Port Arthur Massacre 15 years Gun Reforms Work

15 years after martin bryant was jailed for the Port Arthur shootings, the conspiracy lies continue. most conspiracy theorists are from anti govt political groups, and others are pro gun lobby activists. all disrespect the memories of the innocent victims martin bryant shot so callously. soon their disrespect will be known by all and they can hang their heads in shame for their disgraceful behaviour and constant lies.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• martin
• bryant
• tasmania
• anders
• breivik
• norway
• port
• arthur
• shooting
• murder
• massacre
• conspiracy
• australia

[Parapon3ra]

Fuck gun control, a handful of statistically irrelevant incidents are no excuse for infringing the basic human rights (yes, self-defense is, or rather should be, a basic human right) of millions of people. Gun control is pure hysteria, and only benefits criminals and repressive governments.

[1AussieAvenger1]

@Parapon3ra what you say is hysteria. gun ownership is rising and no law abiding citizen with a valid reason for ownership is refused. the only thing missing is assault weapons capable of semi or automatic function.

your human rights are being infringed upon? what of other people in society? ask your mother or grandmother how they feel about gun control and ownership, they have a valid voice too. some fools wish to carry concealed weapons. you have a lot more to take into consideration yet.

[Parapon3ra]

@1AussieAvenger1 "the only thing missing is assault weapons capable of semi or automatic function"

Handguns can be just as deadly in spree killings (see for example Virginia Tech), so banning ARs and AR style semi-automatics is pointless and arbitrary. Hell, they even used the Port Arthur incident as an excuse to ban pump-action shotguns, even though Bryant didn't actually use such a weapon.

[1AussieAvenger1]

@Parapon3ra you just dont get it do you... but some feel inadequate without some gun or hot car to boost their insignificance and their ego... handguns here are regulated also.

[Parapon3ra]

@1AussieAvenger1 "your human rights are being infringed upon? what of other people in society?"

They could use guns to protect their human rights too.

"ask your mother or grandmother how they feel about gun control and ownership, they have a valid voice too"

Women, especially old women, tend to have an irrational fear of guns (and many other things). It's a biological thing.

"some fools wish to carry concealed weapons"

Some fools wish to be helpless when in public.

[1AussieAvenger1]

@Parapon3ra its obvious you're biased and dont see reality... firearms here are still freely available but regulated. a citizen with a valid reason and no criminal history can obtain a weapon easily. so you want an assault rifle or auto shottie? what for? so you think its ok to carry concealed weapons? again what for? self defence? sounds like you have no confidence in your govt, police, or fellow citizens, but thats your issue not mine. need a gun for protection?... sure you do.

[1AussieAvenger1]

@DaNtHeMaN919 lets talk about desensitization of generations. how many shooter games do you play? at 21 you must have faves. its nothing for a person 7yrs - 15yrs old to have seen graphic murder images whether real or not these days. you may say 'so what'. consider what was once allowed or censored. is the way its going what you want for future generations including children you may have? swearing, sex, murder, deciet, lies, its all there. is your generation going to kill the world or fix it?

[1AussieAvenger1]

@DaNtHeMaN919 its possible to use as a defence on your own property... ah but PA wasn't at home was it. your last statement was accurate, but do you really want those people to be able to own and access weapons of their choice without discrimination of good or bad? that is where regulation came in. like i said you're young and i hold nothing against you, but run what your saying past your grandmother and listen for a change. all society deserves the right to walk free without fear.

[DaNtHeMaN919]

@1AussieAvenger1 You're allowed reasonable force and, in some states, "extreme" force to remove unwanted people from your property/premises or to defend these. So if someone encroaches on these in such a way, with a firearm for instance, then the law is interpreted as saying we can respond but not in an equal (and definitely not reasonable) way. Innocent good guys lose, bad guys who need a hot lead injection win