Ask an American 'Gun Nut' anything, aka does the rest of the world understand us?

[Tiny]

@ technoweenie, I believe you are well intentioned & I have been enjoying the discussion, I can see both sides of the argument & the middle ground, however i can't help thinking of the Monty Python skit, "I came in here for an argument".

[technoweenie]

@ technoweenie, I believe you are well intentioned & I have been enjoying the discussion, I can see both sides of the argument & the middle ground, however i can't help thinking of the Monty Python skit, "I came in here for an argument".

LOL.

NO I DIDN'T!

I don't need to click the link, that's a good sketch...

Monty Python in general, quite genius.

Now leave, or I shall taunt you a second time....

[Skepticist]

There's an obvious need to separate 'wants' from 'needs' and we in AUS are very different from USA in that regard.
If I were in place where I needed a firearm (any kind) in order to feel safe I'd be researching places I could relocate to asap.

I'm not a 'wowser' (if that's an understandable term) when it comes to firearms and I've had military experience in their use plus, when I lived in the bush with plenty of nearby venues, I was a sporting shooter (mainly trap, skeet and target shooting). I don't 'need' firearms now I'm in an urban/suburban environment with a family and they're also not wanted any more (due to expense and practicality) so I have none these days and I don't have to live in fear. May the USA evolve into such a place for all of you but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

[mtv]

No, it's usually nutjobs that snap.

And title you named your thread... "Ask an American 'Gun Nut' anything...."

Let's hope you never 'snap'.

[trash]

Still lost, what's the background?

Corrupt gov't got sacked?

I can explain it for you technoweenie.

In the 1970's the left wing Labor party came to power. They were riding on the coat tails of anti vientnam war protests etc.
Gough Whitlam was the party leader and became the Labor Prime Minister. Our Parliament is not much different from the American Congress.
The House of Representative is the lower house. The majority of the Representatives chooses the Prime Minister who as you know serves much the same role as the US president. Our Senate works much the same way as the US Senate.

The difference is where this story played out. The head of State is actually Queen Elizabeth. But reality is she is just a figure head and takes no roll in the running of the country. Her name is on the cheques, but we pay and sign them. The person who does the Queen's job for her is The Governor General.
The Governor General is the actual equivalent of the US President. He signs the acts of parliament and they become law.
The GG is chosen by the parliament and he or she is somebody well known to the politicians. A buddy of sorts.

Reality is the Governor General does nothing but hold the rubber stamp with the coat of arms on it that says "PASSED".

But this is where the story gets nasty.

Gough Whitlam and the Labor party held a majority in the Representatives but they did not hold a majority in the Senate.
Malcolm Fraser and the right wing Liberal Party held that majority and they blocked supply to the government. They basically shut it down.
It meant that Gough Whitlam couldn't effectively run the country if he couldn't even pay for the parking meter out the front of his office.

What Gough needed to do was negotiate with the Liberals (which they were not going to do) or call an election, or a double dissolution election.
Gough didn't want to do this because he knew he was not going to win the election and instead just intended to sit in his office, collect his pay checks (not that his own government could pay him) and wait until his term ran out.

Malcolm Fraser went to the Governor General, Sir John Kerr and made the case that he should sack the government.
Sir John Kerr would have contacted the Queen who would have told him to, "piss off, it's your country, work it out for yourselves."

Kerr knew that Whitlam had no control and was not likely to be re-elected to power so he dismissed Whitlam as Prime Minister and appointed Fraser as caretaker.
Basically he sacked the government and called an election.

Whitlam lost the election and Fraser and the Liberals won and life returned to normal.

There was a lot more to it than just what I've said, but that's the simple version.
It's a major event in Australian modern history.

It is one of the concerns we have with becoming a republic. Who has the ability to dismiss a government and under what circumstances.
It's one of the reasons we have voted no in the past. If there is an Australian head of state, we want to be able to remove him/her and the politicians from office given good reason and/or a popular majority to do so. We'd prefer not to shoot them We prefer to make them "walk the plank".

[technoweenie]

And title you named your thread... "Ask an American 'Gun Nut' anything...."

Let's hope you never 'snap'.

'Gun nut' is a tongue in cheek term, you know that.. Right now, in the U.S., just about everyone who isn't for the wholesale seizure of all firearms is a 'gun nut'...Currently accused of killing children and having blood on our hands.

I would only use my firearms against a person if I felt morally justified, Ie self defense.

Then again, morality is dictated by the individual, so.... I'm sure guys running around with explosive vests yelling 'aloha snackbar' feel morally justified...

I hope to never be put in a position where a firearm is required, but I'm also not going to hesitate to employ it if the need arises.

[technoweenie]

I can explain it for you technoweenie.

In the 1970's the left wing Labor party came to power. They were riding on the coat tails of anti vientnam war protests etc.
Gough Whitlam was the party leader and became the Labor Prime Minister. Our Parliament is not much different from the American Congress.
The House of Representative is the lower house. The majority of the Representatives chooses the Prime Minister who as you know serves much the same role as the US president. Our Senate works much the same way as the US Senate.

The difference is where this story played out. The head of State is actually Queen Elizabeth. But reality is she is just a figure head and takes no roll in the running of the country. Her name is on the cheques, but we pay and sign them. The person who does the Queen's job for her is The Governor General.
The Governor General is the actual equivalent of the US President. He signs the acts of parliament and they become law.
The GG is chosen by the parliament and he or she is somebody well known to the politicians. A buddy of sorts.

Reality is the Governor General does nothing but hold the rubber stamp with the coat of arms on it that says "PASSED".

But this is where the story gets nasty.

Gough Whitlam and the Labor party held a majority in the Representatives but they did not hold a majority in the Senate.
Malcolm Fraser and the right wing Liberal Party held that majority and they blocked supply to the government. They basically shut it down.
It meant that Gough Whitlam couldn't effectively run the country if he couldn't even pay for the parking meter out the front of his office.

What Gough needed to do was negotiate with the Liberals (which they were not going to do) or call an election, or a double dissolution election.
Gough didn't want to do this because he knew he was not going to win the election and instead just intended to sit in his office, collect his pay checks (not that his own government could pay him) and wait until his term ran out.

Malcolm Fraser went to the Governor General, Sir John Kerr and made the case that he should sack the government.
Sir John Kerr would have contacted the Queen who would have told him to, "piss off, it's your country, work it out for yourselves."

Kerr knew that Whitlam had no control and was not likely to be re-elected to power so he dismissed Whitlam as Prime Minister and appointed Fraser as caretaker.
Basically he sacked the government and called an election.

Whitlam lost the election and Fraser and the Liberals won and life returned to normal.

There was a lot more to it than just what I've said, but that's the simple version.
It's a major event in Australian modern history.

It is one of the concerns we have with becoming a republic. Who has the ability to dismiss a government and under what circumstances.
It's one of the reasons we have voted no in the past. If there is an Australian head of state, we want to be able to remove him/her and the politicians from office given good reason and/or a popular majority to do so. We'd prefer not to shoot them We prefer to make them "walk the plank".

Our political system tends to sway like a pendulum....People get motivated to vote out of office the people they don't like, they get sick of the same old crap, and the other side gets upset and votes their guy in office....Since I've been alive.... It's been 3 terms repub, 2 terms dem, 2 terms repub, 2 terms dem, and now a term (or 2) for repub. Up until Obama, I've seen very little pendulum swing.. You had far left and far right, which were not even on anyone's radar because of how small they were... With the centrists comprising most of the population, usually picking a key issue or 2 to decide where they cast their vote. 2 coworkers laughing at the water cooler, the dem making fun of Bush, the repub making fun of Clinton, and both of them laughing and grabbing a beer after work. No way in hell you could do that today.

After Obama, it's become so polarized, an all or nothing proposition. I've seen staunch leftists eating their own liberal supporters because they have the audacity to think something different on a topic...

My fear, is the pendulum will swing so far one way, that the structure holding the pendulum will become unstable, and tip over and fall.

With the latest attack on rights, and the widening gap between left/right, rural vs urban, I find it hard to believe that it will be getting better.

There are obviously people here that I disagree with and disagree with me, but we can shake hands and grab a beer so to speak.... In the states, people are being harassed merely for showing support for the president. People are being called racist for suggesting that everyone be treated the same, because the left feels that anyone other than a white male is owed something somehow... To me, that's insane. To not even be able to sit down and talk.... to agree to disagree? How can any consensus be made when you're not even willing to sit and talk?

My .02

[trash]

I understand American politics very well. Both sides even
Now of course I think Donald is an idiot, and some of his constituents are idiots too. No surprises there.
But I do not think that of most of the people who voted for him and even most of the people who voted against him.

It goes like this.
Hilary believes she is born to rule. You will vote for me even if I am a diabolical career politician because the other guy is the biggest idiot this country has seen.

America's response is: We'd sooner elect an Idiot than a Tyrant. (and we suspect Hilary is both so we picked the lesser of two evils)

[allover]

technoweenie
We don't need to go to the States when we can play with the real things a bit closer to home

[technoweenie]

I understand American politics very well. Both sides even
Now of course I think Donald is an idiot, and some of his constituents are idiots too. No surprises there.
But I do not think that of most of the people who voted for him and even most of the people who voted against him.

It goes like this.
Hilary believes she is born to rule. You will vote for me even if I am a diabolical career politician because the other guy is the biggest idiot this country has seen.

America's response is: We'd sooner elect an Idiot than a Tyrant. (and we suspect Hilary is both so we picked the lesser of two evils)

Every 4 years, South Park sums it up nicely....

'Who will win this years election? Will it be Giant Douche, or Turd Sandwich?'....

[lsemmens]

Considering the number of people that were killed in Florida, maybe we should also consider banning bridges.

The thing is, some guns are necessary, i.e the right tool for the job. You've missed the point. the fewer guns that are available, the fewer guns that can be misappropriated. No-where on God's green earth can I see the need for Joe Average to own an AK47 or any other high powered assault rifle, machine gun, grenade thrower, cannon or nuclear bomb. If you are hunting Buffalo, Bears or other large animals, then there may be a need for a high powered weapon, but those needs are few and far between.

[enf]

Considering the number of people that were killed in Florida, maybe we should also consider banning bridges.

................................

That's a bit rough! I heard somewhere that that bridge was built to handle 80 people, presumably of average weight. Not Americans.

[Uncle Fester]

That's a bit rough! I heard somewhere that that bridge was built to handle 80 people, presumably of average weight. Not Americans.

Maybe they got the plans from China.

[Uncle Fester]

Looks like your American kids don't even know the difference between a gun and a game controller:


GUNS ACTUALLY KILL people, even though the NRA preaches something different. Your kids sure get the wrong message.

There are reasons why our gun laws force us to keep guns locked in a safe at all times when not in use, just like
we have laws to have child safe fences around our pools.

However in a country like the USA, where every nutter has a gun, I DO understand the need to keep a loaded gun under the pillow when you sleep.

Because we have such tough laws I feel quite safe in most parts of Australia and don't feel the need for a gun.
Burglars up here are often only armed with a screw driver or their fists. Western parts of Sydney might be a different story.
Nevertheless I have an alarm system and cameras, one very big and noticeable from the street and a sharp pointy barbecue knife with a 30cm blade, hidden but quickly accessible.
The ends of all our visible kitchen knifes are rounded.


Having guns to defend yourself against a rouge government? ...we know how well that works out for countries like Syria.
If you use a gun against the government that will always be seen as an act of Terror, no matter what country or what you consider rouge.

[cmangle]

[cmangle]

[technoweenie]

Looks like your American kids don't even know the difference between a gun and a game controller:


GUNS ACTUALLY KILL people, even though the NRA preaches something different. Your kids sure get the wrong message.

There are reasons why our gun laws force us to keep guns locked in a safe at all times when not in use, just like
we have laws to have child safe fences around our pools.

However in a country like the USA, where every nutter has a gun, I DO understand the need to keep a loaded gun under the pillow when you sleep.

Because we have such tough laws I feel quite safe in most parts of Australia and don't feel the need for a gun.
Burglars up here are often only armed with a screw driver or their fists. Western parts of Sydney might be a different story.
Nevertheless I have an alarm system and cameras, one very big and noticeable from the street and a sharp pointy barbecue knife with a 30cm blade, hidden but quickly accessible.
The ends of all our visible kitchen knifes are rounded.


Having guns to defend yourself against a rouge government? ...we know how well that works out for countries like Syria.
If you use a gun against the government that will always be seen as an act of Terror, no matter what country or what you consider rouge.

Unattended firearm access to a 9 y/o is effing stupid. I don't think you'll have anyone arguing for that.

[alpha0ne]

Because we have such tough laws I feel quite safe in most parts of Australia and don't feel the need for a gun.

OT I know but f*ck me nomeat, I really want some of that shit your smokin, I nearly choked on my lunch when I read that

[lsemmens]

WA isn't part of Australia, alpha one, you know that. In fact anything west of NSW and South of Melbourne doesn't count either.

As to your poster, cMangle

When law abiding citizens carry a gun - Criminals think I need a gun, too
When law abiding citizens conceal and carry - Criminals are more likely to shoot first
When law abiding citizens reveal and chamber - It's usually too late because the criminal has fired
When law abiding citizens practices using their weapon - Criminals don't worry about it because they are all on the range
And just when you are bout to hit "share" a pro gun supporter will claim that having guns "protect" your freedoms
Stand up for our right to go out into the world without the need to feel worried that we might not come home!

Actually, you do know the second amendment has nothing to do with guns. It was to allow Grizzly bears the right to remove your shirt before they ate you.

[enf]

..................
Actually, you do know the second amendment has nothing to do with guns. It was to allow Grizzly bears the right to remove your shirt before they ate you.

Actually, it's about the right to wear sleeveless T-Shirts.......the spelling got lost in the writing.