Should Firearm/Weapons Deals Be Disallowed?

gimli on 08/08/2017 - 20:58
Last edited 27/05/2018 - 19:51 by 1 other user

Ozbargain tries to be a family friendly community/site. I know there are many deals which sometimes cross the boundary. (e.g. alcohol)
But i think the wider community consensus (not ozbargain but australia) is that firearms should be restricted. I don't think ozbargain should be promoting firearms

I know smoking advertising is restricted so there are no cigarette deals but if ozbargain started having such deals I would probably leave and troll elsewhere. The gun deals do me make consider this?

Just wondering what the community feeling about these gun deals are?

IMO. Gun deals will eventually cause negative public attention for ozbargain. So if I was the site owner I would disallow gun deals.

EDIT: grammar (see comments lol)

Mod (27/5/18): Due to a multitude of comments, reports and attacks, as well as feedback in this poll and in other deals, firearm deals are no longer permitted to be posted. Comment

Poll Options

  • 881
    Gun deals should be banned
  • 711
    Gun deals should be allowed
Site Discussion

Comments

        • neil on 28/05/2018 - 12:43
          +4

          @tomkun01:

          BRB, adding adult babysitting to Linkedin.

        • nickp on 28/05/2018 - 12:48

          @neil: the toy isn't the post, its their ability to communicate on this forum.

        • S2 on 28/05/2018 - 12:52

          @nickp: You're communicating now on this forum. They haven't taken that ability away.

        • Moderatorneil on 28/05/2018 - 12:53

          @nickp:

          The toy is a megaphone 📣 and while mommy and daddy are trying to enjoy their Sunday, the kids are fighting and yelling non-stop into the toy. Daddy tells them off numerous times but has better things to do like mowing the lawn, so he takes the toy from them as they can't play nicely together.

          (I like this analogy)

        • nickp on 28/05/2018 - 12:56

          @S2: that is correct, thank you for your observation

        • nickp on 28/05/2018 - 12:57

          @neil: yeah thats better, I should have opened with that.

        • ClintonL on 28/05/2018 - 12:57

          So as to my example if a group of vegans went to every meat post and start posting anti meat stuff and making a scene in the comment section there are you going to ban all meat related posts?
          You're ruining it for everyone because of a small vocal minority. Ban the offenders or just disable comments in that section.

        • neil on 28/05/2018 - 12:58

          @Clinton:

          Buttery emails. (Clinton related!)

        • S2 on 28/05/2018 - 13:09

          @Clinton: At my time of posting, the votes are 799 for Gun deals should be banned and 627 for Gun deals should be allowed. Which indicates the ban was in line with the majority. Are the votes simply being ignored or am I reading it wrong?

        • ClintonL on 28/05/2018 - 13:43

          @S2:

          I didn't reference the vote at all in my argument. So if a large group started shitposting on meat/alch/cigarette posts or wants to make the site Chinese or something then starts winning a forum vote you'd suggest we follow it?

        • Abbi on 28/05/2018 - 14:53

          @neil: Unfortunately however that toy has lots of accessory parts and Daddy left all the other little parts around for the kids to play with. And they started fighting over those other parts. What mommy and daddy SHOULD have done is remove the WHOLE toy and then there would be no more fighting.

        • S2 on 28/05/2018 - 15:00

          @Clinton: negative, starting forum votes wasn't the point of my reply. You stated "minority" were against the gun posts ban and I pointed out that the vote indicated otherwise. Feels like this is the second time you've completely ignored that.

        • Moderatorneil on 28/05/2018 - 15:06

          @OzBeergain:

          Actually it's more like one kid tattling on the other..if we are going to continue down this analogy. Give it a couple of days and the kids will forget what they were fighting about and daddy will be a little greyer in the hair.

        • mickeyjuiceman on 28/05/2018 - 19:17

          @Clinton: Comparing meat to guns is even stupider (believe it or not) to comparing cars to guns.

        • Abbi on 28/05/2018 - 21:02

          @neil: …..until daddy gives the kids their toys back.

        • neil on 28/05/2018 - 21:07

          @OzBeergain:

          Daddy got an offer for 1/2 price seller fees and sold all your toys. Sorry kids.

        • ClintonL on 30/05/2018 - 14:23

          @S2:

          No i mentioned the vocal minority as the ones who are behind the troll posts and fighting in the comments. Not 1400 of everyone here who voted has been acting like a child on the deals.

          @Mic Cullen
          I'm not comparing meat to guns i'm trying to make a point about groups with different viewpoints.

        • smux on 30/05/2018 - 14:30
          +1

          @S2: the "ban guns" being in front is relatively recent. For the majority of time that the poll has been around, "allows guns" was ahead. Not sure what that's about.

    • Herbse on 28/05/2018 - 12:00

      To quote a great man. There were very bad people, on both sides.

  • [Deactivated] on 28/05/2018 - 12:24
    +7

    Might as well exclude all the gun-related paraphernalia as well.

    Let's face it, apart from a few farmers and professional hunters there's not much need for them around here.
    The so-called 'sports shooters' can play tiddly winks instead.

    Admission: i had to check the spelling of 'paraphernalia'.

    Oh no, @neil is using bold font - i'm leaving before i end up in the penalty box.

    • GalaxySkater58 on 28/05/2018 - 13:08
      +3

      What's wrong with sports shooting?

      • [Deactivated] on 28/05/2018 - 15:52
        +1

        There's plenty of other sports options, like snake tickling and feral cat shearing.

    • syousef on 28/05/2018 - 13:18

      You bothered to check spelling. That's not a negative at all.

      • [Deactivated] on 28/05/2018 - 15:53

        I have no idea where that second 'r' came from.

    • choodi on 28/05/2018 - 14:30

      So-called sports shooters?

      There are plenty of people who shoot for sport. In fact, many of our most successful Olympians do just that.

      • mickeyjuiceman on 28/05/2018 - 14:53

        "Sport shooting - a basic human right"

      • [Deactivated] on 28/05/2018 - 15:56

        I was going to reference Michael Diamond, but looks like he got off.

    • nickp on 28/05/2018 - 14:47

      Last count there were 85,000 farmers and 300,000 active hunters in australia.. thats approx 2 percent of the adult population. I wouldn't call that a 'few'. can you say that 2 percent of the adult population would be interested in ssd deals or xiaomi air filters?

      • S2 on 28/05/2018 - 15:09
        +2

        Your question suggests that all 2% of the Australian population with guns are interested in having gun deals on OzB. I don't think that is the case.
        Of Australia's total population, I do think more would be interested in an SSD deal than a gun deal.

        • nickp on 28/05/2018 - 15:19

          No, 2 percent would be interested in looking at gun deals. There are 643 votes for gun posts, thats quite a large portion of the community. Interest in a product isnt a majority rules situation. Generally if a post gets 20 upvotes its a deal, thats a minimum of 20 people interested in a product. if a deal got 643 votes it would be a cracker.

          I would be very surprised if 2 percent of the population knew what an ssd was.

        • S2 on 28/05/2018 - 15:30

          @nickp:

          No, 2 percent would be interested in looking at gun deals.

          I flat out disagree. But since I generalised, I can't complain when you do.

          There are 643 votes for gun posts, thats quite a large portion of the community.

          There is an even larger portion of the community against this. I feel like this one is in my favour but others don't see it that way. What am I missing here?

          Interest in a product isnt a majority rules situation.

          But banning a particular group of products is. I'm certainly not helping with this point but that's what's happened.

        • nickp on 28/05/2018 - 15:36
          -1

          I was pointing out that there would be a demand for the gun related posts on ozbargain not whether they would be accepted by the majority of the community.

        • Deelirium on 28/05/2018 - 20:02

          @nickp:

          Just wanted to point out, its a bit under 4% of Australians that own guns.
          http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/australia

      • [Deactivated] on 28/05/2018 - 15:57

        Not all farmers need firearms.

        Yes, i'd call it a few.

        • nickp on 28/05/2018 - 16:07
          +1

          Are you saying pew or few?

          I think you meant pew,

          Yeah its the sound us farmers make when we need to shoot something.. pew pew..

        • [Deactivated] on 28/05/2018 - 16:08

          @nickp:

          Look, i hadn't gone out and counted them all, but i meant a few, not a pew as they're in churches, generally speaking.

  • jules9214 on 28/05/2018 - 13:32
    +2

    Why can't the comments just be locked? The deals were all positively voted (except that troll glock one). The comments were just full of trolls. Seems like the actual bargain hunters miss out again.

    • Moderatorneil on 28/05/2018 - 13:51

      Why can't the comments just be locked?

      Sure it could but we'd still have to go through 100s of reports, comments, PMs, TWAMs that are already still there ON A SUNDAY.

      Seems like the actual bargain hunters miss out again.

      It was those who thought it was a good bargain also making the comments. Out of 220,000 deals these firearm deals made up around 10-20. I think the firearms bargain hunters will be OK.

      Welcome to OzBargain, btw. Loads of deals to check out elsewhere on the site

      • jules9214 on 28/05/2018 - 13:56
        +1

        Only made an acc to give my 2c, been browsing for a while though. Hope there'll be some alternative or 18+ section in the future maybe, gettin a bit tired of maccas deals and chinese electronics.

        Solo moderating all this seems like a tough job though so props to ya, maybe there just needs to be more moderators to take away some of the burden.

        • Hybroid on 28/05/2018 - 16:10
          +4

          gettin a bit tired of maccas deals and chinese electronics.

          Succinct and agreed.

        • nith265 on 28/05/2018 - 18:14
          -2

          gettin a bit tired of maccas deals and chinese electronics.

          so go somewhere else?

      • choodi on 28/05/2018 - 14:33

        Maybe a strategy to deal with people reporting stuff for no other reason than they don't like the type of product should be to warn/ban people for inappropriate reporting.

        • Moderatorneil on 28/05/2018 - 14:39

          Most of the reports were fine and we encourage people reporting anything. Reports from the community (almost 4000 last month) help us alert us to any issues or to fix up titles etc.

  • gnarkill on 28/05/2018 - 14:45
    +4

    Can they not be allowed but just filtered to a firearms specific area and not the front page? Interested people can visit that. This would be more useful and would prevent the brigade of positive votes, which doesn't help identify actual deals.

    • Moderatorneil on 28/05/2018 - 14:58

      No.

      As before, feel free to start a firearms bargain discussion thread. Anything pro/against, political or off-topic comments not relating to discussing firearms bargains will be removed. It's a similar position we have with gambling, not permitted in deals but generally OK in the forums.

      • timlaher on 28/05/2018 - 18:05

        Whereabouts would be a good idea to make this thread? Under forums sporting category? Just don't want to make it in the wrong place.

        EDIT: Also is it possible to get magnumsports.com.au unbanned too?

  • choodi on 28/05/2018 - 18:33
    +3

    It is becoming increasingly obvious that the opposition to firearms deals is based purely on political grounds and has been a result of a concerted and organised campaign by politically motivated members. The ban should be revoked.

    If OzBargain is so easily swayed by a little political pressure, then maybe the April Fools joke was not such a joke after all.

    • chumlee on 28/05/2018 - 18:38
      +2

      Increasingly obvious to whom?

    • Moderatorneil on 28/05/2018 - 19:06

      It's increasingly obvious that you are opposed to reading my posts. Troll away sir.

      • choodi on 28/05/2018 - 19:14
        +1

        Hey, you're the one who implemented an absurd and biased policy. Go right ahead and call me a troll.

        • mickeyjuiceman on 28/05/2018 - 19:19

          I'm presuming you're a troll, because if not, your posts should concern you greatly.

        • choodi on 28/05/2018 - 19:20

          @Mic Cullen: Care to explain Mic…or are you just another drive-by poster with a hot take?

        • Moderatorneil on 28/05/2018 - 19:46

          Go right ahead and call me a troll.

          I did, already proving my point that you don't read my post.

        • choodi on 28/05/2018 - 20:06
          +3

          @neil: So, let me get this straight. You are banning posts about firearms based on the amount of extra work that it causes you regarding people inappropriately negging and reporting and all the drama that occurs in the comments, right?

          Surely a better way to deal with the situation is to deal with the people doing the wrong thing by negging deals and causing controversy in the comments than by punishing those who are following the rules?

          Genuinely interested in your thoughts, or you know, you could just call me a troll and disregard me again.

        • Moderatorneil on 28/05/2018 - 20:21

          @choodi:

          Yes!!! You got it…well half credit as you missed reports, comments, TWAMs, PMs and generally creating a hateful environment. This contributes nothing positive to the community as both sides have shit fits, adds extra moderation where it is needed elsewhere (fixing up deals, dupes, other site stuff).

        • choodi on 28/05/2018 - 20:26

          @neil: Final question about this topic.

          So since you have decided to punish the innocent parties by stopping us from discussing firearms bargains, what is being done to publish those who actually create the hateful environment by coming into bargain posts they have no real interest in and shitting up the place with complaints about the product?

        • nith265 on 28/05/2018 - 20:29
          +7

          @choodi: read this xkcd cartoon:
          https://xkcd.com/1357/

          Its targeted to American’s but the same basics apply to your hurt feelings and grandiose sense of political persecution

          @neil has kindly offered for you to go and play happily in your own forum thread so you can share all your amazing gun deals there without upsetting the flow of the rest of OZB.

          Better still go to a firearms website/forum – they're not working here as a deals. Go away

        • BlazinPast on 28/05/2018 - 20:30
          +1

          @choodi: Says the one who posted the bow deal despite not knowing anything about the product with 'no real interest'. you're a bit thick to think the issue is only coming from one side.

        • Moderatorneil on 28/05/2018 - 20:34

          @choodi:

          What punishment would you like?

          • 🏓
          • 🕳️
          • 🚽
        • choodi on 28/05/2018 - 20:49

          @nith265 I haven't once invoked my "right" to free speech. If you knew anything about the law in Australia, you would realise that there is no such thing as free speech here. What I am allowed to do is question authority. Don't like my questions, then that door is waiting for you just as much as it is for me.

          @BlazinPast I didn't realise that being all-knowing about a product was a prerequisite to posting a deal. I'd love to hear your detailed knowledge about hair clippers and Dyson vacuum cleaners.

          @neil Well, since you are the one who said the reason that this is a problem is because of all the extra work it causes, why not deal with the people who go in those threads and shit up the place with abusive comments and discussion that is politically motivated and not related to the deal? Surely dealing with the source of the problem is better than punishing those who just want to post a simple bargain?

          If it's a manpower issue, then surely it makes sense for more moderators to be appointed so that you are not overloaded with stupidity.

          That being said, if you don't want the firearms deals because you don't want the site associated with firearms, then just say so.

        • Moderatorneil on 28/05/2018 - 21:04

          @choodi:

          Well, since you are the one who said the reason that this is a problem is because of all the extra work it causes, why not deal with the people who go in those threads and shit up the place with abusive comments and discussion that is politically motivated and not related to the deal?

          Like I said what punishment would you like? Because if you want me to punish all of those who "shitted up the place" then you'd be included.

          That being said, if you don't want the firearms deals because you don't want the site associated with firearms, then just say so.

          I would if that was the reason. Let me know if you find any deals on lie detector tests (or tin foil hats).

        • choodi on 28/05/2018 - 21:08

          @neil: So I shitted up the place by posting a deal for a compound bow? Please tell me how that makes sense?

          Maybe if you warned a few people for their invalid negs and for the personal attacks on me, then the comments section in that thread wouldn't be a complete dumpster fire.

          I posted a genuine bargain, I didn't break any rules and I have not attacked anyone personally, so go ahead and tell me how I have "shitted up the place".

        • Abbi on 28/05/2018 - 21:08
          +1

          @choodi:

          "That being said, if you don't want the firearms deals because you don't want the site associated with firearms, then just say so."

          lol

        • BlazinPast on 28/05/2018 - 21:13
          +4

          @choodi: You already know you posted the deal just to stir shit. Until you admit that no ones going to take your pathetic cries seriously. If you can't even be honest, why should anyone care about your complaints? You might think you're really slick with the plausible deniability, but no one else has fallen for it.

        • choodi on 28/05/2018 - 21:23

          @BlazinPast: Why do I have to admit to anything? I posted a deal, people reacted badly. Maybe if all the pathetic holier-than-thou critics didn't wade into a deal that they had no interest in and throw around accusations of trolling and the like, then my post would have got a few comments and a few positive votes and then disappeared like it should have.

          Instead, people like you are running around in the comments trying to "prove" that my post is an attempted troll and causing way more controversy than anyone.

          I hope you can see that YOU are the problem here.

        • BlazinPast on 28/05/2018 - 21:31
          +2

          @choodi: You're too arrogant and indignant for anyone to give you a serious response. You don't have to admit it anymore, everyone knows. It's just sad how you're calling everyone critiquing you holier-than-thou when you can't seem to realise the hypocrisy in what you're doing. Anyway, seems like the mods already know you're trolling (yes, don't cry, that's what you're doing) so doesn't seem like you're going to get anywhere anyway with your whining.

        • mickeyjuiceman on 28/05/2018 - 22:27

          If you knew anything about the law in Australia, you would realise that there is no such thing as free speech here

          We've actually got plenty of free speech here, it's just not legislated. I know, mere details.

        • maverickjohn on 29/05/2018 - 07:58
          +2

          @neil: I disagree with your approach on this comment. Sorry niel but even if you disagree with him there, he didn't actually start the "shitting up of the place".

        • Moderatorneil on 29/05/2018 - 09:51

          @maverickjohn:

          I never said that user started it but the are contributing to it.

          This is the thing, We're neither agreeing nor disagreeing with the issue. We just don't want to deal with the issue on the site. Until people get that through their heads, guess I'll just be repeating the same thing over and over again until the end of time.

        • maverickjohn on 29/05/2018 - 12:10

          @neil: I get what you mean. And as unfortunate as the situation is. Its the right move. I just felt that comment also came off a little targeted as if it it was due to him that this happened. However I could have interpreted that wrong and if that's the case I apologise.

        • Abbi on 29/05/2018 - 18:16

          @neil: Look neil, if you don't want the site associated with firearms, then just say so!!

  • BuyoTheCat on 28/05/2018 - 23:23

    What we need to resolve this problem is a gun duel at noon

  • maverickjohn on 29/05/2018 - 07:48
    +2

    Sigh… That's a bit of a let down. I've had a firearm permit since I was 12. And had my licence which is still active. Currently I'm 33 and own a few rifles. I'm not sure why the community had such a rejection of the deals regarding firearms.
    I understand the concern that it can be used to kill, but so can kitchen knives. It's not a big deal to me as I won't change my firearms for sometime. But the fact that it's so negatively looked upon because of some crazed lunatics out there who used it to murder people, has now affected sports firearms users is upsetting. Anyway.
    Like I said it's not a big deal to me, just upsetting

    • chumlee on 29/05/2018 - 19:19
      +1

      I think the rifle post was fine and if it was only that one mods would have let it be. Unfortunately some troll posted a deal on a handgun (which was not on sale but just at it's everyday price).

      Blame that douche

  • nickp on 29/05/2018 - 11:11
    +1

    What shall we name this historic ozbargain incident?
    Gun-gate? firearm fiasco? Huntingpalooza?

  • trapper on 29/05/2018 - 14:36
    +1

    Absolutely not, a deal is a deal.

    This is worthless virtue signalling.

  • c0balt on 29/05/2018 - 15:27
    +4

    Screw this website. R.I.P May 2018.

    Hope another bargain website comes up soon where I'm not treated like a child that isn't allowed to see a gun.

    I've got a fair bit of coin too, if someone puts together a good plan and is looking for investors- HMU.

    • mickeyjuiceman on 29/05/2018 - 15:30
      +2

      Yep, site is about to stop existing because of a few ammosexuals stopping visiting, you have an excellent point. (Not a huge amount of coin, but don't have my self-worth tied to telling everyone about how much I've supposedly got anyway.)

      • c0balt on 29/05/2018 - 15:32
        +2

        I didn't realise that OZB would end up catering only to those who would flood a single thread with the most votes, but that they would do the right thing and afford people the choice if they wanted to see deals like that or not.

        I've lost all respect for Neil and Scotty, not that they would care but yeah - they have shown their true colours that they are in the camp of forced censorship based on what's popular in culture for that hour. Disgusting.

        When I say a fair bit of coin, I mean in terms of website creation not in terms of purchasing an established business! That's a bit more than just coin..

    • Radar on 29/05/2018 - 16:53
      +2

      children get treated like children for carrying on like annoying children.
      Unfortunately, a whole bunch of them (from both sides) piled on the comments/reports and made the decision to ban firearms easy.
      It's not the end of the world - subscribe to your LGS emails and you'll see more frequent firearm deals then there ever was here.

    • jules9214 on 30/05/2018 - 09:02
      +4

      Someone needs to make an OzBargain Up Late. with guns, eciggs, alcohol, sex toys, knives, etc

  • TheTopMostDog on 29/05/2018 - 18:14

    I was never actually aware Ozbargains could be used to discover firearm deals, and as an avid firearm sportsman and reform supporter, I am extremely disappointed to hear about that being changed.

    Your house, your rules.

    This is a private website and all decisions made by the owners are final. However, I also believe I'm entitled to voice my opinion and make suggestions where I feel they are valid.

    Speaking of; I think the best way to handle the situation (and if you wanted an alternative to simply banning firearm related content), then I reckon firearms could require an account to view their category, and perhaps if so, should have a filter that is opted-out by default on normal accounts (perhaps not if the account was created via the "firearms require an account" warning page).

    In the end, shooting is a legal activity.

    Owning most firearms is completely legal in Australia. Drama surrounding the topic only exists where there is drama incited, most often via argument from opposing views. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought debating the morality of things was not the aim of Ozbargains… so why isn't the drama the thing that's banned, instead of the deals?

    Moderation takes work.

    Creating a subsection which requires an authorized account would also mean that people could be restricted from participating in that subsection if they fail to follow set rules (which may be stricter than the remainder of the website). If I went and called Joe Blow a (profanity) for choosing an AMD graphics card for his gaming computer, then I suspect I'd be well on my way toward receiving a talking to from moderators. And that's the crux of the issue here; the moderators are sick of dealing with the drama, and that's ultimately why the decision was made.

    Help shape the future by empowering the right people.

    Firearms are a national past time and have only fallen into contention because of the number of people brought up without that experience and exposure. Just like video games. Just like fast cars. Just like many other things. The only difference is, this one is less commonly seen where population is largest, therefore it is less popular. That doesn't mean it is, or should be, illegal, and it doesn't mean it shouldn't be supported by anyone with a rational mind - whether you personally enjoy it as a sport or not.

    • belongsinforums on 29/05/2018 - 19:09

      Lol are you comparing guns to video games?

      • Abbi on 29/05/2018 - 19:15

        No, caged eggs.

        • belongsinforums on 29/05/2018 - 19:17

          Well, both caged eggs and guns have come under huge amounts of negs that defy site rules. Video games though… Luckily not.

        • altomic on 29/05/2018 - 23:42

          @tomkun01: though that caged egg simulator video game didn't really receive much love….

      • TheTopMostDog on 30/05/2018 - 03:29
        +2

        "Lol are you comparing guns to video games?"

        Yes; although I don't find the comparison ideal. I thought it would be more relatable for the audience of this website. Another example I chose to omit was alcohol, rightfully so, as I'm told that, too, is banned for legal reasons? I digress, you can use alcohol as another example with the following explanation, I just won't segment it like the others (as it should be obvious by the end, what I'm trying to exclaim).

        In my previous comment:

        "… contention because of the number of people brought up without that experience and exposure."

        I'm referring to the distaste certain groups have toward others' hobbies, ultimately because of their own lack of interest, exposure, and sometimes, education.

        The reasons I would want to compare (as it seems you think the notion amusing):
        a) they are equally legal activities and interests,
        b) some claim it is a harmful activity (often with little supporting evidence, mind you); and,
        c) people who have each hobby struggle to fathom why others might dislike it (it seems irrational to them).

        Games

        Video games leading to violent criminals is far from an uncommon sentiment. Unfounded, as well, from the studies I've read. With video games becoming more and more the norm, it is estimated that in only a few generations, every person in our society will have grown up playing video games. By then, I suspect the frequency of this claim would have dropped significantly. Similarly, if you were to visit areas where firearms are common, you'd find there is very little debate about the merits and morality of owning said firearms. It just kind of 'is'.

        Cars

        "Sports" and "hotted up" cars have been debated by nanny-state soccer Mums for many years. There's no proven correlation between owning something like a V8 and being an unsafe (or unskilled) driver. Incidentally, people are required to acquire a license in order to drive a vehicle on our roads, so they should, logically, be safer than someone who doesn't have a license.

        Some contention still exists surrounding the ease of access for less experienced drivers acquiring fast (and potentially more dangerous) cars, which is why I like this comparison in particular. Yes, truck drivers require further training and scrutinization before being authorized, but the road toll isn't most largely attributed to by trucks, now, is it?

        Guns

        Firearms are as safe in the hands of an experienced shooter as a fast car might be in the hands of an experienced driver. Yes, a hazard will always exist, but the risk is significantly lower. I don't want to start the debate myself (as avoiding it is entirely the premise of my comment), but I feel I should voice that I do think that guns are too easy to come by (even if for sake of finding some common ground with the locals).

        I would like to see training and assessment as mandatory for all firearms license renewals, and if licensees were to have access to a wider range of firearms, then they should also be subject to a more indepth vetting process, including, but not limited to, having fingerprints recorded with licensing divisions of the state police (already a requirement of private security license acquisition), and psychiatric evaluations per either renewal period, year, or per "permit to acquire (a firearm)".

        Still, I think such debate is beyond the scope of this website, and therein lies the unfairness of a simple, blanket ban; when the problem is with the debate, not the item itself.

        • Speckled Jim on 30/05/2018 - 10:56

          I reckon if smart guns were the norm, there wouldn't be much of an issue. A responsible firearm(s) owner is one thing, but kids accidentally (or not) shooting each other is always tragic.

          Then again, the recent events in southwestern WA were committed by a responsible registered firearms owner.

          As someone further up pointed out, firearms owners account for less than 4% of the populace — a small minority. So I'd say the "small, noisy minority" finger should be pointed elsewhere.

        • TheTopMostDog on 30/05/2018 - 15:07

          I really like the idea of smart guns, but I feel they're not a necessity for most owners. Police, security, and anyone else who has to use a firearm for defense would benefit hugely from this as they present a weapon to the fight they're inevitably going to have. If it only responds to them, that's great. I'm in private security myself, and would love to see this (Edit: …although one has to consider that the system might fail, leading to law enforcement being unable to prevent a murder, for instance).

          Most accidents surrounding firearms wouldn't occur if the laws were followed. Tragic, yes, but even kids getting access to safes and playing around with "dad's guns" is completely against the law (at least in my state); no one is meant to know the code to your safe, even if they have a license, themselves.

          Firearms per capita in Australia is actually almost identical to the United States. I don't know whether there's fewer gun owners whom own more guns, or if that's the case for America, where I've seen guys with entire collections. Here, we're required to have a full security system if we own more than 5. *shrug

        • nith265 on 30/05/2018 - 16:18

          @TheTopMostDog:

          Firearms per capita in Australia is actually almost identical to the United States.

          Wikipedia says: 101 guns per 100 people in USA, 13.1 guns per 100 people in Australia
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_guns_per_c…

          I know there is no certainty that Wikipedia is 100% correct but…

          I reckon firearms could require an account to view their category

          I hate guns but agree this would have completely resolved this issue.

          Don't think I've ever even seen a gun advertised in print or online before seeing that pistol deal comingled with all the standard deals on the home page.

        • TheTopMostDog on 30/05/2018 - 17:24

          @nith265:

          Firearms per capita

          Apologies, you are correct; my comment should read lawful firearms per capita, or firearms lawfully owned by civilians. I'm fairly certain that figure (100) includes illegal weapons [see edit below]. I don't have the citation handy, I'll edit with it if I find it.

          <IOU>

          Edit: re- illegal weapons: Affirmative; "The figures cited are estimates for 'private gun ownership (both licit and illicit)'." - from the wiki page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_guns_per_c…)

          pistol deal

          I haven't heard anything about it, was just linked this thread by a mate whom thought I'd be interested. I suspect that's where the drama went down. Unfortunate.

          I receive bulk emails from various sources advertising sales on different firearms and accessories. It'd be great if Ozbargains reconsidered, because newsletters only go so far, it'd be nice to have someone consolidating this stuff.

          Example email: https://i.imgur.com/hGwTgll.png (source intentionally redacted as to not appear as advertisement)

        • nith265 on 30/05/2018 - 22:37

          @TheTopMostDog:

          No worries. Don't quite understand the distinction you're now making re the per capita stats - by whatever measure I'd be surprised if we were anywhere near USA though.

          yeah it was a pistol deal that triggered this round of drama and the ban last Sunday - it was unpublished by mods after a comment/voting crap storm.

        • nickp on 31/05/2018 - 09:06

          @Speckled Jim: 4% is a huge amount of people, in a polital setting a politician would be stupid to ignore 4% of a population. As was stated above its not about being the majority, The question should be, is there a market? Yes obviously.

        • Speckled Jim on 31/05/2018 - 10:47
          +1

          John Howard tightened gun laws, and he was re-elected thrice more. Once despite the GST too. Where was that 4% at the polls?
          So from a historical perspective, we must love copping a hiding from authority, then forever whinging about it eh?

          If replicas can't pass Customs and Border Force, similar items probably shouldn't be here.

          Learn of this so-called "dark web" and have at it.

        • nith265 on 31/05/2018 - 13:54

          @nickp:

          4% is a huge amount of people

          96% is even bigger!

          is there a market? Yes obviously.

          So make a bargain gun site and capitalise on the massive money spinning opportunity gone begging!

          OzB - who I think have 4 (paid?) mods - are simply saying their care factor for a minority is out weighed by the trouble it causes them.

  • Senthen on 30/05/2018 - 00:44

    Thanks Mods.

    Must be hard dealing with all this crap. Just remember that the majority of us agree with you, and the loud minority will be the ones commenting.

    • Abbi on 30/05/2018 - 06:30

      Correct, the votes speak loudly:

      834 Gun deals should be banned

      667 Gun deals should be allowed

      • c0balt on 03/06/2018 - 13:32
        +1

        More than 50% of Germans voted for the Nazis. More than half the population of Germany fought or provided material support to the Nazi war/genocide efforts.

        Being in the majority doesn't make you right.

        Using majority rules as a justification that you are right in an issue is a strawman argument and it means your entire ethos revolves around you changing your opinion to what ever is popular in culture at the time.

        Be careful about popularism, because when it swings the other way, as the pendulum always does, your justification for what makes something 'right' must be applied there too.

        • belongsinforums on 03/06/2018 - 13:38
          +1

          I thought he was agreeing with you

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join