Farmers used to be able to carry hand guns whilst they went about their daily work. Some carried snake guns which were cut down .410 shotguns for protection against snakes. Not any more. These were law abiding people who were suddenly classed as criminals because the government deemed it so! Shotguns, the farmer’s stock in trade along with the little .22 rimfire rifle is now under attack by the Greens & the anti-gun lobby. Semi-auto .22s have already been banned, & now they want our shotguns as well!!!
As I see it it is no good us complaining & protesting against more gun control & the loss of our human rights. We need to put an end to this. Our government is supposed to be looking after our well being, that means ALL OF US. Not just big companies, not just the wealthy, but ALL OF US. This is no longer happening. Whether it be the environment, our safety, our freedoms, our human rights, our well being, or the right to choose our own lifestyle, the right to defend ourselves, our families & our homes. All that is gone now.
I think Australians need to ask themselves where this is all going, is there no end to the government seemingly uncaring attitude. If we have lost the right to defend ourselves & our families without risk of prosecution, then what rights do we have left that matters? People are dieing out there! Do you think that this can’t happen to you? If the preservation of our freedom & the right to defend ourselves is NOT the most important thing in our lives, what is?
Government does not solve problems, it is the root source of the main problem. Government gives the nations right to create credit, to the four main‘Banks of Issue’ and allows them to create it and charge us all for the privilege to borrow it from them.
THEY CREATE IT.
In the terse phrase of the English economist, Sir Ralph George Hawtrey, “They create the means of payment out of nothing.” The money so created is called bank credit, but it really is the public credit, like the oil and gas under our feet, it belongs to all of us.
Action Required Now COAG MEETING is This October 2016.
(All feel good stomach massage, and then!!!)
Action Required Now COAG MEETING is This October 2016.
24 Mc Mahon Rd
Gympie, 4570 Q
Why does, China want military bases in the Spratley Islands, and why does North Korea want nuclear missiles with a range of 2000 miles? The answer is an old strategy, that it is far better to have to fight a war in someone else’s country rather than your own. As the Roman Empire created buffer states to keep out the barbarians, so too do the Chinese. They give nuclear technology and a vast amount of military equipment to Pakistan, so it can hold back India, they keep Tibet enslaved and supply vast amounts of military hardware to North Korea, so it can face off to Japan and Taiwan and as they see it the main bogy man the USA. We cannot be amazed that North Korea and Vietnam also want to keep any threat away from their own countries so also have to engage in a military game of chess as to who dominates the chess board. That chessboard is of course the Pacific Ocean, this should concern all Australians who think.
It is due to our spineless leaders, who are from the same mould as the pre World War Two Appeasers like the Prime Ministers Ramsay Macdonald, Stanley Baldwin and Neville Chamberlain, and French foreign Minister Pierre Laval, who all sought to avoid war by feeding smaller countries to Japan, Germany and Italy, to sate the savage beasts. They downplay the internal threat from Islam that demands world domination and they downplay the threats from our northern military dictatorships that also want to dominate our region.
“It will enable police to share data on guns used in crimes, and provides a quick way to match firearm information against a national dataset. This will significantly affect the way Australian police agencies investigate gun-related crime, by linking ballistic evidence from crimes involving firearms both locally and nationally. This will also provide a national picture of criminal use of firearms in Australia, enhancing the capability of Australian police to investigate firearm-related crime and target violent offenders in our community. Our firearms solutions are valuable tools for police to solve firearm-related crime and to prevent gun crime in Australia. Will support police in addressing violent gun-crime.”
Where is the accountability in this? There is transparency its easy to see through the verbal manure of self justification and gratification for no real result, bar one.
‘Blind Freddy’ can understand the futile waste of recording all the details of the most law abiding part of our community. Only those as ‘Mad as a Hatter’ would believe that those with criminal intent would record any information. So why spend all that money and impose all those costs on us? Are they ‘Mad’, or is it really “People Control” not Gun Control?
Yet, in this report there is some truth, a small grain that should make every shooter in Australia celebrate. It forecasts the winning of our war for firearm freedom. On page 29 it reports that in 2015 there was 1.9 million licenced shooters in Australia and 5 million firearms.
Powerful Political Force.
The largest “Nosy Parker” in Australia has achieved one single good thing, it has officially told us that we are now a powerful force. All we have to do is to let each and all of us know that we have that force. Now with the internet we can even improve it, if each one of us encouraged and succeeded to help a family member or friend to get a shooters licence, we would not have 2 million licenced shooters in Australia we would have 4 million. Well I never thought I would be encouraging shooters licences, I don’t think they serve any useful purpose, but now there is a newfangled point to it all. It unites us in the largest club in this country, expensive and inconvenient, but a means to end the tyranny that we have suffered for the last twenty years.
As with the United States if you prove that more homicides are committed by black people, it would be more logical to address that problem on a racial basis rather than to ignore it. When they blame a tool that by itself has no cause, if there is a problem it will continue un abated. Allowing the politicians to return to it again and again, to fuel their real agenda, People control. When causes are identified like Race or Economics that cannot be discussed, it would not be ‘Politically Correct” they know that high unemployment areas have higher armed crime rates and homicide rates, logically we should address that problem in that area instead of imposing legislation on un related items in all unaffected areas?
Soon Politicians will come to the realization that our 10% of un happy licenced shooters can keep them out of government, or put them into government, their next tactic will be to try and split licenced shooters into categories backing some against others, but before that happens we can form new parties and destroy old ones. Please never forget Mr. Wendell Phillips said, “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty; power is ever stealing from the many to the few. The manna of popular liberty must be gathered each day or it is rotten. The living sap of today outgrows the dead rind of yesterday. The hand entrusted with power becomes, either form human depravity or esprit de corps, the necessary enemy of the people. Only by continued oversight can the democrat in office be prevented from hardening into a despot; only by unintermitted agitation can a people be sufficiently awake to principle not to let liberty be smothered in material prosperity.”
Rather a strange title for us in Australia, as we have already lost so many of our freedoms. Let’s make sure we do not lose any more human rights!
Never take for granted the freedoms we enjoy today! https://ww…
Posted by Gabby Franco on Wednesday, 2 March 2016
Who is the slave and who is the Master?
Questions to Provoke Thought and Action.
Personal liberty is the birthright of all persons and our Constitutional documents recognize that liberty is personal and cannot be sacrificed by a majority vote of representatives, but only by individual consent? What would change if powers given in our Constitutional documents no longer limited parliament but were actually used as a justification to extend parliamentary authority over every realm of human life? What if our Monarchs, first Minister in Australia, Prime Minister Turnbull made himself a Monarch? What if the Prime Minster assumed that everything he did was legal just because he has the numbers in the House of Parliament? What if he could interrupt your regularly scheduled radio and TV programming for a special message from him? What if he could declare war on his own? What if he could read your emails and your texts without a search warrant? What if the violation of the right to privacy is a gateway to all other government violations of personal liberty? What if the High Courts, Justices no longer looked to the Constitutional documents to determine the authority of a law, but rather simply to what other Justice’s who preceded them thought about it? What if the rights and principles guaranteed in the Constitutional documents were so ignored that our grandparents would think they were living in the old Soviet Union? What if the States were mere provinces of a totally nationalized and fully centralized government. What if the Constitution was amended stealthfully; not by Constitutional amendments dully ratified by the people in a referenda but by the constant and persistent expansion of the Government’s role in our lives? What if our parliaments decided that its own powers were above the Constitution? What if the Constitutional document were no longer the Supreme Law of the Land? What if you believed that our Constitutional documents represented the moral principles of our forefathers who valued our rights and freedoms at a higher in price than the parliament powers to interfere with them? What if those who wrote the Constitution believed that personal liberty is the default position and parliament power the exception? What if the Constitution means that our rights should be maximum and governments control minimum? What if the greatest right protected by the Constitution is the right to be left alone, the right to be oneself, the right to answer only to one’s own free will? What if our parliament is essentially the contradiction of that liberty?