|
|
Post by zassy on Jul 27, 2006 15:01:57 GMT -5
DO TOO MANY PEOPLE OWN GUNS IN AUSTRALIA ?
What do you think?
On their website in April and May and in their June 2006 edition of Australian Shooter the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia (SSAA) has made a remarkable statement under the heading 'TEN YEARS AFTER THE NATIONAL FIREARMS AGREEMENT OF 1996'.The first of its four points reads:
From 1996 onwards SSAA have presented the point of view that:
* the massacres of the 1980's and Port Arthur were perpetrated by individuals who required the support of mental health advocates well before they committed their horrific crimes.
Is this true or is it a SSAA attempt to make all multiple shootings look like the work of sick people - people who should not have guns ?
On 23 January 1987 Richard Maddrell used his licensed six-shot pump-action shotgun to murder four teenage women in the Sydney suburb of Pymble. The reason appeared to be his aggravation at his failure to win the heart of one of the women. Thus disappointment and perhaps hatred appears to be the reason he murdered the four sixteen to nineteen year olds.
On 10 October 1987 John Tran used his licensed ex-military high powered rifle to murder five members of the Huynh family in the Sydney's Canley Vale. It appeared that Tran was in love with Lieu Huynh but his love was not returned.
On 3 November 1989 Wayne Johnson murdered his parents and younger brother with a reloaded single-shot shotgun at their home near Launceston Tasmania. The reason for 15 year old Wayne Johnson's actions appeared to be frustration that his parents had stopped his outdoor interests.
Disappointment, frustration and hatred are not uncommon feelings for many people. Should we then make sure that anyone who is granted the privelege of legal gun use is free of such human failings - or are disappointment and frustration not part of everyone's life. Tran committed suicide but Maddrell and Johnson were given life prison sentences - this would not have happened if their legal defence could have argued that they were mentally sick. These cases must make us question whether the SSAA is exaggerating its case.
Let's look now at the horrific actions of three gun enthusiasts who killed people.
On 12 March 1990 Don Clemensha murdered his ex-wife and two of her daughters in the Perth suburb of Girrawheen. Don Clemensha had owned 10 guns and was a member of a pistol club. On 21 August 1993 gun enthusiast John Lascano killed three people at a gunshop at the Melbourne suburb of Springvale, apparently because he was not able to get the handgun he wanted. On 25 January 1996 gun enthusiast Peter May murdered his three children, his estranged wife and her parents in the Brisbane suburb of Hillcrest, apparently in an act of revenge against his wife's actions in moving out.
Perhaps the SSAA would like to support us in a move to stop gun addiction and make sure that if any signs of such a 'disease' are shown in a person they must immediately be excluded from legal gun ownership.
On one thing we seem to agree with the SSAA; there are a lot of people who should not own guns.
More Discussion at
aaamatilda.proboards67.com/
|
|
|
|
Post by myglocks on Jul 27, 2006 23:45:12 GMT -5
DO TOO MANY PEOPLE OWN GUNS IN AUSTRALIA ?
What do you think?
On their website in April and May and in their June 2006 edition of Australian Shooter the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia (SSAA) has made a remarkable statement under the heading 'TEN YEARS AFTER THE NATIONAL FIREARMS AGREEMENT OF 1996'.The first of its four points reads:
From 1996 onwards SSAA have presented the point of view that:
* the massacres of the 1980's and Port Arthur were perpetrated by individuals who required the support of mental health advocates well before they committed their horrific crimes.
Is this true or is it a SSAA attempt to make all multiple shootings look like the work of sick people - people who should not have guns ?
On 23 January 1987 Richard Maddrell used his licensed six-shot pump-action shotgun to murder four teenage women in the Sydney suburb of Pymble. The reason appeared to be his aggravation at his failure to win the heart of one of the women. Thus disappointment and perhaps hatred appears to be the reason he murdered the four sixteen to nineteen year olds.
On 10 October 1987 John Tran used his licensed ex-military high powered rifle to murder five members of the Huynh family in the Sydney's Canley Vale. It appeared that Tran was in love with Lieu Huynh but his love was not returned.
On 3 November 1989 Wayne Johnson murdered his parents and younger brother with a reloaded single-shot shotgun at their home near Launceston Tasmania. The reason for 15 year old Wayne Johnson's actions appeared to be frustration that his parents had stopped his outdoor interests.
Disappointment, frustration and hatred are not uncommon feelings for many people. Should we then make sure that anyone who is granted the privelege of legal gun use is free of such human failings - or are disappointment and frustration not part of everyone's life. Tran committed suicide but Maddrell and Johnson were given life prison sentences - this would not have happened if their legal defence could have argued that they were mentally sick. These cases must make us question whether the SSAA is exaggerating its case.
Let's look now at the horrific actions of three gun enthusiasts who killed people.
On 12 March 1990 Don Clemensha murdered his ex-wife and two of her daughters in the Perth suburb of Girrawheen. Don Clemensha had owned 10 guns and was a member of a pistol club. On 21 August 1993 gun enthusiast John Lascano killed three people at a gunshop at the Melbourne suburb of Springvale, apparently because he was not able to get the handgun he wanted. On 25 January 1996 gun enthusiast Peter May murdered his three children, his estranged wife and her parents in the Brisbane suburb of Hillcrest, apparently in an act of revenge against his wife's actions in moving out.
Perhaps the SSAA would like to support us in a move to stop gun addiction and make sure that if any signs of such a 'disease' are shown in a person they must immediately be excluded from legal gun ownership.
On one thing we seem to agree with the SSAA; there are a lot of people who should not own guns.
More Discussion at
aaamatilda.proboards67.com/ It shouldnt be a problem if you keep them out of the wrong hands ! Did you see this? The release of the second report by the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) into firearm theft in Australia indicates the continuation of the downward trend of firearm theft identified in the first (2002) AIC report into gun theft. Sporting Shooter's National President Robert Green said he was pleased that government research indicated that the number of firearms stolen (0.03% of the total number of registered firearms in Australia) had dropped dramatically since the release in 2002 of the first AIC report. "We are proud of our efforts in promoting the security of firearms amongst our members, a fact identified by the AIC report as a contributor to improve the level of compliance amongst firearm owners." said Mr Green. "The SSAA recognises the responsibility that comes with firearm ownership, and we shall continue to place emphasis on educating all firearm owners to securely lock their firearms in accordance with state and territory legislation." |
|
|
|
Post by lennie on Jul 28, 2006 20:51:39 GMT -5
DO TOO MANY PEOPLE OWN GUNS IN AUSTRALIA ?
What do you think?
On their website in April and May and in their June 2006 edition of Australian Shooter the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia (SSAA) has made a remarkable statement under the heading 'TEN YEARS AFTER THE NATIONAL FIREARMS AGREEMENT OF 1996'.The first of its four points reads:
From 1996 onwards SSAA have presented the point of view that:
* the massacres of the 1980's and Port Arthur were perpetrated by individuals who required the support of mental health advocates well before they committed their horrific crimes.
Is this true or is it a SSAA attempt to make all multiple shootings look like the work of sick people - people who should not have guns ?
On 23 January 1987 Richard Maddrell used his licensed six-shot pump-action shotgun to murder four teenage women in the Sydney suburb of Pymble. The reason appeared to be his aggravation at his failure to win the heart of one of the women. Thus disappointment and perhaps hatred appears to be the reason he murdered the four sixteen to nineteen year olds.
On 10 October 1987 John Tran used his licensed ex-military high powered rifle to murder five members of the Huynh family in the Sydney's Canley Vale. It appeared that Tran was in love with Lieu Huynh but his love was not returned.
On 3 November 1989 Wayne Johnson murdered his parents and younger brother with a reloaded single-shot shotgun at their home near Launceston Tasmania. The reason for 15 year old Wayne Johnson's actions appeared to be frustration that his parents had stopped his outdoor interests.
Disappointment, frustration and hatred are not uncommon feelings for many people. Should we then make sure that anyone who is granted the privelege of legal gun use is free of such human failings - or are disappointment and frustration not part of everyone's life. Tran committed suicide but Maddrell and Johnson were given life prison sentences - this would not have happened if their legal defence could have argued that they were mentally sick. These cases must make us question whether the SSAA is exaggerating its case.
Let's look now at the horrific actions of three gun enthusiasts who killed people.
On 12 March 1990 Don Clemensha murdered his ex-wife and two of her daughters in the Perth suburb of Girrawheen. Don Clemensha had owned 10 guns and was a member of a pistol club. On 21 August 1993 gun enthusiast John Lascano killed three people at a gunshop at the Melbourne suburb of Springvale, apparently because he was not able to get the handgun he wanted. On 25 January 1996 gun enthusiast Peter May murdered his three children, his estranged wife and her parents in the Brisbane suburb of Hillcrest, apparently in an act of revenge against his wife's actions in moving out.
Perhaps the SSAA would like to support us in a move to stop gun addiction and make sure that if any signs of such a 'disease' are shown in a person they must immediately be excluded from legal gun ownership.
On one thing we seem to agree with the SSAA; there are a lot of people who should not own guns.
More Discussion at
aaamatilda.proboards67.com/ It is also interesting to note zassy that around about the same time as the massacres it was not really all that long after the Australian Mental Health System closed down most of it's psychiatric hospitals and put them back in to the community. This HAS caused enormous problems and it is now that they are realising that as such was done in error. The problem that exists now is that many of them have since bred, and many of the resultant children are now reaching and/or reached teenage years, many of them with the same and often more mental illnesses. |
|
|
|
Post by zassy on Aug 1, 2006 23:41:08 GMT -5
Gun laws: the aim is true
29/06/2006 Hobart Mercury
Thanks to our guns laws, Tasmania is a much safer place than it was 10
years ago. And today there is very little heat, and a great deal of
light, from all sides, when the gun issue is raised.
While there might be some residual grumpiness around the edges,
overwhelmingly there is broad consensus that the laws enacted since the
Port Arthur massacre are sensible. There will still be arguments from
collectors about the frustrations of being unable to own some weapons,
particularly those with historic value. And there will still be people
who regard the laws as part of some vast conspiracy to disarm
Australians.
The statistics speak for themselves. There has actually been an
increase in the number of firearms in Tasmania since 1996.
But at the same time there has been a dramatic decline in gun-related
crime and gun-related suicide over the past decade and the number of
gun accidents is now so small as to be a rarity.
What better recommendation for the laws than those two numbers. It
clearly shows there is a new credo among gun owners and they should be
applauded.
Our gun owners are acting responsibly and are much better educated
about guns and their dangers than they were before 1996. And, because
of the effectiveness of the laws, there is now much greater community
acceptance that it is perfectly proper to own a firearm provided it is
used sensibly, stored correctly and does not impinge on the rights of
others.
Of course, a great many gun owners before 1996 were equally
responsible, but there were a significant number of people who simply
did not have the skill, experience or common sense to own a firearm and
were appallingly lackadaisical about storage, maintenance, and safety.
There was the danger of a growing gun culture in Tasmania but that has
been well and truly laid to rest.
The State Government's present review of the Firearm Act therefore
should have as its highest priority anything that can make the laws
even more effective.
That should include more random inspections of gun storage, a
recommendation of the Auditor-General which police are already acting
on, and examining the West Australian system whereby police inspect the
gun storage of all gun-licence applicants, even in remote areas.
The Police Minister, David Llewellyn, has assured Tasmanians there will
be no dramatic changes and penalties may even be tightened.
However, there is some concern that the 28-day cooling-off period for
people wanting to buy a second firearm might be relaxed.
Mr Llewellyn won't rule that out. But when his final proposals reach
Cabinet, his colleagues should do so.
Our gun laws are a credit to the political will of our national and
state leaders of 10 years ago. They are a monument to courage in
politics -- and they work.
In our view gun owners are acting responsibly and are much better
educated about guns and their dangers than they were before 1996.
|
|
