Slip sliding away.....

[goju]

you know the song.....

Sorry Aussie's, we didnt get their in time.


Toy gun a 'prohibited weapon'
August 11, 2004

"NSW Police have outlawed a toy pistol that has a similar appearance to a genuine Glock handgun and has bullets than can travel up to 30 metres.

Police urged the public to keep the pistol out of circulation, since it could cause serious injury when fired.

It could also be mistaken for a real weapon and cause "very serious repercussions" for everyone involved in an incident involving the toy, they said."

Love this part...

""This is an opportunity for the public of NSW to assist police to remove these dangerous items from the community before there is a tragedy.""

Yep, thats what it is... an opporutunity!

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10412855%255E1702,00.html


Here is the prelude...

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/11/14/1037080834377.html?oneclick=true

[skippythwndrdog]

1. Maybe they'll trade all the owners of those nasty things Easy Bake Ovens

Then the food police can clamp down on them for producing dangerously high fat cookies.

Will the insanity never stop?

[Jack_DeLeon]

2. So they are going to ban Airsoft...

who didnt see that coming.

[Jack_DeLeon]

3. BTW what I really find interesting...

is this statement.
NSW Police have outlawed a...

So can Australian Police Departments unilaterally outlaw things without any sort of state or local legislation?

More than 100 of the weapons were seized in Gosford on Monday afternoon while Burwood police seized almost 60 from a discount store on the same day.

Mr Madden said any retailers with the item on sale or members of the public who had purchased the toy weapon should hand it to police immediately.

So was there any sort of discussion on this topic or did they just one day decide to ban this toy and go around seizing other peoples' property without any sort of compensation or due process?

[iverglas]

5. gee

Instead of asking what amount to rhetorical questions because they're addressed to people who have no clue, why don't you find out?

Got google?

Or just have some interest in kinda insinuating that Australia is some sort of police state where the jackbooted thugs run amok?

[MrBenchley]

6. More disarmed craven slaves of the Queen....

"Australia is some sort of police state where the jackbooted thugs run amok?"
That's what they used to think on Pitcairn Island too....and now those folks have to cower in fear while breadfruit go unshot at....

[Jack_DeLeon]

7. Gee Miss Google Goddess...

What search strings do you suppose will turn up my answer.

If you dont have an answer then why did you respond, if you dont know the answer then obviously it wasnt aimed at you.

As for the police state remark, the news article certainly makes it seem as such, which is why I was looking for some clarification from anyone in the know (by your reply thats obviously not you.)

[iverglas]

8. if *I* don't know the answer

If you dont have an answer then why did you respond, if you dont know the answer then obviously it wasnt aimed at you.

... why would you even bother asking the question??

[MrBenchley]

9. Jack is too busy pretending Australia is a tyranny

to really approach coherence these days...

What a tragedy that some people seem unable to use a search engine unless somebody tells them exactly what to search for....but it does make you wonder why folks who can't operate yahoo safely should be trusted with a dangerous weapon...

[Jack_DeLeon]

10. Thats a pretty pretensious statement...

So are you implying that if you dont know the answer then its pointless for anyone to ask any questions?

[MrBenchley]

11. "pretensious statements" seem to be somebody's "fortay"

But I don't think it's Iverglas....

[gatlingforme]

41. geez there has been alot of deletions after your posts again....

You should give up on the forte thing. Don't you think? I made a mistake and I know fortay is really forte. so lets all get over this infantile bantering. I wonder, did you ever make a mistake.? hmmm, I should probably not ask you, considering your propensity for bias on certain issues.

[iverglas]

13. you got it

So are you implying that if you dont know the answer then its pointless for anyone to ask any questions?

If I don't know the answer, you can pretty much bet that nobody else does.

(Unless the question is about something dumb that I don't give a shit about, like guns.)

As, you will note, I have demonstrated in what I posted just now.

The Australian police did not outlaw toy pistols.

The Australian police informed the public that the toy pistols in question are outlawed under NSW firearms legislation.

The reporter who said that the Australian police had outlawed toy pistols needs some remedial reading and basic civics courses.

Anyone who relies on that reporter's blunder to make his/her own independent assertion that the Australian police have outlawed toy pistols needs remedial courses in civility (essentially, respect for other people -- both the people the falsehood is told about and the people to whom it is told). And common sense.

[Jack_DeLeon]

17. ROFL...

little miss know it all, "if I dont know it, nobody does." :eyes:

Well thanks for answering the question though.

Yes I thought it was likely that the reporter was wrong, however it could be just as possible for the police to overstep thier authority.

Even in the US there are numerous cases where an individual police officer, or even a police department will misinterpret laws, or even by virtue of not knowing all the laws make up what they think the laws are.

On another forum I visit someone posted on how while they were playing a game of airsoft a police officer rolled up on them, questioned them for a while, and confiscated thier weapons and did not return them until thier parents went to retrieve them.

Yes there will be some people that would applaud that officer as just making sure the kids are staying out of trouble and wanting to talk to the parents, however there was no legal authority for him to do so, but it happens because people just go along with it, because the police know what is best for everyone. :eyes:

[iverglas]

12. and now for the boring REAL answer

What search strings do you suppose will turn up my answer.

Well, let's see. We know that Australia is a federal state in which jurisdiction over criminal law is vested in the individual states. Right? Of course we do. We wouldn't be talking about its laws if we didn't even know that much.

The story in question originates in New South Wales. So how 'bout we try nsw firearms legislation? Here I go ...

Result # 1 on our hit parade:

http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/firearms/legislation.cfm

Now follow those links
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/scanact/inforce/NONE/0
click "F", go to "Firearms Act 1996 No 46"
(I'm kinda thinking this is actually one of those situations where some people like to talk an awful lot about things they have never read ... I say about no one in particular)
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/fullhtml/inforce/act+46+1996+pt.1-sec.1+0+N

So, let's look at the definitions section.

firearm means a gun, or other weapon, that is (or at any time was) capable of propelling a projectile by means of an explosive, and includes a blank fire firearm, or an air gun, but does not include anything declared by the regulations not to be a firearm.

Looks to me like the items in question are firearms, and therefore subject to whatever specific provisions of the Act and regulations are applicable to them.

Now I'm bored, so that's as far as I'm going with that. Because I have had a better idea.


As for the police state remark, the news article certainly makes it seem as such, which is why I was looking for some clarification from anyone in the know (by your reply thats obviously not you.)

Well, but, you see, it *is* I. Because I know that Australia is not a police state. And unless I were reading a news article written in the Orion galaxy, or maybe listening to it read aloud on FoxNews, it wouldn't occur to me that the information being conveyed to me was intended to mean "Australia is a police state". So if that was the impression I'd somehow got, I'd just know that I'd gone wrong somewhere.

What *I* would think, reading what we all read, is that maybe some cub reporter didn't quite phrase the business accurately.

So anyhow, let's go to the root of the site where we started:
http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/main/default.cfm

And #2 in the list of police press releases there is this:

http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/media/detail.cfm?ObjectID=6743&SectionID=media
"Police Advise Dangerous ‘Toy Gun’ Is Prohibited Weapon"

Oh look. They didn't outlaw anything. They issued a press release reminding the public (which, after all, is deemed to know what the law is) that the weapons in question ARE ALREADY OUTLAWED.

Deputy Commissioner (Operations) Dave Madden said any retailers with the item on sale or members of the public who had purchased the weapon should hand it to police immediately.

... and this would be because ...

“The possession or sale of a prohibited weapon in NSW is punishable by a sentence of up to 14 years’ imprisonment.

So what the coppers were *really* doing was

- reminding people that the sale and possession of these items is illegal
- reminding people of the penalties they are subject to, by law, if they sell or possess these items
- offering to turn a blind eye if anyone dumb, or deliberately criminal, enough to have any of these items on hand hops on a bus and brings it on down to the local nick and hands it over.


Now, if you compare the police press release with the media report offered in the first post --
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10412855%255E1702,00.html
-- you'll observe that really all the "reporter" has done is a sloppy rewrite.

The police press release says:
"Police Advise Dangerous ‘Toy Gun’ Is Prohibited Weapon"

The media report says:
"Toy gun a 'prohibited weapon' ... NSW Police have outlawed a toy pistol ..."

The police didn't ORDER it outlawed; they ADVISED THAT it is outlawed.

Anybody see what I see? I see a reporter who didn't understand what s/he was reading, AND FUCKED UP.

And has undoubtedly brought into existence several gazillion letters and articles and editorials and posts and blog entries all over the WorldWideWeb and spilling out into the real world, sniveling about Australia being a "police state".

All because of one jugheaded reporter, and a whole lot of people who don't have the CIVILITY to check a primary source before spreading false information around the world.


If you dont have an answer then why did you respond, if you dont know the answer then obviously it wasnt aimed at you.

So ... you were saying?

[iverglas]

14. time for an award for me

The Debunker of the Week. Perhaps a nice portrait for the wall, of some famous Debunker. I think I'll start with


http://www.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~bertrand/later.html


Unfortunately, nobody seems to offer the debunk bed I thought might be just right for me.

[MrBenchley]

15. Well deserved...

Russell has always been a hero of mine....

[iverglas]

25. ^^^ library_max -- read this one

(edit -- I mean the "boring REAL answer" one)

And click the link to the police media release.

It really ain't about kids and toys.

Although heck, you might be forgiven for thinking so on reading what was posted to start this thread ...

And it really has nothing at all to do with police powers.

[skippythwndrdog]

43. Anybody see what I see?

I see a reporter who didn't understand what s/he was reading, AND FUCKED UP.

Oh! You mean it's just like many of the the U.S. reporters who write about the AWB!

edited to add HTML

[iverglas]

44. obviously --

Oh! You mean it's just like many of the the U.S. reporters who write about the AWB!

-- I mean it's just like seagulls in a clear blue sky. Could you have possibly read what I wrote and thought I meant something different from "it's just seagulls in a clear blue sky"??

If *you* thought that X was just like Y, why wouldn't you have the guts and decency to say so in your own voice?

What would you need my voice for?

*I* have never relied on the words of any U.S. reporter to assert a false fact and then whine about it.

But damned if that isn't just exactly what somebody did in the post that initiated this thread. Rely on the words of a reporter to assert a false fact and then whine about it.

So hmm. I'm not seeing much of a very good analogy here, I'm afraid.

[skippythwndrdog]

45. So sorry your glasses are off.

Would another analogy suit you better?

How about that it would be similar to many reporters who write science columns claiming that global warming is a myth?

[MrBenchley]

4. "Sorry Aussie's, we didnt get their in time."

LOL!

[thomas82]

16. Oh well

The citizens.. I mean subjects/sheep are doing well in Australia aren't they? first guns, now airsoft hell next it will be water guns.
Tom

[Jack_DeLeon]

18. Well according to the wording in Australian laws...

waterguns may very well be prohibited weapons.

from iverglas's link
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/fullhtml/inforce/act+46+1996+pt.1-sec.1+0+N#pt.1-sec.4

firearm means a gun, or other weapon, that is (or at any time was) capable of propelling a projectile by means of an explosive, and includes a blank fire firearm, or an air gun, but does not include anything declared by the regulations not to be a firearm

Here is thier definition of an airgun.
air gun means a gun that:

(a) can propel, or is designed to propel, a projectile:
(i) by means of any gas or mixture of gases, including air but not including a gas or mixture of gases generated by an explosive, or
(ii) by means of a spring, and
(b) is operated or designed for operation by means of a trigger or similar device

They do not define what a "projectile" is so it could be argued that water is a projectile.

I also cannot find the "regulations" that declare waterguns not to be firearms.

So unless I'm missing something waterguns in Australia = firearms.

[iverglas]

20. ah, statutory construction for amateurs

It's such a diverting entertainment.

They do not define what a "projectile" is so it could be argued that water is a projectile.

Yeah. By a prosecutor who wasn't too keen on keeping his/her job.

Where a word is not defined in a statute, it is normally to be given its ordinary meaning.

The ordinary meaning of "projectile" (noun), per my Oxford Concise, is:

1. a missile, esp. fired by a rocket
2. a bullet, shell, etc., fired from a gun
3. any object thrown as a weapon

Now, we could get silly and go looking for definitions of "object", "thrown" and "weapon", but I suspect it's #2 you've got the hots for.

And here we encounter a little principle called ejusdem generis -- "of the same kind or nature" -- "the rule that where particular words are followed by general words" (e.g. "bullet", "shell", followed by "etc."), "the general words are limited to the same kind as the particular words" (A Concise Law Dictionary, Osborn).

Now, if someone wanted to argue that water is "the same kind" as bullet and shell, I'd be willing to buy a ticket.

I also cannot find the "regulations" that declare waterguns not to be firearms.

I will also bet a large amount of money that the regulations do not declare teacups not to be firearms.

So unless I'm missing something waterguns in Australia = firearms.

Oh ... you don't really want to hear my theory of what you might be missing, do you??


You're welcome. For the link to the legislation and the definition of "firearm", and anything else you may have found useful here.


I do note that you read that post of mine in which I utterly and completely dismantled the outrageously appallingly comically ethnocentrically bizarre claim that anyone might have made about Australia being a place where the police make laws. You're welcome for that too, of course.

[MrBenchley]

19. They seem to be doing better than we are...

Not nearly as much mayhem and bloodshed....and fewer gun nuts...

[MrBenchley]

21. Giant mutant ant colony found in Australia

And the poor Aussies, without their precious air guns!

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040812/sc_afp/australia_animals_ants_040812085554

The good news is, our "pro gun democrats" claim to be on the way to help....

The bad news, is all of their claims turn out to be horseshit....

[library_max]

22. What's the big deal, here?

What, do these kids need their toy guns to protect them from violent criminals? To hunt for food? Or perhaps to overthrow the government? If the measure is unpopular, it'll be rescinded. If not, what's the harm? Are some of us so knee-jerk on the subject that we get upset when toy guns are banned?

[MrBenchley]

23. Perhaps the funniest part

is the second line...suggesting some of our "pro gun democrats" plan to begin meddling in Australian politics but haven't quite got their ducks in a row....

[Jack_DeLeon]

24. Geez...

so you support the goverment taking away toy guns from children?

Whats next taking away video games and violent movies. :eyes:

[goju]

27. Yes

that is exactly what will follow.

[iverglas]

29. absolutely

that is exactly what will follow.

Kids in Australia use video games to rob and wound/kill people with all the time; if you guys weren't so provincial, you'd know this.

And there is always that awful danger that a cop will encounter a kid aiming a video game at someone and have to take the kid out because the cop can't tell whether the video game is loaded or not.

But I'll bet "self defence with a video game" is more likely to succeed than "self defence with a pregnant woman", so obviously access to high-calibre video games must never be restricted.

[goju]

30. Uh, ok

And how many kids are killed/wounded in swimming pools every year? Or bicycles? How bout we go after those too?

Lets not get carried away here. How many kids are really sticking up liquor stores with toy guns? Pleeeassseeee!

[iverglas]

32. I sputter

Can anyone actually be so humour-impaired??

Would anyone who wasn't actually want to represent him/herself as being so humour-impaired??



How many kids are really sticking up liquor stores with toy guns?

Uh ... why do you ask?

Did you REALLY think that those several dozen fake Glocks sold in the space of 2 days were going into the Aussie kiddies xmas-in-August stockings?

Or were you just trying to make me believe that you are so completely dunderheaded that you really thought that?

[Jack_DeLeon]

34. Do you have any evidence to back up your assertion...

that airsoft guns are being used to commit robberies?

I certainly dont see unusual about people buying airsoft guns, even the Japanese buy airsoft guns.

[MrBenchley]

35. Well, now Iverglas has her answer....

Ya gotta believe....

[iverglas]

38. do you have any evidence to back up your false and fabricated assertion

that I asserted that airsoft guns are being used to commit robberies?

No. Didn't think so.

I sure hope you folks find yourselves entertaining.

I certainly dont see unusual about people buying airsoft guns

There certainly is something unusual about it in a country where it's illegal to sell them.

I think that even you might find 200 of this particular item being sold in 2 days by a single vendor just a tad "unusual".

But I don't especially care one way or the other whether you do or don't.

[Jack_DeLeon]

40. Its illegal...

to sell marijuana in the US, yet I dont see anything unusual about people buying that too.

Also lets not forget there are people who will buy stuff just because it is "forbidden."

Jarts are banned from production, yet I dont see anything unusual about people buying those on eBay or garage sales either.

[iverglas]

42. yeah, I didn't think you had any evidence

to back up your false and fabricated assertion.

Nice bit of diversionary grooming, there, though!

[goju]

26. It just shows how far they will go

in taking ridiculous notions of "crime control" into the sublime!

"If the measure is unpopular, it'll be rescinded."

Oh really? And how do you propose they (citizens) do that?

[iverglas]

28. how far "they" will go

If the measure is unpopular, it'll be rescinded.
Oh really? And how do you propose they (citizens) do that?

All the way to pretending to forget that the citizens of Australia elect their governments, it seems.

Or to pretending to think that "citizens" are the ones who rescind legislation.

Or ... is there another blank to be filled in? Here's me, always open to alternative explanations for why someone would ask such far-side-of-the-moon questions.


It just shows how far they will go
in taking ridiculous notions of "crime control" into the sublime!

Yup -- those silly bleeders will go all the way to enforcing the laws on the books.

“Brisbane Water Local Area Command officers seized 103 of these weapons yesterday afternoon. Burwood police officers also seized 58 weapons from a discount store yesterday.

“What is extremely worrying to me, is that police have been told by the owner of the Gosford store that he had sold another 100 of these weapons to Central Coast residents over the previous two days. ..."

Oh, that's right -- they're upside down, down there, and Santa comes to put toy Glocks in good little boys' and girls' stockings in August.

[goju]

31. Hmmm

I wonder, what would prevent a majority of people from enacting/rescinding a law they agree/disagree with. Hmm, tough one here. I wonder if our AWB issue might be a good analogy. Since the constitutional control crowd is so fond of reminding us that 70+% of voters favor its renewal, and that renewal is all but dead, I think its a great analogy! Dont you?

Tell me, why WILL the AWB sunset? Then tell me, how likely is it that common sense people down under will be able to rescind this ridiculous assault on toys?

[MrBenchley]

33. "Tell me, why WILL the AWB sunset?"

Because Tom DeLay and the GOP are pandering to a handful of loonies, silly.

[enfield collector]

36. easy really.

in taking ridiculous notions of "crime control" into the sublime!

"If the measure is unpopular, it'll be rescinded."

Oh really? And how do you propose they (citizens) do that?



the same way they did it in 94 after the AWB was passed, 20 of our guys got voted out of the house according to Bill Clinton.

[MrBenchley]

37. "our guys"

Yeah, it's convincing when our pro-gun democrats say it....

By the way, in which races did anybody's Republican opponent actually come out and say he wanted assault weapons back on the market?

[library_max]

39. What?

How do I propose they (citizens) get an unpopular measure rescinded?

Well, gee, let's see. Australia is a democracy. New South Wales likewise. People can sign petitions, they can vote, they can call for redress of grievances. I'm guessing that politicians there are much like politicians here, and won't try to maintain a measure that is universally unpopular. Of course, if some people like it and some people don't, that's a different story. But, generally speaking, the ways for citizens in a democracy to go about repealing an unpopular law are pretty well established.

And yes, iver, thanks, I see your post now. I didn't read the whole string before I responded to the original post. I still think my response is valid in the context of that post, if not the actual situation.

Finally, in answer to my final question, obviously yes, some of us are so knee-jerk about the issue that they will even get upset about the banning of toy guns - in a country clear around the world from them, by the way, having nothing whatever to do with their lives.