Australian Politics Forum

Grappler Truth Teller Feller

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 83803
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male

Re: Guns
Reply #165 - Sep 12^th, 2015 at 10:54am

Haven't got time now to go into it all - but let me leave you (for now) with this:-

Does anyone really think that the current obvious move to exert greater violence against men as a first port of call is going to reduce the level of violence and lower the endless display of dead women?

Banging men up at the first whine will take us one step closer to war - not peace.

The current system does not work - it has replaced the possibility of violence under an amazing variety of 'definitions' of violence, with direct violence and has thus created the current situation rather than resolving it.

This was done to offer to the Sate the opportunity to steal licenced firearms by regulation, when the electorate had defeated that idea at the previous election. It was NOT to stop violence - it was and remains itself violence - and has created the environment in which these women are now being killed.

You cannot back people into a corner and beat them up without retaliation, just to allow women to do whatever they want without consideration for others, and to give the State the unwarranted power to use violence against men.

That is a declaration of war and unless a better way is found, including compelling women to behave like responsible adults, that war will expand once the State begins greater violence as its only way of trying to stem what it has created.

How you can view that as purely a personal issue with me is beyond me - I seek the better good for all - not just opportunity for the State to bash men at whim to achieve its 'bloodless coup'.

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

Pho Huc

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 985
Victoria
Gender: male

Re: Guns
Reply #166 - Sep 12^th, 2015 at 1:35pm

mariacostel wrote on Sep 11^th, 2015 at 8:08pm:

Quote:

Assuming I was the big poomba and was able to operate over a sufficiently long term time frame I would focus most policy on early intervention and youth education programs.

*I would incentivise people not to commit crimes.
I would incentivise responsible parenting, and parental training.
I would focus on eliminating on the core causes of anti-social behavior (poverty, substance abuse, mental illness).
I would decriminalize drug use.

Vote Pho! Lol

Seriously though, I accept that the way society is structured now requires prisons.
I don't think we should accept that this is the best solution to our social problems though, and should try and look for better ways of achieving the desired outcomes.

*this is a whole other complex idea.

You want to both ELIMINATE drug abuse while legalising drug use. Well that is an interesting if intrinsically inconsistent goal.

How do you 'incentivise' people not to commit crime? You oppose punishment so what is your other plan?

I dispute that decriminalizing drugs would be inconsistent with reducing drug abuse.
In Portugal they have seen a decrease in overall drug use since they adopted decriminalization as a base of their drugs policy.

Decriminalization is a critical step in connecting drug users to health care services and taking control of the supply chain away from criminal organisations.

Regarding ways of incentivising people to be good, I would have thought some kind of rewards system that pays out when you don't get into trouble. I.e every year you receive a $500.00 payment for not being convicted of anything. Every decade you get a a $2000.00 payment. You could also scale it against income so people at the low end of the income scale received a higher reward, which would have the added effect of reducing poverty.

I know it sounds absurd, but given the vast majority of people do not commit crime it would effectively function as a universal small income tax break/dole increase. It wouldn't have a huge change on the economy, but it would give people a financial incentive not to commit criminal actions.

Would it stop all crime?
No
Would it be an efficient crime reduction strategy?
Id love to find out. Maybe Sweden will try it out one day

Back to top

The law locks up the man who steals the goose from the common, but leaves the greater criminal loose who steals the common from the goose (convict saying)

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 83803
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male

Re: Guns
Reply #167 - Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:20pm

Phemanderac wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 10:31am:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 10:23am:

What kind of message for reason and fair discussion of any disagreement does it send when women are told that unless their old man toes their line the State will bash him up?

Well when that actually is the case I will get back to you.

It is the case for the many - as a mountain of evidence will support. Do you not realise that all rights held by a man vanish the moment a complaint is made over 'DV' - regardless of circumstances, with 97-98% of 'complaints' over DV are over nothing of the sort? Vexatious complaints are par for the course and no 'defence' is permitted.

That is your perspective, which I suspect may have come from experience (either your own or someone close).

Of course, ALL law and systems are open to abuse, vexatious claims or manipulation. That is one of the flaws we need to be trying to address.

However, the same system has contingencies in place for redress too... You just need to use the system to seek your own justice.

Impossibly naive. The 'avenues for redress' are first a proper rendering of FACTS before a court of some GENUINE wrongdoing as the Law requires. This does not even begin to occur. Any subsequent appeal is treated with utter contempt by the courts. What is needed is that these matters not occur in the first place in the courts, and a balanced approach be taken to the entire issue - including the abolition of the feminist nonsense that anything a woman doesn't like or can't get in a relationship is somehow 'violence' against her - but not against a man in a similar situation.

I think the money associate with the "system" is a major issue for example. I think a lot of people simply give up because they cannot afford to defend themselves. Regardless of gender. This despite men still having the benefit of (generally) being higher earners...Some absolutely use that to their advantage.

Women's complaints are funded by government here, and men are slugged with court costs if they defend, and there is NO defence permitted. Qui Bono? Try it some time and see for yourself how any nut case can start such a case against you and there is no defence.

Yep, we agree there are flaws.

I think we disagree with the extent of said flaws and how the imbalance works. At the end of the day both genders can fall foul of the system.

The issue is that these (non) laws provide an illegal finding against a person guilty of no wrong,and are a clear indication to that person that HIS rights are open to violation at any time on any whim.

How could any reasonable person not see that this is an absolute precursor to INCREASED violence rather than diminished violence.

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Guns
Reply #168 - Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:21pm

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 9:24am:

Gun bought illegally - the biggest problem with Wee Johnnie's buyback and the draconian measures imposed by State governments through the inflammatory DV 'orders' without any legal requirement of proof - was that countless fireams went underground and there is a burgeoning market for those of unlawful intent in buying them.

None of these killers - with the exception of licensed farmers etc - owned a legal firearm.

You cannot stop that market, since it is an illegal market, and will always remain so.

Nonsense.

Back to top

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 83803 Proud pre-1850's NO Voter Gender:	Re: Guns Reply #169 - Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:23pm God Damn You To Hell, Page Turner.. you
Back to top	« Last Edit: Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:30pm by Grappler Truth Teller Feller » “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ― John Adams IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Guns
Reply #170 - Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:23pm

Pho Huc wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 1:35pm:

mariacostel wrote on Sep 11^th, 2015 at 8:08pm:

Quote:

Assuming I was the big poomba and was able to operate over a sufficiently long term time frame I would focus most policy on early intervention and youth education programs.

*I would incentivise people not to commit crimes.
I would incentivise responsible parenting, and parental training.
I would focus on eliminating on the core causes of anti-social behavior (poverty, substance abuse, mental illness).
I would decriminalize drug use.

Vote Pho! Lol

Seriously though, I accept that the way society is structured now requires prisons.
I don't think we should accept that this is the best solution to our social problems though, and should try and look for better ways of achieving the desired outcomes.

*this is a whole other complex idea.

You want to both ELIMINATE drug abuse while legalising drug use. Well that is an interesting if intrinsically inconsistent goal.

How do you 'incentivise' people not to commit crime? You oppose punishment so what is your other plan?

I dispute that decriminalizing drugs would be inconsistent with reducing drug abuse.
In Portugal they have seen a decrease in overall drug use since they adopted decriminalization as a base of their drugs policy.

Decriminalization is a critical step in connecting drug users to health care services and taking control of the supply chain away from criminal organisations.

Regarding ways of incentivising people to be good, I would have thought some kind of rewards system that pays out when you don't get into trouble. I.e every year you receive a $500.00 payment for not being convicted of anything. Every decade you get a a $2000.00 payment. You could also scale it against income so people at the low end of the income scale received a higher reward, which would have the added effect of reducing poverty.

I know it sounds absurd, but given the vast majority of people do not commit crime it would effectively function as a universal small income tax break/dole increase. It wouldn't have a huge change on the economy, but it would give people a financial incentive not to commit criminal actions.

Would it stop all crime?
No
Would it be an efficient crime reduction strategy?
Id love to find out. Maybe Sweden will try it out one day

That is excruciatingly silly and ineffective. Do you really think $500 would motivate anyone older than 12 to avoid crime? $500 cannot motivate a teenager to keep their room clean for a year. But what DOES motivate is the threat of a year in jail.

Back to top

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 83803
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male

Re: Guns
Reply #171 - Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:29pm

mariacostel wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:21pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 9:24am:

Gun bought illegally - the biggest problem with Wee Johnnie's buyback and the draconian measures imposed by State governments through the inflammatory DV 'orders' without any legal requirement of proof - was that countless fireams went underground and there is a burgeoning market for those of unlawful intent in buying them.

None of these killers - with the exception of licensed farmers etc - owned a legal firearm.

You cannot stop that market, since it is an illegal market, and will always remain so.

Nonsense.

Perhaps you could explain to us how a 'feeling' is considered sufficient proof these days... I thought not.

"as long as the complainant feels'...... hard to toss that one, eh?

Now - where is the legal requirement for PROOF....

"Sentiro Ergo Est' is not sufficient in Law..

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 83803 Proud pre-1850's NO Voter Gender:	Re: Guns Reply #172 - Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:31pm
Back to top	“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ― John Adams IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 83803 Proud pre-1850's NO Voter Gender:	Re: Guns Reply #173 - Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:31pm
Back to top	“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ― John Adams IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 83803
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male

Re: Guns
Reply #174 - Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:40pm

Now - I'm off to work soon - I'll leave you to consider the ISSUES raised about what does and does not constitute violence against the individual, and perhaps to consider how best to approach these in a non-violent way so as to not exacerbate them......

Parting shot - the current thrust - and it is exactly such based on changes in 'DV LAW' in the United States - to draconian measures against any man complained of, such as immediate imprisonment etc to 'preserve the peace' .... will inevitably result in a doubling of killings, and will spread this wildfire to others, including police and magistrates, and politicians who support this form of State sponsored violence etc. At that point a true war will have begun - so I say it is time to back down from this game of brinkmanship BEFORE we get to that point, and many more people die.

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Guns
Reply #175 - Sep 12^th, 2015 at 4:00pm

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:29pm:

mariacostel wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:21pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 9:24am:

Gun bought illegally - the biggest problem with Wee Johnnie's buyback and the draconian measures imposed by State governments through the inflammatory DV 'orders' without any legal requirement of proof - was that countless fireams went underground and there is a burgeoning market for those of unlawful intent in buying them.

None of these killers - with the exception of licensed farmers etc - owned a legal firearm.

You cannot stop that market, since it is an illegal market, and will always remain so.

Nonsense.

Perhaps you could explain to us how a 'feeling' is considered sufficient proof these days... I thought not.

"as long as the complainant feels'...... hard to toss that one, eh?

Now - where is the legal requirement for PROOF....

"Sentiro Ergo Est' is not sufficient in Law..

I've heard you rant on legal matters before. I have zero confidence in your ability to even supply facts never-mind balanced observations about it.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Guns
Reply #176 - Sep 12^th, 2015 at 4:21pm

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:40pm:

Now - I'm off to work soon - I'll leave you to consider the ISSUES raised about what does and does not constitute violence against the individual, and perhaps to consider how best to approach these in a non-violent way so as to not exacerbate them......

Parting shot - the current thrust - and it is exactly such based on changes in 'DV LAW' in the United States - to draconian measures against any man complained of, such as immediate imprisonment etc to 'preserve the peace' .... will inevitably result in a doubling of killings, and will spread this wildfire to others, including police and magistrates, and politicians who support this form of State sponsored violence etc. At that point a true war will have begun - so I say it is time to back down from this game of brinkmanship BEFORE we get to that point, and many more people die.

Complete garbage.

Back to top

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 83803 Proud pre-1850's NO Voter Gender:	Re: Guns Reply #177 - Sep 13^th, 2015 at 8:41pm Meh!
Back to top	“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ― John Adams IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 83803
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male

Re: Guns
Reply #178 - Sep 13^th, 2015 at 8:42pm

mariacostel wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 4:00pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:29pm:

mariacostel wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:21pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 9:24am:

Gun bought illegally - the biggest problem with Wee Johnnie's buyback and the draconian measures imposed by State governments through the inflammatory DV 'orders' without any legal requirement of proof - was that countless fireams went underground and there is a burgeoning market for those of unlawful intent in buying them.

None of these killers - with the exception of licensed farmers etc - owned a legal firearm.

You cannot stop that market, since it is an illegal market, and will always remain so.

Nonsense.

Perhaps you could explain to us how a 'feeling' is considered sufficient proof these days... I thought not.

"as long as the complainant feels'...... hard to toss that one, eh?

Now - where is the legal requirement for PROOF....

"Sentiro Ergo Est' is not sufficient in Law..

I've heard you rant on legal matters before. I have zero confidence in your ability to even supply facts never-mind balanced observations about it.

When you have no idea whatsoever about what is being discussed - just say so and move on.

You have obviously zero concept of rights and legalities, and some amazing ability to consider that a person simply stating that they 'feel' something is sufficient for the intervention of a court and of police (violence writ large).

Care to offer an opposing view? Prepared to say that the exercise of law is not itself a violent act, and one only condoned by necessity - a concept which is itself a very slippery slope?

Any chance you could argue a point instead of using personal attack as the only weapon you possess? Grin

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 13^th, 2015 at 8:49pm by Grappler Truth Teller Feller »

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 83803
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male

Re: Guns
Reply #179 - Sep 13^th, 2015 at 8:43pm

mariacostel wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 4:21pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Sep 12^th, 2015 at 2:40pm:

Now - I'm off to work soon - I'll leave you to consider the ISSUES raised about what does and does not constitute violence against the individual, and perhaps to consider how best to approach these in a non-violent way so as to not exacerbate them......

Parting shot - the current thrust - and it is exactly such based on changes in 'DV LAW' in the United States - to draconian measures against any man complained of, such as immediate imprisonment etc to 'preserve the peace' .... will inevitably result in a doubling of killings, and will spread this wildfire to others, including police and magistrates, and politicians who support this form of State sponsored violence etc. At that point a true war will have begun - so I say it is time to back down from this game of brinkmanship BEFORE we get to that point, and many more people die.

Complete garbage.

Then do your best to explain precisely how it is garbage... I know you can't.

Oh - I wish Longie would come back - he could mathematise it for us into something it never was, is or will be....

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged