Firearm Owners United?

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

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by simmo » 06 Sep 2016, 12:12 am

The evolution of Firearms United just through Facebook has been remarkable, I started following them last year and they were at about 10k followers. Now they are pushing 16k. The guys have been proactively courting media to put a positives spin on things and as has been quoted here they run comps etc.
I would happily throw them $25-$50 a year as they have demonstrated a lot of potential as an organisation.
simmo
Lance Corporal
Lance Corporal
 
Posts: 107
New South Wales

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by WildHunter » 09 Sep 2016, 1:29 pm

Do you mean Firearms United the European group or Firearm Owners United?
30 guns and still not enough.
WildHunter
Private
Private
 
Posts: 95
Victoria

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Sydor » 10 Sep 2016, 12:20 pm

We going to see the changes to NFA some time soonish...
I just wander - ff (!) those changes would carry additional restrictions on us...
And if some one would call for nation wide demonstration by LAFO in the capital cities against it...
Which pro-shooting organisation would scream first not to do it?
Any bets?
Sydor
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 42
Victoria

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 10 Sep 2016, 9:01 pm

FOU..... any group that supports shooters and sticks it to the antis is a plus.

The NFA changes were sorted months ago... That is for sure....even LAST year. the hold up is getting ALL states on board. The hold up is getting all states on board.

The Adler 5+ban is now permanent! Thats right, check the legislation - the temporary restriction now has no end date....

Will there be more restirctions on us, the law abiding?
Damn right, theyre not planning on easing anything..... the only uestion that remains is what the NFA mkII has in it....

All levers limited to 5 Rds?
Levers shotties to Cat C??
Ammo purchase controls for all states?
Detachable mags limited to 5rds for bolts??

The remaining question is whether all shooters will unite this time...... last time I chose to line up.
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by sandgroperbill » 11 Sep 2016, 12:06 pm

I seem to recall when the adler ban was fresh, someone tried to organise a protest in Perth, outside of parliament.
SSAA killed that off, warned people not to attend, etc.
Only time they have seemed publicly active to me.
Nothing but lap dogs, they don't represent shooters imo.
sandgroperbill
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1083
Western Australia

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 11 Sep 2016, 2:36 pm

The SSAA have a model that works with the status quo.... so why would they support a change?..

As far as the SFFP.... I was highly surprised (and a smidge disappointed TBH) when they stated on SBS that THEY did not have any interest, and did not support semi-auto and getting them back!

Sorry. I want semis back, RF for fun times, 12g for hunting and CF for hunting, fun-times...and just because.... that means, I'm sorry to say, SFFP does not support my 'needs'..
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Gamerancher » 11 Sep 2016, 5:38 pm

I tell you what, If you don't like the SSAA, I'll jump up and down for you, support all your demands, get all the firearms laws repealed, anything you want!!!
Just send me as much money as you can, promise I'll use it for whatever it was I said I'd do. :allegedly:
User avatar
Gamerancher
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1596
New South Wales

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 11 Sep 2016, 6:36 pm

Never said I didnt like the SSAA..... theyre a gun club, I'm a member, I use their ranges once in a while... theyre just not a vocal lobby group pushing for change - thats the reality that I accept.
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Shillard » 12 Sep 2016, 5:37 pm

<<Genesis93>> wrote:FOU..... any group that supports shooters and sticks it to the antis is a plus.

The NFA changes were sorted months ago... That is for sure....even LAST year. the hold up is getting ALL states on board. The hold up is getting all states on board.

The Adler 5+ban is now permanent! Thats right, check the legislation - the temporary restriction now has no end date....



Which legislation would that be?

Can you provide a link to it?

My guess is "no", because there is no such legislation. It is a discretionary power within the authority limits of the Minister as dictated by long-standing legislation.

Chicken Little stuff.
Shillard
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 4
New South Wales

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 12 Sep 2016, 6:13 pm

Shillard wrote:
<<Genesis93>> wrote:FOU..... any group that supports shooters and sticks it to the antis is a plus.

The NFA changes were sorted months ago... That is for sure....even LAST year. the hold up is getting ALL states on board. The hold up is getting all states on board.

The Adler 5+ban is now permanent! Thats right, check the legislation - the temporary restriction now has no end date....



Which legislation would that be?

Can you provide a link to it?

My guess is "no", because there is no such legislation. It is a discretionary power within the authority limits of the Minister as dictated by long-standing legislation.

Chicken Little stuff.


Pay attention.

Good second post :welcome: I'll look forward to your third post next month... when hopefully you could translate this one into English, for the simple people like me :roll:
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Shillard » 12 Sep 2016, 11:00 pm

Kindly cite the legislation that "permanently bans the 5+ shot Adler".

Go on - you specifically direct people to "look it up". So where is it?

Fantasy.
Shillard
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 4
New South Wales

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Gwion » 13 Sep 2016, 7:07 am

I think Genisis is a politician. Whenever someone posts something he knows he can't address without conceding his ground, he goes on a thinly veiled personal attack in an attempt to besmirch his "opposition" and completely ignores any valid points or questions.
User avatar
Gwion
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3978
-

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 13 Sep 2016, 8:57 am

Gwion wrote:I think Genisis is a politician. Whenever someone posts something he knows he can't address without conceding his ground, he goes on a thinly veiled personal attack in an attempt to besmirch his "opposition" and completely ignores any valid points or questions.


You got me as besmirch......your new found wordsmithery is starting to impress me :P

Points for calling out the pollie... ;) but this opposition reference? a newbie who hasnt bothered to follow the Adler discussion going back months or yrs...you have no excuse, and ignoring your valid points? Let me be the judge of the validity or otherwise of your points, I promise... any valid or sufficiently intelligible points or questions or statements will potentially be responded to. :thumbsup: :lol:
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 13 Sep 2016, 9:13 am

[[in its own post to keep it simple...]]

ADLER / Lever shotgun import ban expired after 12month..right? this expired quietly a month ago with little fanfare...before the parliament reconvened after the election a revised legislative instrument was prepared and signed off. L.I. are regulations not ordinarily requiring Parliament nor debate or consultation;

Customs (Prohibited Imports) Amendment (Sunsetting of Firearms and Firearm Magazines Provisions) Regulation 2015.


With the expiration of this temporary ban....

(you still with me?)

It was replaced with;

Customs (Prohibited Imports) Amendment (Shotguns and Shotgun Magazines) Regulation 2016


Which doesnt expire, doesnt 'sunset'...to then 'unban' 5+levers... the respective ministry and minister would have to specifically change the regs to specifically 'allow' 5+ levers to be imported.. (I even had a little chuckle typing that last bit :lol: )

So even if pig started flying and the states/some states specifically changed the categories to state lever actions of any capacity.... I couldnt see the Feds removing the ban for the states.

You want a link?
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Gwion » 13 Sep 2016, 9:36 am

and.... my point proven again.

Oh... that's right, the only valid points or questions are the ones that align with your own thought processes.
For example:
Valid question to Gen93:: "Hey, Gen93, what do you think?"
Valid statement to Gen93:: "Oh my... Gen93, you are right... aGain! Oh, i wish everyone was as smart as you, Gen93!"

:lol: :roll: :drinks: :friends: :crazy:
User avatar
Gwion
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3978
-

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 13 Sep 2016, 10:09 am

Gwion wrote: i wish everyone was as smart as you, Gen93!"


So do I Gwion...... so do I.
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by WildHunter » 13 Sep 2016, 12:54 pm

I got a little lost in all that arguing. . .

So will One Shot or Firearm Owners United surpass the SSAA? And will either be an organisation similar to the NRA?
30 guns and still not enough.
WildHunter
Private
Private
 
Posts: 95
Victoria

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Wylie27 » 13 Sep 2016, 1:35 pm

Wikdhunter not in our life time. FOU may have a chance some day..

OSA are just a regurgitator of information..

Shooters Union and the Victorian firearms council should unite and that would start to challenge the SSAA.. Then and only then will the SSAA stand up. When they start losing money.
Wylie27
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 885
New South Wales

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by WildHunter » 13 Sep 2016, 5:23 pm

So One Shot are s**t?
30 guns and still not enough.
WildHunter
Private
Private
 
Posts: 95
Victoria

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by sandgroperbill » 13 Sep 2016, 11:23 pm

At least one shot are trying to do something. I won't begrudge anyone that actually makes an effort
sandgroperbill
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1083
Western Australia

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Wylie27 » 14 Sep 2016, 9:30 am

Well OSA and FOU just tweeted that effectively that "satirical" video by those arseclowns was ok..

Well there you have it.. They think It's ok for LAFO's to shoot an effigy of an anti gun advocate....

We truly are divided and on our own...
Wylie27
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 885
New South Wales

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by doc » 15 Sep 2016, 5:33 pm

sandgroperbill wrote:At least one shot are trying to do something. I won't begrudge anyone that actually makes an effort


If it gives the opposition ammunition against LFO's I do.

What they've done actually helps GCA in their agenda.

Intentions alone doesn't justify actions or deem what someone has done as being helpful.
doc
Lance Corporal
Lance Corporal
 
Posts: 200
-

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by WildHunter » 15 Sep 2016, 8:07 pm

Wylie27 wrote:Well OSA and FOU just tweeted that effectively that "satirical" video by those arseclowns was ok..

Well there you have it.. They think It's ok for LAFO's to shoot an effigy of an anti gun advocate....

We truly are divided and on our own...



Apparently most of Parliament thinks it's okay too https://www.facebook.com/DavidLeyonhjel ... =3&theater
30 guns and still not enough.
WildHunter
Private
Private
 
Posts: 95
Victoria

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Wylie27 » 15 Sep 2016, 8:28 pm

Yeah I saw that.

We are doomed! I am going to enjoy shooting while I can..
Wylie27
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 885
New South Wales

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Sydor » 16 Sep 2016, 7:44 am

WildHunter wrote:
Wylie27 wrote:Well OSA and FOU just tweeted that effectively that "satirical" video by those arseclowns was ok..

Well there you have it.. They think It's ok for LAFO's to shoot an effigy of an anti gun advocate....


Apparently most of Parliament thinks it's okay too https://www.facebook.com/DavidLeyonhjel ... =3&theater


No. Apparently the most of the Parliament thinks that this idiocy is not enough to pass a legislation proposed by greens, X-team and two other freaks.
That stupid video enforces the idea that we ALL are bunch of dangerous redneck lunatics. :crazy:
Sydor
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 42
Victoria

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by on_one_wheel » 16 Sep 2016, 9:29 am

We need to get on social media and publicly condemn the actions of these idiot asap.
Gun control requires concentration and a steady hand
User avatar
on_one_wheel
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3593
South Australia

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Gwion » 16 Sep 2016, 9:54 am

That doesn't mean they think the video is ok; just that they don't support all aspects of the proposal/motion.

Still a good thing that so many do not agree with many of those clauses!!!
User avatar
Gwion
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3978
-

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 16 Sep 2016, 10:34 am

No. What we need to do is reinforce the mantra of these same leftists progressive dills - dont judge the many by the actions of the few.

When theres a jihadist attack we're told over and over again - "that its not ALL of them"....

African gang attacks? the few, dont blame all of them :roll:

WHY does this not apply to shooters?? its different with guns is it???

Port Arthur, action of the one - the many copped it....

Only with guns

a few people will ALWAYS take actions that others oppose. Thats life. If these guys did wrong - let the proper authorities judge them..

The most telling part of this chapter, possibly single line in the ultimate history book of Australian gun control, is how closely intertwined Sam Lee's GCA is with the Greens, and how stupendously quickly THEY GOT A MOTION on the FLOOR OF FEDERAL PARLIAMENT!!!

Why? because they were threatened by a video on youtube that was satirical. Did they raise a motion concerning the almost 400 Australians that died on the same day? most from preventable diseases? or the 7 or 8 suicides that same day (on average)??

If I called up my local member, asked for a motion seeking action of heart disease, to try and save, what, 30,000, 40,000 Aussies a year - would it get up??

No. they wasted more of our parliamentary 'resources' on disingenuous nonsensical which hunting...

The GCA (& the real threat AMF) and the GREENS are BIGOTS by definition;

a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions


....nothing proves it more than their walk out stunt they pulled on Senator Hanson. Theyre supposedly the champions of free speech, until they disagree.... and walk out -fled to their safe space no doubt

The intolerance applies to EVERYTHING on their agenda, if you disagree with their position on climate change, immigration, refugees, drugs etc.... YOU are a bigot, inhuman, intolerant, etc.....
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Gamerancher » 16 Sep 2016, 10:58 am

We could only hope that the rest of those in "the house" grow a set and get up and walk out en-mass when the Greens have their turn.
But you are right Genesis, if we don't agree with the "Greens" we are the narrow minded ones. :allegedly:
User avatar
Gamerancher
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1596
New South Wales

Re: Firearm Owners United?

Post by Noisydad » 16 Sep 2016, 11:30 am

Gamerancher wrote:We could only hope that the rest of those in "the house" grow a set and get up and walk out en-mass when the Greens have their turn.
But you are right Genesis, if we don't agree with the "Greens" we are the narrow minded ones. :allegedly:

In other words - If you can say anything approved, dont say anything at all!
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

PreviousNext

Back to top
 
Return to Firearms related media and politics