Punish Criminals, Not Law-Abiding Firearm Owners

GUN DEBATE | One Nation stands by law-abiding Australians

Last night the Greens attempted to demonise and target law-abiding gun owners.Australians have been lawfully and reasonably carrying weapons for a variety of reasons for generations. New laws introduced over recent years have made owning a gun even tougher.Law abiding citizens are not the problem with guns. Criminals are who the Greens should focus on, not law-abiding gun owners.One Nation has always and will always, support the rights of law-abiding Australian gun owners.

Posted by Pauline Hanson's Please Explain on Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Yet again, the Greens have attempted to demonise and target law-abiding gun owners.

For generations, Australians have been lawfully and reasonably carrying firearms for a variety of reasons including for sports/recreation and as tools of the trade for farmers. New laws introduced over recent years have made owning a gun even tougher.

Instead of focusing on Law abiding gun owners, the Greens should be steering their attention towards the law breaking Criminals.

One Nation has always and will always, support the rights of law-abiding Australian gun owners who deal with some of the strictest gun laws in the world.

8 replies
  1. Sean Streten
    Sean Streten says:

    I have worked as a correctional officer and have had a chance to talk, live and work with the criminals who have utilised illegal firearms to commit the crimes that we the public are scared of. Not one of those people I have spoken with (in the hundreds) have gained a weapons license and aquired a firearm legally to commit their crime. Even with these statistics at hand the greens still focus their fact-less attacks on law abiding firearm owners.

    On this note, it is hard for law abiding firearm owners to gain positive traction for their innocence when their license is classed and titled as a “weapons license”. This term is harsh and brings a negative outlook upon firearms considering that if an object is not utilised to threaten or harm another person it isn’t a weapon.

  2. Charlie
    Charlie says:

    In 2013, I was forced to surrender my firearms licence due to the ex-wife’s unfounded and fabricated DVO. I couldn’t afford to fight it so ended up wearing the Order “Without Admission”. It is totally wrong! Why should I lose my sport (hunting) because the ex decides to destroy my life – and guess who facilitated the process (won’t elaborate in fear of being slapped with defamation).

    There are many fathers in the same boat as myself who only wish to see their kids and participate in their chosen sport. My ex is totally guilty of parental alienation which is child abuse.

    This is why I decided to become a life member of ONE NATION. Great speech Pauline!

  3. Ken Wilson
    Ken Wilson says:

    After all the rhetoric by the greens, what total disarmament for there own ends .No one has asked why the balance of power taken away by john howard has not been ever questioned. He is the direct problem Australian public now cower at the threat criminals now have more rights than legitimate law abiding citizens in out of favor of criminals who are now taking over the whole community, all the while howard sits up on the throne, while tax paying Australians still have to cover his cost no matter what. How grossly un Democratic is that.

  4. Stuart Skeels
    Stuart Skeels says:

    Watch out Ms Hanson…you’ll have the ‘Greens’ All turn up in bullet proof vests if you’re not careful, if Only to mimic your Burqa(s?) protest…… in another pathetic attempt at imitating someone else & so take the focus away from the fact that They have no ‘real’ policies of their own…..

  5. Rick Tomkies
    Rick Tomkies says:

    Good for you Pauline; you are so correct on this matter. I’d also like to take this opportunity of seconding what Sean Streten said in the comments here about the term “weapons.” I have maintained for a long time that the police, media and the general public incorrectly refer to guns and firearms as “weapons.” The term weapon should be reserved to a gun or a firearm when it is used either in a military capacity or when it is being, or about to be used to injure or kill another human being. The term weapon when referring to a firearm used for “peaceful” pursuits only serves to produce fear and mistrust among those of the general public not familiar with firearms, and as Sean correctly points out “brings a negative outlook” to firearms in general.


Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *