Put niceties aside, Albo

I was immediately taken aback when I read that the Opposition was…

Whitewashing at Shinzo Abe’s State Funeral

Be careful who you praise and the degree of zeal you do…

Why Peter Dutton Is Such A Cuddly Koala...

Interviewer: I've been told Dinsdale Piranha nailed your head to the floor. Stig:…

Australian EV Truck Manufacturer Doubles Assembly Capacity

Electric truck manufacturer SEA Electric has extended its commitment to the Australian…

Now is not the right time ...

By 2353NM Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II was buried last week with all…

Whither Constitutional Change?

Within a very short space of time, we are going to be…

Breaching Human Rights: Australia, Climate Change and the…

Australia has a mixed relationship with the United Nations Human Rights Committee. …

So Now It's Wrong To Be Racist, Eh?

Just a few short years ago, Attorney-General George Brandis assured us that…

«
»
Facebook

I won’t be carrying a gun, and I don’t want you to either

“What happened in that cafe would be most unlikely to have occurred in Florida, Texas, or Vermont, or Alaska in America, or perhaps even Switzerland as well,” Senator Leyonhjelm told ABC Radio — adding at least “one or two” there would have had a concealed gun.

If that’s the likely case, then I’m to assume that dozens of people would have been carrying arms at Port Arthur on April 28, 1996. Somebody could have taken out Martin Bryant.

And guns might have been blazing at Julian Knight in Hoddle Street, Melbourne, August 9, 1987.

But despite our gun laws at the time, Australians simply weren’t in the habit of entering restaurants, using public transport, visiting the zoo or going to the cricket armed to the teeth.

Senator Leyonhjelm would like to see us get into the habit. He wants us to carry a weapon so we can, in a nutshell, kill people should the need arise. Just how many nutcases does he want to see armed?

It’s ludicrous for him to postulate that the outcome that evolved in Martin Place would have been ‘unlikely’ in America because armed citizens could have easily dealt with the perpetrator. He needs to do a bit of research on the mass shootings in America and note how many of the murderers were taken out by an armed citizen. I think he’ll find that all – or if not all, then close to it – were left to the police to deal with.

What happened in Martin Place was tragic. Very tragic. And despite the deaths of two innocent people I’d rather live in a country where such situations were always left to the police.

I won’t be carrying a gun anywhere, and I hope don’t want you too either.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

 178 total views,  1 views today

85 comments

Login here Register here
  1. Damo

    Leyonhjelm is a complete twit. The idea that a cafe full of untrained gun-toting civilians engaging in a close quarters gunfight, ok-corral style, would somehow have ended better is ludicrous. The likely result would have been a massacre with out of control fire flaring left & right ricocheting & exiting doors, windows & bouncing around taking down everyone in sight. People panic & the only hands guns should be in are those of highly trained military. I’m not even convinced the level of armament of Australian police is necessary or helpful frankly.

    Leyonhjelm’s suggestion this wouldn’t have occurred in Texas is a tad bizarre given what happened at Waco. THAT is what happens when the public have access to firearms…

  2. mars08

    More guns would make us much safer …

  3. stephentardrew

    Shoot the idiot.

    Now don’t get serious on me anyone.

  4. Möbius Ecko

    There’s a statistic that the NRA fights tooth and nail to suppress, and when the shooters association here was approached to ask about how a licenced shotgun ended up sawn off and in the hands of a killer, they also refused to confront the statistic.

    How many gun related killings and woundings are caused by a gun taken from the owner. That includes those taken by children who shoot themselves. a sibling or a friend and those taken by unarmed criminals who use the gun against the owner or others. In other words deaths or injuries by legally owned guns that would not have occurred if the gun wasn’t there. The numbers from memory are huge.

    So Leyonhjelm is advocating thousands of guns being available for murder, wounding and accidental shooting.

  5. Richard Leggatt

    That’s why the U.S. is the safest country in the world…..Oh wait….What a complete and utter f-wit!

  6. la_lasciata

    Too much oxygen for the moron. Less from now on, please.

  7. Rossleigh

    Oh yeah, I forgot this one in my blog this morning. Which is ironic because he was one of the reasons I started writing it! 😀

    Faith, Dope and Hilarity!

  8. John Fraser

    <

    I want a medium size nuclear weapon.

    I've got to contend with Neil of stupidsville and the miniscule porno Moustache ….. not to mention Duncan and his mate martin who does all his typing for him.

  9. Paul. G. Dellit

    Senator Leyonhjelm also favours gay marriage, for the same reason he favours the right of every citizen to carry a gun. He is a Neoliberal. They believe in the unfettered freedom of the individual. At first blush, it may seem to some a fair enough proposition, and as it applies to gay marriage there can be no dispassionately practical objection to it. But as it applies to the citizenry’s right to carry concealed firearms, it suffers the fate of many ideologies when they are exposed to the harsh light of reality.
    The gun laws which the good Senator espouses operate in the USA, and have produced a rate of gun deaths which is 27 times greater per capita than it is in Australia. And there is a good reason for this beyond the cultural factors which apply in the USA: no matter how well trained one might be in the use of firearms, as any soldier who has seen active service will tell you, nothing can prepare the average person for the real thing.
    The likely outcome, were some of the Lindt patrons to have been carrying a concealed weapon, is that one or more of them would have taken it out and begun firing. With all the adrenalin coursing through their systems, they would have had little chance of hitting their target, particularly with a hand gun when they would have had no time to take proper aim. Their target, in this case carrying a pump action shot gun, would have returned fire and without the need to take careful aim would have hit his target. Then, with his adrenalin pumping, in all probability he would have kept firing and hitting more than one hostage with each shot. This would all have occurred well before the police would have had time to intervene.
    Like Marxism and Hayekian economics, Neoliberalism may look good to some on paper, but in the real world need some fundamental adjustment before they can be taken seriously.

  10. Maureen Walton (@maureen_walton)

    Who the Hell elects these idiots? I am really scared for Australia. With this Leyonhjelm in our Senate and the people who voted him in really what hope have we got? We as a Nation have to continue to say NO to any change of our Gun laws except, to maybe make them tougher..

  11. Keitha Granville

    Most unlikely ?? Is he mad ?? Has he looked at the statistics on gun deaths in the USA recently ??
    This moronic theory / notion / statement that if people could carry weapons to protect themselves then iinocent civilians would be safe is abject nonsense. We only have to look at the school massacres in the US, or the shooting death just a few weeks ago of a young mother by her toddler who found a loaded gun under the sofa and shot her in the head while she changed a baby’s nappy, or the schoolchild who shot his friend with a gun he took for show and tell. That’s not a country I want to inhabit.
    This deranged maniac was a criminal who shouldn’t have been on the street, shouldn’t have had any kind of gun. If guns were legal the mind boggles as to what might have been available to him. We have to be grateful he didn’t have a machine gun.

  12. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    I agree Paul. G, Dellit with your examination of Leyonhjelm’s policy agendas.

    On the one hand, a positive social advancement of equal marriage rights is good because where I come from my way of how I live my life should not impose upon another’s, and vice versa within reasonable realms.

    However, where I come from also, there is no need to carry a gun, although there are some exceptions with respects to farmers’ livelihoods, and we should not be able to have easy access to shooting somebody even if they are trespassing on or stealing what belongs to us.

    It’s hard to talk in general, absolute terms, so we could start examining case by case scenario legislative reforms. Might be time consuming but within some portfolio realms, it would be very beneficial.

  13. Michael Taylor

    I don’t think Tony Abbott will ever relax the gun laws. Just look at how many security guards he needs now!

  14. Bill Minor

    I won’t be carrying a gun* and I don’t want you to* either.

  15. Ian Joyner

    Leyonhjelm raising this issue now is most offensive.

    He is perpetrating the NRA lie that good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns – well why then have there been massacres at military bases where lots of trained good guys with guns are? Even if the average citizen had a small pop gun, they would not be trained. They’d probably be blown away before they even got their hand on a gun. And if criminals knew people carried guns in their bags, the first thing they’d do is get everyone to put their bags over in the corner so they could not get anything inside.

    Leyonhjelm’s view of freedom would be many people’s view of slavery – we would not be free not to carry guns. We’d be forced to carry a gun, and those of us who still refuse would be less safe. Strange interpretation of freedom that Leyonhjelm has.

  16. Kaye Lee

    The man’s an unprincipled moron…..

    Big Tobacco has a new, unabashed, lavishly paid-up errand boy in Parliament, the anti-taxing, gun-loving, donkey-vote-beneficiary Liberal Democrat Senator David Leyonhjelm.

    In October in the Senate he thanked Australia’s three million smoking coughers for their contributions to the Treasury coffers.

    The senator who defended the rights of smokers and said they were being disproportionately slugged through tobacco taxes has confirmed his party accepted donations from tobacco giant Phillip Morris.

    Liberal Democrat senator David Leyonhjelm confirmed the donation to Fairfax Media and said while he could not recall the exact amount given to his party by the tobacco company, it was in the “tens of thousands”.

    And in a provocative comment, said the donations had influenced his stance on plain packaging.

    “I’ve gone from being strongly opposed to totally opposed to plain packaging,” he said.

    Senator Leyonhjelm said he had no qualms about accepting donations from companies that produced products that can kill users, because smokers can “freely choose” to take up the habit.

    “We are very pleased to receive the donations and we hope to receive them from the other tobacco companies,” he said.

    In a speech to the Senate on Wednesday, the libertarian senator, who has pledged never to vote for an increase in taxes, thanked smokers for lighting up and described their “generosity” to the nation’s coffers as staggering.

    I hope someone from the health department has briefed this fool on the medical costs attributed to smoking.

  17. Michael Taylor

    ‘To’ fixed. Thanks Bill.

  18. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    I totally agree, Ian Joyner and Kaye Lee.

  19. John Fraser

    <

    People have to laugh at them.

    Because the alternative isn't worth contemplating.

  20. Pudd'nhead

    I’ll ride with you Michael

  21. stephentardrew

    Off Topic:

    Paul Craig Roberts is and extremely influential financial commentator. I know I often take and internationalist perspective however this is really a must read. The other articles are equally though provoking. This is why we need to detach as much as possible from our US ties and move towards non-alignment. Will take some time but is vital for our survival.

    Financial Market Manipulation Is The New Trend: Can It Continue?

    Financial Market Manipulation Is The New Trend: Can It Continue?

  22. stephentardrew

    John:

    Changing one pinhead for another pinhead that’s really going to work a treat.

    Hopeless task when they all share the same odious pong.

    The musical chair of morons.

  23. Florence nee Fedup

    Want nothing to do with guns. See not n4eed for them. Maybe better if police were less armed. By the way, was bought up with them. Dad felt mum’s little 22 was all he needed. Along with a double barrel shot gun. Neither used much. Shot gun for snakes. 22 for slaughtering the pig.

  24. Kaye Lee

    For those who are interested in facts rather than lobby groups and libertarian ideology…..

    The United States has more guns and gun deaths than any other developed country in the world, researchers found.

    A study by two New York City cardiologists found that the U.S. has 88 guns per 100 people and 10 gun-related deaths per 100,000 people — more than any of the other 27 developed countries they studied.

    Japan, on the other hand, had only .6 guns per 100 people and .06 gun-related deaths per 100,000 people, making it the country with both the fewest guns per capita and the fewest gun-related deaths.

    Australia had 15 guns per 100 people and 1.04 gun related deaths per 100,000 people.

    They said they carried out their study because of what they said are seemingly baseless claims on either side of the gun control debate.

    “I think we need more of what I would call evidence-based discussion and not merely people pulling things out of their hats,” Bangalore said. “We hear time and time again about these shootings, especially in the last year or so. A lot of claims are made…so we wanted to look at the data and see if any of this holds water.”

    They concluded that more guns do not make people safer.

    David Hemenway, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health who specializes in injury research and is considered one of the top gun violence researchers in the country, said the there’s “no question” that the relationship between guns and gun deaths is real.

    “It shouldn’t be really a surprise to people,” Hemenway said

    Except to a man who currently holds a great deal of power in our Senate.

  25. stephentardrew

    Guaranteed Leyonhjelm will get his figures burned.

    Going against one of Abbott’s heroes who is alive kicking and still against the gun lobby would not be a good look.

    Too many of us still remember Port Arthur.

    Ridding on the back of the Sydney deaths is not a good look.

    The guy is not quite up to it.

  26. flrpwll

    No guns, thanks. My ex was crushingly insecure, and had an alarmingly quick temper. Even he admits that if he’d had access to firearms, back in the days we were married (before extensive therapy on his part), we and our kids would be dead.

    As if we don’t have a big enough problem with domestic violence in this country, without making it even easier.

  27. Fnord Prefect

    I don’t want guns to be more freely available in this country. If I’d had access to firearms during any of the times I’ve been suicidal over the last decade or so, I’d be dead; and I have too many friends who would be in the same boat.

  28. olive

    what an irresponsible and stupid statement this man, who holds high office in our parliament, has made………..he knows nothing

  29. Loz

    I think this man likes to be heard despite what rubbish comes out of his mouth.

  30. lawrencewinder

    The seige-mentality of the IPA, and other right -wing “libertarians” is really frightening. Everything they propose is set to destroy social cohesion so that a fragmented community can be more easily fed upon by their overlords.
    Truly medieval.
    Leyonheljm should be arrested for attempting to incite violence!

  31. mars08

    Must be so easy being an English speaking RWNJ or libertarian… there are thousands of American blogs and “think tanks” to cut-and-paste from.

  32. Anomander

    Leyonhjelm – the dangerous neoliberal extremist elected purely on the basis he happened to secure first square on the ballot paper and because a whole slice of our society are too bloody ignorant or stupid to comprehend the outcome of their lazy decision on election day.

  33. Anomander

    It doesn’t take much imagination to envision the carnage that could have ensured on the day had ordinary people been been free to carry concealed handguns.

    As someone formally trained in the use of firearms in a previous career, the last thing I would ever care to contemplate is a bunch of untrained people pulling-out a concealed handgun, charged-up on adrenaline, furiously blasting away at someone they believe is a threat. The collateral damage could have been far worse than the loss of three lives.

    Handguns have one singular purpose – to destroy human lives. The less we have of them, the safer we all are.

  34. Lee

    One does not have freedom if one feels the need to carry a gun.

  35. Evelyn Wheeler

    No gun thanks….I find they hve a habit of repeating themselves

  36. mars08

    It’s fear… it’s paranoia… it’s ignorance… it’s the sense of victimhood… it’s media sensationalism… it’s hyper-masculinity…

  37. stephentardrew

    It’s a chance to flash an egocentric phallic symbol in your hand in an attempt to screw everyone with the threat of violence.

  38. Kaye Lee

    Oh yes….let’s arm THESE guys.

    This week, the Australian Defence League, an ultra-right-wing Australian group known for its racist and anti-Islamic hate speech, has had it’s account taken down by Facebook.

    Also hovering around the edges of Monday’s hostage tragedy like a blowie banging on a flyscreen was Australian Defence League president Ralph Cerminara. Lives were still in the balance but, for Cerminara, it was a chance to mount his putrid soapbox.

    “Half the reason we’ve got this problem today is because of left-wing bigots,’’ he railed. “These people may be murdered because of your left-wing bigotry.’’

    That a racist fool should try to make capital of a looming tragedy is not surprising, but there is something different about Cerminara.

    He is a military wannabe, outed by the Australian and New Zealand Military Imposters site, which says that for all his claims to have served in Timor and Afghanistan, he had “two years of less than spectacular service”.

    Cerminara uses his exaggerated history to give some credence to his bizarre ideals. This is a bloke who rejoices in the prospect of another Cronulla riot: “I can’t wait … because this time, we’re going to show you who’s boss.’’

    And this week he was willing to climb on the backs of innocent people condemned to die at the hands of madness to spread his wicked creed.

    http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/opinion-america-when-you-stop-mass-shootings-you-can-lecture-us/story-fnihsr9v-1227161067004?nk=a68228594d76c937f87d09ca28782c69

    In October The Australian reported the group sent a letter which included death threats to the ­nation’s leading Islamic cleric.

  39. Jexpat

    Senator Leyonhjelm must not read much of the American press, because incidents like this- and tragedies far worse occur with lamentable frequency in the US due to the widespread proliferation of firearms and the culture of cowardice that fuels it.

  40. Kaye Lee

    Americans are more than 10 times more likely to die by firearms than Australians.

    Pertinently, 112 people were shot dead in 11 mass shootings in Australia in a decade up to and including the Port Arthur massacre.

    Since then, and since the gun buy-backs and stricter controls, there have been no mass shootings. (4 or more deaths not counting perp.)

    In the US, The New York Times reported there were, on average, 16.4 mass shootings a year from 2007 to 2013. Nearly 500 people died in such shootings over 13 years.

  41. mars08

    We live in an era of cheap, user-friendly, rapid, global communication. Never before has so much information and scientific data been available to the masses.

    Yet…

    Far too many just want to use the medium to spread fear, ignorance and hatred. Or stupidity.

    How did it get so crazy?

  42. Jexpat

    @Kate Lee

    Technically, the family killing in Lockhart, NSW last September meets the mass shooting criteria- but point well taken.

    Mere hours after the Sydney incident, a guy gunned down 6 people in Pennsylvania (his ex-wife and former in-laws). A few days before that three students were shot in yet another school shooting, this time in Portland, Oregon.

    These tragedies have become so commonplace in the US that they may only (or may not even) make the local papers. It takes a really “big one” in order for national news to cover it at all.

    For anyone interested (or interested in ammunition to fight the gun nuts) there’s a running compilation since Sandy Hook called “GunFail” at Daily Kos.

    The 29 November 2014 instalment is here:

    “How do you shoot a little girl named Liberty? By accident, of course. GunFAIL LXXXI”

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/29/1343157/-How-do-you-shoot-a-little-girl-named-Liberty-By-accident-of-course-GunFAIL-LXXXI

  43. Matters Not

    While the year’s not yet over, read some stats re gun violence in the US.

    Gun Violence Archive 2014 Toll of Gun Violence

    Total Number of Incidents: 49 196

    Number of Deaths1: 12 032

    Number of Injuries1: 21 718

    Number of Children (age 0-11) Killed/Injured1: 609

    Number of Teens (age 12-17) Killed/Injured1: 2 236

    Mass Shooting: 269

    Officer Involved Shooting: 3 020

    Home Invasion: 2 419

    Defensive Use: 1 503

    Accidental Shooting: 1 483

    More here. http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/

    While the ‘theory’ of arming the populace to make individuals safer has superficial attraction (for some), the evidence overwhelmingly points in the opposite direction.

    We would be nuts to follow the US direction re guns, health and education. To name but three.

  44. Matters Not

    In case you didn’t read about it

    December 15, 2014
    100 block of West 5th Street
    Montgomery County Pennsylvania
    Geolocation: 41.173, -76.8711

    Participants

    •Type: Victim
    •Name: Nicole Hill Stone
    •Age Group: Adult 18+
    •Gender: female
    •Status: Killed
    •Type: Victim

    •Name: Jo Anne Koder
    •Age Group: Adult 18+
    •Gender: female
    •Status: Killed
    •Type: Victim

    •Name: Patricia Hill
    •Age: 75
    •Age Group: Adult 18+
    •Gender: female
    •Status: Killed
    •Type: Victim

    •Name: Trish Flick
    •Age Group: Adult 18+
    •Gender: female
    •Status: Killed
    •Type: Victim

    •Name: Aaron Flick
    •Age Group: Adult 18+
    •Gender: male
    •Type: Victim

    •Name: Nina Flick
    •Age: 14
    •Age Group: Teen 12-17
    •Gender: female

    •Name: Bradley William Stone
    •Age: 35
    •Age Group: Adult 18+
    •Gender: male
    •Type: Victim

    •Name: Anthony Flick
    •Age: 17
    •Age Group: Teen 12-17
    •Gender: male
    •Status: Injured

    More info on the link above.

  45. Casablanca

    Gun Crime Would Be Lower If We Followed Example Of Nation With Highest Gun Crime, Says Senator Leyonhjelm
    “Sure, 12,000 people died from guns last year in America. But just think how many more would’ve died from guns if they had less guns,” said Tom from Melbourne’. http://www.theshovel.com.au/2014/12/18/gun-crime-senator-leyonhjelm/

  46. Rob031

    As part of my first job as a bank teller at 18, I and others had to keep a 38 calibre pistol nearby. On one occasion eight of us had to go to a shooting range to learn how to shoot at targets. Apart from one guy we were bloody hopeless. Most people with such firearms would probably hit anything or anyone other than the intended target.

    BTW: we were all under instructions not to use them on a bank bandit. Seems the guns were a requirement of the bank’s insurance company. Never did make sense to me or my cohort.

  47. Matters Not

    Why would we follow the US.

    For the first time in more than two decades of Pew Research Center surveys, there is more support for gun rights than gun control. Currently, 52% say it is more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns, while 46% say it is more important to control gun ownership.

    The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Dec. 3-7 among 1,507 adults, also finds a shift in attitudes about whether gun ownership in this country does more to protect people or put people’s safety at risk. Nearly six-in-ten Americans (57%) say gun ownership does more to protect people from becoming victims of crime, while 38% say it does more to endanger personal safety. In the days after Newtown, 48% said guns do more to protect people and 37% said they placed people at risk.

    As was the case in December 2012, a majority of Democrats (60%) say guns do more to put people’s safety at risk, while only about a third (35%) say they do more to protect people from becoming crime victims. By contrast, eight-in-ten Republicans say guns do more to protect people from becoming crime victims, up 17-points from 2012.

    Among those who have not attended college, 53% say it is more important to protect gun rights. Those with graduate degrees continue to support controlling gun ownership at higher levels than those in other groups.

    As in the past, Republicans support protecting gun rights over controlling gun ownership by a substantial margin (76% to 22%), and support for protecting gun rights is particularly high among conservative Republicans (83%).

    .

    It’s those educated lefties who want gun control. Who would have figured that?

    http://www.people-press.org/2014/12/10/growing-public-support-for-gun-rights/

  48. Florence nee Fedup

    One would have to know how to use gun under all circumstances. One would have to be prepared to shoot. Do not believe many would meet this criteria.

  49. Bilal

    This moronic senator is clear evidence of the defective nature of the electoral system now in place for the Senate. The last lot included the idiot Family First senator elected on practically no votes, now we have this twit and his gun drivel. At least here in our equally defective electoral system for the upper house of Victoria, the PUP creeps did not get any support, although we got a few apparent nuts.
    There has to be some control over the rorting of the preference allocation so that less than 5% or so do not get counted.

  50. What?

    Wow! What a bunch of victims most of you are. This bloke is just trying to start a debate. He mentioned the right for citizens to have access to pepper spray or mace also. He is not saying everybody should walk around like they are in bloody tombstone, he is just calling for debate. The reason I write this is because of the fact that this bloke is one of the only people to stand up AGAINST the right of our self serving government to spy on us all and retain our data. He thanked smokers for the billions they pay in tax……..what a bastard! He is not trying to shove a gun in the hand of every man woman and child or a smoke in their mouths either. He is just calling for debate and the right of the individual to defend themselves. The way you bunch of human hating morons are going on makes me sick. Maybe the old prick is right when he says we are a nation of victims.

  51. mars08

    So you’re saying that Senator Leyonhjelm doesn’t want us to be a nation of victims?

    Cool! Neither do I. And keeping tight controls on who has access to guns seems a good start. Sorted!

  52. Rossleigh

    Yes, having greater access to guns will stop us being victims, because it’ll be potential victims that use guns. Nobody carrying a gun for “self-defence” will ever lose their temper and decide to use it on someone undeserving.

    Of course, as What? said, the man is only trying to start a debate and therefore nobody should be able to argue against him without being abused and called a victim, because that’s what starting a debate means. Leyonhjelm gives his opinion and the rest of us have no right to say what we think.

    What? What an intellect!

  53. Michael Taylor

    What? didn’t read the post.

  54. What?

    These anti terror laws are a deliberate attack on our basic freedoms. Who gives a shit about what he thinks about guns? They aren’t going to loosen gun laws. I wasn’t posting about the article as much as the reaction in the comments about Leyonhjelms right to be in the senate.

  55. Kaye Lee

    rossleigh in his inimitable way summed it up. You want to open debate to those who agree with you…anyone else will be called names.

    You ignore the many facts presented about how gun ownership is proportional to gun violence. You ignore the health costs of smoking. You ignore the fact that this man is only there because of the donkey vote and ignorant voters who thought they were voting for the Coalition and dodgy preference deals.

    Yes he has voted against some of the more stupid legislation. He has also tried to introduce a mariage equality bill. But make no mistake. This man’s vote is for sale as seems to increasingly be the case with our politicians.

  56. stephentardrew

    What?

    Didn’t sound like that to me sunshine. More like general invective for “a bunch of most” who and what? Come on you can do better than that. A simple statement of your opinion would suffice without the sooky. You know democracy and right of free speech and all that. Try a little civility and we could all get along as one big happy family. So much better than shadow boxing.

  57. What?

    I am glad he is in the senate because he speaks out against the anti-terror laws. Most people know gun laws won’t be changed because of his comments. I like smoking. I am sorry for calling everybody human haters.

  58. Damo451

    OK , so i can see who is to blame for this idiot getting voted into the senate.
    I seem to remember a sticker on an old holden ute with the truck stack exhaust ,and it read
    ‘ im a gay smokin ,gun totin , cash in hand worker ,and i vote !! ‘
    Bastards !!

  59. Kaye Lee

    At last year’s election, the LDP polled 415,901 primary votes in NSW, or 9.5%. This represented 0.66% of a quota and Leyonhjelm was elected on preferences. In contrast, the LDP polled only 3.53% in South Australia, 3.43% in Western Australia, 2.32% in Tasmania, 0.69% in Queensland and just 0.01% in Victoria.

    It is generally believed that Leyonhjelm benefited from voter confusion with the names Liberal Democratic Party and Liberal Party. The LDP also drew first position on the Senate ballot paper and may have secured a donkey vote.

    In his maiden speech he said

    “The only purpose for which power can be rightfully ever exercised over any member of a civilised society against his will is to prevent harm to others.”

    He clearly does not think guns cause harm to others and he will fight for the right of smokers to kill themselves.

    He also said ‘If you’re not a socialist at 20 you have no heart, but if you’re still a socialist at 40 you have no brains.’

    So once you accumulate some assets and influence you should forget your heart and remember the combination to the safe instead.

    If you can be bothered you can read his speech here. Seems to me that he is saying we don’t need to be paying for a government. Get out of the way and let the corporations go full speed ahead. Every man for himself.

    Sen. David Leyonhjelm (LDP-NSW) – Maiden Speech

  60. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    I have trouble listening to people like Leyonhjelm, even before they get started on their absurd beliefs, if they refuse to use gender inclusive language.

    I suspect his omission of the reference to the woman’s right to freedom and self-determination, doesn’t quite cut it when it comes to what is important.

  61. revolutionarycitizen

    Quite a reasonable post… I can even support the sentiment.

    Guns don’t make people safer, guns don’t make anyone less safe, US Crime and Murder rates have been declining since the 1970s as a result of much better law enforcement and the use of stiffer penalties to keep repeat offenders off the street, guns being largely irrelevant.

    And MT is right about one very important aspect, Australians aren’t shooters, sure, if the Sheikh tried to take hostages in a roadhouse in Texas there is a likelihood of him meeting his maker sooner rather than later, but in Australia even the criminals don’t carry guns. At the peak the use of fire-arms in homicides was only a touch over 40%, now it’s nearer 20%, Australians just aren’t shooters, and we should probably try and keep it that way.

  62. Michael Taylor

    OMG, RC likes my post. I must be doing something wrong. 😉

  63. Michael Taylor

    But seriously, thanks for the thumbs up.

  64. corvus boreus

    Much of current society is probably too deranged to be permitted to publicly carry weaponry, and those who could be trusted to carry firearms would most likely not want to.
    Children should probably not be allowed to starve or be beaten to death.
    On some things we can all agree.

  65. revolutionarycitizen

    MT, believe it or not common sense is more common than you think…

  66. Matters Not

    MT, believe it or not common sense is more common than you think

    Simply hilarious. Here’s a few quotes with ‘links’.

    by the way, common sense is often used by people who don’t have the real knowledge, expertise, or direct experience to actually make sound judgments

    I’m sure you will read this link RC and recognise ‘yourself’. But perhaps not.

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-power-prime/201107/common-sense-is-neither-common-nor-sense

    That’s a psychological insight.

    Here’s a sociological perspective:

    equating any science with simple common sense could not be further from the truth! Common sense is not always “common,” nor “sensible.”

    http://www.cliffsnotes.com/sciences/sociology/the-sociological-perspective/sociology-and-common-sense

    I could provide countless examples of ‘experts’ commenting on the nonsense of ‘common sense’.

    But, I suspect that you prefer to remain in Plato’s ‘Cave’, (a philosophical link) that’s probably way above your development.

    Yes I know, I ought to be ashamed for my treatment of ‘dum … ‘

  67. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Does anybody here read and comment on Table Talkers aka Bob Ellis’ blog?

    If so brilliant, but insights and suggestions greatly needed for a collaborative, alternative government to the current LNP Degenerates headed by rabid Abbott, his stupid cohorts and their dirty backers..

    Working towards social and socio-economic societal change is the imperative.

  68. John Fraser

    <

    @Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    "Thus, in Sydney, we have not yet heard what Katrina Dawson died of, and why, after the first shot, the ‘crack team’ waited nine minutes before entering the premises, and why they fired so many rounds into a dark place, and who they hit. We do not know why witnesses have not yet been interviewed by Ray Martin, or why the Prime Minister has refused to be photographed with them, or to explain to them why he didn’t help them when they asked him to. No, all the emphasis is on the ‘glorious dead’, and how wonderfully the people have come out to adore and mourn them, and a crucial question, who killed who, and who wounded who, has been, thus far, averted."

    Home

    Very pertinent questions.

  69. Florence nee Fedup

    Very few that will be answered. This mob must be ashamed of what they do. If not, why is all kept big secrets, even their travel expenses.

  70. mike tsarh

    I just wonder how how such an ignorant senator was elected. He also has a simplicity view/standing on education funding. One could not explain his behaviour in terms ignorance but in terms of corruption ..

  71. Dallas

    I understand that many of you do not own firearms, the reason I state this is because if you did, you would understand the amount of effort it takes to attain one of these tools, and like any tool, require proper training.

    if one of the hostages had been allowed to carry, then I assure you they would have had extensive training and reservation in the use of such tools.

  72. Lee

    Is that the same kind of intensive training undertaken by parents in the US who are shot/killed by their pre-school children?

  73. jimhaz

    He should not be honoured with the title of Senator. I’d call him Opportunist Leyonhjelm. He has been a member of Young Labour, The Liberals and Shooters.

    Most vocal libertarians are nut cases. Most of what they ask for is pure greed based hiding under the libertarian banner.

    They fail to understand that large populations need well developed governments to control the excesses of individuals and to specialise for high productivity or international competitiveness people cant be all things at once (as in also being direct providers of support to those who need help as well as being an income earner). Give him what he wants and he’d change his mind real quick, as he seems to do with political parties.

  74. Arizona

    I’ll just leave this here. All your uneducated opinions and biased scources mean nothing. You all imply that killing someone is the only use for a gun When this is the last resort.

    Geuss Australia is truly a country of victims but.

    Good luck with that.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use

  75. The AIM Network

    OK, so it’s not just for killing someone. You guys like killing ‘something’.

    This may come as a surprise to an educated person such as yourself, but up until about 20 years ago we had the same laws as your country when it came to guns. We just got sick of them being used to kill people all the time. Innocent people.

    But I guess they mean nothing to you.

  76. Lee

    I guess Arizona knows nothing about Australia. Otherwise he would know that there has not been a mass shooting here since 1996, since the government actually did something sensible and removed most of the guns from society.

    Jim Jeffries on gun control.

    https://youtu.be/lL8JEEt2RxI

  77. corvus boreus

    Arizona,
    Your Wiki link was blandly statistical, but it seemed to indicate the US has a shitload of firearms crime and shooting injuries and deaths, in a country with shitloads of ordnance in the hands of the citizenry.

    Here are two fun gun facts about Australia, which has phuqloads fewer firearms per capita.
    1; A considerably lesser percentage of the crime here is gun related.
    2; There are far fewer gun deaths per capita.
    Go figure.

  78. Roswell

    Wow. An American who’s heard of Australia. Gosh, he’s a bright one.

  79. Lee

    “Wow. An American who’s heard of Australia. Gosh, he’s a bright one.”

    He probably thinks our capital city is Vienna.

  80. Harquebus

    This guy is hardly likely to come back and argue.

    “If it moves, shoot it; if it don’t move, chop it down.” — Old Hillbilly.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page
%d bloggers like this: