This is what happens when They get power. God help Oz.

[solicitr]

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/s ... public_rss

[Alatar]

I fail to see the problem. I'm not being facetious, but what exactly bothers you about this?

[Pearly Di]

Who, exactly, is 'They'?

And, like Alatar, I'm not seeing cause for outrage.

From the article in the link:

Mr Debus said that there was "absolutely no reason" for anyone to own a shotgun that looked like a semi-automatic rifle.

"If someone has a legitimate use for a shotgun then it should look like a shotgun and not a military assault weapon used by soldiers," he said.

"We don't want people enticed into buying these firearms when the only reason to own one is for show."

Mr Debus said the new controls had been introduced after consultation with the firearms sector and relevant government agencies.

This sounds eminently sensible to me.

And this:

The new regulations will make it easier for museums such as the Australian War Memorial to import items for temporary exhibition. Permits may also be granted to governments, police and film productions.

Customs officials will be provided with a template of the real firearms. If the imports resemble real military firearms, they will be destroyed.

[sauronsfinger]

I cannot speak for anyone else here. But recently I did participate in a very long internet discussion on a different board on a very similar subject.

The people who objected to this sort of thing seemed to feel that the appearance of a weapon was immaterial. It is the function that should be looked at, and if necessary controlled. To ban something because it "looks like a military weapon" even though it may not actually function as a military weapon, was found to be a silly idea.

[Alatar]

Tell that to people who have been robbed or held up by people using facsimile weapons.

[Dave_LF]

With everything that's happening in the world, this seems like a really odd thing to fixate on.

[Alatar]

Well, its hardly brightest on my radar, but neither would I have a problem with it. People seem to find the most bizarre things to get upset about.

[Dave_LF]

Sorry; that was unclear. I was referring to the hyperbole in the thread title. There are a number of things going on right now that might warrant imploring some god or another for help; I'm pretty sure the inability to purchase paintball guns that resemble military firearms isn't one of them.

[sauronsfinger]

Over the last few months, I have spent a lot of internet time - probably too much - in trying to converse with gun owners about these issues. Many really truly believe with all their heart and soul that the federal government will try to either take away their guns or make it so difficult to own one that it has the same effect. And after spending many hours talking to them, no words, no line of reason, no statements by anyone like Obama make any difference to them.


Many of them are either single issue people with guns trumping all - or guns are part of a total world outlook that is extremely politically conservative.

In discussing automatic weapons and who should own them, many push the idea that they are "collectors" and just love to "collect" military weapons. When you accept that as legitimate but ask why can't they be rendered as uselsss mechanically and operationally, they get really angry and say it is akin to chopping off the head of a statue you want to collect. You have rendered it as worthless.

So much for wanting to collect something that looks pleasing to you.

There really is precious middle ground and I find that terribly frustrating. So much so that I gave up and admit to myself that there is really nothing that is going to be done about any of this in the USA barring Columbine events taking place every month for a year which might propel something. But short of that, I see no hope of any resolution on this very very wide gulf.

And that is frustrating for me since I accept that there are tens of millions of people who own guns and are responsible people. I wish there was some way to bridge this gulf and create a win-win situation for society.

[ToshoftheWuffingas]

I think a grown up who wants his gun to look like a military assault weapon even when it isn't is just a little bit sad.
There's a whole bunch of people out there deserving real sympathy before I ever get round to anguishing over these guys.

[Pearly Di]

I think a grown up who wants his gun to look like a military assault weapon even when it isn't is just a little bit sad.

So do I.

There's a whole bunch of people out there deserving real sympathy before I ever get round to anguishing over these guys.

Quite.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Sorry; that was unclear. I was referring to the hyperbole in the thread title. There are a number of things going on right now that might warrant imploring some god or another for help; I'm pretty sure the inability to purchase paintball guns that resemble military firearms isn't one of them.

I had thought about asking that the thread title be changed to something more descriptive and less hyperbolic, but really to my mind it does so much insult any else as reflect on the threadstarter himself. So I let it stand.

[Maria]

I wouldn't mind owning an M-16, merely for nostalgia purposes. Way back when, I could disassemble and reassemble said firearm with my eyes closed in some very small increment of time that I don't remember... one minute, maybe?

However, I have never even looked up the price for the modified version that can only shoot semi-automatic. What's the point of collecting anything that is not authentic? Owning an automatic assault rifle that has been modified to only shoot semi-automatic would be like collecting xeroxed stamps, or blunted knives. Or an antique car that can only go in first gear. Or proudly keeping a set of abridged LOTR books.

Serious collectors want their collected times to be as much like the original thing as possible, whether you are collecting antique shotguns, cars or Barbie dolls.

[Frelga]

Sorry; that was unclear. I was referring to the hyperbole in the thread title. There are a number of things going on right now that might warrant imploring some god or another for help; I'm pretty sure the inability to purchase paintball guns that resemble military firearms isn't one of them.

This +1.

And this is from someone whose favorite childhood toy was a very realistic-looking Makarov in my grandfather's real holster.

Maria, they trained us in high school to assemble and disassemble AK-47. I was pretty fast, too, one of the fastest in my class. Now the only thing I remember is where the little box-thingie with cleaning tools is, and that's only because my finger got stuck in that hole the first time I tried it.

[Pearly Di]

Maria, they trained us in high school to assemble and disassemble AK-47. I was pretty fast, too, one of the fastest in my class. Now the only thing I remember is where the little box-thingie with cleaning tools is, and that's only because my finger got stuck in that hole the first time I tried it.

*is beyond impressed at Frelga's super-coolness*

Boy, that beats anything I ever did in school.

Um ... why did they teach you that, Frelga? I feel a bit stupid asking but I would really like to know.

[Frelga]

Di, that was for when our imperialist enemies attack. I went to school in the old Soviet Union, remember? Civil Defense was a mandatory subject, and it included AK-47 and target practice with I forgot what sort of rifle, among other things. For a couple months, they trained boys on something that had to do with their facing the draft after the school, and the girls got trained separately on first aid.

Don't get me wrong, it was not a big brassy well-oiled machine. It was something like an hour a week, and one of those lowly subjects that no one paid much attention to. Except when we were dealing with weapons, everyone showed up then.

[Primula Baggins]

You know, all in all, I'm kind of glad we never attacked.

[Frelga]

Me too!

[Pearly Di]

Di, that was for when our imperialist enemies attack. I went to school in the old Soviet Union, remember?

Oh, I had remembered. I thought it was something like that ... some Cold War gubbins!

Civil Defense was a mandatory subject, and it included AK-47 and target practice with I forgot what sort of rifle, among other things. For a couple months, they trained boys on something that had to do with their facing the draft after the school, and the girls got trained separately on first aid.

Gotcha.

[solicitr]

So, let's get this straight- they're banning firearms based merely on what they look like and folks here don't think it's totally insane?

It is the function that should be looked at, and if necessary controlled. To ban something because it "looks like a military weapon" even though it may not actually function as a military weapon, was found to be a silly idea.

Wow, sf, we may actually agree on something!

I think a grown up who wants his gun to look like a military assault weapon .....

Er, Tosh, there's no such thing as a "military assault weapon." The military uses assault rifles. "Assault weapon" is a nonsense term, coined by the Brady Center in a cynical effort to confuse the gullible into thinking their "assault weapon" ban had something to do with real assault rifles- which in fact have been controlled in the US since 1934.



Some folks object to the thread title. Who are "They?" "They" are the enemies of individual liberty, of human freedom. Not the tyrants and dictators, but the busybodies and bluenoses, the sorts who feel they have some right to prohibit their neighbor's little harmless pleasures because it somehow offends Their 'higher morality.'

I'm especially troubled by the attitude reflected by some here, the "well, why do they need to have....?" sort. That is precisely the wrong question; or the question is precisely backwards. The citizen of a free society should never be obligated to justify anything to the State. It is incumbent on the State to present a compelling justification for prohibition. And what justification is there for this?

Yes, this is silly. And capricious. And arbitrary. And tyrannical. It has nothing to do with the function of the firearms in question. It isn't a ban on 'replica weapons,' btw, but on ordinary rifles and shotguns which "look badass."

Tosh remarks that young men who are attracted to this sort of appearance are "pretty sad." That may be. I happen to think that Midlife Crisis Guy driving a Vette is pretty sad, too- but an upper age limit on Corvette possession would also be silly-- and tyrannical.

The 'justification" advanced is that supposedly some people might feel 'intimidated' (never mind that in Oz a gun must be kept cased except when actually hunting, or at a range). Well, on that basis I'd be justified in banning 'gangsta' fashion, since young men dressed in that manner I find to be far more menacing than the guy at the next bench sighting in his AR-15.

"They" are the petty dictators of political correctness- and they are at least as perilous to human freedom as the greater dictators. The Prohibitionists, the censors, the busybodies who stick their noses into everyone else's business because they Don't Approve. But they get away with it, because it's for our own good, you see.



This is how liberty dies: The Death of a Thousand Cuts. (See also, "Canadian Human Rights Commissions")