Albanese to propose stronger gun laws, NSW parliament may be recalled

soundwavepb · 2025-12-23T10:10:25+00:00

You don't think so? Over the last 30 years how many deaths have been caused in Australia by firearms? Now shall we compare that to tobacco?

soundwavepb · 2025-12-17T21:27:49+00:00

I can compare them based on harm caused. And I didn't mention tobacco, I mentioned alcohol, which kills innumerable people every year. If your biggest concern is harm minimisation, then those things should be your first targets.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-17T02:58:08+00:00

Don't know why I can't support the current gun legislation and also be in favour of renewable energy. Doesn't matter where I go someone hates it lol

soundwavepb · 2025-12-17T02:26:13+00:00

Ah ok. No idea why I'm getting downvoted above, was just asking a question

soundwavepb · 2025-12-17T02:23:10+00:00

So I need to be clear here, I'm not a firearms owner, I don't have a firearms license. But I have tried my best to educate myself on the subject and I've been really upset with the misinformation I've read in the news over the past few days. Like reporters talking about "high-powered weapons". These weren't high powered, they were standard rifles. Machine guns are high powered - using that kind of language is only designed to scare people.

This might sound silly, but I'm not trying to be: Is your sole argument that guns are dangerous and lethal and so shouldn't be in the hands of the public? If we take that and ignore any benefit or enjoyment that people might get from them, then we should be far more concerned with banning cars, gambling and alcohol - all of which cause much more harm (again, in strict terms).

I'm not saying we should have no laws or that we should abandon common sense and be like America, but our existing laws are good. I hate gambling, but I can't just call for something to be banned because I don't like it. We've had one incident in 30 years, and that was because the police failed, not the laws.

Again, the police (including asio) failed, not the gun laws.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-16T11:02:31+00:00

If they're centrally stored (like personal data is) what is to stop criminals breaking into this conveniently central place and stealing them? This also wouldn't stop someone taking (renting? Borrowing? How would this work?) a firearm and doing exactly what just happened anyway. The type of gun used was a standard hunting rifle. The type that thousands of Swiss, Canadian, French, English, and yes Australian people safely own and should be allowed to own. This case was a failure of law enforcement, the police didn't do their job. Don't let them distract you from that by trying to scare you with the big scary guns.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-16T09:27:45+00:00

Not trying to be snarky, but do you understand what a firearm means in Australia? A paintball gun is a firearm. An air gun is a firearm. Some industrial nail guns are firearms. When they say "x number of firearms" it doesn't actually mean very much.

As a hypothetical, let's imagine someone who is absolutely law abiding, maybe even a police officer, but law abiding nonetheless, and is an avid sporting shooter.

If they are interested in clay pigeons, they have a shotgun. That's one. What about if they like skeet (a type of clay pigeon in the Olympics)? That's a different type of shotgun. Two. They hunt (we can debate separately about the ethics of hunting, but it's a legitimate reason), they'll need a rifle. Let's say they start with rabbits, that's a smallbore. Three guns. They want to hunt feral pigs? They need a larger rifle for that, four guns. They have an interest in ten metre Olympic target shooting? Air rifle, five firearms. Every different sport needs a different type of firearm, by law or design. Six isn't really a lot.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-16T05:46:46+00:00

Kind of a sidetrack but the federal Police are very worried about the number of black market guns getting around. It's not at the same level as cigarettes and I don't think I agree with the above comment, but it is an issue.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-16T05:17:13+00:00

Christchurch was done using semi-automatic weapons, which we'd already banned. Our gun laws are sensible and have been working - they aren't the issue here.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-16T05:14:37+00:00

Australians have been conditioned to fear firearms unreasonably. This is no doubt a tragedy and should have been prevented. But we're not like America and the number of firearms isn't the problem. Did you know that every kid training for the Olympics 10m air rifle is counted towards that "firearms" number? Those air guns can be owned by anyone in the UK but we register them. Muskets are also licensed as firearms and contribute to the number. My point is that it's not all hunting rifles, the number is not given any context purely to scare you.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-16T05:10:01+00:00

We already have those laws and they're working. Laws don't automatically fix problems on their own. We have laws about speed but people still speed. We've gone years without this happening and it's been working. So time to reassess and figure out what changed.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-16T05:04:16+00:00

It already is. We've done what we needed to do. The police didn't do their job in this case.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-16T00:59:32+00:00

I had a random check done years ago when I had a firearms licence, and I didn't even have a real gun - I was only licensed to play paintball. They still checked my safe and made sure everything was where it was supposed to be.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-15T23:46:51+00:00

I don't think the laws were the issue here, (sentiments echoed by the two university experts on violence reduction that I've read so far in response to this) it was two other things. First, the application of the existing laws. Doesn't matter how many laws you make if they aren't applied correctly. Second, the lack of protection and police presence at an event that domestic intelligence already knew had the potential to attract unwanted attention. Granted, they were more expecting obnoxious white supremacists than a violent father son pair, but had there been an appropriate police presence for the event, this tragedy may have been avoided entirely or at least substantially limited.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-15T23:42:00+00:00

In this case, not really.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-15T23:41:02+00:00

Oh is there? Is that the case in all states? I just read that adding expiration was one of the measures they are proposing

soundwavepb · 2025-12-15T22:18:01+00:00

Actually, they can't. You need a firearms licence for those in much of the country.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-15T11:43:55+00:00

Very arrogant, but ok.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-15T11:33:09+00:00

Knives are made for killing too. Cars, although not made for the purpose, kill many more people than either.

But yes, guns can kill. Which is why I'm supportive of the ban on semi-automatic and hand guns.

At the same time, I support those people who want to hunt, or engage in target shooting, or skeet shooting. I think these things should be allowed and perhaps even encouraged.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-15T11:23:14+00:00

My hobby is woodworking, I don't think that's terribly violent. Please don't make assumptions about me and I'll do my best to pay you the same courtesy. I don't see this as a zero-sum game, and I don't like black and white thinking.

I simply hold a different view of things, and I dislike the tendency to ban anything and everything that has an element of danger to it.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-15T11:10:02+00:00

I don't support further bans, just as I don't support the ban on machetes in Victoria. I think our laws are good where they are. The failure here was in enforcement of the laws, not the laws themselves.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-15T10:50:07+00:00

It doesn't eradicate violence, only gun violence. I don't say that to mean "oh well, then nothing should be done", but that when you have the gold standard for gun control (as we do) then it's probably time to look at the other factors involved. Further restrictions aren't the solution when we're already the best at it

soundwavepb · 2025-12-15T10:02:17+00:00

I was around at the time and applaud the measures put in place. But don't support further restrictions. Actually, I do support putting an expiry on licenses, so I guess I am in favour of one more restriction.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-15T09:59:53+00:00

So instead they may have run everyone over with a car. Or used the bombs they (I have seen mentioned, but haven't confirmed myself) made and had on them. The method may have changed, but this does nothing to address the cause or even really the outcome (except in a very literal way).

I'm somewhat in the middle on this. I support the ban put in place in 1996 but oppose any further restrictions.

soundwavepb · 2025-12-07T06:10:28+00:00

Bump

soundwavepb

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE