The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

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

The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by KWhorenet » 22 Oct 2015, 8:16 pm

Check it out. Typical pull heart strings reflecting back to PAM.

An uneducated victims father weighing in on Adler.
Suggested Martin Place seige would have been worse with an Adler vs a pump action.

Hard to swallow this s**t.
User avatar
KWhorenet
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 679
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by KWhorenet » 22 Oct 2015, 8:23 pm

Ha-ha new mechanism lever action
User avatar
KWhorenet
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 679
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by RoginaJack » 22 Oct 2015, 9:22 pm

Very Tragic and I feel for his loss.

Mr Walter Mikac and others talk about "gun laws watered down" or "we don't want the current gun laws watered down". Can someone tell me what gun laws have actually been watered down?

Also, Reference is always made to John Howard's Gun Laws and the buy back scheme but no reference to why an investigation wasn't carried out as to how and from who Martin Bryant obtained the weapon? As I recoil. Howard at the time stated that we don't want to point fingers or blame etc but why not, every time there is a incident involving a firearm, every law abiding LAFO is attached or threatened with further restrictions.
Boom, Boom! Tikka, Tikka, Boom! Shoot first, video later.
User avatar
RoginaJack
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1410
Queensland

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by AZZA'S HJ47 » 22 Oct 2015, 9:44 pm

Once again emotions dictated the outcome that was obvious. 12 months ago I wasn't a real supporter of guns I didn't know enough about them until I was introduced by a workmate. The logic is no diffrent from a small kid being scared of the dark once again they are afraid of what they don't understand
Sako Varmint 243,Marlin 917, Lithgow La101 .22 , 1917 BSA 303 (ted), Finnish Vkt 1944 M39,T3X Super Varmint 223, Marlin 1895 SBL 45-70 Howa 1500 308, BSA CF2 222, 1911 9mm, Adler 12G, Sako 7mm rem Mag,Ruger m77 mk1 22-250AI, Rem 700 17 Rem, BSA No 5 303
User avatar
AZZA'S HJ47
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 688
Queensland

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by winchestersx » 22 Oct 2015, 10:29 pm

RoginaJack wrote:Very Tragic and I feel for his loss.

Mr Walter Mikac and others talk about "gun laws watered down" or "we don't want the current gun laws watered down". Can someone tell me what gun laws have actually been watered down?

Also, Reference is always made to John Howard's Gun Laws and the buy back scheme but no reference to why an investigation wasn't carried out as to how and from who Martin Bryant obtained the weapon? As I recoil. Howard at the time stated that we don't want to point fingers or blame etc but why not, every time there is a incident involving a firearm, every law abiding LAFO is attached or threatened with further restrictions.


How the weapon was obtained is known although the facts on that are not available and won't be for many years. What has been released to the public is the rifle's serial number had been recorded as destroyed in 1991. There are other crimes where weapons used had been identified as previously destroyed.
Fight for Freedom!
winchestersx
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 15
United States of America

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by David Brown » 22 Oct 2015, 11:24 pm

What a disgrace……new lows in journalism.
David Brown
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 421
Queensland

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by Gwion » 23 Oct 2015, 2:05 am

winchestersx wrote:How the weapon was obtained is known although the facts on that are not available and won't be for many years. What has been released to the public is the rifle's serial number had been recorded as destroyed in 1991. There are other crimes where weapons used had been identified as previously destroyed.


:wtf:
Are you suggesting corruption in an Australian state police force? Profiteering for personal gain through criminal contacts or off-loading to mates as a sideline?
Ha! No way... never in a million years!
:sarcasm: :problem: :thumbsdown:
User avatar
Gwion
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3978
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by on_one_wheel » 23 Oct 2015, 7:17 am

I love these kind of journalism and the way they name their rubbish as if it's the final say or conclusion, like the ABC fact check and this one ... The Verdict. They are marketing this one eyed agenda pushing rubbish as if it were gospel and sheeple are lapping it up.

If I was a billionaire I'd start a show called The Absolute Final Verdict and Acual Fact Show.
Gun control requires concentration and a steady hand
User avatar
on_one_wheel
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3596
South Australia

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by KWhorenet » 23 Oct 2015, 7:19 am

Bob tried but unfortunately he just can't get a clear message with concise facts across. Turns into a clown and loses everyone's attention.

Mark Latham is a joke....still. Called the Adler a paramilitary type weapon. Wtf?

The others were typical anti gun. The young girl had to resort to hand actions like a game of charades to explain a pumpy thingo vs a lever thingo saying the new technology lever thingo blah blah blah.

The shows Facebook page needs to be bombarded by emotive facts alone.

Bob bumbled across the point Martin Bryant was a lunatic. Didn't have the aptitude to point out the guns were illegally supplied after apparently being handed in for prior disposal.

By this time everyone there would have laughed down and argued with Bob if he said roses are red and voilets are blue etc etc.

Typical pathetic agenda based Aussie panel show.

As soon as I saw who the host was it lost all credibility with me.

Farcical.
User avatar
KWhorenet
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 679
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by Chronos » 23 Oct 2015, 9:09 am

There is no journalism here. Programs like this one and the project make a point of not fitting the "news and current affairs" box deliberately so they cannot be held to account over truth in journalism laws. Cibtact the network and conpkain but don't bother with reporting it to the broadcasting commission when they lie, it's "opinion" not "news"

Chronos
User avatar
Chronos
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2082
New South Wales

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by Newdave » 23 Oct 2015, 9:10 am

This is coordinated with the Feds to pressure the states to do as they are told . Nine are pushing this hard . This morning Christopher Pyne and Albanese were on calling lever actions semi automatic and they will do what it takes like John Howard did in 96 .

This country is a disgrace . So now officially lever actions were specifically invented to get around our 96 laws ( how they can keep a straight face when they make this claim is beyond me)and they are semi automatic . Where are the Nationals , hiding in the corner . They should be pulling these bastards back into line . But no they will sell out regional Australia again .
Newdave
Private
Private
 
Posts: 52
New South Wales

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by AusTac » 23 Oct 2015, 9:13 am

The bit i liked the best was " why would anyone need a gun that fires 5 shots in quick succession? " when police have been crying for years wanting and getting S&W M&P 10+1 40 cal semi auto pistols, people don't realize the industries effected when they say ' all guns are bad ' just to name a few, cash in transit/security, police, theatre, farmers, target shooters, hunters, olympians we all know these...

Also very intresting to know that S/N had been recorded as destroyed! Wtf?
Certified part time hillbilly
User avatar
AusTac
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1171
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 23 Oct 2015, 12:10 pm

Its pitiful that theyre still getting mileage out of PAM, but particularly out of the terrible loss of a family.... shame on these parasites and shame on Mikac...seeking to advance an agenda by using the death of his family.... he's stated that he doesnt have a problem with guns, "but why do we need them"! :wtf: go away. WE are not to blame for what transpired 19yrs ago....

The AR used at PA; Colt SP1 was identified by a Victorian (Collector?) who claims to have handed that exact same rifle in......
thats not all; there are many inconsistencies that have never been resolved or answered, such as HOW MANY PERPETRATORS?? refer in the recording of his phone call to the police negotiator while holding hostages there is a gunshot heard that was not the police, and not him as he was on the phone talking? In the court transcript its note as a COUGH!
How did MB obtain both firearms and FAKE (false name) firearm licence....

The great lie that the 1996 laws were the result of the PAM.... No, they werent.... its a known fact that the changes were awaiting implementation, just needed/awaiting the catalyst. We were told an incident would occur in Tasmania, we were told it was about to occur.

"Roland Browne, then co-chair of the National Coalition for Gun Control (NCGC), who, with astonishing accuracy, predicted the Port Arthur Massacre when he stated, "We are going to see a mass shooting in Tasmania...unless we get national gun control laws." - (ACA ,with Ray Martin, March 1996)

The Sun Herald reported May 5 1996 that ex-Premier of NSW, Barry Unsworth made this prediction in 1987 - Before Uniform Gun Laws become possible in all States there will have to be a massacre in Tasmania."


Although R.Browne appear an offensive little weasel (Hi Rollie, :thumbsup: <middle finger there) I find it very concerning that he not only predicted PAM, but was reported to be the first person to arrive at the 'media centre' as the incident was unfolding....

Why are we seeing more of these stories.... regurgitating PAM? ......NFA. Yup, time to whip up the antigun sentiment, lather the people into a frenzy of hunter hatred again....now that theyre proposing to 'water down' the laws and all......cant have that.
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by winchestersx » 23 Oct 2015, 12:55 pm

Gwion wrote:
winchestersx wrote:How the weapon was obtained is known although the facts on that are not available and won't be for many years. What has been released to the public is the rifle's serial number had been recorded as destroyed in 1991. There are other crimes where weapons used had been identified as previously destroyed.


:wtf:
Are you suggesting corruption in an Australian state police force? Profiteering for personal gain through criminal contacts or off-loading to mates as a sideline?
Ha! No way... never in a million years!
:sarcasm: :problem: :thumbsdown:


Stating as fact. Police are so corrupt that the general public could not handle the reality of the extent of corruption. In any other country, except Australia, their would be riots if the truth were known.

The "Law abiding" gun owner is misnomer. How can such a person exist when the firearms act is a slippery slope toward prohibition? People either choose to fight for their rights or they don't. Compliance doesn't work.
Fight for Freedom!
winchestersx
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 15
United States of America

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by KWhorenet » 23 Oct 2015, 6:02 pm

Just to clarify, in Tassie I never knew anyone needed a licence until post PAM. I know I didn't and no one else did that I can recall.

How many Firearms handed in to less than straight gun dealers before or even after PAM, were not recorded as such in their books, not destroyed or sold to appropriate licenced persons, then hocked off out the back door? Exactly. No one knows. One dealer in NSW was caught out not that long ago.

People who question how could MB have the skills to shoot 35 odd people...practice. Same as any other person could in a busy place full of tourists.

People seem to forget many people witnessed what did happen. Maybe their stories should be drawn upon to clarify what happened and by whom.

(I know the account my friend who was working there gave me. Not as murky or filled with conspiracy as some would like to think.)

Same as an idiot could mow down scores of people with a car through a shopping mall.

Laws don't stop stupid, crazy or plain nasty people. Never have, never will. Simples
User avatar
KWhorenet
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 679
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by Heckler303 » 23 Oct 2015, 6:42 pm

Gwion wrote:
winchestersx wrote:How the weapon was obtained is known although the facts on that are not available and won't be for many years. What has been released to the public is the rifle's serial number had been recorded as destroyed in 1991. There are other crimes where weapons used had been identified as previously destroyed.


:wtf:
Are you suggesting corruption in an Australian state police force? Profiteering for personal gain through criminal contacts or off-loading to mates as a sideline?
Ha! No way... never in a million years!
:sarcasm: :problem: :thumbsdown:



To take barely any notice of the sh!t that happens in East Devonport Gwion, I'd say the police force itself its pretty weak.

Tasmania's population: Roughly 530,000.

Police numbers: 1200

I'm not bashing the men and women in blue, but gee, that really isn't many coppers about.
If something doesn't work, apply rule .303!
Title_II wrote:If you carry a fun in Australia you will go to jail.
User avatar
Heckler303
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 824
Tasmania

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 23 Oct 2015, 6:50 pm

Tassy Gun licences came in with their 'Guns Act' of 1991

Marty was a retard....who had shot a few tin cans with an air rifle, and took an AR10 into the gunshop, with a round in the chamber, not knowing how to operate it..... :allegedly:

Finished his first spree with one round left in the mag, an 'emergency' round pending a fresh... :allegedly: ..yep retard...

It was also said the guy in the broad arrow had a pock marked acne scarred face, when you MB was said to have a baby smooth face... :allegedly:

There was also a mysterious camo clad guy sitting in the passenger seat of one of the emergency vehicles....who has since been given a name....

and the most interesting is the meat wagon that was purchased just prior to PAM, disposed of after PAM... that could carry several years worth of Tassy homicides.....

But anyway, its all history now....at least until the 30yr embargo is lifted!
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by Heckler303 » 23 Oct 2015, 6:56 pm

<<Genesis93>> wrote:Tassy Gun licences came in with their 'Guns Act' of 1991

Marty was a retard....who had shot a few tin cans with an air rifle, and took an AR10 into the gunshop, with a round in the chamber, not knowing how to operate it..... :allegedly:

Finished his first spree with one round left in the mag, an 'emergency' round pending a fresh... :allegedly: ..yep retard...

It was also said the guy in the broad arrow had a pock marked acne scarred face, when you MB was said to have a baby smooth face... :allegedly:

There was also a mysterious camo clad guy sitting in the passenger seat of one of the emergency vehicles....who has since been given a name....

and the most interesting is the meat wagon that was purchased just prior to PAM, disposed of after PAM... that could carry several years worth of Tassy homicides.....

But anyway, its all history now....at least until the 30yr embargo is lifted!




Let's not also forget that the victims all died from head-inflicted wounds.

He had managed twenty head shots, from the right hip, in 90 seconds EVEN THOUGH HE WAS A LEFT HANDER! There are only about 20 shooters that good (better than Olympians) in the Western World. They are the SPOOKS who work for various governments. Martin stopped shooting after firing 29 shots (of the 30 in a magazine). This leaves a live round in the breech while changing magazines as they found out later. To count while firing at a rate of 48 rounds per minute is a technique that requires tens of thousands of shots to perfect. It is a military skill-at-arms far beyond a mentally retarded youth who fired at a few tins and bits of cardboard in the bush.

Don't immediately slam it down as tin-foil hat crap, this was for real.
If something doesn't work, apply rule .303!
Title_II wrote:If you carry a fun in Australia you will go to jail.
User avatar
Heckler303
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 824
Tasmania

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by KWhorenet » 23 Oct 2015, 9:38 pm

Heckler303 wrote:

Let's not also forget that the victims all died from head-inflicted wounds.

He had managed twenty head shots, from the right hip, in 90 seconds EVEN THOUGH HE WAS A LEFT HANDER! There are only about 20 shooters that good (better than Olympians) in the Western World. They are the SPOOKS who work for various governments. Martin stopped shooting after firing 29 shots (of the 30 in a magazine). This leaves a live round in the breech while changing magazines as they found out later. To count while firing at a rate of 48 rounds per minute is a technique that requires tens of thousands of shots to perfect. It is a military skill-at-arms far beyond a mentally retarded youth who fired at a few tins and bits of cardboard in the bush.

Don't immediately slam it down as tin-foil hat crap, this was for real.


Not to argue, but can you show the references to the details you have mentioned above. I'd like to read the lot. Clearly I haven't read all that you, Genesis and others have.

*Edit: never mind, I've found all your info almost word for word here
http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/port_arthur.htm
User avatar
KWhorenet
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 679
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by winchestersx » 24 Oct 2015, 12:03 am

KWhorenet wrote:
Heckler303 wrote:

Let's not also forget that the victims all died from head-inflicted wounds.

He had managed twenty head shots, from the right hip, in 90 seconds EVEN THOUGH HE WAS A LEFT HANDER! There are only about 20 shooters that good (better than Olympians) in the Western World. They are the SPOOKS who work for various governments. Martin stopped shooting after firing 29 shots (of the 30 in a magazine). This leaves a live round in the breech while changing magazines as they found out later. To count while firing at a rate of 48 rounds per minute is a technique that requires tens of thousands of shots to perfect. It is a military skill-at-arms far beyond a mentally retarded youth who fired at a few tins and bits of cardboard in the bush.

Don't immediately slam it down as tin-foil hat crap, this was for real.


Not to argue, but can you show the references to the details you have mentioned above. I'd like to read the lot. Clearly I haven't read all that you, Genesis and others have.

*Edit: never mind, I've found all your info almost word for word here
http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/port_arthur.htm


Regardless of the facts, or contorting of the facts regarding the Port Arthur incident there is one fact that cannot be disputed. Martyn Bryant never went to trial therefore state evidence has never been tested. This doesn't mean he is innocent but it does mean the opportunity to fully understand the event was never taken. The authorities decided a trial would be too traumatic for the victims families but how the hell does that make any sense? There have been thousands of murders thoughout Australian history, no doubt traumatic for those families too but why the special treatment for the Port Arthur massacre?

Something also to consider is when you obtain a gun permit you are automatically on the watch list. No criminal record required. You are flagged on L.E data bases, you are monitored on forums like this and from what I understand about Australian gun law you waive your right to refuse L.E warrantless entry to your home. That is what ot means to be a law abiding gun owner.

Forums like this one are monitored and have members with an agenda to stir the pot. I don't mean antis, but professional people trained to force a wedge in the firearms community. It is happening on this forum and other gun forums, at clubs, withing organizations that represent gun owners and at gun shows in Australia and Internationally.
Fight for Freedom!
winchestersx
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 15
United States of America

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by Heckler303 » 24 Oct 2015, 6:41 am

KWhorenet wrote:

Let's not also forget that the victims all died from head-inflicted wounds.

.


*Edit: never mind, I've found all your info almost word for word here
http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/port_arthur.htm[/quote]

Yep. That's where I got it from.

still, that meat-truck built almost seemingly built for PA is very sus
If something doesn't work, apply rule .303!
Title_II wrote:If you carry a fun in Australia you will go to jail.
User avatar
Heckler303
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 824
Tasmania

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by AusTac » 24 Oct 2015, 8:00 am

You couldn't blame someone for really holding onto their tin foil hat after reading all that about the PAM - makes you wonder
Certified part time hillbilly
User avatar
AusTac
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1171
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by Baronvonrort » 24 Oct 2015, 8:52 am

winchestersx wrote:Martyn Bryant never went to trial therefore state evidence has never been tested. This doesn't mean he is innocent but it does mean the opportunity to fully understand the event was never taken. The authorities decided a trial would be too traumatic for the victims families but how the hell does that make any sense? There have been thousands of murders thoughout Australian history, no doubt traumatic for those families too but why the special treatment for the Port Arthur massacre?

Something also to consider is when you obtain a gun permit you are automatically on the watch list. No criminal record required. You are flagged on L.E data bases, you are monitored on forums like this and from what I understand about Australian gun law you waive your right to refuse L.E warrantless entry to your home. That is what ot means to be a law abiding gun owner.
.


Bryant was given a disability pension for mental illness over a decade before he went on a rampage, I would say it didn't go to trial because convictions are difficult with people who have documented mental illness.

Yes all law abiding firearm owners are highly monitored, even more than Isamic terrorists with illegal firearms.
Baronvonrort
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 906
New South Wales

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by Sam45 » 24 Oct 2015, 9:14 am

KWhorenet wrote:Check it out. Typical pull heart strings reflecting back to PAM.

An uneducated victims father weighing in on Adler.
Suggested Martin Place seige would have been worse with an Adler vs a pump action.

Hard to swallow this s**t.



Um you can't tell me that guy was not set up and told what to say. What an absolute joke!
Sam45
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 294
Queensland

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by Heckler303 » 24 Oct 2015, 9:28 am

AusTac wrote:You couldn't blame someone for really holding onto their tin foil hat after reading all that about the PAM - makes you wonder


I know right? I don't really want to side with the same people that think the U.S is run by Lizards or the moon landing didnt happen (because they're both obviously a load of crap) but PAM does make me highly sus about what really happened.

Too many coincidences to just say 'It was just a mentally unstable man who did what he did'. From what I've read from the website listed +documents and pdfs about PAM and how it unfolded elsewhere, there different witness reports about who he was and what he was carrying, a black van that moves away from camera view while everyone is fleeing, Martin going from left hand to right hand and back again, scoring near-perfect marksmanship in a very small amount of time from firing fromt the hip, that bloody meat truck that was DESIGNED to hold multiple bodies, somehow turned up ready for it and then was sold off later, police before the PAM happened led off on a wild goose chase that ended up them finding soap instead of caches of drugs, and probably on the most chilling bits of all aside from the unaccounted bodies:

When Anthony Nightingale tried getting up and fleeing from the scene in the Broad Arrow cafe, but seeing Bryant point in his direction, he screamed "No, not here!"

Not here? I know it was a life-or-death situation, but what exactly did Nightingale mean by 'Not here'?
If something doesn't work, apply rule .303!
Title_II wrote:If you carry a fun in Australia you will go to jail.
User avatar
Heckler303
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 824
Tasmania

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by AusTac » 24 Oct 2015, 9:59 am

[/quote]
Yes all law abiding firearm owners are highly monitored, even more than Isamic terrorists with illegal firearms.[/quote]

Kinda expect a knock at the door after reading this thread and that website lol
Certified part time hillbilly
User avatar
AusTac
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1171
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 24 Oct 2015, 10:36 am

AusTac wrote:

Yes all law abiding firearm owners are highly monitored, even more than Isamic terrorists with illegal firearms.[/quote]

Kinda expect a knock at the door after reading this thread and that website lol[/quote]

We can all rest assured that we will be, as of last week a lot safer, because for the next 2 yrs the police will be able to look back and see that you search up PAM in the google machine....

Yes, we are in the same class as the criminals, our details available on the same (inter)nationally searchable database....and we do waive certain rights if the police 'want' to come into our home .... see the blue lights, may as well unbolt the door for them...
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by KWhorenet » 24 Oct 2015, 11:11 am

I, just as everyone else here only have access to what's put out there for us to read often based on opinion.

I really have a hard time allowing myself to believe something this terrible could have been somehow organised by the people paid to protect.

Not just for LAFO's sake, but the nations sake I hope this is proven beyond doubt no matter what transpired. Royal commission comes to mind. There shouldn't be any doubt.
User avatar
KWhorenet
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 679
-

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by on_one_wheel » 24 Oct 2015, 7:34 pm

winchestersx wrote:Forums like this one are monitored and have members with an agenda to stir the pot. I don't mean antis, but professional people trained to force a wedge in the firearms community. It is happening on this forum and other gun forums, at clubs, withing organizations that represent gun owners and at gun shows in Australia and Internationally.


Your post sounded balanced until I read this bit ... that's the stuff tin foil hat people are made of.

Yours sincerely
Pretend lafo
Under cover Green Party member
Government trained professional sh!t stirrer.
And federal police spy.
Gun control requires concentration and a steady hand
User avatar
on_one_wheel
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3596
South Australia

Re: The Verdict on ch 8. Talking gun laws- face palm!

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 24 Oct 2015, 7:50 pm

'Shaping the narrative' is a time proven tool of the information war.
Google H A S B A R A .... everyone should do it, it will amaze you,

There are literally 100s of thousand or even a million or more 'agents' around the world infiltrating forums, media article comment sections of articles (and more??) 24/7 to respond to negative opinion, to plant supportive comments, to shout down those against and to support I S R A E L and its actions. ....

There is absolutely no reason to not believe the same occurs in the gun debate... apart from those active posting opinions, David ****** has declared that he is active/observant/subversive? of the forums (remember he tried to join a club!) and there is no doubt the parasite R Browne has an eye in as well.....
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Next

Back to top
 
Return to Firearms related media and politics