Text 28181, 95 rader
Skriven 2009-02-28 06:44:47 av David Drummond (3:640/305)
  Kommentar till text 28154 av Joe Bruchis (1:3828/12.0)
Ärende: 11yr old with a shotgun
===============================
Joe Bruchis -> David Drummond wrote:

 JB>> Google Australian Gun Control.  I got 612,000 results.

 DD>> 612,000 incorrect websites if they say that Aussies cannot own
 DD>> firearms. Australians CAN own firearms (albeit not assault
 DD>> weapons). My house mate legally has a Glock pistol.

 JB> They say your rights are being legislated away.

Australians have NO right to own firearms - they are however allowed to own
them under current laws. The laws were modified 10 years or so ago after a mass
shooting to disallow private ownership of "assault" weapons.

 DD>> Name a site that you can access that you think I cannot (due to
 DD>> filtering by the Australian government).

 JB> As you said, the filters are not in place yet, but as the article I
 JB> quoted says, the filters are currently being tested. It is apparent in
 JB> the near future your Right to Free Speech, if you have one, is also
 JB> being legislated away.

The filters were to be tested, but the major ISPs refused to participate - then
the legislation failed in Parliament and it's all fallen through. It may come
back.

Be aware that should they get such legislation to work here it would very soon
appear in your country too - the rest of the world is watching Aussie as the
test case.

Blocking a porn site is NOT hindering my "right" to Free Speech, I can still
say anything I could say prior to the ban - all they're doing is hindering me
seeing stuff.

As in USA, they have always blocked what I could see here. In neither country
can I legally walk up to a street vendor and legally purchase a magazine
showing photos of grown men fucking little boys in the arse.

 DD>> I can most certainly access porn - and if you can nominate an
 DD>> "illegal" site I will try that too.

 JB> But you won't be able to in the near future.

So you say. The legislation has to be passed and implemented first. To date is
hasn't managed to get passed.

 DD>> The 612,000 sites are plainly wrong then..... then again, it could
 DD>> be your comprehension of the search results.

 JB> They mainly point to the fact that your rights are being legislated
 JB> away. Don't feel bad, mine are too. I've just been trying to tell you
 JB> this is going on all over the world.  The purpose is to take away our
 JB> rights, crash our economies and place us under a global something or
other.

You have NO rights! Any privilege currently granted to you can be taken away.

True rights cannot be removed - everything you have described can.

 DD>> Australia has a lot less gun related deaths per capita than USA so
 DD>> perhaps the Aussie gun control works. Bugger all Aussies are shot
 DD>> by "agents of the government" either.

 JB> I'm glad you fess up to you gun related deaths.

There ARE gun related deaths in Australia - some even claim the number has
risen since the "gun ban". However, the population has risen since then too,
many of whom are immigrants who are bringing their values with them, values
that place less worth on human life.

Mass shootings on the other hand have not been occurring since the gun bans -
which was the intention of the legislation.

Australia' death by shooting are considerably less per capita than many other
countries - especially USA.

I appreciate that USA has had an increase in immigrants with different values
too - but the practise of shooting people is indigenous to the USA culture, it
is NOT an imported concept.

 JB> Anyone shot by an "Agent", usually, could never be identified as such.

Substitute "law enforcement officer" or "policeman". They are agents of your
government(s).

-- 

regards

David

http://www.jabberwocky.com.au/southamerica

---
 * Origin: -27 28'15.48"  +153 1'38.77" (3:640/305)