Friday, December 15, 2017

How to join the fight to save your way of life



1) Our local MP is corrupt & there is no point in contacting him 2) you say nothing about the gun owners in Australia being fractured. They all have their preferences & don't give a damn about others shooters/gun owners. So long as we are not backing each other, then we are fighting a lost cause 3) you mention nothing about demanding stronger penalties for gun crimes, we should be shouting this from the roof tops. We are not ALL good blokes, there are criminals amongst us & they need to be rooted out & given heavy sentences, not just a slap on the wrist & put back on the streets. This is what the government wants!!! 4) I gave up on the SSAA a long time ago, they are all for themselves & stuff you if you don't do what you are told. Not a hope in hell of me being a member again, never!
Keith.

Saturday, December 9, 2017

Could Skynet Become a Reality???!!!


They were asked why if this is so dangerous would they consider doing it anyway, their reply was that they wanted to see if they could! The problem is that intelligence is not that simple, not that defined. We have feelings, empathy, that is not intelligence. A computer brain with AI will learn far more than a human can in our entire lifetime & do it in seconds. Now think what that means! Imagine this AI brain realising that it could be controlled or limited, imagine if it decided to send all it knows to another computer across the other side of the world. Imagine if it decided that humans were no longer required & were in fact hampering its progress! There are computerised robotics worldwide in manufacturing workshops. These AI computers never sleep. Imagine what could be built overnight without us even knowing it was happening?
It is a little like global warming, we can set up simulations to see what will happen, but there are so many variables involved that we don't know exactly when it will all hit the fan. One more chunk of ice falls away from a glacier, this cools the water quicker than we had anticipated. Suddenly the temperatures drop in the North during summer, & by Autumn the UK is buried in snow! We are looking at the unknown, & we have no control over it. I think AI could easily go the same way.
Keith.



Friday, December 8, 2017

The Government is Trying to Gag GetUp & its Petitions!!!


Fight for our independence
The Turnbull Government just introduced a "GetUp clause" specifically designed to curb our movement's power. We need hundreds more people joining the GetUp Crew to protect our independent movement.

Eric Abetz and his hard right cronies know they're about to fail for the third time to force Getup members to become an "associated entity" of the ALP and the Greens.

Even worse, they're trying to legislate a gag order on charities fighting to protect the rights of children, people who are homeless and our environment – while letting multinational corporations cut politicians blank cheques.

This is more than an attack on civil society – it's a sinister abuse of government power to silence those who speak out against it.

We need to defend the right of everyday people to participate in democracy and civil society. And that means fighting back with everything we've got. Can you join the Getup Crew ? 


Artificial Intelligence. Is It A Threat?

Thursday, December 7, 2017

The Lindt Café Siege | Trailer. Why was the police sniper ordered to stand down???





Why was the police sniper ordered to stand down???

Self defence in Australia

Australian self defence laws

Australian Gun Laws & Anti-Self defence laws leave Citizens At Risk!



Humane Right to Armed Self defence???
The right of self-defense (also called, when it applies to the defense of another, alter ego defense, defense of others, defense of a third person) is the right for people to use reasonable force or defensive force, for the purpose of defending one's own life or the lives of others, including, in certain circumstances, the use of deadly force.[1]
If a defendant uses defensive force because of a threat of deadly or grievous harm by the other person, or a reasonable perception of such harm, the defendant is said to have a "perfect self-defensejustification.[2] If defendant uses defensive force because of such a perception, and the perception is not reasonable, the defendant may have an "imperfect self-defense" as an excuse.[2]

Thwarted by the demise of its global gun ban treaty, the United Nations declares the human right of self-defense null and void

As far as I can tell, no country is listed for restricting the natural, civil and human right to self-defense. So, it appears Human Rights Watch doesn’t care that people are prevented by their governments from protecting themselves. 

In legal terms, Australians have a right of self-defence. While some states rely on the common law and others have it enshrined in statute, the right itself is never questioned. Moreover, juries consistently refuse to convict those charged with serious offences whenever self-defence is made out.
What we don’t have is the practical ability to exercise that right. Possessing any object specifically for the purpose of self-defence, lethal or non-lethal, is a criminal offence. There are many women, raped and/or murdered, who would have been liable to prosecution had they been carrying anything that might have saved them.
The massive Police and government anti-terror apparatus failed yet again to protect the public. How many more reminders do the public need that the state is not their god and saviour? This is not a sleight at Police, but as we’ve discussed at length previously they are reactionary only and in terms of firearms, held to a lower standard than Category H licence holders. Even Queensland Police admit this.
It’s time to get serious about empowering the public by letting them have the opportunity to defend themselves, and end this useless and dangerous obsession with denying people the basic means and right to practical non-lethal and licenced lethal forms of self-defence, in the name of ‘muh public safety’.
RESIDENTS have backed calls from the Shooters Union Australia for the government to clarify and strengthen self-defence laws.
SUA vice president David Brown wants the ambiguity around gun laws, which leave licensed firearms owners at risk of prosecution for defending their homes from intruders, clarified.
Mr Brown this week told The Chronicle guns were the "only means of levelling the playing field against an aggressor", and his view has earned support from readers.
Human Rights Act 2004 Australia.
9 Right to life (1) Everyone has the right to life. In particular, no-one may be arbitrarily deprived of life.
11 Protection of the family and children Note Family has a broad meaning (see ICCPR General Comment 19 (39th session, 1990)). (1) The family is the natural and basic group unit of society and is entitled to be protected by society. (2) Every child has the right to the protection needed by the child because of being a child, without distinction or discrimination of any kind.
18 Right to liberty and security of person (1) Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person.
Part 3B Limits on human rights 28 Human rights may be limited (1) Human rights may be subject only to reasonable limits set by laws that can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. (2) In deciding whether a limit is reasonable, all relevant factors must be considered, including the following: (a) the nature of the right affected; (b) the importance of the purpose of the limitation; (c) the nature and extent of the limitation; (d) the relationship between the limitation and its purpose; (e) any less restrictive means reasonably available to achieve the purpose the limitation seeks to achieve.
There is nothing in this human rights document that actually states that we have a right to defend ourselves or our families. The United Nations says that we have NO right to defend ourselves or our families against harm!








Monday, December 4, 2017

Message to the The Border Mail Newspaper!



Firearm locked onto stranger's stomach after GPS makes a wrong turn.
This is blatant biased reporting, the title should read " A 70 year old pensioner defending herself charged with an offence"
How in the hell was this lady to know these people did not mean her harm? Indeed, how do we know they did not intend her harm? A woman alone is faced with several people on her doorstep & she is genuinely concerned for her safety. We only have the word of these intruders that they were lost, would you believe a story like that?! We still only have their word that they did not intend a home invasion & that the gun was aimed directly at them!
This is morally wrong, this woman SHOULD have the human right to take precautions to keep herself safe. These government anti-self defence laws need changing or scrapping. People are suffering home invasions all the time now, people are getting injured, raped & murdered & the government denies us the right to purchase or carry ANYTHING specifically intended for our defence or the defence of our families.
You should be fighting for our rights to defend ourselves, not fighting against our human rights.
Keith H. Burgess.
If you believe that citizens should have the right to use a gun for self defence against a home invasion, then please email or write the Border Mail regarding this article in their newspaper.
Editorial - newsroom@bordermail.com.au 


A 70-year-old pensioner defends herself & gets charged with an offense!!!

Now this is morally wrong in all ways. This woman could not possibly know that these people were simply lost & meant no harm, indeed, WE don't know this for sure. Is the law saying that this woman should open her door to strangers not knowing if they may mean her harm? This woman did the right thing in regards to protecting herself, WHY should she take the strangers word that they were lost & meant no harm? What would you expect a home invader to say facing a women holding a shotgun?!

These government anti-self defence laws are wrong in every way & they need changing or scrapping. We should have a human right to take precautions to protect ourselves when we feel that we may be under threat. This woman seriously & genuinely felt that she was in some danger & took precautions. No one was harmed. Now her gun has been confiscated so she is no longer able to defend herself. DO YOU THINK THIS IS MORALLY RIGHT?


http://www.bordermail.com.au/story/5098903/firearm-locked-onto-strangers-stomach-after-gps-makes-a-wrong-turn/

The Fuck-it Point



As I see it we have to keep on trying to improve our own environment, & keep trying to inform others. Are we a minority? Probably, but we are so distant from one another it is hard to tell. Looking at all those millions of people in our cities you wonder if life could ever be any other way for them, how can they possibly change their environment?

We are doing the right thing right now, it may not be perfect, but it is the best we can do with what we have to work with. Like this video says, we have to survive the system whilst trying to change it. Personally I don't see it changing, we do the best we can to delay the inevitable, we teach our kids & our grandkids how to survive what is to come. Governments are corrupt & greedy for power & money & the majority of people will vote for that government over & over again. They don't want to know about global warming, it is too big for them to handle. They don't want to hear about the genocide in West Papua, it is so removed from their lifestyle, their way of life. They are too busy trying to keep up with the Jones's to worry about the demise of a people a world away.

 I think before anything is done to save this planet it will all hit the fan. Maybe it won't start in our countries, maybe the protests & riots will start somewhere else & start to spread. Maybe one day there will be enough people who see the light & say f**k it, enough is enough.
Keith.

Friday, December 1, 2017

Gun Control: Victorian Police recommendations: the real story

DC Shane Patton
A good regulator:
consults;
is open and transparent; and
tests its proposals with key stakeholders before submitting them to government.
Then there’s Victoria Police ….
As many of you know, we started 2017 chasing ‘recommendations’ Victoria Police made to the state government to change YOUR laws, but refused to consult on.
First there’s the bad news: we lost the case.  However the good news is that we found out what those recommendations were through other means.
Not only that, but the evidence submitted by Victoria Police confirmed the accuracy of the information we received, and revealed how much lobbying a member of VicPol’s Executive Branch did behind the scenes.
A bit of background …
In March 2016, Victoria Police told the Herald Sun that they had made ‘recommendations’ to the government on “firearm law reform”. This followed around a dozen articles in the Herald Sun over the preceding months where Victoria Police expressed concerns about firearm thefts, coinciding with the 20thanniversary of the Port Arthur shootings.
In February this year, the CFCV put in a FOI request to find out what those recommendations were.
Our FOI application was rejected on the basis that the recommendations were “Cabinet in Confidence” and also that they were “working documents”, which are two exemptions which are available under FOI laws.
The problem we had with this was that these protections are normally available to government departments rather than agencies like the Victoria Police, whose job is to enforce the law, not make it.
Our VCAT action
In May, we hired a lawyer – Avi Furstenberg from Furstenberg Law –  and a barrister – Robert Cameron – to fight the decision in VCAT (and for their help and patience, we’re truly grateful. They did a great job).
To help fund the case, hundreds of shooters chipped in to raise what we needed to run the case – and we’re also sincerely grateful for their (and your) support.
Over the past few weeks, we’ve had a Directions Hearing, a Compulsory Conference and an “admin mention” and finally on November 13th, the hearing.
The decision was ‘reserved’ which meant that we received it by email around the middle of last week.
We lost the case because VCAT agreed that Victoria Police should be able to enjoy the protection of Cabinet (which we still have a problem with, but it is the way the law is).
What we found out from the case
We learnt a number of things from the evidence VicPol provided, including the events which led to how the recommendations came about.  They are:


1.  That it was Deputy Commissioner, Shane Patton, who liaised with the Police Minister’s office.  Specifically, Victoria Police’s statement advises that:“In around February 2016, Crime Command, Victoria Police instituted a legislative reform proposal around firearms legislation. The proposal was of utmost importance to Crime Command and was targeted at decreasing firearms related offending in Victoria.”  
It also stated: “In late May 2016, it became clear that both Crime Command and Deputy Commissioner Patton (the accountable Executive Command member) wanted to ensure that the importance of this proposal for various legislative changes in relation to firearms was fully understood at Ministerial level” and that “DC Patton wanted to brief the Minister directly with concrete proposals for reform due to the significance of the proposals.”.
At the time this started, the Police Minister was Robyn Scott.  Lisa Neville took over the portfolio in May, which is when Patton decided to start briefing the (new) minister directly.
2. That the Department of Justice and Regulation (DOJR) was involved in discussions about the proposals and organising for the matter to go to Cabinet. DOJR hosts the Firearms Consultative Committee (FCC) but once again, decided to keep it in the dark.
DOJR has done this before: several years ago it developed new regulations hiking firearm dealer fees up by up to 600% which would have driven several of them out of business.
While we were able to beat that, it is clear DOJR, like Victoria Police, has a problem in being a good regulator;
3. That the recent Firearm Amendment Bill, which proposed the introduction of Firearm Prohibition Orders and other things such as changing what constitutes trafficking of firearms came from the recommendations; and
4.  That the recommendations went to Cabinet.  Twice.
The first time is to secure the government’s approval of the concept – called “Approval in Principle” – while the second is where Cabinet gets to see the detail of what eventually goes to parliament – that stage is called “Bill at Cabinet”.
We know from VicPol’s statement that the recommendations were sent after the AIP date had communicated to VicPol by the Department.  It means the recommendations were sent after Deputy Commissioner Patton had secured the Minister’s agreement to take the matter to Cabinet. That’s why VCAT ruled in their favour.
.. but we know what the recommendations are
You would think that because we lost the case, that we don’t know what the recommendations are.
Wrong.   Shortly after filing our matter in VCAT (in May) we were contacted by a source who was encouraged by the action we had instituted, who then sent us a detailed email outlining the recommendations – and what the government did with them. (Thank you source, you know who you are …).
Several months later, Victoria Police’s statement provided evidence which corroborated the information we had earlier received (in particular, it verified the origin of the Firearms Amendment Bill, the involvement of Cabinet and the timing of when these events happened).  Our crystal ball proved to be right.
So, in the absence of information to the contrary, it’s pretty clear the information we received is correct.  VicPol, DOJR and Labor are all welcome to refute this, but it would be up to them to prove us wrong.
The recommendations
The recommendations are listed below.  They were agreed by Cabinet, which decided to defer them until after the 2018 Victorian State Election, “so as not to alienate shooters”.
The recommendations are to:
Disarm most cash-in-transit security guards – Cabinet has agreed to remove firearms from plain clothed security guards carrying cash and other valuables, who make up 80-90 percent of the cash-in transit industry. This will threaten the safety of those guards, and the viability of the businesses who supply the equipment they use.  (If relevant industry bodies want to stop this from happening, then they need to get political.  They can email us at admin@firearmscouncil.org.au to find out how);
Greater search and seizure powers – (in addition to the Firearm Prohibition Orders which we already know about), these powers will extend to allowing police to check your firearm storage at any time of day or night, without any warning or a warrant;
The right to reclassify any firearm – Cabinet agreed with police that they – not parliament – should be able to reclassify any firearm, for any reason, and without the right of appeal.
The abolition of the Firearms Appeal Committee – this will remove the ability of shooters to appeal decisions made by Victoria Police (for example, something relating to licence applications) to the Firearms Appeals Committee. This means shooters will need to take the more expensive option of hiring lawyers to take their matters to VCAT or court; and
Increased penalties for firearm offences and changing what constitutes trafficking firearms. The issue of what constitutes trafficking has already appeared in the Firearms Amendment Bill (currently before parliament), but not the ‘increased penalties’.  Cabinet agreed to increase the penalties for minor transgressions of the law, such as leaving a couple of 22s rolling around the floor of the ute.
If Victoria Police or government wish to correct the record, then they are free to do so by producing the source documents we were pursuing, however the information we have been given accords with the evidence given by Victoria Police.
In the absence of this, we are entitled to take these as matters of Labor policy.
Hopefully exposing these particular recommendations will make them go away for now – but more needs to be done to make sure the regulator doesn’t try something like this again (it’s happened before, so is likely to happen again).
At the end of the day we do not have a problem with laws which legitimately target criminals.  However we have to take action where there are deliberate efforts to bypass our community on laws which directly affect it. It’s as much about “good regulatory practice” (eg being open, transparent and consultative …) than anything else.
If Victoria Police can’t or won’t behave like a good regulator, it will never be able to suggest good laws – which means the crims continue to get away.
Stay in touch
With the next state election coming up in November 2018, it’s important that shooters like yourself follow the CFCV:
on Facebook by Liking our page; or
joining our email list (on the link in the comments area with this video)
Following us means we can get pro-shooting voting advice out to you before you vote.  That way, we will be able to use the political process to stop things like this happening.
It’ll also make it easier for you to work out who to vote for when you’re standing in front of your ballot papers unsure about who the candidates are or what they stand for!  We’ll go through the parties and candidates who will be contesting the election, what their policies are, and where their preferences will go.

Wednesday, November 29, 2017

Home Invasion & Attempted Murder. Give us our human rights, give us our guns back.



https://au.news.yahoo.com/vic/a/38055974/gang-of-thieves-attempt-to-run-down-mum-baby-after-stealing-car/
The government claims we do not need guns for self defence. I beg to differ!!!

It is even illegal in Australia for law abiding citizens to purchase or carry pepper spray or tasers. I say forget about the pepper spray & tasers, we want to be legally allowed to purchase & carry firearms for the purpose of self defence & for the defence of our families. This is a human right that we Australian citizens are being denied by our government.

Gun confiscation was never anything to do with the safety of Australian citizens, the fact that there have been no mass shootings since the Port Arthur massacre has nothing to do with it. People are killing other people with knives, such as the massacre in China, & the terrorist attack in London, no guns were used in these killings. But we NEED to be able to use a gun for our defence, do you really want to have to get into a knife fight or defend yourself with just your fists against a bigger person? This is not sensible or practicle.

North Korea claims new 'significantly more' powerful missile puts entire US in range, & Australia!



So the whole of Australia is now in range! We are only just hearing of this & the USA has known it for days!

https://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/38054278/north-korea-claims-new-icbm-missile-puts-entire-us-in-range/

Tuesday, November 28, 2017

A Woodsrunner's Diary: Flax Spinning.

A Woodsrunner's Diary: Flax Spinning.

Human Rights. David Leyonhjelm is correct: Australians should be able to arm themselves against terror


These basic human rights are:
Universal: they belong to all of us – everybody in the world.
Inalienable: they cannot be taken away from us.
Indivisible and interdependent: governments should not be able to pick and choose which rights are respected.
Article 1 Everyone is born free and equal in dignity and with rights.
Article 2 You should never be discriminated against for any reason. Rights belong to all people, whatever our differences.
Article 3 Everyone has the rights to life, liberty and security.
Article 4 No-one shall be held in slavery or servitude.
 Article 5 No-one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 6 You have the right to be treated as a person in the eyes of the law. Article 7 You have the right to be treated by the law in the same way as everyone else. Everyone has a right to protection against violations of their human rights.
Article 8 If your rights under law are violated, you have the right to see justice done in a court or tribunal.
Article 9 No-one shall be subject to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile. Article 10 You have the right to a fair and public trial by an independent and impartial tribunal.
Article 11 Everyone is to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a fair trial. No one should be charged with a criminal offence for an act which wasn’t an offence at the time the act was done.
Article 12 No-one has the right to intrude in your private life or interfere with your home and family without good reason. No-one has the right to attack your good name without reason.
Article 13 You have the right to freedom of movement within your country. Everyone has the right to leave a country and to return home.
Article 14 You have the right to seek and to enjoy asylum from persecution in other countries. You may not invoke this right if fleeing just laws in your own country.
Article 15 You have the right to a nationality.
Article 16 You have the right to marry and to raise a family. Men and women have the same rights when they are married and when they are separated. Article 17 You have the right to own property and it cannot randomly be taken away from you.
Article 18 You have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion and to peacefully express those beliefs in teaching, practice and worship. Article 19 You have the right to freedom of opinion and expression.
Article 20 You have the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
Article 21 You have the right to take part in the government of your country. Article 22 As a member of society, you have a right to social security.
Article 23 You have the right to work, to good working conditions, to equal pay for equal work and to form and join unions.
Article 24 You have the right to rest and leisure.
Article 25 You have the right to a decent life, including enough food, clothing, housing, medical care and social services.
Article 26 You have the right to an education.
Article 27 No-one may stop you from participating in the cultural life of your community.
Article 28 You have the right to live in the kind of world where your rights and freedoms are respected.
Article 29 We all have a responsibility to the people around us and should protect their rights and freedoms.
Article 30 There is nothing in this declaration that justifies any person or country taking away the rights to which we are all entitled.





The Australian government has denied us a human rights, as law abiding citizens we SHOULD have the right to protect ourselves & our families, but that right has been taken from us with a law which states that we are not legally allowed to purchase or carry: Pepper spray, Tasers, or guns for the sole purpose of self defence & the defence of our families!
This law does not stop crime, it does not stop home invasions, muggings, beatings, rapes or murders. All it does is leave us defenceless.
So what are you going to do about this? Our government system is totally corrupt to the core, there is little point in begging to the government. I have started petitions, but hardly anyone bothers to sign! You still think we live in a free country? Think again. Most people are totally apathetic to the loss of our human rights & exist with their heads buried in the sand.

Australian Human Rights Commission.
”The Australian Government has agreed to uphold and respect many of these human rights treaties” . But not all!

Thursday, November 23, 2017

Grandfather, 83, left with smashed skull after brutal home invasion.

Barry Lawless, 83, was savagely bashed by a home intruder. Source: 7 News



This is why our anti-self defence laws need changing. We are not legally allowed to purchase or carry ANYTHING for self defence, no pepper sprays, no tasers, & no guns. HOW are we supposed to protect ourselves & our families?! This is not a one off, these home invasions, attacks, killings & rapes are happening all the time & more frequently. The police can't protect us, and the government will NOT protect us or even give us the human right to protect ourselves.
Remember, when voting time comes, vote first for those that support the right to own guns for self defence, vote for pro gun candidates. Do NOT vote for the Liberals or Labor.

Monday, November 20, 2017

Saturday, November 18, 2017

Good Prepper/Survival Forums.

I have been a member on many survival forums, the American ones are fine for those living in America, but Australia is so different from America that I find it is really of no interest or help to me. Australian survival forums do not impress me at all, many members tend to be narrow minded & set in their ways & spend more time making disparaging comments than actually adding useful information to the topic.
In my search for a forum where I can actually enjoy sharing my knowledge & at the same time learn something new, I came across the "Preppers Forum" based in the UK. Now I fully realise that the UK is also different from Australia, but not as different as America is. The people don't always think in the same way as we do in Australia, but they are more like us than the Americans are when it comes to discussing survival topics.
Right now I am posting topics on this UK forum that is of some use to those in the UK, but if there were more Australian members then I would also post topics that are of interest to Australians. If like me you have found that you don't "fit in" on other forums, forums where Moderators & Managers fail to curb bad behavour by other members, then this could be the forum for you.
You can check out the forum here: https://www.preppersforum.uk/ (I am now site manager on this forum, so if you have any problems, please feel free to contact me).
Regards, Keith.

Monday, November 13, 2017

Voting For Your Rights, By Ron Owen.

Thoughts For The Week.
On election day 25th November 2017, either the 600,000 licenced shooters of Queensland will work together, to put Labor, LNP and Greens at the bottom of the voting ticket and pro firearm ownership candidates at the top, and giving the forces against us the biggest electoral defeat since Barrie Unsworth (NSW) in March 1988, or we will be further tyrannised for another 25 years. We have been waiting for this golden opportunity for a quarter of a century. If we cannot do it this time we do not deserve another chance.
Get Political for Two Weeks and Make a Difference to Our Future.
Never have the forces of evil been in such disarray. Never has it been so open and shut, we either work to put the minor pro shooting parties and independents in a coalition to improve our plight, or follow your family voting pattern, (vote LNP or Labor or Green) then hand your guns in, or go live in New Zealand. You are either with us, or against us.
Now, is the Time.
Now is the Time to get political, even if you have to miss out on a few shooting events.
Firstly, and most importantly contact candidates and check their credentials. Ask them to convince you that they will persistently work to achieve
A. The end of long arm registration,
B. For the individual right of law abiding citizens to own firearms (semi autos, pumps hand guns) as of right and suitable for their needs,
C. For the individual right of all law abiding citizens to use firearms to defend their lives, family and property.

If you do nothing else, that small effort of canvassing candidates will cause change, as that will alert candidates to which issue they won or lost the election.
Secondly, chose a candidate to assist, put some signs out for them, offer to hand out how to vote cards for them. Write letters to the editor of local papers, they should be swamped with letters, share all pro gun articles on social media and most importantly ‘verbalise’, speak out, to all your friends and family about the importance of voting the right way. Explain to all, the importance of filling out every square on the voting paper, as this is full preferential voting, this gives the minor parties and independents the best opportunity of gaining seats.
First Past the Post system of voting gives the major parties an advantage as
in a five candidate election a party with 22% of the vote can have a majority
and 78% of the electorate can hate his guts. When second and third preferences are counted if the candidate does not get over 50% of the first preferences that does not happen and a candidate that is more suited to
most of the peoples ideas wins.
If LNP, Labor or Greens gain power we will have another four years of the Queensland Police making policy to suit themselves from their ivory tower that is built on our backs, paid for by the impositions of fees and charges for our innocence under their dogmatic indolence.
When deciding who to put last out of Labor, LNP and Greens, you have to punish the sitting member out of the three by putting them last as they will have the chance of needing your preference.

The LNP have to be counted as in Coalition with Labor. They Vote with Labor, so they are Labor.
In an article printed in several Queensland newspapers where in a meeting with LNP Members of Parliament, Tony Perrett MP (our local member) and Dr Christian Rowan MP for Moggill and Shadow Minister for Environment and Heritage Protection I was correctly quoted as stating,
“Most of the shooters will not vote for them (LNP) anyway” the article did not include the reasons why shooters will not vote for the LNP, which had been the subject intensely discussed at this meeting with Tony Perrett MP and Dr Christian Rowan.
Furthermore to the John Howard “Great Firearm Theft of 1996/7 and the Hand Gun Theft of 2003”, which were implemented by the National Party, Russell Cooper and Tim Fischer where both voted with Labor. Again Tim Nichols LNP has recently twice voted with Labor to oppose primary producers’ rights to
own Category H firearms then voted again to support the Labor party’s Weapons Legislation (Lever Action Shotguns NFA) Amendment Regulation
2017.

If the LNP votes with Labor, if they have mutually beneficial deals with Labor they are part and parcel of Labor, we have to deal with them the same way we deal with Labor, we vote against them.
Admittedly, our local member, Tony Perrett, was a champion and at the above mentioned vote on October 11th on the NFA, he crossed the floor and voted
with the Katter Party and One Nation Party. We all here in Gympie, hoped that he would have stood as an Independent for the forthcoming election, but he has chosen to remain with the LNP and as his party has caused so much pain for law abiding firearm owners, we cannot vote for the LNP, or Labor, or the Greens. I admire Mr Perrett for crossing the floor and would always want to count him as one of my friends, but cannot help him, as that would assist the LNP who will always betray firearm owners.
The Great Carrot.
On November 2, 2017 LNP Shadow Minister for the Environment Christian Rowan MP announced in Gympie that the LNP would grant a lease of the land in the Curra State Forest, and provide $150,000 grant to the Cooloola Range Complex Association Inc to progress this facility. (Since that time One Nation has given the Association a written pact that if they have the balance of power Cooloola Range Complex Association would get the range complex site and $500,000 to build a world class facility.)
As I am the president of the Cooloola Range Complex Association Inc this announcement was made at the Owen Guns business premises, with Mr Perrett in attendance. Of course, as the campaign to regain our centrefire shooting range in Gympie has been a 25 year battle, I was very pleased to hear that news and told them so, but also reminded them that their LNP government had been in power several times during the last 25 years and last time in 2012, the minister had even given an Agreement in Principle, but continually delayed and procrastinated, preventing the project from proceeding. We also are fully aware that the only reason that we are getting this promise after 25 years is that the ‘One Nation party’ is now a real threat to their seats in the house of parliament. Without the rise of One Nation the promise would not have been forthcoming. This promise is only on the proviso that the LNP wins the forthcoming election.
Betrayal.
I reminded Mr Perrett and Dr Rowan that as the LNP had betrayed the firearm owners yet again and had twice voted with the Labor Party to impose further impositions on law abiding firearm owners their chances of re-election were greatly reduced and that as we spoke the firearm industry and shooting associations were raising a million dollars to ensure their electoral demise.
The Nurenberg Defence.
Dr Rowan suggested that in politics everything was a trade-off, a compromise and that he felt that even though he knew what they were voting for was wrong, the LNP was a better alternative than Labor and to do some good he had to stick with the LNP.

I reminded him that what he had described was in legal circles called the Nuremberg defence, where German Nazi SS soldiers admitted to knowing that they had done wrong, but blamed their superior officers for making the decisions.
That defence failed at the Nuremberg trials and those soldiers were hanged, under the ‘common law principle’ that if you know you’re doing wrong then you are a part of it and share the guilt.
Mr Perrett knew that further impositions on law abiding firearm owners was against the wishes of his electorate and blatantly diametrically opposed to the LNP’s own firearm policy so he took the correct course and became the first and last LNP member to cross the floor of the 55th Parliament.
The rest of the LNP members followed the party dictates, followed the orders in the same way as those German soldiers and like them have to accept the consequences.
Let us hope on the evening of the 25th November that the consequences of following the party orders ‘knowing they committed a wrong’, results in a loss of seats and losing government. As they will remember this mistake for the rest of their lives.

Is Firearm Ownerships a Right or Responsibility?
As at times we all have to debate the reasons for Firearm Ownership with
people who for many reasons have only had emotional negative thoughts about firearms so we need to identify the correct logic in our philosophy so we can properly communicate to people who have had no experience with firearms. A friend of mine raised the issue as a question,
Is Firearm Ownerships a Right or Responsibility?
A Right, or a Responsibility? I believe it is Both.
Because it is in the same way that Day follows Night.
If not a Right, it is certainly a Responsibility,
as if you do not believe that you have a Right to defend your own life, you may Wrongly allow someone else to choke you to death.
That cannot be Right so the opposite has to be Right.
So if you have a Responsibility to defend your life and to defend the lives of others such as your children, or your aged parents, and not to go quietly into the night, in the gas chamber queue.
So it would be wrong, for someone to prevent you from carrying out your Responsibilities so it is a Right. Surely people can see that a country has a Right to defend itself. If it does not, a foreign enemy could commit genocide on the whole population. The government, or the leaders of that nation have a responsibility to defend their nation in the same way that a father has the responsibility to defend his family. Once that conclusion is made then its is only a choice in how that defence is carried out.
Question                                                                           Answer
Do we believe that our Defence is instantly available via a mobile phone?                                                                                NO!
Do we really believe that Assistance is only 15 minutes away?                                                                                 NO! 
(when you could be dead in 15 seconds)
Does the State have a Responsibility to Defend You?                                                                                   NO!
Does the Police have a Responsibility to Defend You?                                                                                     NO!
Do Gun Free Zones have a Responsibility to Defend You?                                                                                     NO!
Does the Church have a Responsibility to Defend its parishioners?                                                                                                    NO!
Does the Cinema or Mall or Café have a Responsibility to Defend You?                                                                                     NO!
Do the people have a Responsibility to defend themselves?                                                                           YES!
Who Ultimately has the Responsibility to defend you?      ONLY YOU!
Your life is a precious gift, and just like any precious gift, you have the Responsibility to care for that and treat that life with the proper respect.
We all know that initiating violence is not an appropriate thing to do, violence when used in defence of self or others, is not only Right, but a required Responsibility.
‘Ethics’ hallow the principle of self-defence as both a right and an obligation, a responsibility. ‘Ethics’ also stress our moral duty to defend others against violent attacks.
To be sure, guns may be misused to injure or kill innocent people, but evil doers have killed and injured since time immemorial and did not need guns, after all, Cain killed Abel with his bare hands! In Biblical times, the slogan might well have been, “Swords don’t kill people. People kill people.” Swords were used to commit genocide, wipe out the populations of entire countries. Of course guns can do the same, but the main difference is that before the firearm was invented the strongest person with the axe or sword won every confrontation but when the equaliser, the firearm became available it made all equal, strength was no more the massive advantage. Now, firearm ownership can and will overcome brute strength.
Crime Rates Fall As Firearm Ownership Increases.
Australia 2.02 million licences and 6.03 million firearms is increasing annually by 27.5 %, while crime rates fall?
Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (You Read it Right, We Are Criminals Registered and Counted by a Commission with a responsibility for Listing know Criminals.
ACIC 2016–17 Annual Report
https://www.acic.gov.au/…/net1491/f/acic_2016-17_annual_rep…
NFLRS (National Firearms Licence and Registration System)
NATIONAL FIREARMS LICENSING AND REGISTRATION SYSTEM
“This system helps build the picture of firearm licence and registration information across the country. It is used to ensure compliance with firearm registration. The system helps firearm registries view the licence and registration information held by other states and territories, including firearm licence holders, licensed firearm dealers, registered firearms.”
During 2016–17:
.. there was a total of 6.03 million firearm records
.. there was a total of 2.02 million licence records
One Crooked Cop Can Sell The Lot.
This is another reason to stop firearm Registration, even if it was up to date and we know that its not, the information that they keep has no relevance to Criminals or Crime it just records the good people whose information and privacy can be sold to the highest bidder in any country of the world that is involved in Interpol. One crooked cop can sell the lot.  Lets hope we can begin to wind this nonsense back after 25th November 2017.
Ron Owen.


Monday, November 6, 2017

Firearms Amendment Bill - Firearm Prohibition Orders

The deadly diseases being released as ice thaws. Surviving The Next Pandemic!

The deadly diseases being released as ice thaws. Surviving the next pandemic.
Scientists have raised the issue of new old diseases being released by the global warming melting the ice. They say it is quite possible that these diseases have been lying dormant since before the coming of man. This means that we will have no immunity to these diseases, & we will have no medicines to combat these diseases. Once released & started they could sweep the globe annihilating humanity completely except perhaps in isolated cases.
In this day & age an infected person could get on a plane & be in another country before they even know they are carrying a disease!
So there is a hell of a biggy to add to our lists!

Australia's capacity to respond to an infectious disease outbreak.
https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp0405/05rp03