Michael Moore - Fights for the Truth or fills his purse?

gun-control is like everything else in life. if you go to the extreme of either side, you've gone too far.

 

We brought in gun control here because of the Port Arthur massacre...a sad, sad day for gun enthusiasts. Oh, and the relatives of the people who died.

 

Never heard of that... Please oh knowlegable one, sate my ignorance.

 

I was about...1996, yeah, I was in Grade Two....anyway...Martin Bryant went on a rampage in Port Arthur, Tasmania...killed 36 people, from memory. One of my sister's friend's great aunts (try saying that with a mouthful of chips) was one of the victims...

 

Yes, because I was being totally serious in that post! Was I attempting to be ironic? NEVER


But, quite obviously, gun control laws, and the "assult weapons" ban in particular, were written by people who have never handled a gun in their lives, and are therefore have almost no effect whatsoever on the actual use of such weapons. Let's go over the assault weapons ban. All assault rifles must be semi-automatic only. Now, there's several reasons why this is ridiculous. Even soldiers rarely, if ever, use fully automatic fire with an assault rifle. In fact, the military-issue M4 carbine does not even have that option. Realistically, after the third shot on full-auto, the weapon will be pointing to the right and above the intended target. This is okay if you are aiming center-mass at a man-sized target, because if you start at the lower left (your left) abdomen, the second bullet will strike the sternum area and the third will hit the heart. But any more shots than that, and you are just spraying bullets into the air. Fully-automatic fire is really only truly effective with machine guns - heavy, large-caliber weapons such as the M249 SAW (Squad Automatic Weapon) or the M2 Browning .50 heavy machine gun. Both of these weapons have the wieght and reduced rate of fire to facilitate fully automatic fire. One can fire an M249 until the 100-round belt is used up, and consistantly hit the target. The weight of the weapon helps counteract the muzzle climb, as well as the bipod mount. Suffice it to say, full-auto fire with an assault rifle is a bit of a joke. But, if one simply must fire their weapon on full-auto, most rifles have a very simple sear that can be pried out with as complicated a gunsmithy tool as a chisel-head screwdriver. Voila, the weapon is again fully-automatic. Therefore, the "demilitarized" assault rifles that we civilians can buy are just as effective as the military-issue models, save for the magazine capacity limitation, which is the next feature of the ban.

The law states that no magazine may be able to hold more than ten rounds. Now, this is actually a disadvantage, because obviously the more ammo the better. Fortunately, firearms manufacturers wisely began cranking out as many high-capacity magazines as possible in preperation for the coming ban. So, one can quite easily find 30, 50, even 100-round magazines for everything from Ak-47s to Calicos. Since these magazines were made "Pre-Ban" they are perfectly legal. Very easily, we have eliminated two of the strictures of the ban, and completely legally (unless you mod the gun to make it full-auto.)

Then there is the issue of weapon length and the folding stock restriction. Little discussion is required to convince a person of discernment how worthless such a restriction is. Just because a SIG 550 has a fixed stock and is full-length doesn't make it any less effective than a folding stock version with a shorter barrel. To the contrary, the longer weapon is more accurate and compensates better for recoil.

Now for the concealed-carry laws: How are the police realistically going to stop people from shoving their legally owned handgun into their wasteband, donning a trenchcoat, and walking the streets? And how much more the criminals who simply obtain the weapon illegally, in one of thousands of illegal gun stores and/or military contacts? The effect of this law is that the citizens who actually need the handguns for self-defense are not able to carry them, due to "moral compunctions" or plain ignorance of the many illegal options. In 1995, George W. Bush, then Governer of Texas, signed a law allowing liscensed citizens to carry concealed handguns. The effect? Violent crime, especially handgun crime, dropped. Look here for details. Concealed carry lowers handgun violence.

Ultimately, all of these laws are so easy to get around it's laughable. I have few underworld contacts, and even I know where to look to obtain illegal firearms. Certainly an established criminal would find it even easier. The only people who actually follow these laws are those who should be armed themselves.

"Being neccesary to the security of a free state, a well-regulated Militia, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

-Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

 

I would have been in Grade 8 or 9 I think. Yeah, Martin Bryant, waltzed around Port Arthur with 2 semi automatic rifles shooting everyone he could see. He only missed a handful of times as well, which was pretty damn impressive.

Then he goes and gets off on an insanity plea.

 

Really? I thought he got life...

 

How are the crime rates in Australia, Jar? Down here, most people are anti-gun because the oligocrats tell them they have to dislike them. And since those oligocrats control all the money in the country. I guess it makes sense that they keep stripping our Work Codex of our rights while benefitting the employers and we do nothing. Man, we have been so lame ever since we started having democratic governments that the first guerrilla battallion that hits the capital will totally own us.

 

I'd say certain crimes is getting worse here - I read in the paper nearly 500 guys a year are permanently injured/disfigured or killed in fights in Brisbane alone (a city of about 1 million). Of coures, most of those are are a group of guys taking on a smaller group, drunken fights, etc, but it is on the rise. A group of my friends were out and a few of them (including someone who is legally blind) were punched in the head by some drunken fuckwits. Luckily they didn't fight back, because they were outnumbered 2 to 1.

I don't think the overall crime rate has changed too much though. Something is always dropping as something else is rising.

 

In Victoria, most things seem to be dropping: armed robbery, murder, rape...then again, they could be changing the definitions again for PR. You can never really tell...

 

Yes, however, a person's rights are relative, not absolute. Therefore, your right to own a gun ends where another's right to personal safety begins. As for it being easy to get around laws, its unfortunate but there will always be corruption. This is not a case for there to be no restrictions though.

(Not trying to ignore the rest of your post but I'm in a hurry and just wanted to say a couple things before I left.)

 

Sigurd, the American constitution has already been shown to be a load of hokey pokey that's compareable in uselessness to communism to human nature. Just because the American constitution says it don't make it true. America has one of the highest crime rates in first world countries. By statistics atleast two of you "Amerkianskys" should be dead . I think guns are a large factor in that but on the plus side assault weapons rock. I go hard at the thought of killing 20 people with a pistol before having to reload.

 

Wow, did you come up with that all by yourself, or did you have help? That's the biggest load of shit I've ever seen in print. Where, exactly, was the U.S. Constitution shown to be "a load of hokey pokey", pray tell?



Also, I've got something else to say about all this automatic weapon ban and shit. First of all, I see no reason for someone to own an automatic assualt rifle. The other side of that coin is that I can't come up with a good reason for them not to own one, either.

Think on this. You're a crook. You're about to knock over a 7-11. You have two weapons to choose between. An AK-47, or a snub-nosed .38 special revolver. Hmm, which would fit inside my pocket easier? Same goes for killing someone. Hmm, should I take the Uzi, for max killing power, or the .25 semi-auto and cap them in the back of the head?

The mass-media would have you believe that the vast majority of crimes, murder, burglaries, etc., are commited with auto weapons, and that is not true. Statistic: Fewer than 2% of crimes commited in America involve bulky, automatic weapons.

Now. The media has scared un-informed John Q. Public into believing that he is in immediate danger of being assualted with a scary looking auto weapon, unless he supports banning said weapon. But the lies and sensationalism don't end there. If an AK-47 can be banned, hey, lets tack on this less powerful caliber scary looking rifle that isn't even automatic, but it uses GASP! a banana clip! Yeah, add that one, we'll get it banned too.

And so goes with the horseshit. Everyone can think what they like about gun-ownership, and be all mis-informed if they want, but I own guns, I enjoy shooting sports (Not all involve killing poor widdle Bambi) and if the day ever comes that all weapons are to be rounded up here in the States, well, I will hand mine over.

Muzzle end first, cocked and locked.

 

You shouldn't forget that America is also one of the largest countries in the world. Now about statistics:
Where did you find those statistics, Sea Dog? Two Americans of...? Statistics and averages do not mean anything. You put a man's head in a freezer, spray his feet with alcohol and light it. His average body temperature wouldn't change!
Statistics are tricky: it's easy to turn them in such a way that suits the man who makes them. For example:
2 Men sent 3$ each to the hungry hippo.
6 Men sent 8$ each.
1 Man sent 200$.
1882732 Men didn't send shit.

If you don't count the last cathegory, the average the hippo got from every participating man would be $28.22_. The average the hippo gets from everyone is almost nil. A word is easily ignored, especially if one wants to...

EDIT: Ah, retard, you replied before I finished my post.
Mind you: in Switzerland, a big percentage of the population owns (and has the right to) an automatic weapon and a clip of ammo. On the other hand, they have few cases of homocide.

 

I just pulled that outta my arse...All of it. And I blame you for making it loose enought in the first place. I don't really think the US constitution is load of hokey pokey, I just wanted to use the word.

But seriously, I think my little shit-hole of a country is better off without guns and, aside from our lazyness and bogan state of mind it is the reason our country has a lower AVERAGE crime rate. Assault weapons are not needed though. The purpose of guns in the US constitution is for protection and as you said we do not need an AK to stop a robber. It's impractical, over kill and if the gun does get into the hands of someone who wants to kill people there is a big problem. Law enforcement should always have bigger guns than the civillians.
I still don't have a major problem with guns but they need to be carefully controlled

 

Strangily, the only peolple who seem to have guns these day are crimminals and police, and they both seem to shoot civilians, am I missing something here?

 

.
Hmm... You aren't part of the international Punk movement, are you?

 

The US Constitution was written in such a "loose" way as to allow it to evolve with the nation. As you can see, it has worked extremely well, as the document is still the supreme law 200 years later.

I really dislike the rampant, biased, and somewhat unfounded police hatred. Police officers are obviously only human, therefore are not perfect. There are plenty of asshole cops (there are plenty of assholes in general). However, they are doing this country a very valuable job and deserve more respect than they are given. All of the police officers I know are extremely nice and have all sorts of other good traits as well. None of them are fat or go around eating donuts. I'm not saying that there should be no questioning of the government or its insitutions, but I do believe that people should realize that most police are not corrupt, greedy, donut eating, black man oppressing arrogent power abusers.

In conclusion, FUCK THA POLICE

 

I remember a couple of years ago, a 20-something guy broke into someone's apartment. The owner caught him, and set into him with a baseball bat - not too much, mind you, but it definitely stopped him.

Anyway, the owner was forced to pay around AU$20000 (I think) to the burglar, and AU$5000 to his mother, for SHOCK caused by her son's injuries. It's a sad world we live in ...

 

Relating to Snowmane's post:

Viele Respekt, Snowmane, this was true wisdom .

Settler: Yes, this is awful: there are so many cases where it's actually the innocent who suffers and the guilty is unpunished (or worse).