juststarting wrote:https://youtu.be/8ErJOSxjO9w
Watch it. Think about it. Now, I know there are a few friends of SSAA Board people here. Maybe you should bring this to their attention?
Maybe, they will write a response to this, like they did for SFFP? Would be good to see, because SSAA supporting semi ban, is crazy! Right? According to Rudd, they've supported the '96 buyback too.
So, any response from SSAA?
juststarting wrote:However, now, it's a different ball game. Someone with a highly visible PR platform made a clear statement about their principles and stance. And they must come out swinging, if that's incorrect.
Pretty simple in my book, alternative is concensuss through silence.
bentaz wrote:Too busy working in the background, lol!
Stand up publicly for members, ain't nobody got time for that...........
juststarting wrote:No need to be amazed. A lefty is being interviewed by a lefty. They will buy whatever he is selling, but it shouldn't go unnoticed or unchecked.
Cryptic wrote:
juststarting wrote:They need to hire PR people. This amateur hour on their budget is tragic.
RoginaJack wrote:Not only the SSAA, there are many clubs that the membership has grown due to the implementation of the National Firearms Agreement.
What amazes and annoys me is the statement that " semi and automatic weapons were prohibited." To the best of my knowledge "Automatic " weapons were never permitted and the weapon used at Port Arthur was, is and always has been a prohibited weapon.
Wombat wrote:I know about the Tassie laws because of a girl who came to stay with me for a while. I warned her there were some guns under the bed, she had a look and laughed at me. Apparently she had a Owen or Austen (I cant remember which) loaded under her bed in Hobart
*All Legal at the Time*
http://crg.aic.gov.au/reports/28-91.pdf
Cryptic wrote: