Ed9362 wrote:usually the antis are trying to make us out to be paranoid redneck weirdos.
usually the antis are trying to make us out to be paranoid redneck weirdos.
pomemax wrote:Saw something of interest yesterday a Young bloke in Victoria being booked by their gov for posting something on Facebook no one complained but the police read it and then he got a date in court so if they are reading peoples fb you can bet they read here
pomemax wrote:Saw something of interest yesterday a Young bloke in Victoria being booked by their gov for posting something on Facebook no one complained but the police read it and then he got a date in court so if they are reading peoples fb you can bet they read here
happyhunter wrote:They don't just read, they also post.
brett1868 wrote:I'm 2 outta 3 of these, which 2 I'll leave open to debate
We should attempt to always portray our chosen sport, hobby, pastime in a positive way so as not to add credibility to the anti's argument.
on_one_wheel wrote:Also can we somehow become a group where each member has proved that they are a genuine firearms owner before we can post ?
Can admin check our credentials by checking face book accounts, club memberships, license numbers, photo's of licenses...
Gwion wrote:Lots of newbies with little knowledge or exposure to firearms turn to forums for info and the obligatory, "this may be a stupid question, but...." posts.
Aster wrote:That kind of stuff is best managed by security experts like the firearm registries... *whistles conspicuously*
Aster wrote:Gwion wrote:Lots of newbies with little knowledge or exposure to firearms turn to forums for info and the obligatory, "this may be a stupid question, but...." posts.
And those are fine.
Everyone was a newbie once, and everyone has asked a 'dumb' question before.
Gwion wrote:Yep. My point exactly. Newbies wouldn't be able to 'prove' an interest in firearms.
It's pretty easy to tell the difference between a genuine newbie and some anti troll or complete moron.
Aster wrote:We have a basic approval process for newly registered members to filter out obvious spammers etc. but that's about where its effectiveness ends.
Notionally, some kind of vetting process for genuine involvement in the shooting community would be great, realistically though I don't think an effective screening process of this type could be done without asking for sensitive information and frankly having myself or the moderators be privy to, or responsible for any personal or identifying information of members is something I definitely do not want.
There are also the concerns around the information being stored or passing through the site. That kind of stuff is best managed by security experts like the firearm registries... *whistles conspicuously*
on_one_wheel wrote:How about a secret handshake
Title_II wrote:The middle finger tickle.
Kinda like when your cousin kisses you and throws in some tongue. Yikes!
brett1868 wrote:Title_II wrote:The middle finger tickle.
Kinda like when your cousin kisses you and throws in some tongue. Yikes!
Seems Tasmania may have been originally colonised by "The Great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania" and over time and lack of options grew to love their brothers and sisters just as much as their cousins.
Supaduke wrote:One of my favourites was the young fella that's "been shooting pistols for years, how do I get hold of some 30 round glock mags?"
/face palm
Wylie27 wrote:Or was from another nation.... don't forget we have international visitors too