US commentators call for Australian-style gun law reform

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
What are you talking about dude? I haven't been corrected even once, to any actual 'facts' within this thread.

Nope, must have been someone else who gave out this gem:

Not illegal since the 1930's. They just made them unattainable though there tax stamp policy. But as is stands today, they are still legally unattainable, even though there tax stamp scam is no longer implemented.

I think you just need to educate yourself on the situation, since guns are far from 'prohibited' in Australia.

Stop putting words in my mouth, I said it was closer to prohibition than the policies we have, which it is. Let me know if you can go down to the local gun dealer and come home with a firearm the same day.

So talking like America is the definition of freedom, simply because you can legally own a AR-15, or own a fully automated Ak-47 that was registered before 1986, is just pure ignorance at its best. Your just a bunch of compliant slaves like the rest of us. Only difference is, you have firearm laws that allow hardcore criminals to have easy access to guns.

Goal post shift much? We are discussing gun rights and the confiscatory policy you would like to see implemented. Not who has more or less civil liberties.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Nope, must have been someone else who gave out this gem:

What did I say that was so incorrect?

Machine guns weren't made illegal in the 1930's. They just put a tax on them that equated to like 2 months of the average wage (at the time), making them unattainable to the average person. They also regularly used to refuse people the tax stamp that would of made being in possession of a machine gun legal, even if the person had the funds to pay the tax.

Stop putting words in my mouth, I said it was closer to prohibition than the policies we have, which it is.

Going by that logic, the US police force is "closer" to a full on tyranny than any other Anglo nation. But that sure as hell doesn't mean the US has a tyranny government.... So your point is moot.

Goal post shift much? We are discussing gun rights and the confiscatory policy you would like to see implemented. Not who has more or less civil liberties.

I wasn't the one who shifted the "goal post" in that direction in the first place.

Several people claimed the US has guns laws that allows criminals incredibly easy access to firearms, because American citizens are far more passionate about freedom and there rights than other countries. So its only reasonable that I would bring up the point that the US has the highest incarceration rate in the world and that the police use deadly force against citizens on average every two days in the states.

Not exactly what I'd definition as a utopia of freedom and civil liberties.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
They just put a tax on them that equated to like 2 months of the average wage (at the time), making them unattainable to the average person. They also regularly used to refuse people the tax stamp that would of made being in possession of a machine gun legal, even if the person had the funds to pay the tax.

You said 'They just made them unattainable though there tax stamp policy. But as is stands today, they are still legally unattainable'. Stop back pedaling, they are not 'still legally unattainable'.

Going by that logic, the US police force is "closer" to a full on tyranny than any other Anglo nation. But that sure as hell doesn't mean the US has a tyranny government.... So your point is moot.

Stop goal post shifting. We are not talking about the police, we are discussing the right to own firearms. If you want to slag the cops go pick one of the myriad of threads already on that topic.

I wasn't the one who shifted the "goal post" in that direction in the first place.

No? Who brought up the topic of police? You or someone else?

Several people claimed the US has guns laws that allows criminals incredibly easy access to firearms...

Besides you, who else in this thread made that claim?

...because American citizens are far more passionate about freedom and there rights than other countries. So its only reasonable that I would bring up the point that the US has the highest incarceration rate in the world and that the police use deadly force against citizens on average every two days in the states.

Not exactly what I'd definition as a utopia of freedom and civil liberties.

Not exactly the topic of this thread, is it now?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You keep chopping up my entire argument and are taking it completely out of contexts.... Mr Augustus!!!

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
You keep chopping up my entire argument and are taking it completely out of contexts.... Mr Augustus!!!

Whatever you say chief. Kind of hard to take it out of context when it was quite clear what you were saying.

'But as is stands today, they are still legally unattainable'. Did you say that, yes or no? Is it correct, yes or no?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
You keep chopping up my entire argument and are taking it completely out of contexts.... Mr Augustus!!!

'But as is stands today, they are still legally unattainable'. Did you say that, yes or no?

I choose to take the 5th.

I've noticed that many gun control supporters wont support limiting rights in other areas (that will also effect them) even though they would end up saving a bunch of more lives than banning semi-auto rifles.

a reply to: [post=19769800]johnwick[/post

Sweet mother of God, no don't do that. We're not really dealing with our current intake of immigrants at all well. I agree with the point of very different countries and laws. The fact that they are calling for a reform like this is promising, though.