FOLLOW BOREME
 
TAGS
<< Back to listing
The Today Show - Can the US take lessons from Australia?

The Today Show - Can the US take lessons from Australia?

(9:52) Discussion on gun control on Australian breakfast TV show Today. Particularly relevant to the US because Australia introduced strict gun control and a gun buy-back campaign in 1996 following a mass shooting.

You can comment as a guest, but registering gives you added benefits

Add your comment
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (2080 days ago)
gun or no gun? Would you rather be beaten up or killed as a victim of a crime? At least if the former I would be arround to complain about it
ReplyVote up (194)down (162)
Original comment
gun or no gun? Would you rather be beaten up or killed as a victim of a crime? At least if the former I would be arround to complain about it
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (2079 days ago)
This is actually a good question. I don't care much about my life so I didn't care if someone broke into my house and killed me. Then my girlfriend made a comment. She said, what if they don't kill you and injure you where you cannot walk for the rest of your life? Or, you're in a coma. Or, they try to rape you. It was then that I decided to buy a couple guns to protect myself. Again, I don't mind dying but I do not want to be injured and have to suffer with pain and disabilities for the rest of my life.
ReplyVote up (177)down (157)
Original comment
This is actually a good question. I don't care much about my life so I didn't care if someone broke into my house and killed me. Then my girlfriend made a comment. She said, what if they don't kill you and injure you where you cannot walk for the rest of your life? Or, you're in a coma. Or, they try to rape you. It was then that I decided to buy a couple guns to protect myself. Again, I don't mind dying but I do not want to be injured and have to suffer with pain and disabilities for the rest of my life.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Your Nan (2080 days ago)
U.S. SCHOOL SHOOTING WIN?
ReplyVote up (188)down (158)
Original comment
U.S. SCHOOL SHOOTING WIN?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Dumb yank problem (2079 days ago)
Cengland0 is a troll. He appears dumb enough to look down the barrel of his own gun, to check if it is loaded. Cengland...remember to hold the trigger fairly tightly when you do this...a little light in the barrel will illuminate just so you can see if it's loaded.
ReplyVote up (195)down (166)
Original comment
Cengland0 is a troll. He appears dumb enough to look down the barrel of his own gun, to check if it is loaded. Cengland...remember to hold the trigger fairly tightly when you do this...a little light in the barrel will illuminate just so you can see if it's loaded.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (2079 days ago)
Latest comment: If you think I'm a troll, then follow the "Do not feed the troll" philosophy and stop replying to my messages or commenting on them.
ReplyVote up (179)down (151)
Original comment
Latest comment: If you think I'm a troll, then follow the "Do not feed the troll" philosophy and stop replying to my messages or commenting on them.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (2080 days ago)
How long can we hide behind a constitutional right? Do you really consider it hiding when we consider it a right? It was not the NRA that passed the amendment. What corrupt NRA leadership are you talking about? These are all just words that have no basis on facts. The US gun laws are NOT based on maximizing gun sales like he would lead you to believe. They are based on maximizing our security as well as our freedoms. It is not a minority that pushes for our rights to own guns. It was the majority that voted for it to be an amendment and it was ratified. No, a buy-back program will not work in America. We have 270 million guns according to this video so who will pay the money in this buy-back program? The tax payers? We already have a financial crises going on here and asking the tax payers to pay that bill is unreasonable. Besides, you cannot guarantee everyone will turn in those guns so you'll be left with the criminals keeping theirs and the law-abiding citizens being disarmed. Funny how their "statistics" conveniently left out countries like Mexico, Israel, and Columbia. It's obviously biased to make you believe there is a link from gun quantities to gun homicides but the reals statistics show that is not true. The reason you will not see Obama taking action is because he doesn't have the right to. It's in our constitution so to take our guns away is not within the power of the government -- it's in the power of the people. The people have spoken and they want guns and that's why we have our 2nd amendment.
ReplyVote up (184)down (167)
Original comment
How long can we hide behind a constitutional right? Do you really consider it hiding when we consider it a right? It was not the NRA that passed the amendment. What corrupt NRA leadership are you talking about? These are all just words that have no basis on facts. The US gun laws are NOT based on maximizing gun sales like he would lead you to believe. They are based on maximizing our security as well as our freedoms. It is not a minority that pushes for our rights to own guns. It was the majority that voted for it to be an amendment and it was ratified. No, a buy-back program will not work in America. We have 270 million guns according to this video so who will pay the money in this buy-back program? The tax payers? We already have a financial crises going on here and asking the tax payers to pay that bill is unreasonable. Besides, you cannot guarantee everyone will turn in those guns so you'll be left with the criminals keeping theirs and the law-abiding citizens being disarmed. Funny how their "statistics" conveniently left out countries like Mexico, Israel, and Columbia. It's obviously biased to make you believe there is a link from gun quantities to gun homicides but the reals statistics show that is not true. The reason you will not see Obama taking action is because he doesn't have the right to. It's in our constitution so to take our guns away is not within the power of the government -- it's in the power of the people. The people have spoken and they want guns and that's why we have our 2nd amendment.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (2080 days ago)
You keep on coming back with points that have been discredited before. Mexico has ineffective gun control and a raging drug war, as with Colombia. Israel is obviously unique being on a constant war footing. Either come back and explain why Mexico, Colombia and Israel are not special cases, or accept it and weave that new knowledge into your thinking. After all, isn't that the point? I'm glad you didn't mention Switzerland, seems like you've learnt something.
ReplyVote up (167)down (179)
Original comment
You keep on coming back with points that have been discredited before. Mexico has ineffective gun control and a raging drug war, as with Colombia. Israel is obviously unique being on a constant war footing. Either come back and explain why Mexico, Colombia and Israel are not special cases, or accept it and weave that new knowledge into your thinking. After all, isn't that the point? I'm glad you didn't mention Switzerland, seems like you've learnt something.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (2080 days ago)
Columbia and Mexico are not allowed to have guns but you can see that the criminals still have them. I don't know why you want to ban these countries from the conversation because they are good examples of what can happen when you ban guns. You take them away from the law-abiding citizens but the criminals still have them. Don't you agree it's the criminals in Mexico and Columbia that have them? In the US, we are also involved in a drug war. Don't you think if we banned guns those people involved in the production and distribution of drugs will still keep theirs? Israel on the other hand has just as many guns as the US but their gun homicides are pretty low. So I provided examples on both sides. Everyone keeps picking England as an example of what happens when you take guns away from the public but you never had 270,000,000 guns floating around before you banned them did you? Also, your crime rate on rapes and burglaries are higher and you have more stabbings. In total crimes, the UK is ranked #2 just behind the US so taking guns away didn't work for you as much as you thought it did. LINK
ReplyVote up (171)down (162)
Original comment
Columbia and Mexico are not allowed to have guns but you can see that the criminals still have them. I don't know why you want to ban these countries from the conversation because they are good examples of what can happen when you ban guns. You take them away from the law-abiding citizens but the criminals still have them. Don't you agree it's the criminals in Mexico and Columbia that have them? In the US, we are also involved in a drug war. Don't you think if we banned guns those people involved in the production and distribution of drugs will still keep theirs? Israel on the other hand has just as many guns as the US but their gun homicides are pretty low. So I provided examples on both sides. Everyone keeps picking England as an example of what happens when you take guns away from the public but you never had 270,000,000 guns floating around before you banned them did you? Also, your crime rate on rapes and burglaries are higher and you have more stabbings. In total crimes, the UK is ranked #2 just behind the US so taking guns away didn't work for you as much as you thought it did. LINK
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: PeterLondon (2080 days ago)
I think you'll find that Israel uses all it's bullets murdering Palestinians, so they has none left to kill each other! Most of those bullets supplied free-of-charge from the USA tax payer. Cengland0 likes small government and low taxes - but I bet he has no problem paying taxes to help the crazy Zionists murder Muslims. eh?
ReplyVote up (155)down (190)
Original comment
I think you'll find that Israel uses all it's bullets murdering Palestinians, so they has none left to kill each other! Most of those bullets supplied free-of-charge from the USA tax payer. Cengland0 likes small government and low taxes - but I bet he has no problem paying taxes to help the crazy Zionists murder Muslims. eh?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (2080 days ago)
Good one PeterLondon but there is a difference between civilian owned guns and guns provided by the military. The ammo used to ward off (not murder) Palestinians are provided by the military. Israel defends themselves and attacks only when they are attacked first. They believe in an eye-for-an-eye so if the Palestinians killed some Israelites, they will counter with an attack to do similar damage to the Palestinians. Realize that Israel is a powerful country and is using technology from the US so they could easily eradicate all the Palestinians from the face of the earth but they don't. They only want to protect their land from outside forces and the Palestinians keep attacking (I think they are stupid for attacking Israel but it is what it is). What do you think Israel should do? Just let their people get killed?
ReplyVote up (176)down (155)
Original comment
Good one PeterLondon but there is a difference between civilian owned guns and guns provided by the military. The ammo used to ward off (not murder) Palestinians are provided by the military. Israel defends themselves and attacks only when they are attacked first. They believe in an eye-for-an-eye so if the Palestinians killed some Israelites, they will counter with an attack to do similar damage to the Palestinians. Realize that Israel is a powerful country and is using technology from the US so they could easily eradicate all the Palestinians from the face of the earth but they don't. They only want to protect their land from outside forces and the Palestinians keep attacking (I think they are stupid for attacking Israel but it is what it is). What do you think Israel should do? Just let their people get killed?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: PeterLondon (2079 days ago)
The crazy Zionists, supported by the USA and tax paying fools like yourself cengland0, have stolen the land of the Palestinian people, then murdered, assassinated, tortured and ethnically cleansed them. You witter-on about your "right" to have guns to "defend" yourself; but you deny the Palestinian people the same right to defend themselves, their families and their land. But don't take my word for it - see what the Zionist leader themselves had to say: Quotes from Moshe Dayan; Zionist military leader and politician: "Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist" "There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population". He also said these words at the funeral of a Zionist coloniser, killed by Palestinian freedom fighters: "Let us not today fling accusation at the murderers. What cause have we to complain about their fierce hatred to us? For eight years now, they sit in their refugee camps in Gaza, and before their eyes we turn into our homestead the land and villages in which they and their forefathers have lived. We should demand his blood not from the Arabs of Gaza but from ourselves. . . . " Quote from David Ben-Gurion, Zionist first Prime Minister of Israel: "I don't understand your optimism," Ben-Gurion declared. "Why should the Arabs make peace? If I were an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been antisemitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?"
ReplyVote up (158)down (165)
Original comment
The crazy Zionists, supported by the USA and tax paying fools like yourself cengland0, have stolen the land of the Palestinian people, then murdered, assassinated, tortured and ethnically cleansed them. You witter-on about your "right" to have guns to "defend" yourself; but you deny the Palestinian people the same right to defend themselves, their families and their land. But don't take my word for it - see what the Zionist leader themselves had to say: Quotes from Moshe Dayan; Zionist military leader and politician: "Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist" "There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population". He also said these words at the funeral of a Zionist coloniser, killed by Palestinian freedom fighters: "Let us not today fling accusation at the murderers. What cause have we to complain about their fierce hatred to us? For eight years now, they sit in their refugee camps in Gaza, and before their eyes we turn into our homestead the land and villages in which they and their forefathers have lived. We should demand his blood not from the Arabs of Gaza but from ourselves. . . . " Quote from David Ben-Gurion, Zionist first Prime Minister of Israel: "I don't understand your optimism," Ben-Gurion declared. "Why should the Arabs make peace? If I were an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been antisemitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?"
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Bryn (2080 days ago)
Violent crime stats in the UK includes a high proportion in which no injury was inflicted and which would therefore not count as such in the US. Take these away and the UK falls way down the list. The comparisons of rape and other crime stats are similarly complex. Given that gun crime is very unevenly distributed across each country I think these comparisons are even more meaningless. But I'm very grateful to live in a country (almost) without guns.
ReplyVote up (166)down (216)
Original comment
Violent crime stats in the UK includes a high proportion in which no injury was inflicted and which would therefore not count as such in the US. Take these away and the UK falls way down the list. The comparisons of rape and other crime stats are similarly complex. Given that gun crime is very unevenly distributed across each country I think these comparisons are even more meaningless. But I'm very grateful to live in a country (almost) without guns.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (2080 days ago)
I'm happy for you that you live in a country that almost has no guns. So quit trying to take our guns away. Since you don't live here, it's not your problem. Why do other countries feel like we care about their feedback on our gun laws? You opinions will not affect our laws or have our guns taken away. It's our constitutional right and it's up to the American citizens to decide if we want to have guns and we have already spoken on this matter. We want them, we added it to our constitution, so they are here to stay.
ReplyVote up (162)down (194)
Original comment
I'm happy for you that you live in a country that almost has no guns. So quit trying to take our guns away. Since you don't live here, it's not your problem. Why do other countries feel like we care about their feedback on our gun laws? You opinions will not affect our laws or have our guns taken away. It's our constitutional right and it's up to the American citizens to decide if we want to have guns and we have already spoken on this matter. We want them, we added it to our constitution, so they are here to stay.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: fletcher1956 (2079 days ago)
"we have already spoken on this matter" Actually you have not, have you had a nation wide referendum on the validity of the 2nd amendment? No you have not so how can you say that. You have not had a vote on such matters so all Americans have not had the opportunity to vote on the continuing validity of the second amendment. The constitution has not been significantly updated since its drafting. 1787 America is in far contrast to 2013 American Society. The second amendment is outdated and deserves a full and transparent review. "You opinions will not affect our laws or have our guns taken away." You have no clue on how International Relations work do you. We may not have the sovereign right to do so but we can help structure debate and policy which can lead to bill's becoming statutory law.
ReplyVote up (162)down (175)
Original comment
"we have already spoken on this matter" Actually you have not, have you had a nation wide referendum on the validity of the 2nd amendment? No you have not so how can you say that. You have not had a vote on such matters so all Americans have not had the opportunity to vote on the continuing validity of the second amendment. The constitution has not been significantly updated since its drafting. 1787 America is in far contrast to 2013 American Society. The second amendment is outdated and deserves a full and transparent review. "You opinions will not affect our laws or have our guns taken away." You have no clue on how International Relations work do you. We may not have the sovereign right to do so but we can help structure debate and policy which can lead to bill's becoming statutory law.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (2079 days ago)
The constitution is designed to not need updating. If it requires an update, the change needs to be ratified by 3/4ths of the states (38 of 50). So our president cannot just add or take anything away from the document unless the majority of the people agree with the change. If there was a major flaw in the document then we would ask for it to be updated. The constitution has been working the way we want it so far so I don't see any immediate need to make any changes. Besides, you have some dates wrong. Our 27th amendment was adopted in 1992 so it has been updated fairly recently. Remember, we did not like the way the UK was controlling us so we fought for our freedoms and we make our own decisions now. We beat the UK in two wars 1775–83 and 1812. We will listen to your advice but it's our country and we will make our own laws and govern our country the way we feel fit. Thank you.
ReplyVote up (160)down (145)
Original comment
The constitution is designed to not need updating. If it requires an update, the change needs to be ratified by 3/4ths of the states (38 of 50). So our president cannot just add or take anything away from the document unless the majority of the people agree with the change. If there was a major flaw in the document then we would ask for it to be updated. The constitution has been working the way we want it so far so I don't see any immediate need to make any changes. Besides, you have some dates wrong. Our 27th amendment was adopted in 1992 so it has been updated fairly recently. Remember, we did not like the way the UK was controlling us so we fought for our freedoms and we make our own decisions now. We beat the UK in two wars 1775–83 and 1812. We will listen to your advice but it's our country and we will make our own laws and govern our country the way we feel fit. Thank you.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: cengland0wanker (2080 days ago)
Can't wait to laugh in your face you ignorant small man.
ReplyVote up (152)down (173)
Original comment
Can't wait to laugh in your face you ignorant small man.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: PeterLondon (2079 days ago)
So cengland0, can YOU answer the Prime Minister of Israel's question? "Why should they (the Palestinian people) accept that"?
ReplyVote up (180)down (172)
Original comment
So cengland0, can YOU answer the Prime Minister of Israel's question? "Why should they (the Palestinian people) accept that"?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (2079 days ago)
Why should the Palestinian people accept what?
ReplyVote up (171)down (165)
Original comment
Why should the Palestinian people accept what?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (2080 days ago)
Some people who comment on here regularly are very well versed in talking sh*te and trying to pass it off as reasonable logic.
ReplyVote up (175)down (164)
Original comment
Some people who comment on here regularly are very well versed in talking sh*te and trying to pass it off as reasonable logic.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Think (2080 days ago)
cengland0 tell me why do you need as a private person an assault riffle, like the Bushmaster that was used for the last killings? For your defence? Then why is this called an ASSAULT riffle?
ReplyVote up (166)down (164)
Original comment
cengland0 tell me why do you need as a private person an assault riffle, like the Bushmaster that was used for the last killings? For your defence? Then why is this called an ASSAULT riffle?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (2079 days ago)
That's like asking why does any private person need a bible. It's our right to own one and if I want one I can have one. In reality, there are instances where you'd wish you had an assault rifle such as during the LA riots. And, if you look at the statistics, the number of killings by rifles of any kind is lower than the killings by bare hands and feet. Why do people pick on a weapon that has such low kill statistics?
ReplyVote up (177)down (181)
Original comment
That's like asking why does any private person need a bible. It's our right to own one and if I want one I can have one. In reality, there are instances where you'd wish you had an assault rifle such as during the LA riots. And, if you look at the statistics, the number of killings by rifles of any kind is lower than the killings by bare hands and feet. Why do people pick on a weapon that has such low kill statistics?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Bryn (2079 days ago)
Cengland0 you say "So quit trying to take our guns away.". Well I'm certainly not trying to take your guns away. It's up to you guys. But permit me to stand dumbfounded between laughter and tears as your fellow US citizens celebrate the murder of 20 children by buying yet more guns. I get the "you take my guns from my cold dead hands" argument, though it is more appropriate to my kids toys than to any adult disagreament. You can do whatever you like. Kill your kids - sure. And I will do the weeping for you.
ReplyVote up (183)down (189)
Original comment
Cengland0 you say "So quit trying to take our guns away.". Well I'm certainly not trying to take your guns away. It's up to you guys. But permit me to stand dumbfounded between laughter and tears as your fellow US citizens celebrate the murder of 20 children by buying yet more guns. I get the "you take my guns from my cold dead hands" argument, though it is more appropriate to my kids toys than to any adult disagreament. You can do whatever you like. Kill your kids - sure. And I will do the weeping for you.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (2079 days ago)
We are not "celebrating" but are "mourning" instead. And wouldn't you agree that it would be an overreaction if 20 people get killed to remove 300,000,000 guns from the environment and to compromise our freedoms? Nobody likes that 20 children were killed but that is really minor when you consider that all mass killings in the US only account for 0.1% of murders. That is a small percentage and not enough to warrant taking guns away from our citizens.
ReplyVote up (178)down (161)
Original comment
We are not "celebrating" but are "mourning" instead. And wouldn't you agree that it would be an overreaction if 20 people get killed to remove 300,000,000 guns from the environment and to compromise our freedoms? Nobody likes that 20 children were killed but that is really minor when you consider that all mass killings in the US only account for 0.1% of murders. That is a small percentage and not enough to warrant taking guns away from our citizens.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
RELATED POSTS
Compressorhead - Ace of Spades
Compressorhead - Ace of Spades
Hypnotist stuns TEDX crowd
Hypnotist stuns TEDX crowd
Poodlebum and Piddlepee
Poodlebum and Piddlepee
How big are SpaceX rockets really?
How big are SpaceX rockets really?
Jim Jefferies gets Jordan Peterson to admit he was wrong
Jim Jefferies gets Jordan Peterson to admit he was wrong