“In my view, the possession of firearms serves absolutely no legitimate purpose in our society … people want guns, they do not need them. Even a licensed firearm owner can misuse a gun under the wrong circumstances. They are human after all, prone to making errors of judgment. The sooner firearms are totally banned, the better off our society will be. No-one should be able to keep guns at their home [as] many guns end up being stolen from licensed owners.” – Australian Judge Paul Muscat, quoted in Lewis McPherson murder: Charles Cullen jailed for supplying gun to killer Liam Humbles [via abc.net.au] [h/t JA]
It should read; “What ALL liberals want to really say………”
That’s not a totally fair assessment, I personally know liberals who own “assualt weapons” and have no issue with gun ownership.
And I know people who are conservatives in every way except that they’d agree with this judge. Broad-brushing has a tendency to oversimplify the complex.
Then, whatever they may be, they are not Conservatives. Perhaps a RINO.
Stereotypes BECOME stereotypes exactly because they apply in fact to a large segment of the group being stereotyped.
ALL people who are HALF-way smart realize that when wvumounties8 said ALL that he used that word as a generality that is applies to approximately 80% of liberals and 95% of Leftists. These numbers are easily confirmed by the recent senate votes.
People who get picky with the word ALL are just trying to impugn and deflect the original supposition. There is no effective difference between 80% and ALL in matters like this.
Except that that’s also wrong.
I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that you and wvmounties don’t hang out with too many real life liberals and probably get your “facts” on what liberals think from FoxNews.
Well, I work in the arts, so I am up close and personal with liberals all day, every day– in fact I live in the skin of one– and I’m here to tell you that the exact opposite of your numbers is true. 90% of the people I talk to about guns are completely supportive of private ownership, even if it’s something they personally wouldn’t choose to do.
I have also had the pleasure of introducing some people who had never fired a shot to the world of firearms, and more than one has literally said “I get it now!”
Truth be told, the people I run into with the ban-all-guns attitude are generally Boomer hippies. And they are getting old.
So, let’s hope the anti-gun ownership section of liberals is dying off, in much the same way that I hope the hardcore racist section of Conservatives are shuffling off.
“All- used to refer to the whole quantity or extent of a particular group or thing:
“all the people I met”
synonyms: everything · every part · the whole amount · the (whole) lot · the entirety
Yeah, I’m a moron for using the widely understood definition, my bad.
A Democrat state representative (Phelps) is the one who shepherded the concealed carry legislation through the Illinois legislature last year which amazed me. Other than that, Democrats and moderate Republicans are on the verge of bringing this state to its knees economically, morally, socially, etc. Since most Democrats are incapable of making the right decisions, I have to wonder what was “in it” for Rep. Phelps. But then I wonder the same thing about the elected Republicans in this corrupt and broken state.
downstate Democrats in IL and really moderate Republicans. Phelps is one of the good guys and has always been pro gun. watched him live during the session when he got the bill thru – he is the real deal, even if he has the wrong letter behind his name
So right about Illinois. Without Cook County,Illinois it’s a good place. And we’ve had equal opportunity corruption. I’m from downstate(Kankakee) but live in Cook County,Illinois for a long time. I don’t trust Republicans but don’t trust democrats at all. Phelps is ok but realize he couldn’t get elected without the hunters in his district. Quid pro quo…
You’ve obviously never marched with the Pink Pistols in the Long Beach or San Francisco Pride Parade.
Even the pink pistols aren’t necassarily ‘liberals’, there are many gay ‘conservatives’. That is the problem with placing individuals into groups and labels based on singular positions. It is a line that has been fed to us for far to long. It may seem unavoidable but I think it is avoidable if we learn what individuality actually means. The whole partisan facade would crumble and we as a people could address issues based on truth instead of what the party leadership says. That may sound idealistic but I truly think it is possible if enough people start actually caring. I’m a cynic about a lot of things but when it comes to our country and our liberty I retain hope and a will to fight for it. It’s sad that not enough people feel and talk that way anymore.
Hey look another person who has accepted the boxes and labels that the government and media have tried to place us all in. Free thought and individuality aren’t your strong suits, are they? Since you accept the nonsense, rhetoric, hyperbole, and propoganda of the government and media I would likely be considered a liberal by you as a result of some of my positions in the red state vs. blue state B.S. but to another partisan wrapped up in the nonsense I may be considered a conservative. Maybe you should try to learn what individuality actually means and stop being a mind slave to the partisan nonsense.
“They are human after all, prone to making errors of judgment”
Of course that doesn’t apply to those sitting on the black leather padded chairs
Nice use of the royal “they”.
Somehow, I’m reminded of Pink Floyd’s The Wall movie, and in particular “The Trial”.
+1
And that arrogant judge probably sits behind his own armed defenders, past an array of metal detectors. I’ve got no problems taking enforcement actions against judges precisely because of attitudes like this.
“In my view, the possession of CARS serves absolutely no legitimate purpose in our society … people want CARS, they do not need them. Even a licensed CAR owner can misuse a CAR under the wrong circumstances. They are human after all, prone to making errors of judgment. The sooner CARS are totally banned, the better off our society will be. No-one should be able to keep CARS at their home [as] many CARS end up being stolen from licensed owners.”
So the NRA is responsible for homicidal junkies half the world away too, now? Sweet Jesus.
Perfect picture of a 50 year old naive child, full of preconcepcions and totally brainwashed.
That judge must have visions of Lordship when he sleeps each night.
Constitutional Peasants – Monty Python and the Holy Grail
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvKIWjnEPNY
Let’s remember Australia started as a penal colony. So what he’s really saying is “No-one should be able to keep guns in their cell [as] many guns end up being stolen from other inmates.”
How about this for a quote of the day?
“If ye love wealth better than liberty,
the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom,
go home from us in peace.
We ask not your counsels or your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.
May your chains set lightly upon you,
and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”
Is it just me or does this guy look like senator Joe Manchin from West Virginia?
yep…kind of sounds like him right after an election cycle too.
Haha so true it’s sad.
Does her statement include her own bodyguards? If not then she is the hypocrite we all know her to be.
Spoken like an intellectual elitist who has had a life long privilege of being protected behind guarded gate often by private security of the normal riff raff and being so far removed has lost all context and manner to comprehend that in real life, bad people exist and even in Australia, the police have no duty to respond and that only you can defend yourself.
May he never suffer a life changing burst of his utopian bubble he lives in because I fear he would not survive the reality before him.
So much for that whole impartial thing.
First off, he looks like a character in a 4th grade play.
Second, substitute the words automobile or prescription drugs for firearms/guns.
Lots of “common” sense with this one.
Nice Flock of Seaguls shirt.
Bringing back the 80’s.
I have more respect for people like this who are honest about their intentions than the “I respect the second amendment, but…” people.
I agree. I obviously dislike and disagree with his opinion, but I can respect his honesty.
I was in the Land of Oz this summer for work. . . . the papers were full of stories about people who got beat up or stabbed while out at night . . . and it was perfectly normal for them. yet, somehow, we are the savages?
Dirk is correct, I also was there on vacation July/Aug and the papers were full of stories including shootings.
“They are human after all, prone to making errors of judgment”
Like that shirt hes wearing with the cute little bow 🙂
Hey. Come on.
It was league bowling night and he didn’t want to go home to change.
I’m thinking we could avoid a lot of wasted time by simply ban evil, certain thoughts and feelings. Then we can use the magical uninvent button to remove it assault murder thingys. In the meantime I’ll trust my M&P
You missed two other jewels – which are one right after the other:
“He said the 1996 guns buyback scheme in the wake of the the Port Arthur massacre had not removed illegal firearms from the community.
“Our community now lives in fear of offenders armed with firearms. In the wrong hands, guns are deadly,” he said.
”
The first one is naive to the max – that ANY buyback scheme will remove ILLEGAL firearms from the community. Yep, criminals will for sure get in line to trade their work tools for a $50 gift card. Sure thing
And for the second – I thought a gun on *anyone’s* hand can be deadly. Or does Australia have some kind of magic guns that, in the “right hands” (which I would assume, based on the overall bias of the story, would mean police & army) are NOT deadly ?
Maybe the opposite of “wrong hands” here is an elaborate pun – not “right” as in “correct”, but “right” as in “liberal” hands 😉
Oh, I’d bet money there is one “purpose in society” that guns have that the good judge has no problems with: Enforcing the will of The State. But then again, he did preface that with “legitimate”, so I guess enforcing the will of The State is not legitimate in his honorable eyes.
*reads title*… Oh, this should be good!… *Goes to grab bag of popcorn *
Bow-boy is right. One does not need a gun like one needs food, water, and oxygen.
We also don’t need to vote, we want to vote. Same for expression and a host of other things we don’t ‘need.’ I suppose he is the one to decide what is worthy of being given?
Apparently small women can easily fight off bigger men, the frail and weak can easily fight off thugs, a shopkeeper can defend his/her store from a riot mob with sheer will, and criminals obey gun-free signs.
I must have missed the memo.
“In my view, the possession of firearms serves absolutely no legitimate purpose in our society … POLICE want guns, they do not need them. Even a POLICE OFFICER can misuse a gun under the wrong circumstances. They are human after all, prone to making errors of judgment. The sooner firearms are totally banned, the better off our society will be. No POLICE OFFICER should be able to keep guns at their home [as] many guns end up being stolen from POLICE OFFICERS.”
“Judges are human after all, prone to making errors of judgment.”
Personally I don’t give a rat’s t*rd what this Australian sonofab*tch has to say. He can stay in Australia deny Australian’s rights and cross-dress all he wants. In return I promise never to set foot in that sinkhole of a country. Oops! Just finished reading “Killing Patton”…guess I got carried away…but, frankly, I don’t care what the Australians think or do. It’s their right to give up their freedom whenever and however they want.
Does this reflect what I think Shannon Watts and other U.S. gun grabbers really want for the U.S.? You betcha’! My fight is here in the U.S. and the Aussies can fight their own battles, or not.
Just because he has a new moo-moo doesn’t mean he has any sence of reality. He dresses like a demanding mom, belying his plan for everyone to be dependent on the government for everything. Another bureaucrat on the bench.
… people want cars, they do not need them. Even a licensed automobile owner can misuse a car under the wrong circumstances. They are human after all, prone to making errors of judgment. The sooner automobiles are totally banned, the better off our society will be. No-one should be able to keep cars at their home [as] many cars end up being stolen from licensed owners.
fixed that
Ditto alcohol.
Ditto religion.
Ditto the ability to freely congregate or speak critically of the government.
Ditto women and blacks voting. (Or anyone, as has been noted.)
Ditto marrying the person of your choice regardless of race or gender.
Ditto habeus corpus.
Ditto a trial by a jury of one’s peers.
Ditto life, liberty, and TPOH.
Rosa Parks did not need to sit on the bus.
If Billy Badass is coming for me with a gun, what is the suggestion as to my course of action if my .38 is not on my side or my shotgun is not handy? Call the police and describe what it feels like to get shot?
It isn’t what Shannon wants to say. She’s just a corporate mouthpiece who left her job (WHY?), to find another sugar daddy to give her money.
If she could have parlayed swimming pool deaths or medical deaths or drinking deaths or Ebola deaths into more money she would have. She must have run into Bloomie somewhere and they connected.
And she doesn’t give a rats a$& about the Constitution.
Judge Paul, why don’t you tell that to the people at Vaughn Foods that the gun serves no legitimate use. I dare you.
Objection overruled.
Australia is special.
Being special, we have no need for firearms.
Because we’re special.
“No-one should be able to keep guns at their home [as] many guns end up being stolen from licensed owners.”
Women should not be able to go outside at all, because because they might make someone rape them. Same logic. Gun owners provide guns to criminals the same way women provide sex to rapists. If this is the thinking you’re using, why not blame women for being rapeable? (Or maybe he already does.)
A judge who can’t think clearly is a scary thing, even on the other side of the world.
I am a “Boomer” type and have a great admiration for firearms , history is full of instances where firearms have helped save lives , and even freed our nation from oppression before , which may have to happen sometime in the future also , and there are other types of ” Boomers” out there who are very pro-gun , and I am a Conservative and I do not feel like I am a racist , there must be some very liberal blood in those veins Swarf , for you to point your finger at a lot of us out here and put us in a box of your making , get your head out of where the sun don’t shine and get involved with other gun owners in your area even if they are what you refer to as “Boomers” . Be prepared and ready . Keep your powder dry .
“In my view, the right of free speech serves absolutely no legitimate purpose in our society … people want to express political opinions, they do not need to do so. Even a politically acceptable thinker can misuse free speech under the wrong circumstances. They are human after all, prone to making errors of judgment. The sooner free speech is totally banned, the better off our society will be. No-one should be able to form their own opinions about the issues as many opinions are contrary to what the State decides.”
Canada and Great Britain are already well along the way in restricting free speech.
Shouldn’t be too long now before they’ve got a complete ban.
What a miserable slave mentality.
Australia was home to a great rifleman’s culture. Now, the whole country is like the Brits, with shrimp.
Although Australia has an image of being a nation full of rugged outback outdoorsy types, the reality is that the vast majority of the population resides in the big cities. So the culture doesn’t mind the banning of guns.
What he is saying could very easily apply to alcohol and sports cars too.
The composition fallacy: Assuming that characteristics or beliefs of some or all of a group applies to the entire group.
Clearly, he failed logic and critical thinking at university.
This judge has it wrong, in so many ways. Every sentence and phrase can be easily rebutted. He uses a lot of anecdotal evidence (something happened once or a few times, so it is a major problem, when in fact, the statistics show that it happens rarely, and is not a significant problem in the population.)
His faulty thinking makes him a danger to the people he is supposed to protect.
I don’t think that most people are stereotypical liberals or conservatives. I am liberal in many social issues and conservative on gun ownership issues. One guy who I know that calls himself a “Socialist” but completely agrees with me on gun issues. That is to say that he agrees that taking guns away from law abiding citizens is senseless and dangerous. So, there you go. Another stereotype shot down. I see many more conservatives who listen to and parrot the Fox News line that act like conservative stereotypes than I do liberal folks who act like stereotypes. I sometimes wonder if some of those folks that listen to Fox News so much ever have any original thoughts of their own.
The liberal/conservative labeling is a false dichotomy meant to keep us distracted and at each others’ throats while the Statists of whatever stripe consolidate more power and shred the Constitution.
Someone needs to kick in the door to judge Muscat’s home and beat the living tar out of him. The we’ll find out just how fast he changes his tune about how HE now needs a gun. Nothing like a little personal violence to make idiots reconsider their position. Problem is many of them simply decide that THEY are the only ones special enough to justify being exempt from such laws.
Aussies are a bit of a special case. Their country is JUST bit enough to think it can go on its own, but lacks the sense of history and depth of knowledge to get it right.
The Aussie judges seem to be in a competition to outdo each other with demonisation of firearms, to prove their disempowered lack of manhood, and perhaps to bemoan the fact that they weren’t born women. That they sound utterly gutless and contemptible at the same time is a bonus. They are trying to win a competition for idiot of the year.
Ivory tower mentalists totally disconnected from the daily reality of Australian life, have no place on the bench or anywhere their opinions could cause harm. They have no actual power, but their influence adds weight to the featherbrained efforts to disarm the populace.
Australia was born a prison colony, and the “wild colonial boy” larrakin is never far from the headlines, with continual drug and gang warfare in the major cities.
Don’t listen to these goons.
“In my view, the possestion of cars (or inseet any other word) serves absolutely no legitimate purpose in our society … people want cars, they do not need them. Even a licensed driver can misuse a car under the wrong circumstances. They are human after all, prone to making errors of judgment. The sooner cars are totally banned, the better off our society will be. No-one should be able to keep cars at their home [as] many cars end up being stolen from licensed owners.”
We can also take public transit, no? Driven by specially licensed professional drivers?
Comments are closed.