Have you read Australia's? No we don't actually have freedom of speech the same way you do, its closer to the Canadian or u.k. I have looked and unless you can show the direct applicable parts to my yourself I don't think you're correct
The US Constitution doesn't grant any rights. It presumes the rights are pre-existing and granted by God. All the Constitution does is prohibit the government from infringing on those rights.
In Australia you have the same rights granted by the same God. Your Constitution may not be as explicit in prohibiting government violation of those rights, but that does not mean the rights don't exist.
This ^ exactly. The rights of man are unalienable. They cannot be separated from the man and are not granted by a government or any entity other than God-nature.
Sorry, Australians, it's time you people and the Canadians, the British and the New Zealanders began to take yourselves seriously and realize that you need to rise up and be the free people you really are and quit playing the helpless baby-victim role. Sure, if push comes to shove America will help you but all of you need to play a more serious, more intelligent game than you are doing at present.
So why did the revolution happen if they are God given?
You can wax philosophical all you want but it doesn't translate to the reality of the situation
Nor did I claim the constitution was what we want/need but a bill of rights. We have a constitution but it isn't like yours and we haven't fought for one which seems to be the only avenue available at this point even though we have no guns or the ability to get guns without becoming criminals.
All this is easy to say while in america or otherwise outside of Australia. If its so easy, come here and become a legend
The first 10 Amendments were second thoughts. They were put in to reinforce the notion that blessings (i.e., rights) bestowed on the people by God are not to be taken away by the government. This is implicit in the articles of the U.S. Constitution, but some founders felt a need to give it explicit expression.
So the Bill of Rights is not technically necessary, since everything flows from the premise of people processing unalienable rights.
No, not all Commonwealth countries have the same constitutions at all. NZ and UK are in sharp contrast to AUS.
Your laws are only as good as those enforcing it. You can have all the Bill of Rights you like. Is it being upheld in the US? No more than anywhere else.
People moan about the gun issue. It's not even remotely the same thing as the US. The countries were form completely differently. Why on earth should every country have the same structure? It's culturally illogical.
You can still own weapons in Australia. Yes, there are licenses, but there's also less in circulation with criminals. If the US authorities wish to take your weapons, guess what? They will. You can "they won't take muh guns" all you like, but they will sneak in like a thief in the night and do it. You're out gunned regardless when it comes to defense against the military. See point 2.
Freedom of speech? Australia has fairly decent implied freedom of speech laws, the UK is not Australia. Where is the US's freedom of speech right now? How is that being upheld? They have ways, very, very viable ways to circumvent 1A. People have just grown to passively accept that "Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences" and ergo, have in turn come to accept that freedom from consequences means if you say shit, you get hit and then your Soros backed DA will make sure you don't get charged for your crime, yet you go and protest an illegal election and you sure as shit DO understand those consequences.
Besides, I didn't say go do your research, I said be informed. There's a leaning I've seen towards victimhood in people here. Like "my state, my country etc isn't as great as ____". Yet if you look at the application unilaterally, how are the laws really being applied? See point 2, again.
Agree with you,magaprincess,those are very good points you have layed out there.
Getting firearms in Australia is not that hard,sure there are some hoops to jump through,but they aren't that bad.Check the relevant legislation in your state.
You can still get very decent rifles.A good example is Australia's favourite,the 303,
the MK 3 S,M,LE.(Short,Magazine,Lee Enfield)Also British And Canadian No4 Lee Enfields.
Investigate the cost of recalibrating to 7.62 NATO or for less recoil,243,6.5 Creedmor.The Lee Enfield has a fast,smooth bolt action.Google"Mad Minute"
for rate of fire that can be achieved.
There are many firearms you can legally own and use in Australia.
I would advise you to go and read both Australia's and the US's and see their applications. You have as many rights as Americans do. Be informed.
Have you read Australia's? No we don't actually have freedom of speech the same way you do, its closer to the Canadian or u.k. I have looked and unless you can show the direct applicable parts to my yourself I don't think you're correct
The US Constitution doesn't grant any rights. It presumes the rights are pre-existing and granted by God. All the Constitution does is prohibit the government from infringing on those rights.
In Australia you have the same rights granted by the same God. Your Constitution may not be as explicit in prohibiting government violation of those rights, but that does not mean the rights don't exist.
This ^ exactly. The rights of man are unalienable. They cannot be separated from the man and are not granted by a government or any entity other than God-nature.
Sorry, Australians, it's time you people and the Canadians, the British and the New Zealanders began to take yourselves seriously and realize that you need to rise up and be the free people you really are and quit playing the helpless baby-victim role. Sure, if push comes to shove America will help you but all of you need to play a more serious, more intelligent game than you are doing at present.
So why did the revolution happen if they are God given? You can wax philosophical all you want but it doesn't translate to the reality of the situation Nor did I claim the constitution was what we want/need but a bill of rights. We have a constitution but it isn't like yours and we haven't fought for one which seems to be the only avenue available at this point even though we have no guns or the ability to get guns without becoming criminals.
All this is easy to say while in america or otherwise outside of Australia. If its so easy, come here and become a legend
See my above post. Stop worshipping the US and understand the application of laws are not unilateral.
So you have nothing to show but belittling me by assuming I worship the u.s... blow it out your ass
I didn't belittle you.
I demonstrated how you are factually incorrect. Don't be such a victim.
The first 10 Amendments were second thoughts. They were put in to reinforce the notion that blessings (i.e., rights) bestowed on the people by God are not to be taken away by the government. This is implicit in the articles of the U.S. Constitution, but some founders felt a need to give it explicit expression.
So the Bill of Rights is not technically necessary, since everything flows from the premise of people processing unalienable rights.
Here are the issues :
No, not all Commonwealth countries have the same constitutions at all. NZ and UK are in sharp contrast to AUS.
Your laws are only as good as those enforcing it. You can have all the Bill of Rights you like. Is it being upheld in the US? No more than anywhere else.
People moan about the gun issue. It's not even remotely the same thing as the US. The countries were form completely differently. Why on earth should every country have the same structure? It's culturally illogical.
You can still own weapons in Australia. Yes, there are licenses, but there's also less in circulation with criminals. If the US authorities wish to take your weapons, guess what? They will. You can "they won't take muh guns" all you like, but they will sneak in like a thief in the night and do it. You're out gunned regardless when it comes to defense against the military. See point 2.
Freedom of speech? Australia has fairly decent implied freedom of speech laws, the UK is not Australia. Where is the US's freedom of speech right now? How is that being upheld? They have ways, very, very viable ways to circumvent 1A. People have just grown to passively accept that "Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences" and ergo, have in turn come to accept that freedom from consequences means if you say shit, you get hit and then your Soros backed DA will make sure you don't get charged for your crime, yet you go and protest an illegal election and you sure as shit DO understand those consequences.
Besides, I didn't say go do your research, I said be informed. There's a leaning I've seen towards victimhood in people here. Like "my state, my country etc isn't as great as ____". Yet if you look at the application unilaterally, how are the laws really being applied? See point 2, again.
Agree with you,magaprincess,those are very good points you have layed out there.
Getting firearms in Australia is not that hard,sure there are some hoops to jump through,but they aren't that bad.Check the relevant legislation in your state.
You can still get very decent rifles.A good example is Australia's favourite,the 303, the MK 3 S,M,LE.(Short,Magazine,Lee Enfield)Also British And Canadian No4 Lee Enfields.
Investigate the cost of recalibrating to 7.62 NATO or for less recoil,243,6.5 Creedmor.The Lee Enfield has a fast,smooth bolt action.Google"Mad Minute" for rate of fire that can be achieved.
There are many firearms you can legally own and use in Australia.