After The Gatton Shooting

[hodgo]

I hope they don't take him alive There is no question of his guilt, he has no compassion for others and I don't see or understand why we need court cases to find him guilty a bullet or two is cheaper than locking him up, I have no feelings at all for this scum bag.other than hate and anger

Hodg

[V8Ian]

No Hogo, shooting is giving him the easy way out, let him rot in jail for the rest of his natural. With his form, he'll cop life without parole.

[trout1105]

let him rot in jail for the rest of his natural.

No way, I agree with Hogo Put a bullet in the tossers head.
Why on earth would you want to feed and house that animal for the next few decades.

[Pateyw]

No way a bullet is to fast .
nail him down and surgically take him apart peice by peice.

[V8Ian]

No way, I agree with Hogo Put a bullet in the tossers head.
Why on earth would you want to feed and house that animal for the next few decades.
Because I'm vindictive.

[Tins]

State sanctioned murder is still murder, writ large. Do you want the State to come down to the level of this creep?

That said, if I could turn the clock back and be given the chance to take out, say, Martin Bryant, would I do it? In a heartbeat I would. But that turning the clock back is something I cannot do.

There are so many things to consider here. What I'm hearing is "revenge". I don't blame anyone for feeling that emotion, when it's fresh in your minds. But I would remind you of this:

I,, do swear that I will well and truly serve our Sovereign Lady the Queen as a recognised law enforcement officer without favour or affection, malice or ill-will until I am legally discharged, that I will cause Her Majesty’s peace to be kept and preserved, and that I will prevent to the best of my power all offences against that peace, and that while I continue to be a recognised law enforcement officer I will to the best of my skill and knowledge discharge all my duties faithfully according to law. So help me God.

I don't believe anyone who swore to that would want to see death by The State as a punishment. I could well be wrong.

Vale.

[Tins]

True. And it needs to be said; Nobody has a "right" to anything. Not to be alive, let alone come home from work. We have NO rights, only expectations. I would love to have a "right" to be alive in my back pocket. I don't. I could drop dead tomorrow.

The death if this Officer is tragic, it is unnecessary, I hope that the NSW system deals with the perp as harshly as they can, but there is a reality here that we cannot escape. He is dead. Nothing we do, no outrage we express, no anger we vent will change that. I'll go further. How many of us will even remember in a month's time? Have a look at yourselves. There was a VicPol member who was killed in the same way, around Lilydale, a while back. Do any of you remember his name? Or even the incident? Outrage has a lifespan, and then we move on. It's what we are designed to do.

My heart, my feelings, to the family of this officer. I have no doubt he honoured his oath. I have no doubt he honoured his family.

[digger]

amazing..... no real details out but already people making judgement on his actions? Basing these judgements on experience I assume people? (And I'm not meaning just here but across the board these experts are appearing thick and fast). Most of QPOL don't know what happened, so respectfully I would suggest your mate is "assuming a lot" from the unconfirmed and generally uninformed reports.. and we know what 'assume' does.... he/she should know better, and, I would have expected, shown a little more respect for a fallen colleague...

How about we leave it a while folks before there are judgements made about this, let's wait until the
Details are known...little things (we use a name for them ... "facts") are important.

Also we don't know what he knew or didn't etc... circumstances... etc etc...

Although the idea of the offender being "removed from the gene pool" is an attractive one, the whole idea here is we believe we are better than them, we believe that difference is because we play by the rules... this is the difference between us and them.... so it's important. That said, if he is still shooting at people, it's not an option to allow that to continue.

Like most Police who've got a few years in I've been in a situation in some ways similar to this, luckily all the Police involved went home but the stuff that people and newspapers and Tele felt the need to sprout as "experts" etc was so off base it was ludicrous..(I won't cover that any further here I've said my piece about it on the forum the one and only time I'm going into it previously but take it from me nothing is like the training..)

There are some very basic facts you can assume..

*Brett left home this morning, kissed his wife and kids and expected to see them for tea...
*Brett and other officers have confronted a male who has been armed, (I'm not sure if they knew he was armed or not) after a vehicle pursuit and a vehicle collision.
*Brett despite desperate efforts of his mates in the thin blue line, has died as a result of this offenders actions.
*Brett is someone for whom the words HERO & BRAVE are appropriate.


--Everyone needs to get out and line the funeral route when it is announced for the following reasons:
A) his family deserve that, his young children will remember this as one of the main memories of their father - make them aware we understand what he did for all of us.
B.) his wife is now a widow and deserves any help and support she can be given
C) his colleagues and family will be buoyed by the show of support
D) it will send a clear message to scumbags everywhere that the Public support the Police and won't tolerate this..

Let's not judge what has happened without knowing the facts. One report indicated that after being involved in a police vehicle rollover caused by the offender, as Brett was trying to get out of the vehicle he was shot multiple times -- if that's correct not sure what training prevents that.... but as I indicated earlier this is just at this stage 'a report'. It could be mixed up or completely wrong..


TIE A BLUE RIBBON TO YOUR CAR AERIAL TODAY TO SHOW YOUR SUPPORT... Flags around the nantion should be halfmasted also both tomorrow (Tuesday) and on the day of his funeral. (We saw how the Poms did it, unfortunately I think we are too casual to be the same...)

Lastly, Rest easy Brett, your duty and your job is done mate and the 'thin blue line' will take up your duties from here - your family will remain for ever part of the blue family.

Bretts name will be included on the National Police Memorial in Canberra later this year on Police Remembrance Day (sept) with any others lost during the year... As at National Police Remembrance Day 2016, sadly both the National Police Memorial and the Honour Roll contain the names of 764 Police Officers who have been killed on duty or died as a result of their duties.

(This does not include those lost to suicide (ptsd) - if it did it would likely be 4x or more larger.)

[DiscoMick]

Latest stories say the guy used a machine gun to spray bullets at police in several vehicles. Police would not expect a man to be carrying a machine gun. I assume the gun was obtained illegally. This seems a good argument in favour of tight gun control to try to reduce the number of such weapons in the community. We don't want people driving around armed like that.
Police corner gunman after officer shot dead Police officer Brett Forte shot dead west of Brisbane, gunman contained - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://ab.co/2scrV28) - via @abcnews

[Pickles2]

No way, I agree with Hogo Put a bullet in the tossers head.
Why on earth would you want to feed and house that animal for the next few decades.
Agree, 3 meals a day & a warm bed, computer, TV etc etc,..no way, one bullet is all he deserves,
Pickles.

[DiscoMick]

That's murder. We don't want to encourage police to murder or we'll end up like The Phillipines or North Korea. No vigilantes. Just let the police do their jobs.

[Ausfree]

I would like to know, how in the hell did this criminal get his hands on a machine gun????????????? My sincere sympathies to the dead police officers family, he was only doing his job.[bigsad]

[donh54]

Latest stories say the guy used a machine gun to spray bullets at police in several vehicles. Police would not expect a man to be carrying a machine gun. I assume the gun was obtained illegally. This seems a good argument in favour of tight gun control to try to reduce the number of such weapons in the community. We don't want people driving around armed like that.
Police corner gunman after officer shot dead Police officer Brett Forte shot dead west of Brisbane, gunman contained - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://ab.co/2scrV28) - via @abcnews

Machine guns are already illegal in Australia. Have been for many years, and a safe bet would be that the weapon was (if indeed it is a "machine gun", and not a modified semi-automatic rifle) illegally imported, or fabricated from plans available on the internet, by anyone with basic metal fabrication skills and tools. Placing even more onerous rules on people who are already doing the right thing, is not the answer. More funding for more rigorous application of the existing laws, and a judiciary that actually punishes those whom choose to do harm to others, would be a far better deterrent IMO

[Ausfree]

It certainly sounded like a machine gun, going by the clip they played on the news last night. Anyrate I am sure the police did not realise he was so heavily armed. Note to Digger, excellent post mate, certainly makes more sense than the emotional posts made by some forum members on this subject.

[incisor]

lets keep it civil

prying eyes are watching, so to speak....

[DiscoMick]

Machine guns are already illegal in Australia. Have been for many years, and a safe bet would be that the weapon was (if indeed it is a "machine gun", and not a modified semi-automatic rifle) illegally imported, or fabricated from plans available on the internet, by anyone with basic metal fabrication skills and tools. Placing even more onerous rules on people who are already doing the right thing, is not the answer. More funding for more rigorous application of the existing laws, and a judiciary that actually punishes those whom choose to do harm to others, would be a far better deterrent IMO

I assume he got the machine gun, if that is what it is, illegally in the underground gun market. That just proves how much we need gun control laws to try to prevent these guns getting in the hands of people who might use them. After all, in most cases the laws have worked, since most people do not have machine guns, which is a very good thing - we don't want to copy America. We don't abolish laws just because a small number of selfish people choose to break them.
The issue with the underground gun market isn't laws, the laws are good, it's why people should even want something like a machine gun, and why some people would want to trade in illegal weapons. Let's just support the police in trying to do a very difficult job for the community.

[Roverlord off road spares]

I would like to know, how in the hell did this criminal get his hands on a machine gun????????????? My sincere sympathies to the dead police officers family, he was only doing his job.[bigsad]
There was a doc on TV the other night, thereas a post office owner buying glocks in pieces from a gun shop in Germany, importing them, having the description changed on the shipping doc, and having them delivered to his post office in the mail. he was a crim, and knew the customs and police shortfalls so worked around the system/

[cuppabillytea]

I once spent the best part of a day stuck in my house, forbidden to leave, with a Police sniper positioned on the dunny roof. His weapon was aimed at the back window of a neighbours house. There were two more out the front and one out the back gate. A fifth was moving between them all, constantly giving out food drink and information.
The bloke under siege was known to the Police. The information they had about him was coming in dribs and drabs. They didn't know it all the instant they showed up.
I kept my sniper mate company for several hours and he didn't move an inch the whole time, while I couldn't sit still for Five minutes. You have to respect that kind of discipline and stoicism.
The siege ended and no one was harmed. The offender ended up being charged with minor fire arms offences.
Some years later though his son shot a bloke dead in the street.
There are definite gene pool arguments there but once you start down that road you are going on tour with Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin. How harmful were they?

[Pickles2]

Latest stories say the guy used a machine gun to spray bullets at police in several vehicles. Police would not expect a man to be carrying a machine gun. I assume the gun was obtained illegally. This seems a good argument in favour of tight gun control to try to reduce the number of such weapons in the community. We don't want people driving around armed like that.
Police corner gunman after officer shot dead Police officer Brett Forte shot dead west of Brisbane, gunman contained - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://ab.co/2scrV28) - via @abcnews
Nope. Tighter gun laws make no difference to those on the other side of the law who have always had no trouble in sourcing whatever weapon it is that they want.
Law abiding citizens abide by the gun laws, & of course any laws, criminals do not.
Pickles.

[Eevo]

Nope. Tighter gun laws make no difference to those on the other side of the law who have always had no trouble in sourcing whatever weapon it is that they want.
Law abiding citizens abide by the gun laws, & of course any laws, criminals do not.
Pickles.
so more focus on targeting illegal guns, not tighter gun laws, is the answer.

[DiscoMick]

Nope. Tighter gun laws make no difference to those on the other side of the law who have always had no trouble in sourcing whatever weapon it is that they want.
Law abiding citizens abide by the gun laws, & of course any laws, criminals do not.
Pickles.
Gun laws are aimed at ordinary people who go off the rails. They're not there to stop criminals who will just do it anyway. The laws give the cops the grounds to charge them for breaking the laws. To make it illegal there must be a law saying its illegal.

[V8Ian]

The siege is over, Maddison has been shot dead.

[Ausfree]

The siege is over, Maddison has been shot dead. Well, that is the ending I expected. I could not imagine that maniac surrendering to police.

[V8Ian]

Yes Jim, not unexpected but I would have preferred him to have a long suffering rest of life in jail.

[Ausfree]

Ian, I get your point but he is now safely out of the way and not a threat to the public anymore, thank God for that!!!!!!

[DiscoMick]

Gatton police shooting: Cop killer shot dead, Queensland police say - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-30/gatton-police-shooting-alleged-gunman-shot-dead-qld-police-say/8572162)
Gunman shot dead after cop killing near Gatton (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/gunman-shot-dead-after-cop-killing-near-gatton-20170529-gwfyzm.html)

Sounds like the police followed the normal protocol which allows them to return fire.
We should make it as hard as possible for people like that to get their hands on guns. Making those guns illegal makes their possession a crime and gives the police grounds to act.

[Pickles2]

Gatton police shooting: Cop killer shot dead, Queensland police say - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-30/gatton-police-shooting-alleged-gunman-shot-dead-qld-police-say/8572162)

Sounds like the police followed the normal protocol which allows them to return fire.
We should make it as hard as possible for people like that to get their hands on guns. Making those guns illegal makes their possession a crime and gives the police grounds to act.
Mate "those guns" are already "ïllegal", their "possessiion" is already a "crime",.....and as I have said, the crims can easily get weapons like they always have. That is what our gun control laws have done,....law abiding citizens, many of whom have been shooters for all of their lives have been affected by our Gun Laws, but not the bad guys, doesn't affect them at all.
How to stop them getting their hands on illegal weapons?.....If you are a realist, I would say that would be nigh on impossible.
Pickles.

[Saitch]

I tend to agree Pickles. Where there is a "Demand" there will always be a "Supply"[bigsad]
Steve

[Tins]

I don't believe in Capital Punishment, but death by cop seems to be a good result here.

A bloke like him would very likely become a big deal in prison.

[DiscoMick]

Mate "those guns" are already "ïllegal", their "possessiion" is already a "crime",.....and as I have said, the crims can easily get weapons like they always have. That is what our gun control laws have done,....law abiding citizens, many of whom have been shooters for all of their lives have been affected by our Gun Laws, but not the bad guys, doesn't affect them at all.
How to stop them getting their hands on illegal weapons?.....If you are a realist, I would say that would be nigh on impossible.
Pickles.

Yes, I know they're already illegal - I said that. Making them illegal also makes it illegal for crims. to possess them, so the cops can act based on their possession, even if they can't prove they have actually been used, which strengthens the hand of the police. Its a good thing too.
As for law abiding citizens, why would a law-abiding citizen need a machine gun?
Take America as an example - most gun crime is committed by ordinary citizens, not criminals. No way should ordinary citizens be able to get machine guns. In fact, very few people have a legitimate reason to own any gun, I reckon. And I grew up on a farm, so I know about and have used various guns in farm work, but no way should I or most people be able to get a gun for normal life, I think. The fewer guns there are, the safer is society.

[Eevo]

In fact, very few people have a legitimate reason to own any gun, I reckon.
i agree mick. a gun is a tool. its a tool with a specific purpose, and should only be used for specific purposes where no other tool does as good a job.

[Mick_Marsh]

Take America as an example - most gun crime is committed by ordinary citizens, not criminals.
Really! you got the stats to back that up?

I'd have thought, if you have committed a gun crime, that would make you a criminal. Not in America, apparently. Committing a gun crime makes you a citizen!

[bee utey]

Really! you got the stats to back that up?

I'd have thought, if you have committed a gun crime, that would make you a criminal. Not in America, apparently. Committing a gun crime makes you a citizen!

An ordinary citizen in the US can easily and legally purchase a cache of deadly weapons, then subsequently become a criminal. Lots of nutso shooters do this, don't you read the news?

This process is just a little harder in Oz so the petty fish shop crim has to resort to waving a knife because he's not high enough up the career ladder to be allowed to have an illegal weapon by his superiors. Making illegal guns expensive by limiting supply does reduce gun crime.

[trout1105]

I don't believe in Capital Punishment, but death by cop seems to be a good result here.

I Do believe that capitol Punishment IS applicable in certain cases, Especially Murder This was a Great result.
Its just an absolute shame that we lost one of our policemen in the process and it is "Toerags" like these that think when they kill someone they will Not have to pay the ultimate price and will be out of jail in a few years.
Once again Great result [thumbsupbig]

[Don 130]

The assailant is now dead also. Good riddance, but he got out the east way.

Gatton police shooting: Cop killer shot dead after shootout - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-30/gatton-police-shooting-alleged-gunman-shot-dead-qld-police-say/8572162)

Don.

[Pickles2]

Yes, I know they're already illegal - I said that. Making them illegal also makes it illegal for crims. to possess them, so the cops can act based on their possession, even if they can't prove they have actually been used, which strengthens the hand of the police. Its a good thing too.
As for law abiding citizens, why would a law-abiding citizen need a machine gun?
Take America as an example - most gun crime is committed by ordinary citizens, not criminals. No way should ordinary citizens be able to get machine guns. In fact, very few people have a legitimate reason to own any gun, I reckon. And I grew up on a farm, so I know about and have used various guns in farm work, but no way should I or most people be able to get a gun for normal life, I think. The fewer guns there are, the safer is society.
Lol!!
Of course they're illegal, & illegal in the hands of the crims, you know that, I know that, and the crims know that,...and the crims don't give a stuff.
And they know how to hide 'em, No "laws" are going to make any difference,...sure IF the Cops can find 'em they can grab 'em (weapons),....and when & if they do,..the crims just get more,..they do not, to use your term, care about "illegality".
Disco, mate I have said before you are a reasonable man, but if you think that the cops are ever going to be successful in preventing firearms from falling into the "wrong hands", I will disagree with you. It will never EVER happen.
All IMHO of course, Pickles.

[Andy130]

This seems a good argument in favour of tight gun control to try to reduce the number of such weapons in the community. We don't want people driving around armed like that.


Problem is Mick, the laws and restrictions already in place which are some of the strictest in the world, clearly don't stop the criminals from getting the guns if they want them. The perp in this case, under the current laws, would likely not have been able to own a firearm - let alone legally posses what I assume will turn out to be a semi auto firearm ( i'm assuming here, based on news reports of 'automatic fire' that he had a semi auto - pure assumption on my part).

I can't see what 'tighter control' can do to stop clearly violent crims in Australia who don't obey the laws anyway.

Thankfully we live in a country that has historically very few police homicides - and even less by firearm - and that has been a fact even long before the tightergun laws that came into effect in 1996.

Anyway, I don't want to hijack what is a very sad story for the officer involved and his friends and family. It's a tragic situation, just one I don't believe is going to be preventable by passing 'laws' - but it is thankfully a very rare event in Aus.

[Eevo]

andy, i think mick is looking for greater enforcement of the current laws.

[DiscoMick]

I think maybe you're missing the point. Everyone knows some crims will get illegal weapons, the laws will never stop that, as you correctly say.
The point is making those guns illegal means the cops can act against people who seek and gain them, without having to wait for those people to commit a crime with them. Making possession illegal means those who possess them can be charged. That is how the cops often break up criminal gangs. Jail them for illegal possession BEFORE they commit a crime with them.

[trout1105]

All semi autos are now illegal, Fully auto has always been a No-No, These are usually the crims weapons of choice.
Australia already has very tough firearms licencing laws But if these criminals want these things they seem to have little difficulty procuring them.
Maybe the illegal possession laws need to be "Beefed Up" so that the offenders do serious "Time" instead of just getting fined in future.

[rangieman]

Mick move on and start another thread for your naive rant this is not the place for it at the moment please[thumbsupbig]

[Gordie]

Agreed Rangie...move the gun debate to another thread...it has been debated before and will be debated again. This thread is for the man who gave his life while serving the community and trying to protect all of us...from low-lifes like this particular perpetrator of a heinous killing.

RIP brave Police Officer. Respect to you.
Condolences to his friends and family.
Thankyou QPol for making the world a safer place today.
Rot in Hell perpetrator.

[DiscoMick]

Cop killer who died in shootout had 'grievance against police' Gatton police shooting: Cop killer shot dead after shootout - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://ab.co/2rhg2uL) - via @abcnews

[hodgo]

MY heart goes out to the family of the police man and his family also his partner she witnessed the shooting, this will stay with her for life. The only good thing that has come out of this the gun man is dead saving the tax payers hundred off thousands of dollars.

[DiscoMick]

Police to probe whether slain cop was lured to his death by shooter with 'grievance' (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/he-was-challenged-he-shot-at-police-police-lay-blame-for-deaths-on-gunman-after-fatal-siege-20170530-gwgdws.html)

[PAT303]

Yes, I know they're already illegal - I said that. Making them illegal also makes it illegal for crims. to possess them, so the cops can act based on their possession, even if they can't prove they have actually been used, which strengthens the hand of the police. Its a good thing too.
As for law abiding citizens, why would a law-abiding citizen need a machine gun?
Take America as an example - most gun crime is committed by ordinary citizens, not criminals. No way should ordinary citizens be able to get machine guns. In fact, very few people have a legitimate reason to own any gun, I reckon. And I grew up on a farm, so I know about and have used various guns in farm work, but no way should I or most people be able to get a gun for normal life, I think. The fewer guns there are, the safer is society.

Mick, I disagree with pretty much everything you say,and can say honestly that you have no idea what you are talking about.''Machine Guns'' as you put it have never been legal in Oz,ever,and no one can legally possess a ''machine gun'' in Oz,under any conditions or circumstance.As far as not having a reason to own a firearm,well shooting is a sport,one of the oldest registered sports there is,and one which many people from all walks of life participate in,including me.Your statement about less guns in society makes it safer,you are delirious,people are killed in society every day by criminals who should not be allowed to live in society,yesterday a know criminal/troublemaker was jailed for 4 years for running down a women outside a shopping center with a motor bike killing her,should we outlaw motor bikes?. Pat

[PAT303]

I think maybe you're missing the point. Everyone knows some crims will get illegal weapons, the laws will never stop that, as you correctly say.
The point is making those guns illegal means the cops can act against people who seek and gain them, without having to wait for those people to commit a crime with them. Making possession illegal means those who possess them can be charged. That is how the cops often break up criminal gangs. Jail them for illegal possession BEFORE they commit a crime with them.

I think your missing the point Mick,if the Police know a person has an illegal firearm they can act against them,after watching 4 Corners the other night it was the Police that helped the criminals get firearms. Pat

[DiscoMick]

Mick, I disagree with pretty much everything you say,and can say honestly that you have no idea what you are talking about.''Machine Guns'' as you put it have never been legal in Oz,ever,and no one can legally possess a ''machine gun'' in Oz,under any conditions or circumstance.As far as not having a reason to own a firearm,well shooting is a sport,one of the oldest registered sports there is,and one which many people from all walks of life participate in,including me.Your statement about less guns in society makes it safer,you are delirious,people are killed in society every day by criminals who should not be allowed to live in society,yesterday a know criminal/troublemaker was jailed for 4 years for running down a women outside a shopping center with a motor bike killing her,should we outlaw motor bikes?. Pat

Then I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, because I know exactly what I'm talking about. Anyway, I've already answered your questions previously, so enough said.

The thing that does concern me about this tragedy is how does someone reach the state of mind that they think it's OK to behave like this bloke did? What is his story? How did he get this way?

[Eevo]

The thing that does concern me about this tragedy is how does someone reach the state of mind that they think it's OK to behave like this bloke did? What is his story? How did he get this way?

because our prison system is about punishment, not rehabilitation.

[DiscoMick]

because our prison system is about punishment, not rehabilitation.

Had he been to prison? He wasn't on bail or parole. I don't know his record. Some people refuse to be rehabilitated.

[DiscoMick]

Had he been to prison? He wasn't on bail or parole. I don't know his record. Some people refuse to be rehabilitated.

Answered my own question. It appears he had a suspended sentence, but hadn't actually been to prison.
REVEALED: Cop killer's violent past | Queensland Times (https://www.qt.com.au/news/alleged-cop-killers-violent-past-revealed/3183683/)
$10,000 punch | Chronicle (https://www.thechronicle.com.au/news/10000-punch/167991/)

[Pickles2]

Answered my own question. It appears he had a suspended sentence, but hadn't actually been to prison.
REVEALED: Cop killer's violent past | Queensland Times (https://www.qt.com.au/news/alleged-cop-killers-violent-past-revealed/3183683/)
$10,000 punch | Chronicle (https://www.thechronicle.com.au/news/10000-punch/167991/)
Repeat crime on a "suspended sentence",.....where, & how many times, have I heard that of recent date?....Yeah Right.
Pickles.

[Eevo]

Answered my own question. It appears he had a suspended sentence, but hadn't actually been to prison.
REVEALED: Cop killer's violent past | Queensland Times (https://www.qt.com.au/news/alleged-cop-killers-violent-past-revealed/3183683/)
$10,000 punch | Chronicle (https://www.thechronicle.com.au/news/10000-punch/167991/)


sounds like the whole system failed.

[stealth]

Mick, I disagree with pretty much everything you say,and can say honestly that you have no idea what you are talking about.''Machine Guns'' as you put it have never been legal in Oz,ever,and no one can legally possess a ''machine gun'' in Oz,under any conditions or circumstance.As far as not having a reason to own a firearm,well shooting is a sport,one of the oldest registered sports there is,and one which many people from all walks of life participate in,including me.Your statement about less guns in society makes it safer,you are delirious,people are killed in society every day by criminals who should not be allowed to live in society,yesterday a know criminal/troublemaker was jailed for 4 years for running down a women outside a shopping center with a motor bike killing her,should we outlaw motor bikes?. Pat

Not exactly correct Pat. In Victoria a machine hand gun or machine longarm are Category E firearms. And you can get a Category E licence. If you fit the criteria.

[UncleHo]

It appears that the offender's weapon was a 7.62 SLR rifle (ex Military type) that's a very high powered weapon, and is of the type that has been illegal to own unless one has a type E license, long range high velocity, weapon with mil ammo,hence the try to take out the chopper.

the better result under the circumstances.

cheers

[PAT303]

Not exactly correct Pat. In Victoria a machine hand gun or machine longarm are Category E firearms. And you can get a Category E licence. If you fit the criteria.

From my understanding on the regulations you can only have a class E license for making films etc,as mortars,rockets and anti Armour missiles come under that license.You cannot just get a class E license and buy a belt fed machine gun. Pat

[Pickles2]

Not exactly correct Pat. In Victoria a machine hand gun or machine longarm are Category E firearms. And you can get a Category E licence. If you fit the criteria.
Ah yes, there's a "criteria" for everything. So, what is the "criteria" to own this weapon? I would suggest that there was no way known that this "person" met ANY crirteria, would not be in the slightest bit interested, in any "criteria" like any crim etc that wants to own this stuff. They don't care about "laws", "criteria" or whatever, and I'm saying if ya want this stuff, ya can get it.
And, I have NO IDEA how ya stop this stuff coming into the country.
An initial solution, if authorities placed FAR greater deterrants to get caught,..and that would be LLLOONNNGGG periods of incarceration,.....but would the do-gooders have any part of that?....You know the answer, so I won't even answer!
Pickles.

[PAT303]

It appears that the offender's weapon was a 7.62 SLR rifle (ex Military type) that's a very high powered weapon, and is of the type that has been illegal to own unless one has a type E license, long range high velocity, weapon with mil ammo,hence the try to take out the chopper.

the better result under the circumstances.

cheers

It's just a 308,a very common caliber and nothing special.I cannot fathom the constant reference ''known to Police'' when it comes to these types of people,FFS deal with them,that's why we have a Justice system. Pat

[Disco Muppet]

Whatever happened to taking the debate elsewhere people?

[stealth]

Sorry wasn't trying to hijack the thread and it should be diverted to another area out of respect for the OP.

Correct Pat you do need to demonstrate an 'official, commercial or prescribed purpose' to get an E cat licence but just correcting your statement of 'never ever in Oz.' There are re-enactment groups with Brens, Vickers, Mortars, 25 pounders, MP40, MG42 etc. Blank firers of course but they are about.

[PAT303]

Sorry wasn't trying to hijack the thread and it should be diverted to another area out of respect for the OP.

Correct Pat you do need to demonstrate an 'official, commercial or prescribed purpose' to get an E cat licence but just correcting your statement of 'never ever in Oz.' There are re-enactment groups with Brens, Vickers, Mortars, 25 pounders, MP40, MG42 etc. Blank firers of course but they are about.

A movie prop/blank firer is not a firearm. Pat

[trout1105]

It's no wonder the Police took this bloke out when he started firing at them The SLR is more than capable of killing at 300m, It is Not your regular 9mm and has more hitting power than an AK47.
I have No idea how this maggot got hold of one of these in the first place.
I think the Police did a fantastic job containing this as any of his stray shots could have proved fatal to anyone in the area.

[Grumbles]

A movie prop/blank firer is not a firearm. Pat

Any thing which replicates the look of a real firearm is legally classified as a firearm in Victoria. This means all plastic replicas etc as well as movie props, blank firers.

[stealth]

A movie prop/blank firer is not a firearm. Pat

They are real weapons Pat. A genuine Vickers or Bren fitted with a blank firing barrel only needs a barrel change. As does an MG42. 3" and 4.2" Mortars and 25 Pdrs are not props. But that is not my point. They are adapted to fire gas or blanks but they are real items. And the Firearms Act is very specific on what is classified as a firearm. You can argue but that is the law.

[trout1105]

Donations to the Heritage Bank fund for the family of Senior Constable Brett Forte can be made using the following details:
Account name: Brett Forte Family Fund
BSB: 638-010
Account Number: 143 689 27


While we are online here arguing Gun Laws, We can also log into our Bank accounts and help Brett's family at this awful time for them [thumbsupbig]

[123rover50]

It's no wonder the Police took this bloke out when he started firing at them The SLR is more than capable of killing at 300m, It is Not your regular 9mm and has more hitting power than an AK47.
I have No idea how this maggot got hold of one of these in the first place.
I think the Police did a fantastic job containing this as any of his stray shots could have proved fatal to anyone in the area.

I thought the channel nine news last night said it was an SKS not an FN Self Loading Rifle.
They said the SKS had been converted to full auto making it like an AK.
Thousands of these SKS were sold from the likes of A Mart All Sports back in the 80,s and even though with Johnnys "buyback" there are still many of them out there especially on stations etc. They are a short 7.62mm.
Still , it might be false news.[bigsad]

Keith

Saw a brief glimpse of a photo. It had the long curved mag of an AK not the short mag of an SKS or the straight mag of the FN FAL. May not have been the actual rifle but more fake news.

[hodgo]

I feel the whole concept or of the death of a person going about his duties that cost him his life has been lost, Its now turned into a who knows the most about guns and gun laws
Hodgo

[rangieman]

I feel the whole concept or of the death of a person going about his duties that cost him his life has been lost, Its now turned into a who knows the most about guns and gun laws
Hodgo
A couple of us tried but maybe some have a agenda other than the poor soul that got killed doing his job.
I am a shooter and if any one feels the need to Debate owner ship and laws start a new thread as i am more than willing to educate you , Just Not Here Please

[Roverlord off road spares]

On the News tonight there was footage of Brett's wife being supported whilst she walked to a memorial of flowers, a heckler yelled out, what about Rick"" (The killer) , yeah What about the scum bag?
At a hard time like this I hope some one took him down. GRRR

[bob10]

Just let it go, stop being internet experts.

[trout1105]

On the News tonight there was footage of Brett's wife being supported whilst she walked to a memorial of flowers, a heckler yelled out, what about Rick"" (The killer) , yeah What about the scum bag?

That is disgusting, Maybe someone should take pot shots at that Tosser whilst at work maybe that way he/she would know Exactly what the Police have to put up with when they go to work, Just so that Cretins like this can walk the streets Safely.
I am amazed that nobody slapped him/her stupid.

[hodgo]

Can we close this tread two people have lost their lives one good bloke one bad finished

[mox]

Have not looked at details of this case myself to see if the real gunman was almost certainly the one subsequently killed. However an accused should have the right of a fair trial considering evidence presented in court. In some cases the wrong person is charged or circumstances and details may differ considerably from those initially portrayed. Certainly don't want an immediate lynch mob mentality or "trial by media" which may be blatant contempt of court. Regarding an alleged offender shot dead immediately after the offences, in some cases it may not be the real one but the blame is then usually put on him unchallenged while the real offender gets away. This is sometimes what happens with "false flag" atrocities covertly arranged to falsely blame someone and/or pursue an agenda.

Nowadays thanks to the Internet, news and views that the mainstream media is unlikely to publish can be disseminated more than ever before. Including evidence that helps expose false flags, including some carried out long ago. Seems to have been plenty of them lately, including incidents in Syria and other terrorist attacks supposedly committed on sole initiative of Muslim fanatics. Another type has been mass shootings each allegedly committed on sole initiative of a deranged "lone nut gunman". When these have been quickly been followed by a barrage of anti gun propaganda and calls for tougher gun laws, some details of the case usually not publicised in mainstream media and "official" accounts may suggest these may have deliberate omissions and/or contain half truths or even blatant lies. Some in themselves could be just coincidences but combined, they virtually expose a "false flag".

One of these I have studied a lot of detail on is the Port Arthur Massacre. Especially note how Martin Bryant has been vilified. Including in TV programs aired by the major networks last year for the 20th anniversary. However, a large proportion of comments on their Facebook pages following these show that increasing numbers of people now recognise it was a false flag atrocity. The shootings were certainly real, but scrutiny of numerous details show that Martin could not have been the real gunman but was an appropriate dimwit selected beforehand and set up to take the blame. He was not and could not have been convicted of these crimes on evidence . Just sentenced after being successfully pressured to plead guilty by a crooked lawyer after being kept in illegal solitary confinement for six months. This was necessary after one important part of many false flags went wrong. ie Not having the alleged offender killed by police or supposedly commit suicide to avoid messy court proceedings. However, the anti gun psychopaths still managed to have implemented a significant proportion of draconian gun laws they wanted that largely affected mainly law abiding shooters though.

I expect that pointing out the PAM as a false flag will prompt name calling and other personal type abuse against me from a few who have been brainwashed to regard anything that questions the official accounts of it as crackpot "conspiracy theories" that should not even be listened to, let alone considered. Remember apparently the term was originally popularised by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) as a description to use when trying to detract from dirty things it gets up to at times and attempting to discredit whistleblowers.

Re a reference being made to Ned Kelly, it seems some of his criminal activity was prompted by bad police officers. I remember hearing on local ABC radio once a lawyer representing his current Kelly family members. Pointed out it had been widely known that at least one of the police officers killed by Kelly gang, Lonergan, had been bragging he was going to kill Ned. So not surprising that if they knew he was among those shooting at them their aim would be to kill first. Seems the motivation of those who shoot at police is sometimes a form of retaliation against what a police officer has done. A possibility that should be considered in analysis of this latest incident.

[Disco Muppet]

And sometimes, bad people play stupid games and win stupid prizes. **** off and take your conspiracy crap elsewhere, this isn't the place for it

[Roverlord off road spares]

Have not looked at details of this case myself to see if the real gunman was almost certainly the one subsequently killed. However an accused should have the right of a fair trial considering evidence presented in court.

If he wasn't the real gunman then he was just another person with hate for police and got involved in a gunfight with police?
He could have had a fair trial if he hadn't of had a gun fight with police .

[trout1105]

Have not looked at details of this case myself to see if the real gunman was almost certainly the one subsequently killed.

The Police simply fired back at the person that was shooting at them, No conspiracy theory or anything in a grey area here.
This bloke would have been given every opportunity to surrender and put down his weapon, He chose not to and died as a result of his OWN actions.
End of story.

[stealth]

Mox........I am speechless!!!!

[Eevo]

This bloke would have been given every opportunity to surrender and put down his weapon

i hope so. otherwise its murder. two wrongs dont make a right. we have laws for a reason. qld police cant ignore them cause its convenient or cause people are emotional.

[trout1105]

i hope so. otherwise its murder. two wrongs dont make a right. we have laws for a reason. qld police cant ignore them cause its convenient or cause people are emotional.

I have No doubts that the police followed every guideline and protocol in this matter, Especially because one of their own had been lost and that they would have been acutely aware everything that they did would be under scrutiny.

[Bytemrk]

Eevo, have you seen the photographs of the bullet holes in the police vehicles?

Not sure that they are there for convenience or because of "people are getting emotional"

The bloke was shooting at armed police.... even his family have come out and made a statement which supports police.

All this conspiracy stuff is just plain stupid.

Brett Forte killing: Police remove damaged vehicles from deadly siege scene - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-01/brett-forte-killing:-police-remove-damaged-vehicles/8580958)


Brett Forte shooting: Rick Maddison's family says son 'not one-dimensional career criminal' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-01/rick-maddison-family-says-he-was-not-one-dimensional-criminal/8578534)

[Eevo]

I have No doubts that the police followed every guideline and protocol in this matter, Especially because one of their own had been lost and that they would have been acutely aware everything that they did would be under scrutiny.

i hope so.

[Eevo]

Eevo, have you seen the photographs of the bullet holes in the police vehicles?

Not sure that they are there for convenience or because of "people are getting emotional"

The bloke was shooting at armed police.... even his family have come out and made a statement which supports police.

All this conspiracy stuff is just plain stupid.

Brett Forte killing: Police remove damaged vehicles from deadly siege scene - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-01/brett-forte-killing:-police-remove-damaged-vehicles/8580958)


Brett Forte shooting: Rick Maddison's family says son 'not one-dimensional career criminal' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-01/rick-maddison-family-says-he-was-not-one-dimensional-criminal/8578534)


i'm not pushing any conspiracy.

its too easy to get lost in the moment and want revenge. posts on this forum are examples. people wanted him dead without a trial. is this some 3rd world country without a proper justice/legal system? i'm disappointed by the attitudes of people here. or should i forget we live in a civilised country and say they should of napalmed the forest he was hiding in and burnt the ****er straight to hell.

[DiscoMick]

Damage to police vehicles shows scale of gunman's arsenal Brett Forte killing: Police remove damaged vehicles from deadly siege scene - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://ab.co/2rsJ2j2) - via @abcnews

[bsperka]

The police are major part of society's 'glue' that keeps us safe and orderly in society. An attack on the police is seen as an attack on our way of life. That's why the death of a policeman in the line of duty garners such strong reactions.
It's also why they (should and usually do) get pinged harder when they break a law.

[DiscoMick]

This blokes weapon was so heavy it was able to send bullets through an armoured police vehicle. That is a good example of why such weapons should be banned.
Supporting the current ban on such weapons is very respectful of the dead officer and his family, who I bet support laws to make it harder to obtain such weapons. It is those who want to shut down discussion of how to make it harder for people to possess the weapon which killed him who are being disrespectful. It would be disrespectful to argue the law should be changed to make it easier to get weapons like the one that killed the officer.
Having those laws in place means the police have the legal backing to grab those who choose to possess them and charge them with possession of illegal weapons. Him being able to get that weapon on the black market does not mean the ban has failed, it just means those who selfishly break it can be arrested. This is not naive, it is how the law actually works.

[trout1105]

With respect DiscoMick , The Australian gun control laws are an emotive subject and many people that do Not have the experience or knowledge about different types of firearms or different calibres wade into the discussion half cocked and it always ends in tears on any forum.
This thread is all about the tragic demise of a Queensland Police officer in the line of duty and I personally feel that it is not the platform to debate "Gun control", A new and separate thread would be a much better option to discuss this [thumbsupbig]

[hodgo]

Have not looked at details of this case myself to see if the real gunman was almost certainly the one subsequently killed. However an accused should have the right of a fair trial considering evidence presented in court. In some cases the wrong person is charged or circumstances and details may differ considerably from those initially portrayed. Certainly don't want an immediate lynch mob mentality or "trial by media" which may be blatant contempt of court. Regarding an alleged offender shot dead immediately after the offences, in some cases it may not be the real one but the blame is then usually put on him unchallenged while the real offender gets away. This is sometimes what happens with "false flag" atrocities covertly arranged to falsely blame someone and/or pursue an agenda.

Nowadays thanks to the Internet, news and views that the mainstream media is unlikely to publish can be disseminated more than ever before. Including evidence that helps expose false flags, including some carried out long ago. Seems to have been plenty of them lately, including incidents in Syria and other terrorist attacks supposedly committed on sole initiative of Muslim fanatics. Another type has been mass shootings each allegedly committed on sole initiative of a deranged "lone nut gunman". When these have been quickly been followed by a barrage of anti gun propaganda and calls for tougher gun laws, some details of the case usually not publicised in mainstream media and "official" accounts may suggest these may have deliberate omissions and/or contain half truths or even blatant lies. Some in themselves could be just coincidences but combined, they virtually expose a "false flag".

One of these I have studied a lot of detail on is the Port Arthur Massacre. Especially note how Martin Bryant has been vilified. Including in TV programs aired by the major networks last year for the 20th anniversary. However, a large proportion of comments on their Facebook pages following these show that increasing numbers of people now recognise it was a false flag atrocity. The shootings were certainly real, but scrutiny of numerous details show that Martin could not have been the real gunman but was an appropriate dimwit selected beforehand and set up to take the blame. He was not and could not have been convicted of these crimes on evidence . Just sentenced after being successfully pressured to plead guilty by a crooked lawyer after being kept in illegal solitary confinement for six months. This was necessary after one important part of many false flags went wrong. ie Not having the alleged offender killed by police or supposedly commit suicide to avoid messy court proceedings. However, the anti gun psychopaths still managed to have implemented a significant proportion of draconian gun laws they wanted that largely affected mainly law abiding shooters though.

I expect that pointing out the PAM as a false flag will prompt name calling and other personal type abuse against me from a few who have been brainwashed to regard anything that questions the official accounts of it as crackpot "conspiracy theories" that should not even be listened to, let alone considered. Remember apparently the term was originally popularised by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) as a description to use when trying to detract from dirty things it gets up to at times and attempting to discredit whistleblowers.

Re a reference being made to Ned Kelly, it seems some of his criminal activity was prompted by bad police officers. I remember hearing on local ABC radio once a lawyer representing his current Kelly family members. Pointed out it had been widely known that at least one of the police officers killed by Kelly gang, Lonergan, had been bragging he was going to kill Ned. So not surprising that if they knew he was among those shooting at them their aim would be to kill first. Seems the motivation of those who shoot at police is sometimes a form of retaliation against what a police officer has done. A possibility that should be considered in analysis of this latest incident.

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______________________________________

Are you for real ? what story books do you read? I lost two of my relations in the Port Arthur and I have talked and listened to all the conspiracy theories but the facts that I have come from people that were directly involved in the advent I went to school with one of the main players in the advent I know 2 prison warders that looked after Bryant for some time I have a cousin that has worked At Port Arthur for many years. I don't know who starts all this conspiracy crap for sure it must be the media, just to sell their trash. Martin Bryant was allowed to survive so that the authorities could find out the way he thinks and why The police on the ground that day were ordered not to take him out.
I am just glad that people that live with these conspiracy theories are the minority of our of our population If you want to say something please take facts not conspiracy theories.
I an not sorry if I have offend you or any one else, but my feelings and anger so?

Hodgo

[rangieman]

With respect DiscoMick , The Australian gun control laws are an emotive subject and many people that do Not have the experience or knowledge about different types of firearms or different calibres wade into the discussion half cocked and it always ends in tears on any forum.
This thread is all about the tragic demise of a Queensland Police officer in the line of duty and I personally feel that it is not the platform to debate "Gun control", A new and separate thread would be a much better option to discuss this [thumbsupbig]
Here Here :BigThumb:
Leave it alone Mick please it is not the time nor the place [wink11]

[DiscoMick]

How could it not be the place to discuss laws which might make it harder for people to get guns such as the one which killed officer Forte? Shutting down that discussion would be disrespectful to the dead officer and his family. We should be seeking greater ways to protect police such as him by further reducing the availability of those weapons.

[PAT303]

Mick,seriously mate,people are trying to be nice and giving you a hint to leave it.You seem to not only be extremely ignorant of firearms and firearms regulations but of when people are being politically correct when they want you to stop. Pat

[DiscoMick]

That goes both ways. I'm not ill-informed at all.
Anyway, it's the weekend and I'm sick of repeating myself. Enough said.

[rangieman]

That goes both ways. I'm not ill-informed at all.
Anyway, it's the weekend and I'm sick of repeating myself. Enough said.
If your not ignorant of such matters and law`s start a new thread and we can debate this elsewhere job done[thumbsupbig]

[Pickles2]

No need to start a new thread.
I reckon Disco is an OK bloke,...he is a nice guy, and I've told him that, publicly on this forum,...and he is,...a nice guy,....imho.
However, Disco,...on this thread, you are missing the point,.....so please, LISTEN to me.
No-one is denying that these weapons should not be available, no-one is denying gun laws etc, however strict they are now, or however strict they may be even more so in the future.
The point you are missing/ignoring is that it ain't "Laws" that is the issue here, because all decent people adhere to "Laws", whatever they are, whether we agree with them or not, laws,....& we adhere to them.....what you are choosing to ignore/not think about is that crims/gangs/addicts etc of any description don't give a flying **** about "laws"... they just do what they feel like.....they just do what they want,...."gun laws" ain't gonna make a scrap of difference to oxygen thieves who have their own agenda.
So, what you need to think about Disco is, how would you stop illegal weapons from being in the possession of crims?..How is that going to happen?
Pickles.

[Eevo]

How is that going to happen?
Pickles.

greater enforcement by the police. they might need greater funding or a law change to allow this.

[Roverlord off road spares]

greater enforcement by the police. they might need greater funding or a law change to allow this.
Eevo they can't even stop the influx of drugs so how are they going to stop illegal guns.
I have been out of the shooting scene for many years, way before even the buy back scheme.
As far as I know, I can't walk in into a gun shop as a licenced shooter and buy some of the types of weapons used in crimes. They are just no avail to the public. So it doesn't matter how strict gun laws are, they would only become strict laws preventing legal ownership.
Guns are smuggled in , so criminals will get them by various illegal sources.

So for example if we had the toughest Gun laws in the world and no fire arms were allowed period . Do you think there would be no gun deaths? the majoriry would be disarmed, and the crims would still have/get them.

[Eevo]

Eevo they can't even stop the influx of drugs so how are they going to stop illegal guns.





and thats a fair point. we shouldnt give up in the goal of eliminating illegal weapons.

[mox]

Are you for real ? what story books do you read? I lost two of my relations in the Port Arthur and I have talked and listened to all the conspiracy theories but the facts that I have come from people that were directly involved in the advent I went to school with one of the main players in the advent I know 2 prison warders that looked after Bryant for some time I have a cousin that has worked At Port Arthur for many years. I don't know who starts all this conspiracy crap for sure it must be the media, just to sell their trash. Martin Bryant was allowed to survive so that the authorities could find out the way he thinks and why The police on the ground that day were ordered not to take him out.
I am just glad that people that live with these conspiracy theories are the minority of our of our population If you want to say something please take facts not conspiracy theories.
I an not sorry if I have offend you or any one else, but my feelings and anger so?

Hodgo

You have not offended me. Will start with a couple of applicable quotes as I remember them. The first from writer Mark Twain: "It is easier to fool people than convince them they have been fooled." Then another which some people recognise and covertly use its principles. ( I reckon including whoever was really behind arranging the Port Arthur Massacre.) One honest enough to openly declare it was Adolf Hitler. ie "If you a going to tell a lie, make it big one, keep it simple, keep repeating it and eventually people will believe it".

Further re the recent tragic shooting of Qld police officer, seems the offender was basically a decent bloke to his family but apparently had a violent criminal history. Even if his guilt is readily proven beyond doubt and he is dead , hopefully some sort of further investigation will indicate likely reasons. eg I have seen first hand an intelligent sensible bloke having delusions and display violent and dangerous behaviour after not taking prescribed medication. Others become dangerous after taking (usually illegal) drugs they shouldn't have.

Martin Bryant was /is obviously a dimwit. Much has been made of details to reinforce the still widely held false perception he committed the Port Arthur shootings. He was immediately vilified after them. Few people questioned the official narrative and those who did were vilified too. One who did was Port Arthur staff member and paramedic Wendy Scurr, who was the first to enter the Broad Arrow café after the shootings. Would be expected she would be an important witness in subsequent legal proceedings but police did not want to even take a statement from her, which would obviously detract from the official narrative by exposing some details that would indicate possibility that Martin Bryant was NOT the real gunmen.

Many aspects of this terrible atrocity are undeniable but unfortunately many people seem to take the view that pointing out reasons that indicate it was someone other than Martin who was responsible is like denying them. Obviously some who were closely involved on the day such as those Hodgo mentions are among them. However, remember that just because a lot of people believe an idea is right does not make it so if it can be proven wrong.

From memory after having studied and browsed a lot of material that mainly would not be revealed by the mainstream media, I could probably write several pages of details which discredit the "official" story of Martin Bryan's supposed guilt. Have a look at times at three Facebook groups where information and discussion of the truth about the PAM is discussed. Would regard them relatively of low, medium and high quality postings. The latter is a secret group obviously partly to keep trolls and "shills", ie paid misinformation agents out. Meanwhile, seems there are plenty of people who will defend official stories as peddled by the mainstream media as if it was their own research and refuse to even consider claims that question it. Just claim it is crackpot conspiracy theories peddled by gun nuts etc.

Is not an appropriate place here for me to post more PAM details. Better to point out where to look to find more original material for consideration. Nowadays many people with any initiative can find all sorts of information starting with a Google Search on the Internet. In this case typing in "Port Arthur Massacre Coverup " is one good start. it should "snowball" from there. Some information is basically the same stuff posted in different places. Also note that I have reasons for disagreeing somewhat with some peoples analysis of events and have also come up with my own ideas on others. Probably the most detailed and up to date article I have downloaded but so far only read bits of is the free on line book by Dr Keith Allan Noble. For other recent updates, check back through postings on www.gumshoe.com (http://www.gumshoe.com)

[BMKal]

Guess what Mox ....................... I, like many others are not interested in your whacky nut job conspiracy threads - especially on a thread such as this one. How about you stick your stupid theories where the sun don't shine.

This forum really is turning to **** if we allow this type of rubbish to be posted here. :2up:

[DiscoMick]

Eevo they can't even stop the influx of drugs so how are they going to stop illegal guns.
I have been out of the shooting scene for many years, way before even the buy back scheme.
As far as I know, I can't walk in into a gun shop as a licenced shooter and buy some of the types of weapons used in crimes. They are just no avail to the public. So it doesn't matter how strict gun laws are, they would only become strict laws preventing legal ownership.
Guns are smuggled in , so criminals will get them by various illegal sources.

So for example if we had the toughest Gun laws in the world and no fire arms were allowed period . Do you think there would be no gun deaths? the majoriry would be disarmed, and the crims would still have/get them.
I explained in previous posts why the 'Crims will get guns anyway' argument is false logic. People speed, but we don't say the speeding laws have failed.
Maddox was under surveillance by the cops after reports of machine gun fire on his property. He was on bail on a suspended prison sentence for assault. If the cops could have had him convicted for possession of an illegal weapon the magistrate would have sent him straight to prison.
This is an example of how the gun ban laws can be used to jail someone even if they don't commit a crime with the weapon. It shows the gun ban laws are effective against criminals.

[rangieman]

Eevo they can't even stop the influx of drugs so how are they going to stop illegal guns.
I have been out of the shooting scene for many years, way before even the buy back scheme.
As far as I know, I can't walk in into a gun shop as a licenced shooter and buy some of the types of weapons used in crimes. They are just no avail to the public. So it doesn't matter how strict gun laws are, they would only become strict laws preventing legal ownership.
Guns are smuggled in , so criminals will get them by various illegal sources.

So for example if we had the toughest Gun laws in the world and no fire arms were allowed period . Do you think there would be no gun deaths? the majoriry would be disarmed, and the crims would still have/get them.
When ever someone wants to purchase a firearm and this is Vic law unsure of other states but im guessing with little johnny`s reform all states would be similar .

You need a valid reason you have to get approval from the police and you also have a cooling off period.
So us law abiding firearm owners are not the problem here also as a lawful firearm owner the laws are more than stringent enough in my humble opinion.

Now for illegal firearms there is a certain amount of illegal firearms still out there from way before the buyback in 96 that were legal to own which little johnny in his wisdom deemed illegal.

Now these firearms were not registered as some states did not have registration , I will add mine were registered so i lost a couple as if i did not surrender them im guessing a few men in blue would have been paying a vist.

Over the years there were many firearm law changes in all states so there were no uniform laws across the country so any one any where could have acquired said now illegal firearm .
So apart from very few of these illegal firearms still out there the biggest problem is boarder protection rather than making laws harder for the law abiding firearm owner which is only penalising the law abiding owner .

[DiscoMick]

When ever someone wants to purchase a firearm and this is Vic law unsure of other states but im guessing with little johnny`s reform all states would be similar .

You need a valid reason you have to get approval from the police and you also have a cooling off period.
So us law abiding firearm owners are not the problem here also as a lawful firearm owner the laws are more than stringent enough in my humble opinion.

Now for illegal firearms there is a certain amount of illegal firearms still out there from way before the buyback in 96 that were legal to own which little johnny in his wisdom deemed illegal.

Now these firearms were not registered as some states did not have registration , I will add mine were registered so i lost a couple as if i did not surrender them im guessing a few men in blue would have been paying a vist.

Over the years there were many firearm law changes in all states so there were no uniform laws across the country so any one any where could have acquired said now illegal firearm .
So apart from very few of these illegal firearms still out there the biggest problem is boarder protection rather than making laws harder for the law abiding firearm owner which is only penalising the law abiding owner .
Yes, good points. I don't see any need to make laws harder for legal gun owners.
The laws do give the police a legal basis to act against owners of illegal weapons.
Personally, I think most people would oppose any move to weaken the protection provided by the gun laws. We certainly don't want to copy the disastrous example of the USA, which leads the world in gun deaths per head.

[bob10]

It's difficult to understand how Switzerland can have a gun culture that seems to work.

How Switzerland Developed a Gun Culture That Works | TIME.com (http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/)

[rangieman]

It's difficult to understand how Switzerland can have a gun culture that seems to work.

How Switzerland Developed a Gun Culture That Works | TIME.com (http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/)
And why is it Difficult to understand ?
They have a law enforcement system that is working for the better and worse and people respect it , Unlike our western culture that see`s our law enforcement as some third world policing that should not be adhered to or respected so simple to understand[thumbsupbig],
Also no political or non political bleeding hearts to deal with[wink11]

[bob10]

And why is it Difficult to understand ?
They have a law enforcement system that is working for the better and worse and people respect it , Unlike our western culture that see`s our law enforcement as some third world policing that should not be adhered to or respected so simple to understand[thumbsupbig],
Also no political or non political bleeding hearts to deal with[wink11]

I think it is a bit more complex then that. Don't agree with your description of our policing. The last mass murder in Switzerland was 2001, when a gunman burst into a local government meeting and shot numerous people. So they are not squeaky clean. I don't know the statistics of the drug problem in Switzerland, but it would be interesting to find out. Also some members of the Swiss Militia have killed themselves or others with their issued weapons. This resulted in legislation being passed, probably by bleeding hearts, to control this.

Firearms-Control Legislation and Policy: Switzerland | Law Library of Congress (https://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/switzerland.php)