- Aus. vs USA ... who is lying ?

8 views
Skip to first unread message

- Prof. Jonez©

unread,
Mar 23, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/23/00
to
Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans

March 23, 2000
Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)

SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded today that the U.S. National Rifle
Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming that the nation's gun reform laws
had backfired.

The video, presented as a television news story, claims that crimes involving guns have
increased in Australia since the laws, which ban all semi-automatic rifles, semi-automatic
shotguns and pump action shotguns, were introduced.

Federal Attorney General Daryl Williams said the NRA was using inaccurate statistics and
urged the group to remove "any reference to Australia" from its Web site.

"I find it quite offensive that the NRA is using the very successful gun reform laws
introduced in 1996 as the basis for promoting ownership of firearms in the United States,"
he said.

Williams sent a letter today to NRA president Charlton Heston, asking for the immediate
withdrawal of misleading information.

Australia's gun-related homicide rate was 0.28 per 100,000 people in 1998 compared to 4
per 100,000 in the United States, Williams wrote in the letter, which was distributed to
reporters.

"There are many things that Australia can learn from the United States," he wrote. "How to
manage firearm ownership is not one of them."

Australia adopted the gun laws after an April 1996 rampage by Martin Bryant, who opened
fire with military-style rifles at the Port Arthur historic site in the state of Tasmania.
Bryant, who killed 35 people and injured 19, is serving a life sentence.

More than 640,000 firearms were removed from the Australian community under a buyback
program. The NRA video shows footage of guns being sawed to pieces, and thousands of
destroyed guns piled on scrap heaps.

South Australia's Attorney General Trevor Griffin -- who is seen in the video talking
about crime -- said he was not interviewed by the NRA and a quote from him was taken from
a previous interview and used out of context.

The video claims that after the gun laws took effect, armed robbery in Australia went up
69 percent, assaults involving guns rose 28 percent, gun murders increased 19 percent and
home invasions rose 21 percent. It does not give a source for the data.

Dr. Adam Graycar, director of the Australian Institute of Criminology, said the statistics
were misleading.

He said the latest annual crime figures, for 1998, showed that assaults had increased but
that most attacks did not involve guns. He said homicides decreased and were only rarely
committed with guns.

Because there were so many other factors involved, such as population change, it was
"enormously difficult" to draw conclusions about what effect the gun laws have had on the
level of crime, Graycar said.

"It is a very long bow to draw," to claim the ban led to an increase in crime, he told
Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio.

"What we've got here is an American group with a heavy gun culture -- guns figure very
significantly in crime in the United States -- trying to transpose that into Australia.
There is no comparison," Graycar said.

Copyright 2000 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.


--
=======================================
Free Directory Assistance - NumberFinder.com
Free Email Address - Alias.org
Free Trademark Searches - TrademarkSearch.org
Free Multi-Auction Searches - AuctionFeed.com
5¢ Phone Calls to Australia - SuperPhone.net
=======================================

Ric Trask

unread,
Mar 23, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/23/00
to

- Prof. Jonez© <jo...@norcom.to> wrote in message
news:aDsC4.420$N47....@news.uswest.net...

> Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
>
> March 23, 2000
> Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
>
> SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded today that the
U.S. National Rifle
> Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming that the nation's
gun reform laws
> had backfired.
SNIP>

> The video claims that after the gun laws took effect, armed robbery in
Australia went up
> 69 percent, assaults involving guns rose 28 percent, gun murders increased
19 percent and
> home invasions rose 21 percent. It does not give a source for the data.
>
> Dr. Adam Graycar, director of the Australian Institute of Criminology,
said the statistics
> were misleading.
>

If they are misleading then please cite the statistics side by side.

> He said the latest annual crime figures, for 1998, showed that assaults
had increased but
> that most attacks did not involve guns. He said homicides decreased and
were only rarely
> committed with guns.
>

If most attacks do not involve guns then please cite the numbers.

SNIP


>
> Copyright 2000 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
>

AP..... Go figure. If they are going to debunk the numbers put forth by
the NRA then shouldn't they put the numbers on the line and not put vague
statements like "most attacks did not involve guns." Lets us see the
numbers for ourselves. Untill then I will trust the NRA's numbers.

Ric

--
I see your $.02 and raise you $.02

www.outdooradventures-usa.com


Panhead

unread,
Mar 23, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/23/00
to
"- Prof. JonezŠ" wrote:
>
> Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
>
> March 23, 2000
> Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
>
> SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded today that the U.S. National Rifle
> Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming that the nation's gun reform laws
> had backfired.


If they are all that pissed, let the Aussies try to shoot it out
with us.

The-Trainers

unread,
Mar 23, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/23/00
to
The OZ A.G. is LYING by mis-direction.

He claims the NRA lied, but then he does NOT say one word that relates
to what the NRA actually said.

He KNOWS that his own government stats PROVE the NRA was telling the
TRUTH, so since he cannot actually attack the facts the NRA stated,
he spews a bunch of unrelated figures and hopes no Aussie will be
smart enough to notice.

It appears he was right, about how easily fooled the Aussies are, that is.

MT

On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, - Prof. Jonez© wrote:

> Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
>
> March 23, 2000
> Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
>
> SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded today that the U.S. National Rifle
> Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming that the nation's gun reform laws
> had backfired.
>

> The video, presented as a television news story, claims that crimes involving guns have
> increased in Australia since the laws, which ban all semi-automatic rifles, semi-automatic
> shotguns and pump action shotguns, were introduced.
>
> Federal Attorney General Daryl Williams said the NRA was using inaccurate statistics and
> urged the group to remove "any reference to Australia" from its Web site.
>
> "I find it quite offensive that the NRA is using the very successful gun reform laws
> introduced in 1996 as the basis for promoting ownership of firearms in the United States,"
> he said.
>
> Williams sent a letter today to NRA president Charlton Heston, asking for the immediate
> withdrawal of misleading information.
>
> Australia's gun-related homicide rate was 0.28 per 100,000 people in 1998 compared to 4
> per 100,000 in the United States, Williams wrote in the letter, which was distributed to
> reporters.
>
> "There are many things that Australia can learn from the United States," he wrote. "How to
> manage firearm ownership is not one of them."
>
> Australia adopted the gun laws after an April 1996 rampage by Martin Bryant, who opened
> fire with military-style rifles at the Port Arthur historic site in the state of Tasmania.
> Bryant, who killed 35 people and injured 19, is serving a life sentence.
>
> More than 640,000 firearms were removed from the Australian community under a buyback
> program. The NRA video shows footage of guns being sawed to pieces, and thousands of
> destroyed guns piled on scrap heaps.
>
> South Australia's Attorney General Trevor Griffin -- who is seen in the video talking
> about crime -- said he was not interviewed by the NRA and a quote from him was taken from
> a previous interview and used out of context.
>

> The video claims that after the gun laws took effect, armed robbery in Australia went up
> 69 percent, assaults involving guns rose 28 percent, gun murders increased 19 percent and
> home invasions rose 21 percent. It does not give a source for the data.
>
> Dr. Adam Graycar, director of the Australian Institute of Criminology, said the statistics
> were misleading.
>

> He said the latest annual crime figures, for 1998, showed that assaults had increased but
> that most attacks did not involve guns. He said homicides decreased and were only rarely
> committed with guns.
>

> Because there were so many other factors involved, such as population change, it was
> "enormously difficult" to draw conclusions about what effect the gun laws have had on the
> level of crime, Graycar said.
>
> "It is a very long bow to draw," to claim the ban led to an increase in crime, he told
> Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio.
>
> "What we've got here is an American group with a heavy gun culture -- guns figure very
> significantly in crime in the United States -- trying to transpose that into Australia.
> There is no comparison," Graycar said.
>

> Copyright 2000 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
>
>

Glenworthy@xteleport.com Henry Glenworthy

unread,
Mar 23, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/23/00
to

Ferg wrote in message ...

>er, you got your backsides tanned by little men in black
>pyjamas not so long ago, remember? We, on the other hand,
>haven't ever had that kind of trouble.


>>>>

YOU forget that Aussie dumbfucks were in Vietnam too.

--------------------------------------------

Lee Harrison

unread,
Mar 23, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/23/00
to
in article bAAC4.800$jb5.5...@news0.optus.net.au, Ferg at
fergu...@yahoo.com wrote on 3/23/00 8:40 PM:

>> If they are misleading then please cite the statistics
>> side by side.
>

> Have a look for yourself, freak, try the Australian Bureau
> of Statistics & the AIC (mentioned above).
>
> Since the new gun laws, homicide fell by 10%, suicide fell,
> firearms accidents fell, the percentage of armed robberies
> involving firearms fell.
>
> And where they got "armed robbery increased by 69%" is a
> total mystery, considering the trend of annual rise in armed
> robbery actually fell in the year succeeding the
> introduction of the gun laws, with armed robbery up by only
> 22%, as opposed to the 2 years preceeding the gun laws when
> it had increased by a cumulative 70%-odd.
>
> I think this is what is meant by "misleading". He was
> diplomatically trying to avoid saying that "Americans are a
> bunch of dishonest ignorant gun-loving liars"

Actually, these NRA gunloons are only about 7% of all American gun owners,
and maybe 2% of all Americans.

Most gun owners are responsible, loyal American citizens, and know that the
Second Amendment doesn't provide any right to have a gun unless their
possession or use of that gun has some reasonable relationship to the
preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.

> But then again, this is the NRA, we don't really expect them
> to give us real facts, do we?

Unfortunately, no.


Famous Last Words Of Gunloons - Glock

Last week, Smith & Wesson, the nationąs largest gun manufacturer, agreed to
make its handguns more childproof by installing safety locks and developing
łsmart gun˛ technology. Smith & Wesson also agreed to the same oversight
commission that Glock opposes.

Smith & Wesson accepted the restrictions in exchange for some protection
against lawsuits. At least 15 of 29 cities and counties that had sued the
gun industry have agreed to drop Smith & Wesson from their lawsuits.

Any changes at Glock, however, will not be made with an eye toward avoiding
lawsuits, Jannuzzo said.

Nobodyąs going to drop any of these lawsuits unless we sign on to the
commission," Jannuzzo said. "And we will never do that."

ABC News - March 22, 2000


The Lone Weasel

Not-So-Secret-Hideout
http://leeharrison.simplenet.com/weasel/index.html

My Weasel Board
http://leeharrison.simplenet.com/weasel/bboard.mv

Hall of Fantasy
http://leeharrison.simplenet.com/weasel/hall/


Richard G Cheek

unread,
Mar 23, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/23/00
to

Henry Glenworthy <Henry Glenw...@xteleport.com> wrote in message
news:FDAC4.512$Wr5....@nntp2.onemain.com...

>
> Ferg wrote in message ...
>
> >er, you got your backsides tanned by little men in black
> >pyjamas not so long ago, remember? We, on the other hand,
> >haven't ever had that kind of trouble.
>
>
> >>>>
>
> YOU forget that Aussie dumbfucks were in Vietnam too.

Dammit, Dave, "Aussie dumbfucks" is a VERY redundant phrase. Lets save those
electrons now.

RGlenCheek


Richard G Cheek

unread,
Mar 23, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/23/00
to

Olly <watk...@melbpc.org.au> wrote in message
news:8beos0$rk1$1...@possum.melbpc.org.au...
> there are lies, damn lies, then there's the NRA
>
>

If that were true, then the NRA would be a natural Democratic party
affiliate. The fact is, however, that of the parties involved it is only
CLINTON that is a known and confirmed PERJURER, dickhead.

RGlenCheek


brian

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Panhead wrote:

> "- Prof. JonezŠ" wrote:
> >
> > Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
> >
> > March 23, 2000
> > Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
> >
> > SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded today that the U.S. National Rifle
> > Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming that the nation's gun reform laws
> > had backfired.
>

> If they are all that pissed, let the Aussies try to shoot it out
> with us.

Why would we, if we were drunk?

Do not assume that the whole world speaks/reads American English, twonk.

Anyway, your response is that of a typical gun nut - shoot first, ask questions later.

Time to grow up and stop telling your fellow citizens lies about guns.

stereotype

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 10:39:51 -0600, "- Prof. Jonez©" <jo...@norcom.to> wrote:

>Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
>
> March 23, 2000
>Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
>
>SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded today that the U.S. National Rifle
>Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming that the nation's gun reform laws
>had backfired.
>

>The video, presented as a television news story, claims that crimes involving guns have
>increased in Australia since the laws, which ban all semi-automatic rifles, semi-automatic
>shotguns and pump action shotguns, were introduced.
>
>Federal Attorney General Daryl Williams said the NRA was using inaccurate statistics and
>urged the group to remove "any reference to Australia" from its Web site.

What about the statistics on Legal Aid Daryl? How many people can't get proper
representation in court because your government cut the LA budget by 40%. Let's
talk about justice Daryl.

>
>"I find it quite offensive that the NRA is using the very successful gun reform laws
>introduced in 1996 as the basis for promoting ownership of firearms in the United States,"
>he said.
>
>Williams sent a letter today to NRA president Charlton Heston, asking for the immediate
>withdrawal of misleading information.

On yer Daryl. Fire a few at an easy target. Might win you a few votes.

>
>Australia's gun-related homicide rate was 0.28 per 100,000 people in 1998 compared to 4
>per 100,000 in the United States, Williams wrote in the letter, which was distributed to
>reporters.
>
>"There are many things that Australia can learn from the United States," he wrote. "How to
>manage firearm ownership is not one of them."

But we're trying aren't we Daryl. Can't afford a lawyer, well, that's just too
bad. Did we learn that from the USA?

snip.

Ferg

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Panhead <panmy...@intac.com> wrote in message
news:38DA6AE8...@intac.com...

> "- Prof. JonezŠ" wrote:
> >
> > Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
> >
> > March 23, 2000
> > Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
> >
> > SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded
today that the U.S. National Rifle
> > Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming
that the nation's gun reform laws
> > had backfired.
>
>
> If they are all that pissed, let the Aussies try to shoot
it out
> with us.

er, you got your backsides tanned by little men in black

Ferg

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Ric Trask <nospa...@htc.net> wrote in message
news:8bdrao$i7i$1...@ns2.htc.net...
>
> - Prof. JonezŠ <jo...@norcom.to> wrote in message
> news:aDsC4.420$N47....@news.uswest.net...

> > Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
> >
> > March 23, 2000
> > Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
> >
> > SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded
today that the
> U.S. National Rifle
> > Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming
that the nation's
> gun reform laws
> > had backfired.
> SNIP>

> > The video claims that after the gun laws took effect,
armed robbery in
> Australia went up
> > 69 percent, assaults involving guns rose 28 percent, gun
murders increased
> 19 percent and
> > home invasions rose 21 percent. It does not give a
source for the data.
> >
> > Dr. Adam Graycar, director of the Australian Institute
of Criminology,
> said the statistics
> > were misleading.
> >
>
> If they are misleading then please cite the statistics
side by side.

Have a look for yourself, freak, try the Australian Bureau
of Statistics & the AIC (mentioned above).

Since the new gun laws, homicide fell by 10%, suicide fell,
firearms accidents fell, the percentage of armed robberies
involving firearms fell.

And where they got "armed robbery increased by 69%" is a
total mystery, considering the trend of annual rise in armed
robbery actually fell in the year succeeding the
introduction of the gun laws, with armed robbery up by only
22%, as opposed to the 2 years preceeding the gun laws when
it had increased by a cumulative 70%-odd.

I think this is what is meant by "misleading". He was
diplomatically trying to avoid saying that "Americans are a
bunch of dishonest ignorant gun-loving liars"

Ferg

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

The-Trainers <trai...@best.com> wrote in message
news:Pine.BSF.4.21.00032...@shell11.ba.best
.com...

> The OZ A.G. is LYING by mis-direction.

liar.

> He claims the NRA lied, but then he does NOT say one word
that relates
> to what the NRA actually said.

liar.

> He KNOWS that his own government stats PROVE the NRA was
telling the

liar.

> TRUTH, so since he cannot actually attack the facts the
NRA stated,

liar.

> he spews a bunch of unrelated figures and hopes no Aussie
will be

liar.

> smart enough to notice.

liar.

> It appears he was right, about how easily fooled the
Aussies are, that is.

liar.

Dave Proctor

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
Henry Glenworthy > wrote in message ...

>
>Ferg wrote in message ...
>
>>er, you got your backsides tanned by little men in black
>>pyjamas not so long ago, remember? We, on the other hand,
>>haven't ever had that kind of trouble.
>
>YOU forget that Aussie dumbfucks were in Vietnam too.

YOU forget that we had the good sense to puu out in 1972 when it became
apparent that the war (oops, police action) was not going to be won.

Dave

Olly

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Steve Hix

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
In article <QQAC4.805$jb5.5...@news0.optus.net.au>, "Dave Proctor"
<dap...@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote:

The U.S. didn't hang in for much longer, did it?

"Duane" K/ Kelly

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
"- Prof. JonezŠ" wrote:
>
> Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
>
> March 23, 2000
> Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
>
> SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded today that the U.S. National Rifle
> Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming that the nation's gun reform laws
> had backfired.

Yep, I would admit... gun control has backfired and it would appear that
the leaders in Australia are more worried about saving face, than
addresses the issue...

Media Release: Australian Bureau of Statistics - Recorded Crime in
Australia 1997
Release Date: July 15th, 1998

The upward trend in property crime presently occurring in NSW appears to
be part of an Australia-wide trend, according to figures released today
by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).

The ABS figures show trends in crime recorded by police in every
Australian State and Territory over the period 1996-1997.

Police in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia and
Western Australia all recorded an increase in the rate of armed robbery.

The largest increase (+ 63%) occurred in New South Wales. However the
increases in some other States were also quite substantial.

Victoria recorded an increase in the rate of armed robbery of 38%,
Queensland recorded an increase of 34%, South Australia recorded an
increase of 10% and Western Australia recorded an increase of 7%.
New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia also recorded increases
in unarmed robbery (+29%, +19% and +40%, respectively).

Other States have also experienced the increase in break and enter and
vehicle theft announced earlier this year in New South Wales.

Recorded rates of break and enter rose by 8% in NSW and 4% in Victoria.
Recorded rates of motor vehicle theft rose by 11% in NSW, 6% in Western
Australia and 5% in Victoria.

Commenting on these figures, the Director of the NSW Bureau of Crime
Statistics and Research, Dr Don Weatherburn, said that they suggested
that the underlying causes of the upward trend in property crime in New
South Wales were probably national rather than State-based.

"They also highlight the need for a nationally coordinated approach to
the development of strategies for reducing the level of property crime."

--
========================================================

"Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of
Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the
governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

[James Madison - The Influence of the State and Federal Governments
Compared From the New York Packet. Tuesday, January 29, 1788]

A government that cannot trust its citizens, is a government its
citizens cannot trust.

=========================================================

Simon Slade

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Henry Glenworthy wrote:
>
> YOU forget that Aussie dumbfucks were in Vietnam too.

To our eternal shame!

solicitors.vcf

Dan Day

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 02:40:07 GMT, "Ferg" <fergu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>I think this is what is meant by "misleading". He was
>diplomatically trying to avoid saying that "Americans are a
>bunch of dishonest ignorant gun-loving liars"

My, you're certainly an obnoxious little twit, aren't you?


>But then again, this is the NRA, we don't really expect them
>to give us real facts, do we?

Yes, actually, we do, and they've got a spectacularly good
track record.

Which is more than I can say for how often I've caught the
anti-gun factions lying through their teeth. And ironically,
often those lies are about the NRA's track record.


Rod Speed

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Simon Slade <solic...@camattalempens.com.au> wrote in
message news:38DB003B...@camattalempens.com.au...
> Henry Glenworthy wrote:

>> YOU forget that Aussie dumbfucks were in Vietnam too.

> To our eternal shame!

Eternal eh ? Bet its forgotten in a millennium or two.

Benjamin

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
> It appears he was right, about how easily fooled the Aussies are, that is.

You're so fucking right, MT.

Aussies are a bunch of sheep who constantly applause the government for
controlling things.

Look at my other post regarding Sandgroper as a FUKKWIT.

Australia interpolates into Southern Chinese States. FUCKING YUCK!!!

Kimbo

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Sort of an inane comment since your here...........and the land of the great
Septic is over there.

If you are so anti-OZ all there is to say is .....see y'all later

Trevor Calder

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
Granted the gift of wisdom - Prof. Jonez© tried to impress us by writing the
following:

>Dr. Adam Graycar, director of the Australian Institute of Criminology,
> said the statistics
>were misleading.

>Because there were so many other factors involved, such as population

>change, it was
>"enormously difficult" to draw conclusions about what effect the gun
>laws have had on the
>level of crime, Graycar said.

>"It is a very long bow to draw," to claim the ban led to an increase
>in crime, he told
>Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio.

The other side of this, of course, is that it is drawing an equally
long bow to claim that the ban led to a decrease in crime of any type.

You'd think that the director of the Australian Institute of Criminology
would realise that, wouldn't you?

--
Trevor Calder
"..it is foolishness and endless trouble to cast a
stone at every dog that barks at you.."


Seppo Renfors

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Dan Day wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 02:40:07 GMT, "Ferg" <fergu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >I think this is what is meant by "misleading". He was
> >diplomatically trying to avoid saying that "Americans are a
> >bunch of dishonest ignorant gun-loving liars"
>
> My, you're certainly an obnoxious little twit, aren't you?
>
> >But then again, this is the NRA, we don't really expect them
> >to give us real facts, do we?
>
> Yes, actually, we do, and they've got a spectacularly good
> track record.

So WHY are you guys lying your arses off for then? I would bet my
balls that the "track record" is as much of a LIE as your video about
Australia! Once a con artist, always a con artist = NRA!


>
> Which is more than I can say for how often I've caught the
> anti-gun factions lying through their teeth. And ironically,
> often those lies are about the NRA's track record.

BWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaHHHHHaaaaaaaaaaaaHHHHaaaaaaa......


WHAT DID I SAY, the track record STINKS (my balls are safe :-)!! A mob
of shysters and con artists!! That is the NRA (Nutty Rabid Americans)!
--

SIR -Philosopher Unauthorised
------------------------------------------------------------------
" Don't resent getting old. A great many are denied that privilege "
---------------------------------------------------------------

David Lentz

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Lee Harrison wrote:

<snip>

> Most gun owners are responsible, loyal American citizens, and know that the
> Second Amendment doesn't provide any right to have a gun unless their
> possession or use of that gun has some reasonable relationship to the
> preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.

Citizen who understand the Constitution know the Constitution
does not establish, provide for, any rights what so ever. The
Constitution protects rights.

Further, students of the Constiution realize that the Second
Amendment is redundant, as the Constitution provides no authority
to Congress to control private ownership of weapons by
individuals.

David

Julie Cochrane

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
In article <aDsC4.420$N47....@news.uswest.net>,

"- Prof. JonezŠ" <jo...@norcom.to> wrote:
> Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
>
> March 23, 2000
> Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
>
> SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded today that the
U.S. National Rifle
> Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming that the
nation's gun reform laws
> had backfired.

<snip>

> Dr. Adam Graycar, director of the Australian Institute of Criminology,
said the statistics
> were misleading.
>

> He said the latest annual crime figures, for 1998, showed that
assaults had increased but
> that most attacks did not involve guns. He said homicides decreased
and were only rarely
> committed with guns.
>

<snip>


"Most attacks did not involve guns"

That's NOT significant, and here's why: If a 200 lb 6'1" 19
year old thug attacks a 65 year old man or woman, without a gun,
that is STILL symptomatic of the failure of Australia's gun
confiscation because bigger, stronger, criminals may have been
emboldened in their attacks on physically weaker people now that
they are more confident those physically weaker people don't have
guns.

A rise in non-gun assaults in the immediate aftermath of restrictive
new gun laws is a significant component of what would be expected
if removing the guns from their honest owners removed a deterrent
effect upon the criminal population that those guns were having.

Victims don't get to choose who attacks them, and are usually
attacked by people bigger and stronger than they are.

Criminals DO get to choose who they attack, and NATURALLY attack
people they perceive to be weaker than themselves.

Criminals don't need guns to carry out their criminality as much
as victims need guns to defend themselves from criminal attack.

By making the invalid argument that an increase in non-gun assaults
could not indicate a negative consequence of their law, it is
Dr. Graycar who is using statistics in a misleading fashion.

It is, of course, POSSIBLE that Dr. Graycar is unaware of the
arguments proposing a mechanism for a link between gun confiscation
and increases in non-gun assaults, but VERY, VERY UNLIKELY.

Regardless, to say what he did would amount to EITHER blatant
intellectual dishonesty OR a lack of insight into evaluating
statistical data for social science purposes that amounts to
flaming incompetence OR he did acknowledge the possible relationship
between confiscation and an increase in non-gun assaults and
the statements quoted here have been taken terribly out of context
and misrepresented by the reporter. Take your pick.

If the Australian government side doesn't have any better arguments
than this (ie-- -"assaults are way up, but we don't want to count
big thugs beating up little old ladies now that they have a government
guarantee the little old ladies are disarmed"-), then apparently
they're wrong and NRA is right.

Julie

--
Money isn't Speech? When you spend it to rent a
printing press, and the restrictions on what you
spend are based on the nature of what you choose
to print, money BECOMES speech.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Julie Cochrane

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
In article <QQAC4.805$jb5.5...@news0.optus.net.au>,
"Dave Proctor" <dap...@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> Henry Glenworthy > wrote in message ...
> >
> >Ferg wrote in message ...
> >
> >>er, you got your backsides tanned by little men in black
> >>pyjamas not so long ago, remember? We, on the other hand,
> >>haven't ever had that kind of trouble.
> >
> >YOU forget that Aussie dumbfucks were in Vietnam too.
>
> YOU forget that we had the good sense to puu out in 1972 when it
became
> apparent that the war (oops, police action) was not going to be won.


Oh, right, a big one year difference in leaving---since we left
in 1973.

>
> Dave

rain...@hogtrader.com

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
In article <8bg8ge$486$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Julie Cochrane <julie_c...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <aDsC4.420$N47....@news.uswest.net>,

>
> "Most attacks did not involve guns"
>
> That's NOT significant, and here's why: If a 200 lb 6'1" 19
> year old thug attacks a 65 year old man or woman, without a gun,
> that is STILL symptomatic of the failure of Australia's gun
> confiscation because bigger, stronger, criminals may have been
> emboldened in their attacks on physically weaker people now that
> they are more confident those physically weaker people don't have
> guns.
>
> I hated to snip this excellent post
>
> Julie
>
I cannot add to your post, you are exactly right.

Bert Hyman

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
stev...@NOSPAMERS.iinet.net.au (Sandgroper) wrote in
<38dbc390$0$21...@echo-01.iinet.net.au>:
>

>Aust has had a very large increase in drug activity and hence , an
>explosion of drug addicts.
>This has had the result of increased incidents of home invasions ,
>bag snatching , car thefts and muggings ...etc , it is a direct
>result of the drug addicts needing extra cash to support their habit
>, it has NOTHING to do with any so called "restrictive gun laws".
> ...
>That is the fact that you yanks do not realise , Aust people NEVER
>carry guns in public , Aust people only use guns for the purpose of
>carrying out their profession ( farmer, ringer , fisherman ..etc ) or
>because they belong to a gun club.
>
So, you believe that as your drug problem grows and drug trafficking
becomes more lucrative, your criminals will refrain from carrying and
using guns? If not on "civilians", then at least on each other?

American criminals didn't really start using firearms in earnest until
our government banned the sale of alcohol, thereby establishing
organized crime. The current "war on (some) drugs" serves to keep
organized crime in business.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | be...@visi.com

Glenworthy@xteleport.com Henry Glenworthy

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
Sandgroper wrote in message <38dbc390$0$21...@echo-01.iinet.net.au>...
>Julie Cochrane wrote in message <8bg8ge$486$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>>In article <aDsC4.420$N47....@news.uswest.net>,

>>That's NOT significant, and here's why: If a 200 lb 6'1" 19
>>year old thug attacks a 65 year old man or woman, without a gun,
>>that is STILL symptomatic of the failure of Australia's gun
>>confiscation because bigger, stronger, criminals may have been
>>emboldened in their attacks on physically weaker people now that
>>they are more confident those physically weaker people don't have
>>guns.

>>A rise in non-gun assaults in the immediate aftermath of restrictive


>>new gun laws is a significant component of what would be expected
>>if removing the guns from their honest owners removed a deterrent
>>effect upon the criminal population that those guns were having.

>Wrong , wrong , wrong, wrong ,wrong !!!!!!!

>You do not know anything about Aust culture

[Aussie drivel deleted]

>>>>

Australian "culture"? Hahahahahahahahahaha.

----------------------------------------------

Dave

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Sandgroper <stev...@NOSPAMERS.iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:38dbc390$0$21...@echo-01.iinet.net.au...

>
> Julie Cochrane wrote in message <8bg8ge$486$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
> >In article <aDsC4.420$N47....@news.uswest.net>,
> >
> >That's NOT significant, and here's why: If a 200 lb 6'1" 19
> >year old thug attacks a 65 year old man or woman, without a gun,
> >that is STILL symptomatic of the failure of Australia's gun
> >confiscation because bigger, stronger, criminals may have been
> >emboldened in their attacks on physically weaker people now that
> >they are more confident those physically weaker people don't have
> >guns.
> >
> >A rise in non-gun assaults in the immediate aftermath of restrictive
> >new gun laws is a significant component of what would be expected
> >if removing the guns from their honest owners removed a deterrent
> >effect upon the criminal population that those guns were having.
> >
>
> Wrong , wrong , wrong, wrong ,wrong !!!!!!!
>
> You do not know anything about Aust culture or what has been happening in
> Aust recent years.

> Aust has had a very large increase in drug activity and hence , an
explosion
> of drug addicts.
> This has had the result of increased incidents of home invasions , bag
> snatching , car thefts and muggings ...etc , it is a direct result of the
> drug addicts needing extra cash to support their habit , it has NOTHING
to
> do with any so called "restrictive gun laws".

Are you saying, perhaps, just perhaps, that "correlation doesn't necessarily
imply causation?" Hmmm. Yet you will spout on about the US crime rates
versus Oz's. Goose. Gander. Sauce.

Dave

Julie Cochrane

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
In article <38dbc3fb$0$21...@echo-01.iinet.net.au>,
"Sandgroper" <stev...@NOSPAMERS.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> rain...@hogtrader.com wrote in message
<8bg9e6$5bc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
> >In article <8bg8ge$486$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,

> >>
> >I cannot add to your post, you are exactly right.
>
> ...........For USA society and culture , NOT for Aust society and
culture.
>


Oh garbage. The scientific method, mathematics, and logic are
true, independent of culture.

My post---go back and read it, if you didn't, dealt with
purely questions of logic. Dr. Whatshisname's comment about
non-gun assaults was a Straw Man* argument, because the pro-gun
contention is NOT that confiscation necessarily causes crimes
committed WITH GUNS to go up, BUT INSTEAD that confiscation
causes criminal acts against people IN GENERAL to go up by
giving the criminal a government guarantee that his victim
is disarmed.

The pro-gun contention may or may not be accurate in Australia,
but the fact remains that Dr. Whatshisname did NOT successfully
refute the pro-gun contention because he DID NOT ADDRESS IT.
Instead, he addressed his own strawman. By the rules of logic,
demolishing your own strawman says nothing about your opponent's
actual argument.

Logic is logic is logic. If an argument is logically flawed,
it is logically flawed REGARDLESS of where on the globe the
the argument happens to be made, and REGARDLESS of which people
happen to be milling about, and REGARDLESS of those people's
social behaviors.

Social science results vary across different cultures and
societies. The rules of science, mathematics, and logic
that underly social science methodologies are consistent
across all societies and all cultures.

If you screw up in your application of the laws of science
and mathematics and logic in building a bridge, your bridge
falls down.

If you screw up in your application of the rules of logic
in building an argument, your argument falls down.

That's true no matter WHAT side of the world you're on.

Julie

*Straw Man Argument: One of the major logical fallacies, in
which someone fabricates an argument (the "straw man") that
may resemble his opponent's argument, but is weaker and easier
to refute than his opponent's actual argument, then refutes
the "straw man" argument he fabricated, and claims to have
refuted his opponent's argument.


> Sandgroper
> ==========
> Remove NOSPAMERS for Email


>
>
--
Money isn't Speech? When you spend it to rent a
printing press, and the restrictions on what you
spend are based on the nature of what you choose
to print, money BECOMES speech.

Julie Cochrane

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
In article <38dbc390$0$21...@echo-01.iinet.net.au>,
> The amount of high grade imported drugs seized in the first 3 months
of this
> year (2000) alone , is more than double to what was seized in the
whole of
> 1996 before the new gun laws came into effect.
>
> Most of these crimes have been perpetrated without using guns ,
because they
> are drug addicts out for a quick dollar , and NOT because they know
that the
> people are not carrying guns .
> In Aust society , NOBODY CARRIES GUNS OF ANY KIND WHILE OUT IN PUBLIC
,NEVER
> HAVE AND NEVER WILL ( except for the coppers ) .

>
> That is the fact that you yanks do not realise , Aust people NEVER
carry
> guns in public , Aust people only use guns for the purpose of carrying
out
> their profession ( farmer, ringer , fisherman ..etc ) or because they
belong
> to a gun club.
>
> Learn about Aust and Aust culture before you start giving out
scenarios
> based on USA standards and culture.
>


Oh, GARBAGE!!!

It's not a matter of CULTURE it's a matter of LOGIC.

If you erect a straw-man argument and then refute it, you have
NOT refuted your opponent's argument, no matter WHERE in the
world you live nor what your "society" is nor what your "culture"
is.

Again, you run into the issue that the criminals know fewer
honest people have guns, and therefore the criminals know there
is less chance of their victim being armed.

Some assaults may occur in your house, or on your land around
your house, or on your farm---the criminal now knows such potential
victims are unarmed.

The issue is NOT any specific example, the issue is that the
general pro-gun contention is NOT that confiscation causes
crimes committed WITH GUNS to rise, but that confiscation causes
crimes committed AGAINST PEOPLE to rise, and the issue of LOGIC
is that Dr. Whatshisname did NOT address that contention, but
ONLY the subset of crimes committed WITH GUNS---WHICH WAS HIS
OWN STRAW MAN.

Logic.

Logic. Has. Nothing. To. Do. With. Culture.

He tilted at his own Straw Man instead of addressing his opponent's
real argument, therefore he proved nothing.

The NRA commercial MAY well have factual errors, but Dr. G-something's
comments don't demonstrate any specific ones.

I'm a great fan of letting people go to hell in their own way,
and I have no intention of trying to tell you Australians how
to live in your own country.

HOWEVER, when an organization in our country is basically called
liars by someone using flawed logic, I'm going to point that error
in logic out.

Live how you like, but we're still going to feel free to comment
on it (as your people quite freely comment on us). Where the
statistics are inaccurate or taken out of context, by all means
let's get to accurate numbers and the various accurate contexts
for those numbers. Just do it with sound logic, accurate math,
and sound science.

Julie

The-Trainers

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

On Fri, 24 Mar 2000, Benjamin wrote:

> > It appears he was right, about how easily fooled the Aussies are, that is.

> You're so fucking right, MT.

I usually am.



> Aussies are a bunch of sheep who constantly applause the government for
> controlling things.

Well, not 100% clearly there are some Aussies with a clue.



> Look at my other post regarding Sandgroper as a FUKKWIT.

I'll look for it.



> Australia interpolates into Southern Chinese States. FUCKING YUCK!!!

I'm not sure what you mean by that, could you elaborate?

MT


The-Trainers

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

On Fri, 24 Mar 2000, Kimbo wrote:
> If you are so anti-OZ all there is to say is .....see y'all later

I am not "anti-OZ", I am pro-gun-rights, I am pro-thinking-for-yourself,
I am pro-learning-the-facts.

Far too many Aussies and Americans and Europeans and ....humans
simply choose not to dig below the surface white-wash paint-layer
to see the rotten wood underneath to learn the truth.

They would prefer to live on blind faith rather than be self-reliant
and prepared.

MT


Message has been deleted

Carman

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Sandgroper wrote in message <38dc2920$0$33...@echo-01.iinet.net.au>...
>
>Bert Hyman wrote in message <8F018554Cb...@192.61.219.6>...

>>>
>>So, you believe that as your drug problem grows and drug trafficking
>>becomes more lucrative, your criminals will refrain from carrying and
>>using guns? If not on "civilians", then at least on each other?
>>
>
>Aust gun laws past and present , make it very hard for the average person
to
>pocess a gun and hence there is not an over supply of guns in circulation
in
>Aust., like it is in the USA.
>When Aust criminals arm themselves , it is more likely they would use other
>means like knives , swords ....etc.
>In short , having a very restrictive set of gun laws makes it even harder
>for criminals to obtain , carry and use guns.

>
>>American criminals didn't really start using firearms in earnest until
>>our government banned the sale of alcohol, thereby establishing
>>organized crime. The current "war on (some) drugs" serves to keep
>>organized crime in business.
>
>Your gun laws has never changed since the old wild west days and guns were
>very accessable , so it was very easy for crimminals to arm themselves when
>they became organised .
>
>Sandgroper


Sir: If you intend to talk about the history of firearms in the US, then
please acquaint yourself with that history before you post. The laws have
been changing almost constantly since they were first introduced. I
recommend the work of Clayton Cramer Ph.D., on the subject.

Jim Patrick

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 , "Sandgroper" <stev...@NOSPAMERS.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>Wrong , wrong , wrong, wrong ,wrong !!!!!!!
>
>You do not know anything about Aust culture or what has been happening in
>Aust recent years.
>Aust has had a very large increase in drug activity and hence , an explosion
>of drug addicts.

It still proves that guncontrol has no effect on reducing crime.

Jim Patrick

---------------------------------------------------------------------
"A right delayed is a right denied" - Martin Luther King Jr.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Panhead

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to
Sandgroper wrote:
>
> Benjamin wrote in message <38db3f42$0$18...@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au>...

> >> It appears he was right, about how easily fooled the Aussies are, that
> is.
> >
> >You're so fucking right, MT.
> >
> >Aussies are a bunch of sheep who constantly applause the government for
> >controlling things.
> >
>
> You are just pissed off because the the Aust Gov will not let a whacko like
> you import banned reptiles into Aust.... Ie Corn snakes.

And just what IS "the majorities" problem with these harmless
pets?
Those snakes are a hell of a lot cuter than the females you ever
dated.

Richard G Cheek

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Sandgroper <stev...@NOSPAMERS.iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:38dc25bc$0$32...@echo-01.iinet.net.au...

< Aussie submissive wuss BS deleted >

Your nothing but a nation of former criminals, and now you're just a bunch
of idiots. You have given up the very idea of natural rights so that Nanny
state can take care of your lazy asses from cradle to grave. Your whole
country is little more than a bunch of loafing thieves and cowards.

Who gives a flying fuck what you try to think?

Richard G Cheek

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

MC <comr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:38DC23B5...@hotmail.com...
> What on earth makes you think that you have the information to determine
who is lying

Its easy, really. Like any other LEftist crew of criminals, they are lying
whenever their lips move.

> Johnny Lee Pettimore wrote:


>
> > "- Prof. JonezŠ" wrote:
> >
> > > Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
> > >
> > > March 23, 2000
> > > Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
> > >
> > > SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded today that the
U.S. National Rifle
> > > Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming that the
nation's gun reform laws
> > > had backfired.
> > > <snip>
> >

> > Aus is lying, they're all a bunch of disarmed liberal lefties now and
have to lie like the
> > Clintons.
> >
> > Johnny Lee Pettimore,
> > Same as my daddy and his daddy before
>

Richard G Cheek

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Sandgroper <stev...@NOSPAMERS.iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:38dc2664$0$33...@echo-01.iinet.net.au...
> Dave wrote in message ...

> >
>
> >
> >Are you saying, perhaps, just perhaps, that "correlation doesn't
> necessarily
> >imply causation?" Hmmm. Yet you will spout on about the US crime rates
> >versus Oz's. Goose. Gander. Sauce.
> >
>
> Yeah , at least Aust doesn't has 15 year old school kids blowing away half
> the kids in their high school.
>

They wouldnt have the brains to pull it off anyway, so what?


Richard G Cheek

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

Carman <jo...@istar.ca> wrote in message
news:ySVC4.3105$xz1....@cac1.rdr.news.psi.ca...

>
> Sandgroper wrote in message <38dc2920$0$33...@echo-01.iinet.net.au>...
> >Your gun laws has never changed since the old wild west days and guns
were
> >very accessable , so it was very easy for crimminals to arm themselves
when
> >they became organised .

You thus totally prove that you are an idiot and an ignoramus. In the
Western frontier areas, people could openly carry guns on their hip.

Seppo Renfors

unread,
Mar 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/24/00
to

\"Duane\" K/ Kelly wrote:
>
> "- Prof. JonezŠ" wrote:
> >
> > Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
> >
> > March 23, 2000
> > Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
> >
> > SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded today that the U.S. National Rifle
> > Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming that the nation's gun reform laws
> > had backfired.
>

> Yep, I would admit... gun control has backfired and it would appear that
> the leaders in Australia are more worried about saving face, than
> addresses the issue...

Oh, a LOCAL gun-nut!!
>
> Media Release: Australian Bureau of Statistics - Recorded Crime in
> Australia 1997
> Release Date: July 15th, 1998

OLD STATISTICS I see!!
>
> The upward trend in property crime presently occurring in NSW appears to
> be part of an Australia-wide trend, according to figures released today
> by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).
>
> The ABS figures show trends in crime recorded by police in every
> Australian State and Territory over the period 1996-1997.

Aren't these BEFORE and DURING the gun buy-back? This is about as
"Honest" as the NRA stuff by the look of it!
>
> Police in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia and
> Western Australia all recorded an increase in the rate of armed robbery.
>
> The largest increase (+ 63%) occurred in New South Wales. However the
> increases in some other States were also quite substantial.

Still makes the NRA Liars as they said 69%, even if the HIGHEST figure
available that are NOT CURRENT FIGURES. If the National figure was
used then it would be vastly lower at 22.8%....

BTW, don't you think Tasmania is part of Australia anymore. What about
NT and the ACT? Don't they count either? Perhaps the figures weren't
"suitable" for you?
>
> Victoria recorded an increase in the rate of armed robbery of 38%,

...armed with what? A baseball bat? Knife? Perhaps it was the popular
syringe? How many were GUNS? No it doesn't assist the gun-nut cause,
does it.

> Queensland recorded an increase of 34%,

> South Australia recorded an
> increase of 10%

...and the NRA highlighted ADELAIDE (in SA for the noongs OS) and
claimed 69%. Falsified the opinion of the elderly lady. They took the
Attorney Generals words out of context from some archive clip, they
hadn't even interviewed him!

Now, tell us all how many SCHOOL YARD massacres are there here due to
GUNS? ZERO that's how many! How often do they happen compared to the
US? It happens on about a WEEKLY basis in the US. How many other
massacres have we had? Three from memory over.. what 2 or 3 decades?
Another pretty well WEEKLY affair over there (two in two days this
week alone). Where would you rather bring your kids up. The US or AUS?

> and Western Australia recorded an increase of 7%.
> New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia also recorded increases
> in unarmed robbery (+29%, +19% and +40%, respectively).
>
> Other States have also experienced the increase in break and enter and
> vehicle theft announced earlier this year in New South Wales.
>
> Recorded rates of break and enter rose by 8% in NSW and 4% in Victoria.
> Recorded rates of motor vehicle theft rose by 11% in NSW, 6% in Western
> Australia and 5% in Victoria.
>
> Commenting on these figures, the Director of the NSW Bureau of Crime
> Statistics and Research, Dr Don Weatherburn, said that they suggested
> that the underlying causes of the upward trend in property crime in New
> South Wales were probably national rather than State-based.

Oh is that so. I hope you don't mind if people don't believe you for
ONE SECOND, considering that data you yourself have published.
>
> "They also highlight the need for a nationally coordinated approach to
> the development of strategies for reducing the level of property crime."

No kidding! Would you expect anyone to say anything different. hmmm?

[snip government conspiracy theories]

Sandgroper

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to

Benjamin wrote in message <38db3f42$0$18...@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au>...
>> It appears he was right, about how easily fooled the Aussies are, that
is.
>
>You're so fucking right, MT.
>
>Aussies are a bunch of sheep who constantly applause the government for
>controlling things.
>

You are just pissed off because the the Aust Gov will not let a whacko like
you import banned reptiles into Aust.... Ie Corn snakes.

If you hate Aust that much , then why don't you piss off the US , or
perhaps you are too scared to go because you won't be able to get to dole
there , like you do here in Aust.

Sandgroper

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to

Julie Cochrane wrote in message <8bg8ge$486$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <aDsC4.420$N47....@news.uswest.net>,
>
>That's NOT significant, and here's why: If a 200 lb 6'1" 19
>year old thug attacks a 65 year old man or woman, without a gun,
>that is STILL symptomatic of the failure of Australia's gun
>confiscation because bigger, stronger, criminals may have been
>emboldened in their attacks on physically weaker people now that
>they are more confident those physically weaker people don't have
>guns.
>
>A rise in non-gun assaults in the immediate aftermath of restrictive
>new gun laws is a significant component of what would be expected
>if removing the guns from their honest owners removed a deterrent
>effect upon the criminal population that those guns were having.
>

Wrong , wrong , wrong, wrong ,wrong !!!!!!!

You do not know anything about Aust culture or what has been happening in
Aust recent years.
Aust has had a very large increase in drug activity and hence , an explosion
of drug addicts.

This has had the result of increased incidents of home invasions , bag
snatching , car thefts and muggings ...etc , it is a direct result of the
drug addicts needing extra cash to support their habit , it has NOTHING to
do with any so called "restrictive gun laws".

The amount of high grade imported drugs seized in the first 3 months of this
year (2000) alone , is more than double to what was seized in the whole of
1996 before the new gun laws came into effect.

Most of these crimes have been perpetrated without using guns , because they
are drug addicts out for a quick dollar , and NOT because they know that the
people are not carrying guns .
In Aust society , NOBODY CARRIES GUNS OF ANY KIND WHILE OUT IN PUBLIC ,NEVER
HAVE AND NEVER WILL ( except for the coppers ) .

That is the fact that you yanks do not realise , Aust people NEVER carry
guns in public , Aust people only use guns for the purpose of carrying out
their profession ( farmer, ringer , fisherman ..etc ) or because they belong
to a gun club.

Learn about Aust and Aust culture before you start giving out scenarios
based on USA standards and culture.

Sandgroper

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to

rain...@hogtrader.com wrote in message <8bg9e6$5bc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <8bg8ge$486$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>>
>I cannot add to your post, you are exactly right.


...........For USA society and culture , NOT for Aust society and culture.

Benjamin

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to
> > Australia interpolates into Southern Chinese States. FUCKING YUCK!!!
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by that, could you elaborate?

Australia slowly turns into China. I'm scared!

That's all.

(Sorry for my french, I was a bit off mood last night).

Benjamin.

MC

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to
What on earth makes you think that you have the information to determine who is lying

Johnny Lee Pettimore wrote:

> "- Prof. JonezŠ" wrote:
>
> > Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
> >
> > March 23, 2000
> > Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
> >
> > SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded today that the U.S. National Rifle
> > Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming that the nation's gun reform laws
> > had backfired.

Sandgroper

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to

Julie Cochrane wrote in message <8bgvej$ujp$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...

><snipped the gun loon crap>


>
>The NRA commercial MAY well have factual errors, but Dr. G-something's
>comments don't demonstrate any specific ones.

The commercial had that many factual errors that it leaked like a sieve , it
also took some people interviews and twisted it out of context , and one
person didn't even know that he was being used in that commercial to promote
NRA propaganda.

>
>I'm a great fan of letting people go to hell in their own way,
>and I have no intention of trying to tell you Australians how
>to live in your own country.

Good , keep your nose out of Aust and don't tell us how to run our country.

>
>HOWEVER, when an organization in our country is basically called
>liars by someone using flawed logic, I'm going to point that error
>in logic out.

Your "organization" , the NRA , took Australian Brueau of Statistics figures
and twisted them around to suit their own purposes in than effort to twist
and distort the facts about Aust and Aust way of life.

The Aust Brueau of Statistics is a neutral Gov non political , non
<whatever> organization that just compiles statistics about Aust , it has a
reputation as being a very credible and accurate Gov agency.

The NRA are LIARS and I would believe a very credible ABS over a whacko ,
gun loon organization with their "facts and figures".

>
>Live how you like, but we're still going to feel free to comment
>on it (as your people quite freely comment on us). Where the
>statistics are inaccurate or taken out of context, by all means
>let's get to accurate numbers and the various accurate contexts
>for those numbers. Just do it with sound logic, accurate math,
>and sound science.

Yeah , the yanks still want to play god to another country.

>


Your original presumption is that Australians were allowed to carry guns in
public to defend themselves and that since the new Aust gun laws were
introduced, the Aust public were not allowed to carry any guns in public ,
so this has caused an increase in crime rate because your scenario article
it says :

"criminals may have been emboldened in their attacks on physically weaker
people now that they are more confident those physically weaker people don't
have
guns".

Aust people has NEVER been allowed to carry guns in public to defend
themselves for the last 80-100 years.
That is the point that you yanks do not understand about Aust laws and
society.

Sandgroper

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to
Dave wrote in message ...
>

>
>Are you saying, perhaps, just perhaps, that "correlation doesn't
necessarily
>imply causation?" Hmmm. Yet you will spout on about the US crime rates
>versus Oz's. Goose. Gander. Sauce.
>

Yeah , at least Aust doesn't has 15 year old school kids blowing away half
the kids in their high school.

Panhead

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to
The-Trainers wrote:

>
> On Fri, 24 Mar 2000, Benjamin wrote:
>
> > > It appears he was right, about how easily fooled the Aussies are, that is.
>
> > You're so fucking right, MT.
>
> I usually am.


And modest as well I have to assume.

Sandgroper

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to

Bert Hyman wrote in message <8F018554Cb...@192.61.219.6>...
>>
>So, you believe that as your drug problem grows and drug trafficking
>becomes more lucrative, your criminals will refrain from carrying and
>using guns? If not on "civilians", then at least on each other?
>

Aust gun laws past and present , make it very hard for the average person to
pocess a gun and hence there is not an over supply of guns in circulation in
Aust., like it is in the USA.
When Aust criminals arm themselves , it is more likely they would use other
means like knives , swords ....etc.
In short , having a very restrictive set of gun laws makes it even harder
for criminals to obtain , carry and use guns.

>American criminals didn't really start using firearms in earnest until
>our government banned the sale of alcohol, thereby establishing
>organized crime. The current "war on (some) drugs" serves to keep
>organized crime in business.

Your gun laws has never changed since the old wild west days and guns were


very accessable , so it was very easy for crimminals to arm themselves when
they became organised .

Sandgroper

Scott Gilbert

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to
In article <tBAC4.801$jb5.5...@news0.optus.net.au>,
"Ferg" <fergu...@yahoo.com> wrote:

[snip]

> liar.

[snip]

> liar.

Pants on Fire.

--
"The emperor is not at forgiving as I"
Darth Vader

Sandgroper

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to
Panhead wrote in message <38DBDA64...@intac.com>...

>And just what IS "the majorities" problem with these harmless
>pets?
>Those snakes are a hell of a lot cuter than the females you ever
>dated.

At least I date human FEMALES , looks like you fancy snakes , probably males
one at that.

Aust is a reasonably isolated place that does not have any of the
flora/fauna diseases that other parts of the world have, very strict laws
were introduce to prevent any of these disease from entering and destroying
Aust native fauna and also to prevent any upsets in the native ecological
systems.

Before these laws were introduced , some flora/fauna species was introduced
into Aust with very bad consequences.
Any imported reptiles would greatly upset the local native fauna if the were
to escape and start breeding in the wild , this would have devasting
consequences for Aust small marsupials, insects and a whole range of other
native fauna.

Every plant, animal , animal/plant by products that comes into Aust is
quarantined and checked.

Eiley

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to

Sandgroper wrote in message <38dc2664$0$33...@echo-01.iinet.net.au>...

>Dave wrote in message ...
>>
>
>>
>>Are you saying, perhaps, just perhaps, that "correlation doesn't
>necessarily
>>imply causation?" Hmmm. Yet you will spout on about the US crime rates
>>versus Oz's. Goose. Gander. Sauce.
>>
>
>Yeah , at least Aust doesn't has 15 year old school kids blowing away half
>the kids in their high school.


I think you misspelt "6" and "primary"!

gHoSt

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to

"Seppo Renfors" <sren...@notspam.internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:38DB5565...@notspam.internode.on.net...
>
>
> Dan Day wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 02:40:07 GMT, "Ferg" <fergu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >I think this is what is meant by "misleading". He was
> > >diplomatically trying to avoid saying that "Americans are a
> > >bunch of dishonest ignorant gun-loving liars"
> >
> > My, you're certainly an obnoxious little twit, aren't you?
> >
> > >But then again, this is the NRA, we don't really expect them
> > >to give us real facts, do we?
> >
> > Yes, actually, we do, and they've got a spectacularly good
> > track record.
>
> So WHY are you guys lying your arses off for then? I would bet my
> balls that the "track record" is as much of a LIE as your video about
> Australia! Once a con artist, always a con artist = NRA!
> >
> > Which is more than I can say for how often I've caught the
> > anti-gun factions lying through their teeth. And ironically,
> > often those lies are about the NRA's track record.
>
> BWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaHHHHHaaaaaaaaaaaaHHHHaaaaaaa......
>
>
> WHAT DID I SAY, the track record STINKS (my balls are safe :-)!! A mob
> of shysters and con artists!! That is the NRA (Nutty Rabid Americans)!

And your words are based on facts found where ?
That's what I thought...just emotional kneejerking again.

Eiley

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to

Jim Patrick wrote in message <1obods4q9aq2b36co...@4ax.com>...

>On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 , "Sandgroper" <stev...@NOSPAMERS.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>Wrong , wrong , wrong, wrong ,wrong !!!!!!!
>>
>>You do not know anything about Aust culture or what has been happening in
>>Aust recent years.
>>Aust has had a very large increase in drug activity and hence , an
explosion
>>of drug addicts.
>
>It still proves that guncontrol has no effect on reducing crime.


?? How does one prove such a negative?

Could you tell me, of all the gun related deaths in the USA each year, what
percentage is "intruder killed by homeowner protecting his/her
property/family"? What percentage are escalated domestic arguments? What
percentage are accidents? I bet the first one is so miniscule as to only be
lumped in with "other" and the other two are substantial.

The section of the ad I saw on TV said something along the lines of
"Australians barricade themselves in their homes, afraid to go out after
dark". This is a blatant lie, unless I missed the bit where they said
"agrophobic Australians". I live in what would be considered a lower
socioeconomic suburb and I have never once felt afraid when at home alone or
walking around at night. The thought that someone might pull a gun on me is
so remote as to be laughable.

But this is the NRA, the same organisation who suggested after Littleton
that "teachers should be armed to prevent incidents like this" and went wild
when someone suggested that it might have been a good idea if the gun the
6-year-old picked up had some sort of safety catch on it. Intelligent,
coherent argument indeed!

Cheers,
eiley

=== I doubt, therefore I might be. ===

Kevin Sandford

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to
This is not a good idea for two very good reasons-
1)As an old German (ex WW2) workmate used to say,"when the German Army
shoots,the British duck.When the British Army shoot,the Germans duck.When
the US Army shoot,EVERYBODY ducks!!
2)Australia is a pretty big place,marked on lots of maps,etc,but you can
bet the USAAF/Army etc would still shoot at and bomb Austria instead
"Waal,we kinda figured it sounded pretty damn much the same,so we just went
right ahead and bombed it anyways"


Panhead <panmy...@intac.com> wrote in article
<38DA6AE8...@intac.com>...


> "- Prof. JonezŠ" wrote:
> >
> > Australia rejects America's NRA claims on gun bans
> >
> > March 23, 2000
> > Web posted at: 10:58 a.m. HKT (0258 GMT)
> >
> > SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australian officials demanded today that the
U.S. National Rifle
> > Association pull a video airing on its Web site claiming that the
nation's gun reform laws
> > had backfired.
>
>

> If they are all that pissed, let the Aussies try to shoot it out
> with us.
>

Trevor Calder

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to
Granted the gift of wisdom Sandgroper tried to impress us by writing the
following:

>In short , having a very restrictive set of gun laws makes it even har
>der
>for criminals to obtain , carry and use guns.

This is, unfortunately, a complete load of bollocks.

--
Trevor Calder
"..it is foolishness and endless trouble to cast a
stone at every dog that barks at you.."


Dan Day

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to
On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 05:05:43 GMT, "gHoSt" <de...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> WHAT DID I SAY, the track record STINKS (my balls are safe :-)!! A mob
>> of shysters and con artists!! That is the NRA (Nutty Rabid Americans)!
>
>And your words are based on facts found where ?
>That's what I thought...just emotional kneejerking again.

That's not his *knee* he's jerking...


Clayton E. Cramer

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00
to
Carman wrote:

> Sir: If you intend to talk about the history of firearms in the US, then
> please acquaint yourself with that history before you post. The laws have
> been changing almost constantly since they were first introduced. I
> recommend the work of Clayton Cramer Ph.D., on the subject.

Ph.D.? When did that happen? No one ever tells me anything!

I only have an MA in History. Web page at http://www.ggnra.org/cramer.

--
Clayton E. Cramer http://www.ggnra.org/cramer to see excerpts from my
five published books and full text of a number of scholarly and popular
articles. Looking for startup opportunity. Skills: Java, embedded C,
TL1, SNMP, large user interface system design, project management,
writing.

Joe Bridgehouse

unread,
Mar 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/25/00