

Wapiti wrote:Good points Rich, appreciate them.
Personally I'm still coming to grips with this social media thing.
Up here it's big news, other politicians are jumping onto the bandwagon, calling for stricter laws. And they have jumped on the fact that this clown JH has jumped in on it to skite how it was him who "took the necessary steps to stop us becoming another US gun culture".
What disappoints me is the people who are supposed to be our peers, who brush this off as a membership drive by SU by whipping up fear.
Honestly, those people are my arch enemy, people who sicken me. And they white ant the social media wood-pile, because they hide behind that as an excuse.
No wonder there are so many people on social media blaming others for their position in society, belittling others who dare to never give up, or achieve something they never will with their attitudes, all to hide their lack of achievement or the fact they are satisfied with being pushed around, or being a sheep hiding in the flock.
Or maybe, too average to fight like some of us. So it is their peers that become the enemy.
Don't dare show that you have a go if you want to be popular, but who wants to be a sheep going up into the truck?

Terraincognita wrote:That being said it’s only a matter of time before complete confiscation.
Governments toughen gun laws not because licensed owners cause the crime, but because:
Governments believe fewer guns = lower future risk
Legal ownership is the part of the system they can control
Political and public pressure demand visible action
Whether that approach is fair or optimal is a legitimate debate—but that’s the reasoning behind it.


Finniss wrote:230,000 assessments added burden to health care system.









Terraincognita wrote:It seems to be labor trying to wedge the government because of there tough on crime stuff. I have it on good authority that no changes to gun laws are planned by the LNP government.
