Re: Australians, guns, and "socialism, sodomy and surrender".


"WindsorFox<SS>" <darkshado666@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fsornr$gta$2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Nope. The NRA is owned by the arms industry. The membership are just
pawns. They suck up the lies told to them, pay their dues and allow the
myth to be perpetuated. The NRAS has consistently opposed good, strong,
homogeneous gun control laws. Those laws whcih they oppose would serve to
reduce the likelihood that bad people could obtain guns.


Either show proof of that accusation or admit it is a lie.

**I just did.

I know it
is untrue.

**Prove it.

But the point remains that the NRA represents the interests
of it's members.

**Nope. I represents the interests of the gun manufacturers. That interest
*may* coincide with the needs of some members. Make no mistake: The NRA's
primary aim is to represent the needs of manufacturers.



**Nevertheless, the NRA opposes sane, strong, homogeneous gun control
laws. The only beneficiaries of those objections are criminals and gun
manufacturers (and the NRA, through kick-backs).

And the reason you tout this illogical and incorrect crap in an audio
group is you've had your ass handed to you in the on topic groups.

**Actually, I didn't. I prefaced my original post with "OT". Bratzi elected
to alter the heading to what it is now. If you have a problem, take it up
with Bratzi.

You
are either too dense to grasp the truth or you are just a troll. Most
likely a combo of the two.

**Actually, unlike you, I have grasped the truth.



**BULL***! The UK is at 1/20th the figure of the US. That is not
"catching up". That is a LONG way behind. I should, at this point, inform
you that US gun homicides are on the way up. Combine that with an economy
which is descending into the toilet and you will have a recipe for more
gun crime. Ya gotta love those cheap guns, poor gun controls and a
dissaffected population of poor people.

I really think have no clue what you are talking about, but by all
means tell me where you got the figures to back up that kludge of info.

**That "kludge info" is fact. Anyway, here is the data you require:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir_percap-crime-murders-firearms-per-capita



**Prove it.

You made the point, you have to prove it. You can not though.

**Dream on. Your proof has just been supplied.


**Utter, banal nonsense. The US is clear proof that lax gun control laws
DON'T work. The US has, by a long margin, more of it's citizens murdered
via gunshot than any other Western, developed nation.

Which you can not in any way prove is due to the particular laws.

**Prove it? No. The evidence is compelling, however. No other Western,
developed nation allows legal gun owners to sell guns to criminals. The US
does.

In
fact you've been proven wrong numerous times,

**Nope. I'm still waiting for you to supply any evidence to support your
nonsense.

shown that every state
which adopts a concealed carry law has an over all drop in violent crime.

**Prove it. Cite the evidence to prove your case that "every state which
adopts..." I'll wait. Whilst you are at it, mull over these facts:

CCW came into effect in Alabama in 1977. In 1976 the violent crime rate was
388.8. Every year since then it has been higher than that. The lowest
property crime rate since CCW was 1977, the year CCW was introduced. Every
subsequent year has been higher than 1977.

Remember, it only takes ONE to prove you wrong. I just did.

More over, the gun murders in the US are majority gang/drug
related.

**And just who do you imagine commits murder in all the other Western,
developed nations? Sunday School teachers?

If all guns immediately miraculously disappeared those murders
would NOT go away, they would become murders with some other weapon.

**Prove it.

If
you deny that it will be further proof of your being completely out of
touch and clueless to the true situation in the US. Something those of us
who live here already know.

**I deny nothing. I just want to see your proof.



**Sure. Not as many though. And they cost far more for criminals to
purchase. Here in Australia, for instance, the average heroin addict
cannot afford a handgun. They're too expensive. Not in the US though. Any
old junkie can afford the $50.00 price tag of a used gun and a

Wrong. But then you've never been here so you do not know nor do you
understand.

**Wrong, wrong and wrong. I visited mainland US in 1995 and 1996 and, prior
to that, Guam in 1990. I also asked a mate (an Aussie, BTW) to check on the
price of a cheap, used handgun when he was collecting his .44 Magnum from
his local gun store near LA. He confirmed that around $50.00 would secure a
cheap handgun.


no-questions-asked policy in most jurisdictions. Having said all that,

Having said that, you are again obviously oblivious to the actual laws
here.

**Wrong.


re-read my list of positives again. It seems you failed to digest the
information. SOP for a gun loon. You idiots ignore the positive effects
of good gun control.

I read your list. It's a LitS -0- caRp.

**Nope. Just factual. Something gun loons positively detest.




**Here is what you snipped (and failed to answer):

How is it that all the
pounding can not seem to make you understand that by removing the guns
from those 200 lawful owners who protected themselves is *NOT* going to
stop the 10,000 murdered by criminals?

**Because a large chunk of those 10,000 were murdered by legal gun
owners.

BS. Please show me the source of that information.

**I don't have that data. I can only draw on the fact that in Australia,
around 15% of all gun related homicides are committed by legal gun owners.
It is likely that the figures from the US are higher, given the lax gun
control laws there.



In any case, gun control laws (in Australia and most other Western,
developed nations) actively seek to limit the availability of guns to bad
people.

No, they actively seek to limit the availability to EVERYone save for
the very rich.

**Wrong. The pricve of guns has not altered significantly since the 1996 gun
control laws were enacted.



(I doubt those numbers, but the
point still works.)

**Doubt all you wish. The US FBI list them quite succinctly:

Total homicides, broken down by weapon:

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_07.html


That shows nothing on the circumstances of the murders, nor does it say
anything about whether the shooter was legal or not.

**YOU ASKED FOR PROOF OF THE NUMBERS. I provided that proof.


Now, I am adding the appropriate groups to the cross post. I expect you
to then REMOVE rao from said list when replying.

**Expect what you want.

Trevor Wilson


.

Quantcast