Strange people in the WA Government they allow people who have been arrested as mentally unfit to possess and drive motor vehicles but will not allow them to have a Zimmerstutzen.

Those assessed as mental risks are also allowed access to chainsaws, hatchets,axes and a variety of knives.

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 18^th, 2024 at 10:35am:

Your obfuscation doesn’t alter the fact that people considered to be mentally unfit are allowed free access to lethal weapons but are not allowed to own a Zimmerstutzen.
Going by your posts I doubt that you could get a firearm license.

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 18^th, 2024 at 11:39am:

Not embarrassed in the slightest.
I didn’t say they were classified as weapons but they are lethal and one would expect that a Government that doesn’t allow a Zimmerstutzen over the limit for those it considers mentally stable would have been at pains not to allow potentially lethal things/weapons into the hands of those that it considers mentally unstable.

Bye the way, do you know what this symbol ‘’?’’ means ?

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 18^th, 2024 at 12:20pm:

So you think that it’s OK for those deemed to be mentally unfit to own a Zimmerstutzen should be allowed things that can be lethal weapons?
Allowing those deemed to be dangerous because of a Government employee’s thinking on their mental health access to knives but not to a Zimmerstutzen borders on the hysterical in terms of mirth.
‘It would be funny were it not so pathetic.

Just curious, but is your rudeness hereditary or did you acquire it?

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 18^th, 2024 at 1:17pm:

Just answer this; why should a person who has been deemed mentally unfit to possess a Zimmerstutzen be allowed to have things with the potential to cause much harm?
A Zimmerstutzen has iess power than a thrown dart yet is required to be registered, minuscule power compared to a chainsaw and not worth mentioning compared to a motor vehicle.
Why do you think that those deemed to be mentally unfit to possess a firearm are mentally stablei enough to be trusted with a motor vehicle?
Motor vehicles have been used to commit murder , a few years ago at Glen Innes, north NSW, there was a double murder and suicide by a mentally unstable man., then therewas the time a truck was driven into the cafe at Ayre’s Rock.
Can happen any time.
But you would seem to condone the mentally unstable having free access to dangerous items that can become weapons in an instant.

What’s your thoughts on those deemed to be mentally unfit having free access to matches and petrol?

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Oct 19^th, 2024 at 1:04pm:


So your proposal is either....

1. Mental health and background checks for everyone wanting to purchase chainsaws, hatchets, axes and knives with licencing and severe penalties for breaches....We can also add matches and petrol although motor vehicles require a licence and practicle test as welll as restrictions....That way we can make sure anybody with a mental condition cannot purchase anything....Everything someone wants to purchase that may be used to cause harm will require a background check....Just to be sure!!!

2. No background checks for anyone wanting to purchase any firearm and no limit to the amount of firearms someone can possess???

If you dont like the laws go to court and change them....Your whole argument is complete bullshit!!!

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 19^th, 2024 at 6:10pm:

Owning a firearm for self defence is a right it’s just that in Australia people are denied that tight.

All people have a right to defend themselves from unlawful acts, therefore they have the right to an adequate means of defence.
The Government cannot protect its citizens from attack so it has no right to deny them the means of protection. 

Now tell me that that is not logical, refute my points with logical reasoning if you can.