custom weapons each year produced in Australia for movie usage. Semi-automatic weapons are complex to import. Automatic is forbin. Yes Mil deck chain guns have to be produced here in Australia they cannot be imported any more.

    Before the firearm laws you could import deck chain guns and semi-automatic from the USA. So the weapon makers from Australia were at risk of being out of a job due to competition. With arms laws they now have a protected market.

    Also here is something scary. Australian forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and East Timor have been seen with USA SR-25. Australian Mil has never purchased any.

    Ram that is the scary part a some of the weapons used by the Australian mil are in fact captured weapons for the enemies of Australian forces. Those weapons are serviced and maintained in Australia. Every time Australia operates anywhere outside Australia the Australian forces normally bring home more weapons then that took onto the battle field. Yet USA forces normally come home with less.

    Robert Pogson Syria government is being blocked from being able to resupply. The Syria government depends on weapon imports. Syria makes basically none of there own weapons.

    –In Iraq and Aghanistan the Taliban and Alqaida are laughing at USA. Every drone strike turns more children into future talabanis.–

    Robert Pogson this is exactly why the USA Mil has to be held account for mistakes. And stop doing stupid things like paying mercenaries that don’t have to properly account for their actions.

    Australia has proven given time we can turn locals to peace liking as long as we are not attempt to impose our own will are are only there to stop the violence..

    –In short, no amount of war-machinery and money can defeat a population unwilling to be governed.–

    Yes this is why in the islands near Australia the Australian forces have never stayed. We go in stop the civil war help get a police force and mil up and leave. Australia has never tried to govern the countries it interfered in due to civil war.

    Robert Pogson
    –Viet Nam, low tech defeated the USA in the jungle.–
    Funny. Australian forces by the end of the VietNam war saw almost no engagements because the Local VietNam forces knew Australia forces would be operating under the cover of there long range guns. So engaging Australian forces would see your forces nuked if the Australia patrol got off a radio message.

    USA was mostly defeated in VietNam for laying out bases wrong. Australian bases once developed in VietNam were setup that one base could blow the next base off face of map if it got overran. In fact the Australian forces knew if they let the base be overran they might be going up with the base. The largest loss of VietNam own army in a single night was vs Australia forces not the USA forces. Not because Australian forces have over more forces. In fact the Australian forces that held were outnumbered 20 to 1. Yet most of the 20 VietNam forces died.

    The reality Robert Pogson the history of battles show the Australians being better.

    Even in Afghanistan hunting the enemy the Australia forces are still using the plan of there is a local hill over looking a village place artillery of some form on it they proceed into village leaving the artillery to provide cover fire. Result is most aggressors in villages know that engaging the Australia forces will trigger lot heaver rounds to come in. Basic Australian forces tactic always make sure you have the weapon ready to cover your ass so you can retreat and kill anyone who attempt to follow you so retreat can be successful. Better to plan for failure because all plans can fail.

    USA forces forget this and do stupid thinks like having helicopter drop ins Resulting in own forces pinned down with nothing to dig themselves out.

    When Australian forces were embedding with USA forces in Afghanistan. This forced Australian forces into the bad location of having to call in bombing raids on their current location with unguided bombs to make a retreat path.

    There is critical operational control reason why Australian forces are no longer embedded with USA forces in iraq and Afghanistan the way they started. Mostly bad orders and planning on the USA side.

  4. Ivan says:

    No, it’s about keeping guns out of the hands of the people that shouldn’t have guns. You’d realize this if you weren’t a reactionary whackadoodle.

  5. ram says:

    Once again, Oiaohm’s representation of arms, arms control, and weapons exports bears no resemblance to the actual reality on the ground.

    Previous to the John Howard regime, most military arms, and virtually all land army weapons were made by an Australian government controlled entity called Australian Defense Industries (ADI). John Howard ‘sold’ ADI to the French Government controlled international arms dealer Thales. Now Australian made arms are used by hundreds of thousands of mercenaries around the world, mostly in the Middle East and Africa.

    Since almost all the Australians who used to work for Australian defence have been laid off/sacked/refreshed there are plenty of highly skilled people now making arms for Australian ‘motercylcle clubs’ and the ‘enforcement branches’ of various labour unions. Oh yeah, that gun ban of John Howard’s worked real well! — well if you actually want chaos and crime.

  6. oiaohm, denying history, wrote, “Even with the full population armed with assault weapons the tanks drones and other items can simply crush that form of resistance.”

    The USA has used “high-tech” to overcome enemies for longer than I have lived. In WWII they overcame the nazis not by their air-power but by superior forces on the ground. In Korea, jets, recoilless rifles, machine-guns and artillery could not defeat the Chinese, only bring them to the bargaining table. In Viet Nam, low tech defeated the USA in the jungle. In Iraq and Aghanistan the Taliban and Alqaida are laughing at USA. Every drone strike turns more children into future talabanis.

    In short, no amount of war-machinery and money can defeat a population unwilling to be governed. There have been many nasty merciless regimes and they all fail. The one weakness of tyrants is that they cannot hold power by annihilating people because the people are the power. Without people tyrants are just brain-dead nut-cases railing against the world. It’s only when people support a tyrant that the tyrant has power. In the USA, support of Congress is abysmal. Many are elected after campaigning on a platform of disrupting the US government.

    Current case is Syria. Despite having all the guns and being ruthless, the government of Syria is about to fall because the people would rather die than support the government. The government there has air-power, artillery, SCUDs and chemical weapons but they don’t have enough bodies to hold the country. Stolen smuggled firearms in the rubble will be used until the government has run out of soldiers and then no one will be left to use the more advanced technology.

  7. oiaohm says:

    The reality assault weapons against the USA armed forces is next to useless. Even with the full population armed with assault weapons the tanks drones and other items can simply crush that form of resistance.

    Bulletproof limo will not withstand a drone strike. Heck tanks will not withstand a drone strike.

    What we need out of everyone in the USA include the USA government is implementing a true responsible storage and usage policy of weapons.

    Yes responsible does include not storing excess weapons where immature people can get there hands on them. Yes it also include requirement to properly secure weapons not in use.

    It does require forbidding USA government from using drones to bomb schools and funeral with non combatants. Australia got many island countries out of civil war not once was it required to bomb a school or a funeral. Some how the USA thinks this is fine way to wage war. Drones and a lot of modern fighter aircraft have black boxes that video the targets they fire on. So it should be really simple to police who has fired incorrectly and remove those from the battle field.

    USA is using the same play book as the Nazi did in world war II around the world. This does make it very hard to win over the local population to work with you.

    Robert Pogson the big problem is the right to have arms has gone to the populations head over there. They have missed the fact they are 100 percent out gunned. That there government does not give a rats about bombing schools, funeral and social events in other countries.

    Right to have arms has gone to there head.

    If Australian forces did the same kind of drone strikes they could be prosecuted for war-crimes in Australia even possibly returned to the country where they did it to be punished. Classic is don’t take drugs and drive its illegal in the USA. Yet you can take the same drugs hop in a USA fighter aircraft and go bomb someone home/school…. and walk away Scott free.

    USA really does need laws for responsible weapon usage for everyone. Does not matter if you are mil or cit in Australia abuse a weapon you are facing the same charge.

    Some of the reason for 9/11 was the fact USA war machine takes no responsibility to limit civilian deaths. This is why I really think some sections of the USA due to how out of control they are should be placed under USA mil control so the USA population learn how bad there mil forces sux for taking care of non combatants lives. With this sorted less people would hate the USA country.

    Bringing in proper tracking of weapons is another way to reduce risk. Lets say person is slightly mentally wrong there friend was killed by a USA made weapon they might blame the USA for it and come bomb them.

    Reality semi automatic weapons made in Australia cannot be exported.

    Problem here USA stops exporting weapons they go bankrupt. USA needs war. USA does stuff to create more wars. USA population is dumb enough to play into it.

    What does the USA population think will happen if the USA cannot create war else where. That is right create it at home. So there war machine can keep on turning over.

Leave a Reply