Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

News and events in the media and political arena relating to firearms.

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by on_one_wheel » 21 Jun 2014, 7:43 am

The numbers are slowly stacking up against us with the growing population of do gooders, wowsers, greens and people who have been taught by the media that guns = bad people, violence and murder, it is inevitable that things are going to get tougher until we are left with only our memories of firearms.

The only hope we have of fighting them is by uniting as a group, It works for the Yanks but we are too layed back.

For anyone who has not already joined the SSAA, you are not doing your sport any favours, with numbers comes power, money and influence....Join already, or you can just sit back and complain when our next big buy back happens and we get to watch our arms go through the steel chipper.
Gun control requires concentration and a steady hand
User avatar
on_one_wheel
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3596
South Australia

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by 1290 » 21 Jun 2014, 9:17 am

Westy,I'm really not that happy at the moment, Italy went down to Costa Rica.... Shades of 90&94.... they threw the game. They were a totally different team to the previous game.
I'm warming up the Pavoni (first to know what this is wins) and will drown my sorrows with a quad shot of Colombian...sufficiently corrected.

As far as unity goes, I have been a member of SSAA for a while, I cant see them pushing the cause... there are so many committees they could have influence to make some changes... they like the status quo and the bonanza that the 96 law was for them. yes thats what I said. If it wasnt mandated how many members would there be today??


We need to combat the significant threat to not only our shooting and gun ownership but many other facets of our lives.... thats the greens.
They are little concerned about our environment, they more concerned about destroying our nation and our liberties, dramatic? not really, just look at their border protection policy - open the borders and let all comers in. THAT is internationalism, no borders, Communism/socialism. The Environment?? they use that a a ploy to suck in the punters, the foot soldiers who are truly concerned with the rivers, the pollution, a prosperous future for our kids, they've joined the wrong club though.

The watermelons, the greentards aka the greens care little about the things we cherish and couldnt give a rats proverbial if we were taxed to buggery, including the carbon(dioxide) that we breath..... they are commies, reds, for goodness sake the chief NSW green, that ugly nasty piece of work who currently goes by who third surname, the one who is our Feinstein, did her training in moscow in the 70's.....
User avatar
1290
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1336
Victoria

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by Noisydad » 21 Jun 2014, 9:33 am

1290 your post- even if somewhat longish - SOOOOO needs to be posted in mainstream press AND the other "Book"! ...ok maybe tidy it up a bit but you put it all in perspective very well! Tools like that "reporter" need to be slapped down like a dunny seat IN PUBLIC other wise they get their way all the time! As the old proverb says there's no use preaching to the converted!
There's still a few of Wile. E Coyote's ideas that I haven't tried yet.
User avatar
Noisydad
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1383
Victoria

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by MeccaOz » 21 Jun 2014, 11:34 am

Apollo wrote:
MeccaOz wrote:Laffin, Im from WA, we were barely allowed semi auto .22's even back in the day :lol:


I'm not laughing as I still can't believe you guys in WA can't have empty cartridges cases laying around as they are treated as live ammo....what a joke that is..... :( :(

The funniest thing I remember from way back in the early 1980's was the local Cop asked me to take a few of his visiting, youg police mates out shooting on my property. All was pretty good, nice guys , not really good shots but one of them brought out his .22LR Semi Auto Rifle had a few single then quick fire shots and some of them hit the tree he was aiming at, some and it was only 50 yards away. Then the fun started, watch this he said, I converted it to full automatic. Well I couldn't stop laughing, I think the first shot hit the tree but it was anyone's guess where the rest of the 20 clip ended up.

Don't think any of them managed to hit a rabbit and it took ages to pick up all the boxes of empties laying around. They had fun and shouted quite a few ales at the local afterwards.

LMAO !!!
That was back in them times.
User avatar
MeccaOz
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1013
Western Australia

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by MeccaOz » 21 Jun 2014, 11:39 am

Noisydad wrote:1290 your post- even if somewhat longish - SOOOOO needs to be posted in mainstream press AND the other "Book"! ...ok maybe tidy it up a bit but you put it all in perspective very well! Tools like that "reporter" need to be slapped down like a dunny seat IN PUBLIC other wise they get their way all the time! As the old proverb says there's no use preaching to the converted!



LOL I cleaned it up again and reposted it to the newspaper in question. It lasted all of 5 minutes before they removed it.
User avatar
MeccaOz
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1013
Western Australia

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by Warrigul » 21 Jun 2014, 12:02 pm

WesleySnipes wrote:Excellent post 1290. Champion.

And Mecca why don't you be the forum news man and compile relevant documents to our interests and post them all in one post once a week? I would find that useful as I really don't spend a lot of my time on the net. Just food for thought.


Keep it up MeccaOz, nothing wrong with posting, the SAMS don't have to read it if they don't want to and the amount of time you have available is none of their business.

Back top the article, I have stayed out of commenting on this one as it has been well handled by 1290.

Whilst I don't agree with Mr Pippos this time, in his favour he usually presents a logical point of view regarding firearms. He has come out on "our side" a couple of times in the past.
Warrigul
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1103
-

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by Noisydad » 21 Jun 2014, 1:39 pm

I agree with Warrigul. Keep posting please! If we don't read this stuff AND respond to and challenge these self opinionated twats they will continue to bend us over and make us take any piece of crap they want dish out in the effort to sway the public into outlawing us! We are far, far to willing to bury our heads in the sand and ignore these relentless attacks and do nothing but whine to each other about it and farm organisations are no better! We really need to learn how to protest like the French do!
There's still a few of Wile. E Coyote's ideas that I haven't tried yet.
User avatar
Noisydad
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1383
Victoria

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by 1290 » 21 Jun 2014, 5:25 pm

Noisydad wrote:1290 your post- even if somewhat longish - SOOOOO needs to be posted in mainstream press AND the other "Book"! ...ok maybe tidy it up a bit but you put it all in perspective very well! Tools like that "reporter" need to be slapped down like a dunny seat IN PUBLIC other wise they get their way all the time! As the old proverb says there's no use preaching to the converted!

Hey noisy, long post ha, I do know what you mean, at times I have been known to lose interest halfway thru the first line....mainstream media doesn't really care much for the shooters opinion.... thats the problem and as mecca discovered there is not a great deal of room in the comment section for an opinion opposing their spin....

Which is the other book? The 'good' book? I don't think their still taking submissions....
User avatar
1290
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1336
Victoria

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by MeccaOz » 21 Jun 2014, 5:33 pm

1290 wrote:Which is the other book? The 'good' book? I don't think their still taking submissions....


:lol: :lol: :lol: , havent you read it, every year the pope adds to it , now it's even got something like "Forging cash is a sin"
User avatar
MeccaOz
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1013
Western Australia

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by tiki » 22 Jun 2014, 2:51 pm

MeccaOz wrote: :lol: :lol: :lol: , havent you read it, every year the pope adds to it , now it's even got something like "Forging cash is a sin"


Tax evasion is a sin.

Oh, unless you're the church... Then it's all good.
CZ 452 .22 WMR
Savage Weather Warrior 16/116 FCSS .260 Rem
Winchester Model 1895 .30-40 Krag

Weaver K-Series 4x38
Zeiss Victory HT 2.5–10x50
User avatar
tiki
Private
Private
 
Posts: 69
Northern Territory

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by gazza » 23 Jun 2014, 5:06 pm

Charge anyone found with a stolen, unregistered firearm with attempted murder.
User avatar
gazza
Lance Corporal
Lance Corporal
 
Posts: 156
South Australia

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by MeccaOz » 23 Jun 2014, 5:12 pm

gazza wrote:Charge anyone found with a stolen, unregistered firearm with attempted murder.


Why ???? Nearly every rifle Ive met has never harmed a human being in it's life. How about we charge people who have actually attempted murder with attempted murder. A license is paperwork .. A white color crime at best.
User avatar
MeccaOz
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1013
Western Australia

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by bigfellascott » 23 Jun 2014, 5:22 pm

WesleySnipes wrote:I honestly think that even when private ownership of firearms is completely outlawed and 20 years later down the track gun crime is still through the roof and increasing at a healthy rate these idiots still probably wouldn't even get it. Nothing that specifically legislates law abiding citizens and makes it tougher on the good guys will make a difference to the underlying issues causing gun crime. In fact all it seems to do is make more and more innocent people defenceless against the criminal element in our society.

Is this not common sense though? Or am I missing the point...


Spot on WS - these SHEEPLE are so thick they will never get it ever.
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by bigfellascott » 23 Jun 2014, 5:27 pm

MeccaOz wrote:
gazza wrote:Charge anyone found with a stolen, unregistered firearm with attempted murder.


Why ???? Nearly every rifle Ive met has never harmed a human being in it's life. How about we charge people who have actually attempted murder with attempted murder. A license is paperwork .. A white color crime at best.


Yep that is what I reckon too, how the hell do you change someone with something they haven't done (scratches head). Charge em with the theft or illegal possession etc but charging em with murder isn't going to fly in my books.
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by 1290 » 23 Jun 2014, 6:02 pm

gazza wrote:Charge anyone found with a stolen, unregistered firearm with attempted murder.


Someones either taking the pi$$ or has been on the pi$$ a bit early today....

as far as 20yrs time... Im not going to stand idely by and allow those mofos to take our society to that extent whereby guns are outlawed and the associated police state is cast upon us....

but just for discussions sake imagine a society with no 'legal' guns... I'm quite sure that gun crime will not 'disappear' and all thos involved in banning guns will be scrathing their collective heads and wondering how possibly their could be ANY gun crime.... "we outlaw guns years ago!!"
User avatar
1290
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1336
Victoria

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by headspace » 23 Jun 2014, 6:22 pm

I guess it must have been a slow news day down in Tassie, but that reporter does look a little like he's fit right in with a Greens Party committee meeting. Designer stubble and all. I reckon 1290 has a pretty good case and stated it well. I do believe though that making a gun related crime a minimum (long) sentence would be a step in the right direction. Zero tolerance for gun crime including stealing them.
JD
If it's not wood and blued steel, it's not one of mine
headspace
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 738
New South Wales

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by WesleySnipes » 23 Jun 2014, 6:22 pm

1290 wrote:
gazza wrote:Charge anyone found with a stolen, unregistered firearm with attempted murder.


Someones either taking the pi$$ or has been on the pi$$ a bit early today....

as far as 20yrs time... Im not going to stand idely by and allow those mofos to take our society to that extent whereby guns are outlawed and the associated police state is cast upon us....

but just for discussions sake imagine a society with no 'legal' guns... I'm quite sure that gun crime will not 'disappear' and all thos involved in banning guns will be scrathing their collective heads and wondering how possibly their could be ANY gun crime.... "we outlaw guns years ago!!"


And neither will I. History is cyclical, especially if the majority of people are dumb enough and allow it to happen again.

And that's exactly my thoughts, when all private ownership is gone and crime is through the roof and innocent people are getting hurt everyday they won't have a whole lot to say then.
User avatar
WesleySnipes
Lance Corporal
Lance Corporal
 
Posts: 140
New South Wales

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by MeccaOz » 23 Jun 2014, 6:36 pm

The Brits are doing that now ... They want them back, they realised what a crock it was and I bet their government is really going to say, yeah sure, have them back :)
User avatar
MeccaOz
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1013
Western Australia

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by 1290 » 23 Jun 2014, 6:45 pm

Honestly, I think there is only one circumstance where the shooters/firearm owner will gain the respect they deserve in a balanced/intelligent society, and thats at time of war.

Should we ever be threatened by war and invasion of our shores again (& I hope it doesnt) at that time many people WILL change their tune....instead of castigating the shooters, their skills appreciated and as occurred a century ago the farmers will be sought out again... "oh sorry, you took our guns away years ago... but I'm good at XBox, does that count??"
User avatar
1290
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1336
Victoria

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by WesleySnipes » 23 Jun 2014, 7:23 pm

1290 wrote:Honestly, I think there is only one circumstance where the shooters/firearm owner will gain the respect they deserve in a balanced/intelligent society, and thats at time of war.

Should we ever be threatened by war and invasion of our shores again (& I hope it doesnt) at that time many people WILL change their tune....instead of castigating the shooters, their skills appreciated and as occurred a century ago the farmers will be sought out again... "oh sorry, you took our guns away years ago... but I'm good at XBox, does that count??"


That's exactly right. It'll be funny when all the guns are taken and absolute oppression sets in (hoping it doesn't), and they'll want something to protect themselves, or perhaps even someone else to do it for them, and no one will be there. I bet if you told a German in the 1930's that an insane mass murderer was going to be ELECTED by the people and then be responsible for an estimated 80 million deaths during the course WW2, they'd laugh at you and send you to the local mad house.

Unfortunately my generation is caught up with the latest copy of Call of Duty rather than actual life. A bit of a generalisation but you get the point.
User avatar
WesleySnipes
Lance Corporal
Lance Corporal
 
Posts: 140
New South Wales

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by gazza » 23 Jun 2014, 8:56 pm

I'm saying make these people who steal our guns more accountable. My dad got his guns stolen years ago, uninsured. If you want a gun for sport you go and buy one. If you steal guns or buy stolen guns you are a scumbag crook and should be dealt with harshly. What do you want a stolen gun for? Plinking in the woods?
User avatar
gazza
Lance Corporal
Lance Corporal
 
Posts: 156
South Australia

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by Warrigul » 24 Jun 2014, 6:40 pm

gazza wrote:I'm saying make these people who steal our guns more accountable. My dad got his guns stolen years ago, uninsured. If you want a gun for sport you go and buy one. If you steal guns or buy stolen guns you are a scumbag crook and should be dealt with harshly. What do you want a stolen gun for? Plinking in the woods?


Aside from those sold to the "criminal class for nefarious purposes"I suspect there is also a huge sub culture of people simply having one for the sake of it or to pot a few rabbits without going to all the bother of getting a licence.

If every single firearm that was stolen was used in a crime we would have an epidemic.
Warrigul
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1103
-

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by subatom » 24 Jun 2014, 7:56 pm

gazza wrote:What do you want a stolen gun for? Plinking in the woods?


Did you read that thing a week ago about the drug dealer in the states? Shot 2 junkies and used 'self defence' as his legal defence.

Protection against the people you're fuelling with drugs is a legit reason apparently...
Remington VTR .308 Winchester. Marlin 336 .35 Remington. Mossberg 185 20 gauge.
User avatar
subatom
Lance Corporal
Lance Corporal
 
Posts: 110
South Australia

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by on_one_wheel » 25 Jun 2014, 7:39 am

Regarding potential changes to storage requirements...

It would be nice to know what is going to change if anything in regards to gun security, I'm about to buy a new safe but don't want to end up using it as a cupboard if it doesn't suit the requirements in a year or two.

Im going to buy a Spika SFABH or a slightly larger SFB1 Like these ones

Surely they will be fine for years to come ?
Gun control requires concentration and a steady hand
User avatar
on_one_wheel
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3596
South Australia

Re: Storage requirements AGAIN in the news

Post by flap » 27 Jun 2014, 9:40 am

Something like the SFABH I reckon will always be ok, it's well above the "minimum" in a lot of ways. Multiple locking points, 150kg, bolt holes, fire resistant...

More than a few pegs above your normal gun locker. That's where they'll make changes if any.

I can see them changing something like forcing safes to be bolted down regardless of weight, like in WA. But above that I don't see much changing.

2c.
Sako A7 .270 Win
Tikka Lite .22-250 Rem
flap
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 34
South Australia

Next

Back to top
 
Return to Firearms related media and politics