Australia: 640000 Confiscated Semi Auto Firearms, Pump Action Rifles, Shotguns:

[Guest Shep Stoner308]

Australia: 640000 Confiscated Semi Auto Firearms, Pump Action Rifles, Shotguns: Forced Surrender – Destroyed MeltedDown

August 4, 2012By Maggie

Can you believe this happening in Australia? Australia! Promising safety in return for gun bans – a right stolen from the people, citizens were forced to turn in their semi-auto firearms, pump-action rifles and shotguns – 640,000 of them. There was a “buy back†plan, as if that makes it acceptable. One man says he lost 40 years of gun collecting.

Australia has found that the loss of liberty is being measured by the loss of life. Criminals still have their weapons. The weapons still legal inside a private home must be unloaded and locked up. Handguns are expected to be taken next.

Crime has not been reduced – in fact crime is up, no surprise among those with a tad of common sense:

Armed Robbery up 69%

Assaults with Guns up 28%

Gun Murders up 19%

Home Invasions up 21%

Politicians say they can’t explain the rise in home invasions, because they don’t have a definition for “home invasion†in Australian law. The woman in the video can explain it to them, but then she’s just another unarmed citizen, not worthy of possessing the right to protect herself:

If someone set their foot inside your door, uninvited, they are invading your home and your privacy. ~ Concerned Citizen of Australia

The question is not why home invasions are up. The question is who in their freaking mind wouldn’t know that private property and lives are at stake when the whole country is unarmed.

Police undermanned, and moral at record lows.

Citizens in the video send a warning to Americans:

◠Don’t think it can’t happen to you.

◠Don’t trust your politicians.

â— Be a member of the NRA

â— Be a member at your local gun club

â— Be a partner with the NRA

â— Never, never, ever give up your freedoms.

â— If you think you have rights, tomorrow the government can take them away from you.

◠[in Australia] We don’t have a chance in hell of getting our rights back.

Many thanks to Cry and Howl for the video. He has a sobering quote from Thomas Jefferson. Go read it here.

[media=]

http://youtu.be/p8RDWltHxRc[/media]

http://www.maggiesno...yed-melteddown/

Edited August 5, 2012 by Shep Stoner308

[TripleDigitRide]

Sickening, on so many levels.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[Bigiron]

The voters obviously allowed their gov't to do this. I don't think Americans will roll over and allow that to happen.

[Guest Springfield1911guy]

The voters obviously allowed their gov't to do this. I don't think Americans will roll over and allow that to happen.

I hope not, but, out of the estimated 65- 80 million gun owners in this country, if only one million draw a line in the sand when the government tries this, (and they will), it should be enough.

They are already after our semi-automatics, high cap mags, amount of ammo you can buy, guns with pistol grips, and black, scary looking guns!

That witch Mcarthy even says barrel shrowds should be illegal. When asked by a reporter what a barrel shrowd was, she was unable to even say what it was, but she wants them outlawed anyway!!! What? Barrel shrouds?

Oh yeah, that is one deadly accessary that needs to go!

[Guest Shep Stoner308]

Well, I just got an update from a friend on another media site that I posted this to, and it appears this story is like 14 years old, my apologies. Normally this blog is up to date. BUT, the fact remains that it is something for discussion.

Shep

Edited August 5, 2012 by Shep Stoner308

[Guest Shep Stoner308]

Original story here with date

Gun Buy Back

Posted on July 29, 1998

Share this...

About 640,000 guns were taken in under the amnesty and buy-back scheme which operated soon after the Port Arthur massacre. Victoria was been the most successful state to call in its prohibited weapons. Before the scheme started the Victorian Firearms Registry records showed that there were about 750,000 registered guns in Victoria. About 210,000 were handed in because they became prohibited weapons. These were mainly military style rifles, semi-automatic and pump action shotguns and .22 low power rifles with 10 shot magazines. About 20% of those guns however were unregistered.

Thus 30% of Victorian guns were handed in by the end of the amnesty and this probably represents about a 70% success rate. The situation however in NSW and Queensland was nowhere near as satisfactory. There were probably almost 2,000,000 guns in those two states and we would expect that at least 600,000 would fall into the prohibited categories. Yet no more than 285,000 were handed in. This means that the success rate in NSW and Queensland was below 50%. This is a very serious matter but it’s not hard to see why the buy-back partly failed in these two major gun owning states.

Victoria had mandatory gun registration for a decade yet NSW and Queensland did not had gun registration on rifles and shot-guns. This means that shooters in Victoria were aware that the Government knew what type of gun and how many guns each of them owned. In NSW and Queensland the government had little idea of these facts and we must presume that gun owners felt they could flout the law in these two states.

Of course a national gun registration scheme came into existence as one of the major gun law improvements following the Port Arthur massacre and we might expect that in NSW and Queensland, as guns become registered and hence their existence and their type become known to the Police, then gun owners will be forced to obey the law.

It is crucial that all six state and two territory governments make efforts to take in the guns which eluded the buy-back scheme. Viewing Australia as a whole it would seem that no more than two out of every three prohibited guns were actually handed in.

Prohibited guns can still be taken to police stations, but no fee will be paid.

http://guncontrol.org.au/1998/07/gun-buy-back/

[DaveTN]

I suspect that Obama will try something like this if reelected. I think he will try to outlaw semi-auto weapons (especially AR and AK types) with no grandfather clause. I don’t think he could get the votes, but it may come down to what he’s willing to trade off.

Before making any judgments about statistics quoted concerning Australia crime you might want to read what Snoops had to say about it.

http://www.snopes.co...ics/ausguns.asp

[mikegideon]

Well, I just got an update from a friend on another media site that I posted this to, and it appears this story is like 14 years old, my apologies. Normally this blog is up to date. BUT, the fact remains that it is something for discussion.

Shep

Yes it is. Not a bad thing to drag up though. It's interesting to note that they collected less than a million guns. Our pile would be much bigger.

[Guest Shep Stoner308]

Very hard for me to trust Snopes these days, if you use it alot, like I used to, then cross reference credible sources from other areas they often disagree with what the definition of what the ""Truth"" is. I have found that this is primarily a tend for Snopes to lean toward the more progressive side of the field.

[mikegideon]

I suspect that Obama will try something like this if reelected. I think he will try to outlaw semi-auto weapons (especially AR and AK types) with no grandfather clause. I don’t think he could get the votes, but it may come down to what he’s willing to trade off.

Before making any judgments about statistics quoted concerning Australia crime you might want to read what Snoops had to say about it.

http://www.snopes.co...ics/ausguns.asp

If the balance in Congress doesn't get any worse, he may not have enough goodies to trade.

[Guest Shep Stoner308]

Yes it is. Not a bad thing to drag up though. It's interesting to note that they collected less than a million guns. Our pile would be much bigger.

Hopefully our pile would stay piled in our own hands through proactive measures..........

[mikegideon]

Very hard for me to trust Snopes these days, if you use it alot, like I used to, then cross reference credible sources from other areas they often disagree with what the definition of what the ""Truth"" is. I have found that this is primarily a tend for Snopes to lean toward the more progressive side of the field.

Snopes probably does spin things to the left. With that said, getting caught in a lie would kill them dead.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

In most cases of non-dictatorships suddenly banning or greatly restricting guns, a highly visible mass killing by a previously unrecognized lone nut seems to have usually been the proximate cause? Though most likely anti-gun sentiments would have been growing in such places before a tragedy becomes "the straw that broke the camels back"?

Some of the reactions leading to gun control are surely outrage and fear of armed lone nuts. Exacerbated by libtards "looking down their noses" at their local equivalent of armed rednecks. Possibly also a gradually building urban middle-class fear of armed thugs, paired with the mass delusion that a law against armed thugs will be respected by the thugs themselves?

But surely as well those are times of, "never let a crisis go to waste" for activists in the nations. Columbine looked for awhile that it would be a non-wasteful crisis in the USA, but every time we have one it seems to be a danger of being the straw that broke the camels back. Every time the internet lights up with the same people on both sides rehashing the same arguments for a few weeks. The usual suspects trying to make sure a crisis doesn't go to waste.

But libtards are not the only ones to ever take advantage of crisis. The republicans are not afeared to take advantage of a good crisis when it suits their purposes. Project for a New American Century...Invade Iraq...Foreign Policy Initiative...waiting in the wings and hoping for an Iran crisis...

Edited August 5, 2012 by Lester Weevils

[Dolomite_supafly]

If there is an outlawing of guns in this country the majority of gun owners will turn their guns over because of fear of jail. I would be willing to bet 90%+ will do it. Then 5% will put their guns in hiding and the other 5% will take a more "active" approach. Right now there are more guns in civillian hands than in the military's. After a ban and the commensurate turn in that will change and at that point we will become the subjects, not citizens.

Dolomite

[Guest Shep Stoner308]

If there is an outlawing of guns in this country the majority of gun owners will turn their guns over because of fear of jail. I would be willing to bet 90%+ will do it. Then 5% will put their guns in hiding and the other 5% will take a more "active" approach. Right now there are more guns in civillian hands than in the military's. After a ban and the commensurate turn in that will change and at that point we will become the subjects, not citizens.

Dolomite

What does that 5% add up to I wonder? I would think that it would also vary based on geographic region as well. Higher in some places and lower in other.

[dats82]

I have said it before, I will say it again, and I will stand by it. I will never live to see the day that I am forced to turn in any of my guns, even if they send some one to take them.

The opinions I hold regarding the second amendment are stronger than any of our other constitutional rights. I am not a constitutional scholar or anything, but it is my belief that, with the second amendment, we do not need the constitution to guarantee these other rights. If we hold fast to the second amendment, we can guarantee those rights on our own. This may be a little extreme for some, but it certainly was not for our forefathers. For they had the insight to understamd that we did not need guns to gather food, to have recreation, or to even serve as protection from thugs, but rather that our arms may be used to spill the blood of tyrannical leaders. In my opinion, tyranny starts with an unarmed populous. I will not be part of that populous, one way or the other.

[TripleDigitRide]

If there is an outlawing of guns in this country the majority of gun owners will turn their guns over because of fear of jail. I would be willing to bet 90%+ will do it. Then 5% will put their guns in hiding and the other 5% will take a more "active" approach. Right now there are more guns in civillian hands than in the military's. After a ban and the commensurate turn in that will change and at that point we will become the subjects, not citizens.

Dolomite

Agreed. I think your numbers are very close.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[mikegideon]

Agreed. I think your numbers are very close.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

I don't know about that. It could turn onto a huge stink. I would expect a blatant violation of the Bill of Rights to roust that sleeping giant. News flash... it just got serious.

[ted]

Here is one more

[ted]

We need to make sure join the NRA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AsWraO1yd8

[Guest ThePunisher]

Get ready to add Obama's picture to the list above in post #1.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I don't know about that. It could turn onto a huge stink. I would expect a blatant violation of the Bill of Rights to roust that sleeping giant. News flash... it just got serious.

I have my doubts, also, about turning in 90% of all the weapons. It would probably be a high number, but if the day

came that we had to turn our guns in, there would be a hell of a storm rising way before they got to the halfway point.

What exactly are they going to do? Throw all of us into prison. Not happening. They may make selected examples

out of a few to entice people to give up weapons, but it would eventually fall on deaf ears.

Do you really think that would happen when the economy will crush this country to oblivion? Even if they try it, here,

like Australia and England, it ain't the right timing and when the economy blows, so does the government. They

need power and money is their fuel for the power machine. They will have so much non co-operation they will all

end up leaving the country. The elitist bastards, that is. Yeh, you too, Lamar.

Someone else might try to take our guns, like the UN is currently making the attempt, but that will fall short, also.

I don't see anyone left standing that will be feeding that bottomless pit, either. The only way it will happen is by an

invading country.

Won't be anything left to rule that they can handle. Obama does seem to think otherwise, but his brain is in the

marxist clouds. He may be living again in Kenya.

If I'm around, I'll be slinging lead until I'm not around.

[Guest Shep Stoner308]

Well, here we go again..........

Gunman kills 6 in Sikh temple attack in Wisconsin

[Guest ThePunisher]

Won't be anything left to rule that they can handle. Obama does seem to think otherwise, but his brain is in the

marxist clouds. He may be living again in Kenya.

Careful 6.8. Using the word Kenya( Kenyan ) will get you accused of being a racist according to some people, but not by me.

Edited August 6, 2012 by ThePunisher

[Guest ThePunisher]

We've been given a warning by countries that went to sleep and turned their guns in, and now they've warned us to not make the same mistake they made, and these countries are pretty much democratic countries. But I don't believe we are really paying attention to those warnings. I really believe our government will try one day to take our guns. Don't know whether or not we the people will allow the government to have them, the verdict is still out.