This is "Ozzie's guide to understanding an anti-gunner" in Australia as you are bound to hear these statements this month being the anniversary of Port Arthur, although these would apply equally to the ANTIs in the US. This should help you interpret their sales pitch:

Statement 1: I'm a shooter too or I'm from the bush
Translation: I'm anti-gun and I'm hoping that I fool you to make you agree with my anti-gun comments because you'll think I'm one of you

Statement 2: We only want sensible gun restrictions
Translation: We only want restrictions that are fuelled by our emotion and which have absolutely nothing to do with common sense (such as the banning of firearms solely based on cosmetic appearance rather then their actual function)

Statement 3: We stand for gun safety
Translation: We have absolutely no qualifications in the safe handling or safe use of firearms but we are going to sell ourselves using this catch phrase to ban as many firearms as possible

Statement 4: We need to have a common sense debate about guns
Translation: We are blaming you for the actions of criminals and we need to negotiate changes to the gun laws where you will have to accept further restrictions and we will give you nothing in return (this is also the building block for training firearms owners into being apathetic shooters, so you're accustom to having to suffer more restrictions every time a criminal does something wrong with a firearm)

Statement 5: It's not in the public interest
Translation: The firearm you want, is not permitted by the anti-gun lobby, so therefore it's not in the interest of members of the public (who share our own anti-gun views) to allow you to own it

Statement 6: Australia's gun laws have stopped mass-shootings since being implemented in 1996
Translation: We will only focus on the statistics since 1996 which show an average decline in gun homicide to now, however we won't admit that this average decline is at the same rate that it was prior to 1996, nor will we acknowledge the Monash University shooting or the fact that the Sydney siege gunman was unlicensed using an unregistered Category-C pump action shotgun (that was banned from general sports and recreational use back in 1996)

Statement 7: Gun laws work
Translation: Gun laws work for us to achieve our ultimate goal - to disarm you so that only the criminals have firearms

Statement 8: Gun registration saves lives
Translation: Registration creates jobs so that numerous public servants can be paid to enter incorrect information about what you have, but we will have a rough idea of where the guns are so we can come for them in the future. We won't admit that countries such as New Zealand (who have no registration of long arms and still have access to semi-auto rifles and shotguns for sports / recreational use) actually have a lower gun homicide rate per capita than what Australia does

Statement 9: Due to recent shootings, we need to look at the gun laws
Translation: We intend on passing further restrictions on law-abiding firearm owners called 'feel good legislation' as it makes the general public feel good that something is being done, even though it will have absolutely no effect on the criminal use of firearms

Statement 10: I'm not against people having guns
Translation: So long as it's the police or the military only

Sadly it is true..

Thanks for the translation, Vince!

I just had an adverse reaction and thru up.
Actually that also happened in 1996.
Thanks Vince.

Scary stuff Vinnie....Got another one for ya, just heard it the other day on the news and it does need a good translation. The media covering at a Trump rally decided to use the word long-guns when referring to the armed police presence (who were carrying AR-15s or a variant) instead of assault rifles. I'm assuming that means something or other but I can't put my finger on it. Totally surprised me to hear long-guns! I suppose if they were bad people carrying them they would be called assault rifles?



Suz

Suz,
Simply means they were carrying rifles not just handguns.
Media are 80% of the problem.

dhc4ever wrote:

Suz, Simply means they were carrying rifles not just handguns. Media are 80% of the problem.

Yep...as Pete says Suz.

Only 80% of the problem Pete???

No you don't get it, they actually showed them carrying AR-15s but wouldn't call them assault rifles (which is the media's preferred twist of the knife). So I thought they were trying to make a point or something because they ALWAYS call them assault rifles. They went the softer route and called them long guns, as if that was a more people friendly term, as in, they were police not bad guys. When they want to remove AR-15s from the earth they call them assault rifles, but when they want a police force protecting the population they call them long guns.

I swear if I have to carry a stick again to get my point across (and I'll call it an assault switch), I'll have to get me a sling so it'll be at-the-ready.....thought you guys would run with this...no I wasn't fishing

So it would be interesting to see (cause I can't remember what I was watching) what the cause was, that was on the television and just who they were protecting (a gun friendly guy?) be interesting if it was a politician of whatever party or just a gathering where they expected trouble. If it was a Democrat or a Republican I could easily understand the rhetorical bait and switch, but if it was just a gathering then the media might have done that on their own and it might show that the media is being more gun friendly.




strong
Suz



like garlic.....

Suzanne wrote:

strong Suz like garlic.....

Or horseradish!

media - gun friendly? I believe that is a contradiction in terms.

I could see the media saying "long guns" if there was a mix of carbines, rifles and shotguns. Let's face facts guns that are black plastic are SCARY!

Interesting point Suz...I didn't pick up on the assault rifle/long gun terminology mix mate. However one term I did pick up on was that mention of an assault switch...that sounds downright scary I promise I'll try my very best to pay more attention next time.
But in the meantime...KEEP MY SEAT FREE UP THE LADDER GUYS.

Interesting that the media referred to the ARs as "long guns" when carried by the Police. I wonder if it was just to differentiate between handguns and rifles, is it the media suggesting that maybe the Police (and possibly the media) expected problems at the rally that would require more "firepower" or is it a case of the media being told to refer to the ARs as long guns rather than assault rifles for some reason? I find the suggestion that the media would suddenly "go easy" on firearms by dropping the term "assault rifle" in favour of long gun, a very hard pill to swallow. Call me cynical, but I don't trust the media to suddenly display pro gun sympathies.

There is more to this than meets the eye.

long guns??????? sounds like a term from black powder era......
and I thought in this PC world size didnt matter?????
or is that just something to make those with something small fell better about themselves while being sung KOOMBYAAR lullabies?????