Canadian missing teens revealed as suspects in Lucas Fowler and Chynna Deese murderhttps://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07...spects-in-fowler-deese-canada-murder/11340738. This is a crying shame. Two young people clearly in love cruelly taken before their time. I saw the interview of Lucas' father.. a police inspector.. very moving.
@Craig Swanson I saw the headline and chose to not read it earlier. However, I did read your link, above. Surprised somewhat that the couple were shot to death in a country where gun ownership is pretty tightly regulated. We may now possibly expect more political gesturing and posturing for further control of firearms, that always following their illicit use. Frank
What is your view on control of firearms in your country? As you may know Australia had to have a tragedy.. the Port Arthur Massacre..before something was done to ban the use of semi automatic rifles and curb other firearms.
@Craig Swanson My personal view is that as more laws restricting firearms in America, ownership of firearms, both legal and not, has increased, public ownership has increased also. Psychological reaction, certainly, as the known fact human beings always gravitate toward freedom, removing freedoms, firearms ownership in this case, produces increased ownership intent, the opposite of the aim of lawmakers. During the interval between the discussion phase and finally passage of the Act, The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, aka Clinton Crime Bill, caused enormous public response disfavoring it, during which time record numbers of firearms of all types as well as huge quantities of ammunition were purchased, presumably to be horded away. I personally saw this at the gun shows I attended, where strings of everyday folks carted wooden crates of ammunition, most containing 1000+ rounds, to their cars using hand-trucks. Sporting goods stores' shelves were quickly denuded of stocks of firearms. Buying and selling of arms between individuals proceeded at a faster pace than I could have imagined. I had always fancied the "assault-style" military rifles, and had purchased a goodly number of them during years previous to the Act, expecting I would keep them forever. However, temptation loomed: I took my two Uzi rifles to a show, a Model A and Model B, the Israeli military rifle designed by Uziel Gal. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uziel_Gal They were not true submachine guns, but rather semi-automatic, as required by the National Firearms Act of 1934. I had invested under $1000 in the two of them, carried one by it's sling over my shoulder in to the gun show, and had not moved about longer than ten minutes when a well-dressed gentleman approached me accompanied by his two little boys, asking if I was selling my Uzi. He was a school teacher, intent on buying two Uzi rifles, one for each boy to own when they grew up because he knew that ability of ownership was about to be lost forever. They accompanied me out to my car, and left with the two Uzis, $3500 "lighter" than they had arrived. When President Reagan was wounded by a demented young man in 1981, the scene was being caught on film, to be viewed by all of America. I watched as a Secret Service Agent carrying a small suitcase, dropped it open, and quickly produced an Uzi submachine gun: The truly unfortunate ending of the Clinton Crime Bill is this: It's provisions required our Congress, after ten years in effect, to inspect the result aspects of the bill's various requirements, and MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS therefrom. Congress did NOTHING, simply denying to perform their duty as the Bill required, and the Bill died, but surely not quietly. The firearms and ammunition industries, as well as accessories, began producing greater numbers of firearms and related gear than ever before. This would have been an excellent time to turn most of the Congress people out of office for dereliction of duty. One provision of the Bill halted all production and sale of firearms ammunition magazines capable of carrying more than 10 rounds. However, the billions of such magazines already in use were permitted to remain. Huge stacks of "pre-Crime Bill" magazines appeared for sale at astronomical prices! All magazines manufactured between 1994 and 2004 were required to carry the inscription, "Law Enforcement and Military Use Only". After 2004, the Bill having died, all such magazines became legal for everyone. Original intent was that Congress would review "high capacity magazine ban" results to actual crimes committed using them. They did not do so. By now, you likely are sorry you "got me started". The subject is obviously near and dear to me! Frank
Gun laws are about as effective as restraining orders. If someone wants to do harm to someone else, they will do it. The insult to this injury, is the law abiding victim is then left with nothing to defend themselves with. Most gun owners are totally responsible. The ones who aren't will use knives, ligatures or buy a black market gun and commit the crime/murder anyway.
Yes and No. In Australia's case thousands of killing weapons were removed from circulation via a buyback scheme .. a master stroke by the government of the day. In addition semi automatic and multiple bullet weapons .. such as the type the sick Martin Bryant used on 35 innocent tourists in his hour long killing spree.. were banned.
That might have worked in a smaller country like Australia but can you see the criminals in the US cities of Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Miami, etc. walking into the police station saying, "Here's my gun, now gimme my money"?
No. In any case your Ist Amendment (is that the one? ) and your powerful NRA or is it the AGA will not allow it. For the record I agree that every person must have the freedom to protect their property.
@Shirley Martin Yes and no. USA Area: 3.8 million square miles, population 327 million Australia: 3.0 million square miles, population 25 million Similar size, much lower population density, factor of > 10. But, let's not get into crime rate banter. Obviously criminals will use their guns to steal money, or salable things. Some folks possessing stolen guns might turn them in for money, doubtful if they bought them (at least not this gun owner!). I suspect, and believe this pretty strongly after deliberating for years now, that Americans use their guns to commit criminal acts more because they are powerful tools, amongst the most powerful, compared to clubs, knives, shovels. Ever hear of a guy robbing a store armed with a shovel? Then, too, they act out of "heat of the moment" in various psychologically prompted situations, road rage being one; one driver, or both, may have guns, and foolishly elect to use them (or don't elect at all, due to the intensity of the situation. No doubt, both would be better off without their guns at that moment, but given attitude, someone will get hurt anyway. Frank
Certainly not. But it did mean that the authorities now had the power to scrutinise places that were likely to have such weapons then confiscate and prosecute.
@Craig Swanson What legal limits exist down under to prevent "scrutiny" such as searching a residence (or other private place) without court-approved warrant? Our police forces here have new-found limitless, more or less, ability to force searches, based on their own decided "probable cause". That particular ability along with confiscation of private property greatly distresses me. Frank
I dont know precisely. But I do know that police now have greater powers due to homeland security legislation following terrorism related crime. I suspect during the time of the banning of auto weapons that police powers to search a private residence were more limited than today. I was thinking more of being able to scrutinise rifle associations and unregistered hunters.
@Craig Swanson We have something here referred to as "The Freedom of Information Act", "The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C.ยง 552, is a federal freedom of information law that requires the full or partial disclosure of previously unreleased information and documents controlled by the United States government upon request." See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_(United_States) It is in some ways laughable, but in limited ways, has proven enlightening, but not providing "much transparency". For example, secrets held by government concerning nuclear power for many decades, have been "unlocked" by it, but, big deal. Are we all now able to build nukes? No. One certainly less than superficial "reveal" concerns our country's blatant security forces, namely the CIA. Their efforts at "protecting us" as citizens has extended tentacles worldwide, and revealed long-standing intent going as far as political assassinations government supported. One well-known case I heard of some years ago revolved around a CIA agent suspected of preparing to "spill his guts" regarding some butchery by them. Family man, respected member of his community and employer, he fell to his death from a hotel room window while sharing it with another agent. All available evidence indicated after much scrutiny by family and local police that he was dead before he fell out the window. His family filed numerous lawsuits seeking truth if not compensation; they received neither. Others here may know of this case. 'Nuff said. Frank