john-melb

Trevor, that remark is absolute, abject Bullshit!

Does Australia's "strong gun law" stop criminal gangs in Melbourne or
Sydney from obtaining arms?

Over the past few years there's been a gang-land war in Melbourne over
drug trade
"turf". Two crime groups having at each other, not one legal gun used
but over twenty people dead. The gang war only stopped when one side
were all deceased, and the other mob all dead or in prison.

Australia's "strong" laws on pistol ownership didn't stop Mick Gatto
from possessing the gun he used to ventelate "Benji" Venamin, or
"Benji" from being in possession of a .38 revolver when he ceased
breathing. It didn't stop Carl Williams from sending a number of
members of the opposing camp to meet their maker.

I owned pistols for recreational target shooting for over twenty
years, I am, contrary to your repeated assertions, quite sane and
whilst owning these pistls posed no threat whatsoever to any other
member of the public. I'm not alowed to own pistols for target
shooting anymore, and my pistols were forcibly "bought back" buy the
government and destroyed. Why, because these "strong" gun laws changed
the attendance requirements for target pistol shooters. My club only
shot competitions every second weekend and I'm a shiftworker, I work
two out of three weekends.

Support Trevor Wilson's "strong" gun laws, they wont stop crims from
getting a gun, but they'll stop a law abiding shift worker from
enjoying what little spare time he has.

Trevor, you really are a wanker.

trevor wilson

**Non-sequitur. Read my words.

**Non-sequitur. Read my words.

**Non-sequitur. Read my words.


--
Trevor Wilson
http://www.rageaudio.com.au

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

john-melb

Trevor Wilson claimed that

But the examples I have given of criminals in possession of arms in
spite of "strong" gun laws is "non-sequitur", I also note that Trevor
snipped my examples of strong gun laws adversely effecting law abiding
persons who own arms solely for recreational purposes, obviously my
example doesn't fit with Trevor prejudces.

Your arguements have been proven to be bullshit Trevor, absolute
abject bullshit.

"Strong" gun laws, like those we have in Australia DO NOT stop persons
with criminal intent from obtaining arms.

"Strong" gun laws, like those we have in Australia, DO stop law
abiding people from owning arms for sporting or recreational purposes.

Trevor, you are either a liar or a fool.

trevor wilson

**Read what I wrote, not what you think I wrote.

I also note that Trevor


**The laws IN AUSTRALIA affected you. That does not mean that other laws in
other places will affect other people.


**Non-sequitur. Read what I wrote, not what you think I wrote.


**No, they do not.


--
Trevor Wilson
http://www.rageaudio.com.au

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

john-melb

How many times have I said it to fellow gun owners, "anti-gun zealots
don't hate your guns, theyhateYOU!"

john-melb

I'm glad you've accepted that, does your acceptance of that mean you
now wish to review or rescind your asertion that "Neither law would
affect good citizens". Or are you going to continue with your tired
old mantra. Clearly, "strong" gun laws DO adversly effect law abiding
citizens who wish to own arms for sporting or recreational purposes.

You've claimed that "strong" gun laws inability to stop criminal from
obtaining arms is "non-sequitur", on what basis do you make that
assertion, I believe possession of arms by those with criminal intent
is very bloody relevant to any discussion surounding firearms laws.

Then why is my pistol safe empty?

mortimer schnerd, rn

He's right. You really are full of shit.

--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

trevor wilson

**SOME gun control laws MAY affect SOME gun owners.

**READ WHAT I WROTE, NO WHAT YOU THINK I WROTE.

"non-sequitur", on what basis do you make that


**Can you own another type of gun?


--
Trevor Wilson
http://www.rageaudio.com.au

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

john-melb

So, when you said "neither law would affect good citizens" you weren't
being entirely truthful., how out of character.

DONT "SHOUT" AT ME YOU IGNORANT CUNT!

You were going on about "strong" gun laws, I pointed out that
Australia's "strong" gun laws hadn't stopped persons with criminal
intent from obtaining arms, you stated this was "non-sequitur", I have
asked you on what basis you make the claim that discussion about the
failure of "strong" laws to stop persons of criminal intent from
obtaining arms is "non-sequitur".

I note you inability to support your assertions with any reasoned arguement.


Yes, how exactly do I use another type of gun in the sporting
competition I wish to compete in? Are you giving me you permission to
use my .303 or my 6.5x50 in MPC Competition? I lawfully owned some of
those arms for over twenty years, I'm now not allowed too, you believe
that is acceptable. You believe it is acceptable to "punish" me by
removing my ability to participate in the sporting pursuits of my
choice, on what basis do you come to that belief? What have I done to
deserve such treatment?

"**SOME gun control laws MAY affect SOME gun owners." you're
apparently prepared to accept laws which do not stop criminals from
obtaining arms, but which stop the law abiding from owning arms for
legitimate sporting or recreational purposes. Why?

john-melb

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Australasian Police Commissioner's Resolutions - Australasian Police
Ministers' Council (APMC)

10th May 1996

Australasian Police Ministers' Council Special Firearms Meeting
Resolutions
1. Bans on Specific Types of Firearms

RESOLUTION

3. Genuine Reason for Owning, Possessing or Using a Firearm

RESOLUTION

Council resolved:

* that personal protection not be regarded as a genuine reason for
owning, possessing or using a firearm.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Care to withdraw your erroneous assertion to Mortimer now Trevor?