The Daily Wire: NSW considering allowing children to hunt unsupervised on public land - The Daily Wire

Jump to content

  • 5 Pages +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

NSW considering allowing children to hunt unsupervised on public land

#61 User is offline   Bam 

  • Advanced Member
  • View blog
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3205
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 18 May 2012 - 10:54 PM

View Postheadwerkn, on 18 May 2012 - 08:59 PM, said:

Actually there is - you won't get a licence unless you have a clean criminal record and no outstanding mental health issues.

You are assuming in your post that a gun licence is the only way of getting a firearm. Judging by the large number of criminals who possess firearms, illicit methods of obtaining firearms also exist.

Responsible, law-abiding gun owners are not the only gun owners out there. Sadly.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#62 User is offline   Roderick 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2748
  • Joined: 15-April 12
  • LocationNew England, NSW, Australia

Posted 19 May 2012 - 07:39 AM

View Postscotto, on 14 May 2012 - 07:25 PM, said:

Sure there have been cases of bent gun dealers; also of very bent licensed gun owners. There's no basis for suggesting gun owners are more honest than any other identifiable bunch of people.

Licesced firearms owners are pillars of the community and enjoy the confidence of the various State Commissioners of Police and, by extension, of the State Parliaments.

Convicted criminals are an identifiable bunch of people, do you not question their honesty?
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

Self-defence is not only a Right, it is an Obligation.
0

#63 User is offline   Roderick 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2748
  • Joined: 15-April 12
  • LocationNew England, NSW, Australia

Posted 19 May 2012 - 07:43 AM

View PostBam, on 18 May 2012 - 10:54 PM, said:

You are assuming in your post that a gun licence is the only way of getting a firearm. Judging by the large number of criminals who possess firearms, illicit methods of obtaining firearms also exist.

Responsible, law-abiding gun owners are not the only gun owners out there. Sadly.


Having a licence is the only way,subject to other requirements, of getting Game Council permission to hunt in State Forests.
The proposal of allowing non-firearm hunting for those between 12 and 18 years of age is also subject to Game Council control.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

Self-defence is not only a Right, it is an Obligation.
0

#64 User is offline   Bam 

  • Advanced Member
  • View blog
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3205
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 19 May 2012 - 02:52 PM

View PostRoderick, on 19 May 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:

Licesced firearms owners are pillars of the community and enjoy the confidence of the various State Commissioners of Police and, by extension, of the State Parliaments.

Convicted criminals are an identifiable bunch of people, do you not question their honesty?

I wouldn't be putting licensed firearm holders on pedestals as pillars of the community to be worshipped as idols. All it means to hold a firearms licence is they they have applied for a licence to own a firearm, met the requirements and been issued with the licence. It does not really mean anything other than that. To suggest otherwise shows a reckless disregard for the wide variety of human nature.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

1

#65 User is offline   scotto 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4300
  • Joined: 14-January 11
  • LocationNewcastle, NSW

Posted 19 May 2012 - 03:14 PM

View PostBam, on 19 May 2012 - 02:52 PM, said:

I wouldn't be putting licensed firearm holders on pedestals as pillars of the community to be worshipped as idols. All it means to hold a firearms licence is they they have applied for a licence to own a firearm, met the requirements and been issued with the licence. It does not really mean anything other than that. To suggest otherwise shows a reckless disregard for the wide variety of human nature.

I tend to agree with this.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#66 User is offline   Roderick 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2748
  • Joined: 15-April 12
  • LocationNew England, NSW, Australia

Posted 19 May 2012 - 04:21 PM

View PostBam, on 19 May 2012 - 02:52 PM, said:

I wouldn't be putting licensed firearm holders on pedestals as pillars of the community to be worshipped as idols. All it means to hold a firearms licence is they they have applied for a licence to own a firearm, met the requirements and been issued with the licence. It does not really mean anything other than that. To suggest otherwise shows a reckless disregard for the wide variety of human nature.


Do you mean to say that they have not been vetted by the police?
That the police have not looked at their general character and their mental state?
Are you suggesting that the Commissioner via the Firearms Registry is not doing a good job of policing this very important matter?

It takes well over six months to get a licence to own a target pistol, even one such as this:
Posted Image
Copy of a Flintlock target pistol of around 1790-1800, same system as used in the days of the First Fleet.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

Self-defence is not only a Right, it is an Obligation.
0

#67 User is offline   Bam 

  • Advanced Member
  • View blog
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3205
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 19 May 2012 - 06:58 PM

View PostRoderick, on 19 May 2012 - 04:21 PM, said:

Do you mean to say that they have not been vetted by the police?
That the police have not looked at their general character and their mental state?
Are you suggesting that the Commissioner via the Firearms Registry is not doing a good job of policing this very important matter?

You are making inferences from what I wrote that are impossible to justify. Did you even read what I wrote?

You also place too much importance on the ability to obtain firearms, as is judged by your assertion that firearm licensing is a "very important matter". It's less important than access to nutritious food, clean water, adequate shelter, warm clothing and sound footwear. It's less important than obtaining employment so that the necessities of life can be obtained. It's less important than maintaining a decent social life, meeting a partner and raising a family. It's less important than many other things that I can name.

Many people could obtain a firearm licence if they wished. Most who can don't choose to do so because they don't feel the need. That's a fair indication on how important this matter really is.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#68 User is offline   Roderick 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2748
  • Joined: 15-April 12
  • LocationNew England, NSW, Australia

Posted 19 May 2012 - 07:40 PM

View PostBam, on 19 May 2012 - 06:58 PM, said:

You are making inferences from what I wrote that are impossible to justify. Did you even read what I wrote?

You also place too much importance on the ability to obtain firearms, as is judged by your assertion that firearm licensing is a "very important matter". It's less important than access to nutritious food, clean water, adequate shelter, warm clothing and sound footwear. It's less important than obtaining employment so that the necessities of life can be obtained. It's less important than maintaining a decent social life, meeting a partner and raising a family. It's less important than many other things that I can name.

Many people could obtain a firearm licence if they wished. Most who can don't choose to do so because they don't feel the need. That's a fair indication on how important this matter really is.


Of course I read what you wrote, it's just that I consider that the Commissioner of Police is doing his job and so licenced firearm owners, although not idols, are a cut above the rest.
They have been vetted by the police and have not been found wanting.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

Self-defence is not only a Right, it is an Obligation.
0

#69 User is offline   Bam 

  • Advanced Member
  • View blog
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3205
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 20 May 2012 - 10:40 AM

View PostRoderick, on 19 May 2012 - 07:40 PM, said:

Of course I read what you wrote, it's just that I consider that the Commissioner of Police is doing his job and so licenced firearm owners, although not idols, are a cut above the rest.
They have been vetted by the police and have not been found wanting.

So does anyone who passes a police check to meet employment requirements. So does anyone who has passed a police check to prove that they are safe to work with children. So does anyone who has passed a security check to work for organisations involved with matters of national security. It's a rubbish argument to assert that only firearms licence holders are "a cut above the rest". These "rest" include a lot of people who have passed much more stringent checks or are capable of doing so.

It's a narrow-minded view to be focused exclusively on probity when issuing firearms licences when there's a lot more going on in the real world that you have not even considered.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#70 User is offline   Roderick 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2748
  • Joined: 15-April 12
  • LocationNew England, NSW, Australia

Posted 20 May 2012 - 03:30 PM

View PostBam, on 20 May 2012 - 10:40 AM, said:

So does anyone who passes a police check to meet employment requirements. So does anyone who has passed a police check to prove that they are safe to work with children. So does anyone who has passed a security check to work for organisations involved with matters of national security. It's a rubbish argument to assert that only firearms licence holders are "a cut above the rest". These "rest" include a lot of people who have passed much more stringent checks or are capable of doing so.

It's a narrow-minded view to be focused exclusively on probity when issuing firearms licences when there's a lot more going on in the real world that you have not even considered.

None of the others of which you write are trusted with an instrument that can be used to kill people, either close up or a mile away, that's what makes the trust in gun owners different.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

Self-defence is not only a Right, it is an Obligation.
0

#71 User is offline   Frogman 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 683
  • Joined: 31-October 11
  • LocationPerth

Posted 22 May 2012 - 12:14 PM

View PostRoderick, on 06 May 2012 - 04:22 PM, said:

But this is not about hunting with firearms but only about letting 12 to 18 year olds (not really children) do what they are now allowed to do on private property.


13 year olds : not really children.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#72 User is offline   Roderick 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2748
  • Joined: 15-April 12
  • LocationNew England, NSW, Australia

Posted 22 May 2012 - 02:06 PM

View PostFrogman, on 22 May 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

13 year olds : not really children.


Correct,
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

Self-defence is not only a Right, it is an Obligation.
0

#73 User is offline   Frogman 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 683
  • Joined: 31-October 11
  • LocationPerth

Posted 22 May 2012 - 02:54 PM

Is that a valid debate tactic though? Just redefine words so they mean other things. Can anyone do it?
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#74 User is offline   Roderick 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2748
  • Joined: 15-April 12
  • LocationNew England, NSW, Australia

Posted 22 May 2012 - 07:18 PM

View PostFrogman, on 22 May 2012 - 02:54 PM, said:

Is that a valid debate tactic though? Just redefine words so they mean other things. Can anyone do it?

I agreed with you, what's the problem?
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

Self-defence is not only a Right, it is an Obligation.
0

#75 User is offline   Frogman 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 683
  • Joined: 31-October 11
  • LocationPerth

Posted 23 May 2012 - 08:43 AM

Because I was being sarcastic and everything I have been able to find defines 13 year olds as children, except you.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#76 User is offline   Roderick 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2748
  • Joined: 15-April 12
  • LocationNew England, NSW, Australia

Posted 23 May 2012 - 09:29 AM

View PostFrogman, on 23 May 2012 - 08:43 AM, said:

Because I was being sarcastic and everything I have been able to find defines 13 year olds as children, except you.

I can assure you that 13 year olds who who get up close and on terms of intimacy, if not endearment, with a wild pig whilst they kill it with a knife are not children; but let us go to the other end of the scale, just under 18, are they children?

The Greens, and others, are becoming rather famous for opening their mouths before the brain is in gear.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

Self-defence is not only a Right, it is an Obligation.
0

#77 User is offline   Frogman 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 683
  • Joined: 31-October 11
  • LocationPerth

Posted 23 May 2012 - 10:01 AM

You let 13 year olds take on a wild pig with just a knife?

We are talking about the same wild pigs yeah?
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#78 User is offline   Bam 

  • Advanced Member
  • View blog
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3205
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 23 May 2012 - 02:15 PM

View PostRoderick, on 20 May 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

None of the others of which you write are trusted with an instrument that can be used to kill people, either close up or a mile away, that's what makes the trust in gun owners different.

What a rubbish argument. Different how? Why do you persist in your view that someone with a firearms licence is somehow better than someone who is, say, passed as fit to spend time, unsupervised, with other people's children?

Oh, of course. You possess a firearms licence. So essentially what you're saying (without proof) is that you are better than other people.

All these checks are horses for courses. None are inherently better than others. You place far too much emphasis on the ability to own firearms.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#79 User is offline   Roderick 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2748
  • Joined: 15-April 12
  • LocationNew England, NSW, Australia

Posted 23 May 2012 - 03:14 PM

View PostFrogman, on 23 May 2012 - 10:01 AM, said:

You let 13 year olds take on a wild pig with just a knife?

We are talking about the same wild pigs yeah?


That's what pig hunting without a firearm is mostly about, it's called Pig Dogging and when the dogs bring the pig to bay the hunter goes in with the knife and has a person to pig confrontation.

Ozziedoggers

Posted Image

Boarhunters

This is a wild (dead; real world) pig, I imagine that's what were talking about. It's what 12 year olds and up hunt on private property.

Of course not all would be using the knife on pigs, some might prefer the lance or spear as they're a bit safer, not much but a bit.

Some 12 and ups would be using bows and the bow allows a much wider variety of game to be hunted, not only pigs.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

Self-defence is not only a Right, it is an Obligation.
0

#80 User is offline   Roderick 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2748
  • Joined: 15-April 12
  • LocationNew England, NSW, Australia

Posted 23 May 2012 - 03:22 PM

View PostBam, on 23 May 2012 - 02:15 PM, said:

What a rubbish argument. Different how? Why do you persist in your view that someone with a firearms licence is somehow better than someone who is, say, passed as fit to spend time, unsupervised, with other people's children?

Oh, of course. You possess a firearms licence. So essentially what you're saying (without proof) is that you are better than other people.

All these checks are horses for courses. None are inherently better than others. You place far too much emphasis on the ability to own firearms.


I told you how a Shooter's Licence is different, shooters have been trusted with a weapon that can kill at a great distance, very few others are so trusted.

" You place far too much emphasis on the ability to own firearms."

Not at all, there is no big deal in the ability to own firearms, anyone with the money can buy just about anything that they want, or if someone gives them one or they inherit.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

Self-defence is not only a Right, it is an Obligation.
0

Share this topic:


  • 5 Pages +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Fast Reply