I’m waiting for this to be used in USA as “see gun control doesn’t work”
I think they’re way past the point of even discussing that.
You see, everyone in there is surprised because it happens in Australia, not USA.
Everyone is surprised because it happens there SO RARELY, because of strict firearm rules.
Watch the guy who disarmed one of the shooters
Real fucking hero. He was shot twice during the scuffle and was in surgery expected to survive.
His name is Ahmed al Ahmed. Found the footage of his relative being interviewed and he is named. Saw it early in Aussie news, can’t remember if it was 9 News or ABC (Australia Broadcasting)
Edit: updated link
Can’t believe the guts that must have taken. Absolute legend.
They immediately labeled it a terrorist attack. In the US this would’ve been called Tuesday.
When was the last time Australia had a mass shooting before this?
No we’d call it a terrorist attack because the shooters are arab. Have you been paying attention the past 24 years?
Around 30 years ago in Port Arthur. I think 40 people were killed that day. It triggered our national strict gun laws, although they’re continually being watered down since we’ve been experiencing more gun violence in the last decade.
Christchurch at least. But I’m sure there might have been something between. But just not daily/weekly like the US or middle east.
Isn’t Christchurch in New Zealand?
I think you’re right. They aren’t just nasal Aussies no matter how close proximity they are. It sucks no matter where it happens. I hate that us Americans have gotten so desensitized to it. There’s definitely middle ground to work from on reducing mass murders including gun violence.
Close proximity. They’re about 1500 km apart according to this site https://outthere.kiwi/new-zealand-travel-guide/is-new-zealand-part-of-australia/
That’s about the same as the distance from Australia’s westernmost point to the easternmost point, so I say we take over.
My sympathy to families of all the innocent people who got murdered. Ending Israeli occupation is the only way to prevent those type of incident
shut the fuck up with that bullshit.
When is the right time to acknowledge that injustice radicalises people? Once everyone is blind?
How long do we have to act as though Israel’s genocide is not directly causing a sharp increase in “antisemitism” globally?
You’ve been on Lemmy long enough that you should know that this is one of the most discussed topics here. Probably top 3.
Okay, so why are attacks targeting Jewish people the wrong time to discuss how dangerous the Israeli states actions are to the global Jewish diaspora?
The Islamic world has not grown anti-jewish over the last century in a vacuum, just like they didn’t grow anti-American in a vacuum. The exact same binary “you’re either with us or against us” rhetoric has been displayed after every terrorist attack since 9/11. It’s never the right time to discuss how our own past and present crimes recruit current and future enemies. They just hate us for our freedoms — who we are and our way of life — and that’s the only narrative our ministries of truth deploy.
It’s never the right time
That’s precisely the point of my comment though: there are tons of other posts one can condemn Israel’s genocide that don’t come off as opportunistic. The other side engages in this behavior: Netanyahu made a ridiculous statement that blamed Australia’s recognition of Palestine - https://www.commondreams.org/news/australia-palestian-state
Honestly though, this isn’t a hill worth dying on. Especially when we are on the same side, so this is just pointless infighting. You win, I forfeit. Have a good day.
What no one seems to be asking is the obvious question: how the fuck did these attackers get hold of guns? This is Australia folks not fucking America. We have laws to stop exactly this. How, where and by whom were they circumvented? More importantly: how can we prevent this from happening again?
You can get semi automatic hunting weapons relatively easily, same as in New Zealand.
The problem is, there’s enough people with a legitimate use case of firearms that banning them completely isn’t possible.
A cat C license (self loading) is a lot more difficult to get than a cat A,B licence. So far this has worked, no semi auto terrorist attacks since Port Arthur. Thank fuck these guys did not have semi auto weapons.
I honestly wouldn’t have much issue with them removing the cat C licence, effectively banning semi auto outside of military use. But it certainly has some legitimate use cases in feral animal control.
A pump shotgun is far more reliable than a semi-auto. Want to kill a bunch of people? I’d never trust a semi. Bring the pump.
Hell, for that matter I might pick one of my single shots. Takes less practice than a pump, cannot fail to send lead down range. I know that’s all counterintuitive. Slow is smooth, smooth is fast, as they say. :)
SOURCE: Own 12 shotguns of all ages and sorts.
Yeah no shit mate. That’s why pump shotguns are also under a cat C licence here. The legislators weren’t stupid, they basically categorised things on fire rate and public danger.
The Adler lever actions are very questionable in my opinion. They are almost as fast. Though the one I tried would jam all the time. Lever actions like that weren’t a common thing in the 90’s so it slipped by for a while.
And saying that a bolt action is potentially worse than a semi auto is some full on American bulshit. Sure things can jam and go wrong, but in the worst case situation with aresholes like this firing into a dense crowd where aim doesn’t really matter, faster shooting is more casualties.
The legislators weren’t stupid
Sorry maybe I’m giving away my country of origin but this part here is really hard for me to wrap my head around. I have no prior experience with this concept to relate to. Please be patient with me. 🤔
Haha. We have plenty of moron politicians. But typically all our legislation is usually written by public servants with expert advice and lawyers, and even they get it wrong sometimes. The politicians direct what they want, but most of them have never written a law. I assumed it worked this way in most places.
I hate Australian Nazis.
One of the men was named Naveed Akram, so take of that what you will.
Am thinking this was a bit less Wehrmacht related and a bit more Gaza…
…but yeah… obligatory fuck NAZIs just so no one misunderstands my point.
This news comes less than 24 hours after Hamas leader was killed in Gaza, during cease-fire no less. These innocent people have nothing to do with that, and it’s possible it’s not related, but BOTH sides need to stop this madness or it will never end.
…BOTH sides need to stop this madness or it will never end…
Isaac and Ishmael. It’s been going on for thousands of years. Old, old family squabble, it is. :(
I must politely reject this assessment. There have been decades and centuries of peaceful coexistence. It isn’t as though this is a persistent condition.
Prior to 1948, there were a lot of Christians and Jews living in Palestine without major conflict.
The modern ethno-religious tensions are the product of modern political events, not some mystic curse.
This doesn’t get brought up enough. The UK and US rolling up with wealthy Zionists to bully people from their ancestral lands. To give those lands to the wealthy Zionists who has largely escaped personal suffering. As consolation for their suffering they’d largely escaped. (But also as a platform to influence and manipulate the middle east) Anyone should be infuriated. Not just Palestinians.
No there hasn’t, wtf are you on about? First of all, there literally has never been a Palestinian state in history before the modern one which started around the same time as the modern Israeli state. So what you’re referring to doesn’t exist.
Second of all, the different religious groups have been killing each for literally thousands of years over this crappy piece of land. This is true now, during the British mandate, during the Ottoman era, during the Mamluk era, and so on. Even in the most peaceful of times, there was still rampant oppression, discrimination, riots, and atrocities. This idea that things were just peachy before is complete nonsense.
Whatever Palestine ever existed as a state of not is completely irrelevant and that talking point is used by Zionists. The fact is that Palestinians was living on there land and foreigners came and forced a state on them then ethnically cleanse them two and not they are ethnically cleansed a third time . You have right to hate religions but please do not excuse settler colonialism, creating famine and the murder of children because of it.
Let’s not also forget that the 2 world wars didn’t happen because of religion and the European colonial powers had the most bloody colonization history. You would not dare to infer that Europeans are natural savages that are always bloody like you are trying to portray all Muslims and jews
Whatever Palestine ever existed as a state of not is completely irrelevant. The fact is that Palestinians was living on there land and foreigners came and forced a state on them then ethnically cleanse them two and not they are ethnically cleansed a third time
It’s not though. The point that I was trying to make is that this region never had sovereignty until very recently with the two modern states. Prior to this, the region was always controlled by foreign empires like the British, Ottoman, Malmuk, Ayyubid, and so on. Every one of these empires came and forced a state on to the region.
But we have to contextualize what this means. Back during the days of the Ottoman Empire, there was an infamous system in place called sürgün that kept everybody the boot and the Turks were at the top. They did this by radically shifting demographics of all the regions they conquered. They would forcibly deport entire ethnic and religious groups that they viewed as threat to their rule to other regions of the empire that they felt were safer, and vice versa.
For example, the Ottoman empire famously did this with the Christians in Southeastern Europe. The Ottomans moved millions of Christians Europeans to Anatolia and the Levant, and relocated just as many muslims and Turks to southeastern Europe. This is why countries like Bulgaria, Albania, Bosnia, etc have such large muslim populations and why Turkey and the Levant region have so many people who are ethnically European. This of course includes the region of Israel/Palestine. A lot of prominent figures in the Palestinian movement were ethnically European. For example, Amin al-Husseini was ethnically Bosnian.
The Israel/Palestine region meant a lot to the empire as it was a strategic location, but also contained important islamic sites that the empire uses to derive its legitimacy as the muslim empire. To ensure this, they wanted to make sure that the region stayed firmly in islamic hands, and so they tried their best change the demographics. The Empire forcibly relocated muslims and Turks from all over empire to settle in the region, they forcibly relocated Jews to other parts of the empire like Cyprus and Anatolia, they placed restrictions to prevent Jews from migrating to key cities in the region like Jerusalem and Hebron, and they use dubious reasons to depopulate Jewish areas by forcing them to evacuate from a nearby battle for example, but then the empire would give the okay for muslims to return but not Jews. They did the same to Christians in the region, but to a lesser extent. What this means is that a lot of the inhabitants of the region were moved out and replaced by other people not from the regions via imperial policy
The point is that this region was always controlled and populated by foreigners. This idea that the region of Israel/Palestine was inhabited by Natives like North America was when the Europeans arrived is simply false. The region’s population was pretty cosmopolitan and dynamic, though not by choice. This doesn’t excuse the ethnic cleansing campaigns that happened afterwards, but I do think there’s value in maintaining a historically accurate understanding of the region rather than repeating misinformed online narratives.
You have right to hate religions but please do not excuse settler colonialism, creating famine and the murder of children because of it.
This is a very myopic and historically inaccurate view of history. While some elements of Israel’s establishment can be classified as settler colonialism, it’s not accurate to say that all of it is. For example, when Israel was established. The muslim world started committing pogroms in mass against their Jewish communities even though they had nothing to do with Israel. These people who been living in their communities for hundreds, and for some, thousands, of years were forced to abandon everything, including their citizenship, and flee to Israel because that’s the only place that took them in. The total number of people from the exodus total around 1 million people. These people and their descendants now make up a very large chunk of the Israeli population, if not an outright majority.
The term “colonialism” implies intent, but in reality these people were refugees who ended up in Israel due to circumstance. This is a stark difference from European Jews, who were also refugees, but they actually migrated to the region with the intent of settling and creating their own state.
Let’s not also forget that the 2 world wars didn’t happen because of religion and the European colonial powers had the most bloody colonization history.
This is true, but these are also different regions with different histories.
You would not dare to infer that Europeans are natural savages that are always bloody like you are trying to portray all Muslims and jews
Except I never made such claims, I merely pointed out the historically accurate fact that this region has been fought over constantly for thousands of years. A bunch of major religions claim this region to be the holy land, and so it has always been the center of different people fighting for control.
