Er, in Australia one can drive to the next state over where the laws might be more lax. These laws were federal laws, just as one can have in the good ol' US of A.
Someone I know commented on this when I posted something similar to Facebook. He said:
If Australia had the criminal gangs and the
drug war which both empowers and assaults
those gangs, as America has, the results
might have been different.
To say nothing of any discussion of defensive
rights or of genocides.
He also talks elsewhere about how home-invasions would become endemic if home-owners were prevented from having guns. In other words, America is effectively lawless, and so-called "gun control" can't and won't work, as it will expose law-abiding citizens to unacceptable risks. The ownership of guns is part and parcel of American society, and cannot be removed without the immediate collapse of law and order.
Is this true? Who can say. But when one of the "good guys with guns" gets shot in his car by a law-and-order officer, one wonders.
And Australia still has half again more violent crime of, say, Iowa, which has essentially no gun laws. What's good for the goose may very well be irrelevant to the gander.
4 comments
[ 806 ms ] story [ 286 ms ] threadhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVuspKSjfgA
I'd like to see a comparison of how strict California (the state with the toughest gun laws) is compared to Australia.
http://political-issues.insidegov.com/stories/10617/states-t...
It helps that Australia is an island so people can't just drive to the next state over where laws might be more lax.
Is this true? Who can say. But when one of the "good guys with guns" gets shot in his car by a law-and-order officer, one wonders.