May
06

Freedom Depends On An Educated Voter.

Freedom Depends On An Educated Voter.

These  thoughts are not good news, or bad news, they are just as it is, and as
it has always been. They are not happy thoughts, or depressive thoughts,
just thoughts that express our current situation. A situation that at
some times looks better, but due to our collective thought patterns and
media training never really change. Well not yet, but assessing our
collective pattern, unless it gets so bad that our stomachs are stuck to
our backbones, or all out invasion, apathy will always reign against
us.
As a student of elections, being involved in elective struggles
since I was about ten years old, many people would put me down as a slow
learner, but in reality I must be an eternal optimist. I once got it
right and the local masses even elected me to local council. An
independent. I have handed out, put signs up studied election results
for over half a century and I have now the same conclusion as I did
twenty years ago, the only reason I keep getting involved, is I believe
that just once, it may change in my lifetime.
It is not just that in  our local division council election that out of 4000 voters on the
electoral role, about a 1000 protested that they were voting under
duress, as they did not want to be fined, another 1000 did not turn up
to vote at all. Quite a few customers I know purposefully keep
themselves off the voting register so they do not get fined. Again, it
is not just the knowledge that in the last federal election more people
decided not to vote, to either get struck off the roll, vote informal or
not turn up at all, risking a fine than voted for the ruling Labour
Party. That is sad enough, knowing that good men fought and devoted
their life’s work to win the right to vote for all but what really bugs
me is that our brothers and sister fellow sufferers, ‘Do Not’ think, Do
Not make choices on issues or the individual person, they continue in
the majority to vote for which party their grandparents voted for, or if
the candidate has nice teeth, or they have been in office for years, as
don’t make a change that could be dangerous.

We are all please to  see Anna Bligh go, we are all desperately waiting for the day when we
can get rid of Anna’s sister in crime the red headed harlot in Canberra,
but I have questioned customers as to their choice in voting. In the
state elections I asked customers and shooters, ‘why were you handing
out how to vote cards for the LNP,’ Why do you brag about voting for the
LNP, they voted with Labour to give you another set of Gun Laws on
November the 15th, Why vote for the LNP when they brought John Howard’s
Un-informed Gun laws down on your head?

Why work for your enemy.
Some bleated well we just wanted to get rid of Anna. Well that would
have worked just as good, if you had voted for an independent or the
Australia Party is my response. Why donate $4.00 for your vote to their
party funds? It gets even worse, during the local elections I observed
shooters handing out how to vote cards for un-officially the LNP (not
supposed to be party politics in local elections but scratch the surface
a little and it bleeds party politics) Worse than that when the ‘arty
farty’ un official Labour hand outers were missing the LNP hand outers
would hand out for both their candidates to oppose independent
candidates. I asked some customers why they voted one way or another,
some of the responses were almost from a TV comedy script we would
laugh, but it is so sad. “I voted for X, because I did not know who he
was, I knew the other three.” “Oh I voted for Meredith, I wanted to vote
for a ‘sheila’,” “Meredith was his second name you voted for a bloke
anyway.” I said. ” I wanted to vote for the Sheila in the red shirt”.
Nothing about what the people stood for, or Rates or roads.
By about  this time, your going to be saying, what’s this to do with us shooters.
Well this Apathy has everything to do with how out sport, our hobby our
way of life is treated by those we install as our masters. Our American
cousins have a voting impact, they have hundreds of freedoms that we
have already forgotten exist, due to the simple fact that in their
country, shooters will vote with an issue. Not only that, they will
mobilise and phone up and lobby their representatives and because they
vote to protect their property, their rights and freedoms, they win.
They win because they think before they vote. They lobby their
candidates prior to the election not just moan in the local Gun Shop.
The American’s send out lists of questions and then they vote on the
answers, which results in voting, into office, pro-shooting candidates.
It is not that they are a huge majority or that they are in one club,
both of those premises are incorrect. There majority is similar to ours,
and there are many hundreds of different shooting clubs and shooting
lobby associations in the USA. The difference is, they make there votes
count for them. In Australia and the UK we do not, we get easily
sidetracked into debate on irrelevancy like the Prime Minister lost her
slipper. In more ways than one.
John Howard in 1996 had a large  majority when he decided to strike at firearm ownership he knew well,
what I have just told you above. He had utter contempt for shooters and
showed it. He knew that the shooters would still install him or his
opposition, that he still would be in government, even if they were not
in office. Campbell Newman is going to introduce another new lot of Gun
laws. As usual, they always promise that they will not harm the lawful
firearm owner but will only impact on the criminal elements. He talks of
amnesties and we all know that he does not even believe it himself,
everyone knows, it is just feel good politics. It will not change
anything, the crims will never hand their guns in, the Police will still
sell their issue pistols, or supposedly lose them, or purportedly have
them stolen and the only impact will be on the law abiding shooter. 
Campbell Newman now knows that the 255,000 licensed shooter in
Queensland are not going to vote for independents or the Australia Party
at the next election. We have given him the largest majority ever held
in parliament, he knows he can treat us all like serfs, bonded slaves
who will all vote without considering freedom, rights, ownership of
property, or self defence. Yes, and when his new rules of legislation do
not work, as they never do, he will go and produce another set of feels
good legislation. Meanwhile, their Goebbels propaganda machine will
keep the public mesmerised in ‘man bites dog’, or ‘wag the dog’
scenarios to keep the people thinking of only trivia. We used to be
free. 1984 was it science fiction??

Mar
06

Washington residents are up in arms, though not armed

City official insists residents shouldn’t defend themselves

By Emily Miller

The Washington Times

Thursday, March 1, 2012

Washington residents are up in arms, though not armed. With violent crime
up 40 percent in the first two months of the year – including double the
number of robberies at gunpoint – residents are looking for ways to protect
themselves. Elected officials and police have no solution.

Take Benjamin Portman, who lives on Capitol Hill, part of the 1st
District, where violent crime has increased the most. A total of 110 incidents have
been reported in 2012, a 69 percent jump, according to statistics obtained
by The Washington Times. Two weeks ago, Mr. Portman’s male roommate and his
girlfriend were robbed by three armed men in ski masks as they walked home
on a well-lit street.

That spurred Mr. Portman to attend a community meeting on the increased
violence, which was held last week by D.C. Council member Mary M. Cheh, Ward 3
Democrat. Mr. Portman asked officials why the city makes it so difficult
for law-abiding residents to register guns and refuses to allow them to
carry weapons outside of the home.

As you can see in the video below, Paul Quander, the District’s deputy
mayor for public safety and justice, responded that crime victims should give
the criminals what they want. Mr. Portman protested, saying, “But how do you
know you’re going live and survive? You’re completely at their mercy.”

Mr. Quander thinks victimhood is preferable to self-defense. “The problem
is, if you are armed, it escalates the situation,” Mr. Quander told
residents. “It is much better, in my opinion, to be scared, to be frightened, and
even if you have to be, to be injured, but to walk away and survive. You’ll
heal, and you can replace whatever was taken away.”

Kristopher Baumann, head of the D.C. police union, also was at Ms. Cheh’s
meeting. “Having the deputy mayor for public safety publicly announce that
being victimized is something we, as residents of the District, must accept
is disgraceful,” he told The Washington Times. “At the same time, Mr.
Quander failed to offer a single short- or long-term solution to fighting crime
in this city.”

The police officer added that, “This is a mayor who, as chair of the
Council, cut 400 police positions and failed to enact tougher laws for repeat
offenders. Now we know why. His crime fighting strategy apparently involves
giving up and just living with being scared. Accepting violent crime and
victimization is not an acceptable trade-off for living in the District.”

The Washington Times caught up with Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier on
Wednesday and asked for her reaction to Mr. Quander’s comments. The police chief
did not remember exactly what was said, but she said she thought Mr. Quander
was referring only to victims of theft, not physical assault. “We always
say, if you are a victim of a robbery, your best thing to do is comply and
try to be safe,” the chief said.

Mr. Portman said Chief Lanier approached him after the meeting, but he
left unsatisfied. “I think if the chief realized that the police cannot protect
us all the time, everywhere, she might come to the conclusion that it’s
the right thing for her to recommend relaxing the gun-control laws in the
city,” he said in an interview. “I have the right to protect myself if the
police can’t.”

While the council is working to ease some registration requirements,
that’s not enough. The city needs to recognize that the Second Amendment
guarantees not just the right to keep arms at home, but also to bear them. Doing
so would give criminals reason to think twice before assaulting residents.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/1/dcs-crime-solution-be-a-victi
m/print/

Jan
06

Correspondence with a Katter Australia Party Candidate.

Ron

As for our official KAP gun policy, it has not been released because it’s not fully finished. We need to change the laws slowly so that the public don’t complain.

I can assure you that I have read the entire policy and it’s very well written, especially so the media can’t hang us out to dry but the gun owning public can read between the lines.

Ron, if it was up to me, we would have no long arm registration and Cat H would have no restrictions either. I’m a proponent of Concealed Carry to make society safer. Also, that is the “internal” policy but we can’t do that straight away.

We intend to get rid of licencing for air rifles, pellet guns and paint ball. Long arms will be all one group. Cat H will be all one group minus the stupid laws about barrel length, mag cap and calibre.

eg, if you are licenced for a 22 slazanger, then you should be able to go buy a Barrett 50 S/A.

We have to do these things disceretly and slowly.
Like I said Ron, If it were up to me, there would be ZERO registration for weapons and we’d have CCW.

Feel free to ask me any more questions
Regards

Dear  A…….

The public are not the enemy, they are your friends. If you do not spell it out they won’t trust you.
Without the media making a fuss, they won’t even know you exist.

One Nation thought they were being smart , and would not say what they promised privately to their members. This created mistrust.

As shooters mistrust the LNP they mistrust Labour they mistrust KAP. So they may as well not change their voting pattern, you get nowhere . Its a chicken and the egg, you either come up front tell the truth about your intentions or your just as devious and un trustworthy as the other parties. I will vote for some independents or just get my name crossed off the list informal rather than vote for someone who will not speak out for me. I think that and thousands of other do as well. Wait and see.
You cannot sneak into power, like a thief in the night, you have to be a champion, one that we are waiting for.
Still waiting
Ron

I just replied to your email.
I agree with all you say.
Any journo asks me my views and the views of the KAP, then I will not be afraid to speak my mind. That’s why Bobby Katter asked me to be his candidate out here in Southern Downs, he knows I will open my gob and speak out against what is wrong
I hope you like the media release that I sent to you in the email. ( that is added below)
I won’t be sneaking around in the night. I’ll let rip.
Ron, these laws piss me right off ! I’m going to change them.

Let me assure you, when the time is right, I will let fly on gun laws and self defence and all that….. Trust me, I’m angry.
I think that most of the gun owning public know that the KAP supports them. The SSAA have given us alot of support.
And you would naturally know Rob Nioa’s position on this too.

When we take power, and we will, the gun laws will be changed and removed.

Are we on the same page here mate ??

Cheers
Ade
0417 707 404

Not at all, the time is right now, they have to know, that your not ashamed to show, that your on their side. Until your party has the intestinal fortitude to represent the shooters, you will get money but you will not get the rank and file keenly standing at the polling booths handing out how to vote for you. You cannot expect something for nothing, if you want loyalty you have to earn it.
  I will put your response to the questionnaire on the www.foaa.com.au site and I do hope you do very well. No one more than me wants to see the end of the other parties.

Ron Owen

GUNS-BLAZING-FOR-KATTER but what about his shooting supporters?

GUNS-BLAZING-FOR-KATTER but what about his shooting supporters?

 

Democracy, not hypocrisy

Katter’s Australian Party candidate for Southern Downs Ade Larsen has called on both sides of politics to provide honesty in representation.

Mr Larsen, a Justice of the Peace since 1995, said that it was gravely hypocritical that MP’s said one thing while they were in their electorates but then turned their backs on their constituents whilst in George Street, Brisbane.

“What we’ve got is a situation where a sitting member comes out in the media and says one thing to appease the electors and then votes against their wishes because of party-line politics and self-interest,” Mr Larsen said.

“But the hidden hypocrisy is that they (the MP’s) won’t come out and publicly tell you that they voted against your best interests and that’s a shame”

“The latest incarnation of this hideous practice is the newly passed Weapons Act amendment bill which sees farmers, fisherman, hunters and outdoors enthusiasts become criminals because they can no longer carry a pocket or pen knife in public, that’s the Nanny State gone mad,” Mr Larsen exhorted.

The fired-up candidate went on to say that the new laws which will make criminals of innocent citizens were introduced by Labor and received bi-partisan support from the LNP.

“Why do politicians do the opposite of what’s good for the people? How do we have democracy when the people who claim to represent us don’t support our wishes?” Mr Larsen asked.

“It’s not about left and right anymore, it’s about right and wrong – We will give people back their freedoms”.

Katter’s Australian Party Leader, Bob Katter also came out swinging, saying “You’re going to have to stand up and represent your people or you’ll lose your seat – don’t turn your back on your people.”

Ade Larsen followed up on those remarks and said “I’m not interested in politics, I’m interested in representation and doing what’s right, and God willing, the day after the election, there will be democracy and the people will again have a voice.”

Dec
09

Brian Zimmerman LNP

 

Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 11:49 PM
To: Brian Zimmerman
Subject: Re: Your Vote (reply)

 
—– Original Message —–
From: Brian Zimmerman
To: ‘GORDON’
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 11:09 PM
Subject: RE: Your Vote

Hello Gordon,The best way to answer your question would be to say that I am a member of several shooting associations.Yes I do know about the LnP’s actual voting regarding the new bill, and they did not actually cross the floor as the LNP’s intention was to always approve it.If you want to chat about issues and concerns for the Gaven electorate or Queensland for that matter, please do not hesitate to call me on Ph 0411 179 364.Kind Regards
Brian Zimmerman
 
 
Thank you Brian, your comments have been passed on.
Brian this is an extract from comment  by Rob Harrold, Shooters Union: http://www.foaa.com.au/latest-news/
‘To explain, as a general rule, when a vote is taken in Parliament, it’s by show of hands and it’s so quick that nobody knows who voted for what. When a division is called, the vote is taken much more graphically. If the bill is presented by the government, those who wish to vote FOR the bill cross the floor to the government’s side of the House. Those who wish to vote AGAINST the bill cross the floor to the opposition’s side of the House. If there are 5 or more to vote against the bill, the names are recorded in Handsard. This is the process that occurred when the Weapons Act was originally voted in and when registration was voted for as well. On that occasion (1996), the only one who voted against the bill was Liz Cunningham.
Last Tuesday, there were six who voted against the bill: the Independents Liz Cunningham, Dorothy Pratt, Rob Messenger and Chris Foley and the two Katter’s Australian Party members Aiden McLindon and Shane Knuth.
Whilst some of the opposition spoke during the debate, ALL of them crossed the floor to vote with the government – again! Only those six stood up for shooters.’
So I’m not sure about the floor crossing procedure- but it certainly seems that no LNP stood against it despite their supposed protests.
Hence we are looking for a candidate that will stick up for his constituents if he says he will!!

Dec
09

Albert Page KAP Waterford

—– Original Message —–
From: Albert Page
To: GORDON
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2011 7:35 AM
Subject: RE: Your Vote

Hi Gordon,
 
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4. Yes
5. No
6. Yes
 
Merry Christmas.
 
Albert Page
Katters Australian Party Candidate for Waterford

From: GORDON [norfy@gcmanors.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 23 November 2011 1:38 PM
To: Stephen Beck; Lachlan Bensted; Justin Bowman; Kevin Brown; Damian Byrnes; Gordon Dale; Ashley Dodd; Steve Ensby; Dean Fisher; Brendan Fitzgerald; munding burra; Ray Grigg; Shane Guley; Darren Hunt; Bob Jarvis; Robbie Katter; Brandt King; Jeff Knuth; Mark Maguire; John Mathison; Peter McCambridge; Graeme Moorhouse; David Neuendorf; Albert Page; Peter Pyke; Ron Wadforth; Matthew Smith; Lindsay Temple; Steve Todeschini; Margaret Waterman
Subject: Your Vote

Dear  Candidate or Serving Member of the House of Representatives.
Dear Sir or/ Madam
I  Name ………Gordon Northcott……………………………           ……JP/C.Dec………………………
Address……G.C.Manors Highland Park   4211……………………………..             ………………………….
 would like to know your feelings on firearms legislation, to gauge the support that I  could give to your name and could expect in the future if your are elected. I, and my friends and club members, will direct their votes accordingly  to your response in the forth coming  State Elections.
We appreciate you do not have a lot of time to devote to this as you will be busy campaigning, in the New Year. So could you please just tick , or cross, or type Yes or No accordingly. Reply by mail to the above address or just click the Reply button.  We will score them and send them to the FOAA s website where they will be displayed on a page, advising their members how to vote. If at any future time you wish to change your answers just alter and send back and we will amend the score accordingly.
1. Do you believe that law abiding citizens of Australia should have the right to own and use firearms for sport, tools of trade, pest eradication, collecting  and hunting?
Yes / No
 
 2. Do you believe that law abiding citizens of Australia should have the right to save lives, by defending their own lives and the lives of their families and friends with firearms?
Yes / No
 
 3. Do you believe that law abiding citizens of Australia should have the right to hunt introduced species in Queensland State Forests and Crown land?
Yes / No
 
 4. Do you believe that law abiding citizens of Australia should have the right to hunt introduced species in Queensland with Hand Guns?
Yes / No
 
 5. Do you believe that law abiding citizens of Australia should have a Long Arms Registry imposed on them ?     (Which costs the Queensland tax payers millions, employs 155 full time staff, and thousand of police hours in every police stations in Queensland, and costs the shooter $30. every time he changes a firearm and has to wait sometimes 11 months to have the paperwork returned to him, during that time he cannot use the property he owns. We all believe Governments, cannot make it work, it solves no crimes, it does not save a life so it should be scrapped)
Yes / No
 
 6. Over the last twenty year Queensland politicians have followed the ‘Wrong’ principle of collectively punishing the law abiding, property owners, (that property being firearms) by prohibiting or registering that property and ignored the policing and prosecuting of the individual wrong doers. As no serious attempts by police are made to protect the community, crime increases and instead of addressing the real problem parliament again attacks the innocent property owners and prohibits even more property. This principle is immoral and should be reversed not compounded. Will you continue and support these prohibitive Acts of legislation?
Yes / No
 
 We will score the questions at 10 points per question, recommended Candidates will have 60 points.
Firearm Ownership Defines the Quality of Individual Freedom.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1873 / Virus Database: 2102/4657 – Release Date: 12/04/11

Nov
30

Mark Maguire KAP Maroochydore

 

 

 

Score is 50  out of a possible 60.

Check answer 5 is a Yes, to agree with Long Arm Registration he could have made a mistake but its up to Mr Maguire to clarify that one. ron.

From: Mark Maguire [mailto:maroochydore@ausparty.org.au]
Sent: Monday, 28 November 2011 10:15 AM

To: Albert
Subject: RE: Your feelings on firearms legislation

 

Hello Albert Yes to 1-5 and no to 6
Regards,   Mark Maguire
Katter’s Australian Party Candidate for Maroochydore
Ph: 0402 121 828
Email:     maroochydore@ausparty.org.auWebsite: www.ausparty.org.au

 

Dear  Candidate or Serving Member of the House of Representatives.
Dear Sir or/ Madam

I  Name ……………………………………           ……………………………
Address…………………………………..             ………………………….

 would like to know your feelings on firearms legislation, to gauge the support that I  could give to your name and could expect in the future if your are elected. I, and my friends and club members, will direct their votes accordingly  to your response in the forth coming  State Elections.

We appreciate you do not have a lot of time to devote to this as you will be busy campaigning, in the New Year. So could you please just tick , or cross, or type Yes or No accordingly. Reply by mail to the above address or just click the Reply button.  We will score them and send them to the FOAA s website where they will be displayed on a page, advising their members how to vote. If at any future time you wish to change your answers just alter and send back and we will amend the score accordingly.

1. Do you believe that law abiding citizens of Australia should have the right to own and use firearms for sport, tools of trade, pest eradication, collecting  and hunting?
Yes / No

 

 2. Do you believe that law abiding citizens of Australia should have the right to save lives, by defending their own lives and the lives of their families and friends with firearms?
Yes / No

 

 3. Do you believe that law abiding citizens of Australia should have the right to hunt introduced species in Queensland State Forests and Crown land?
Yes / No

 

 4. Do you believe that law abiding citizens of Australia should have the right to hunt introduced species in Queensland with Hand Guns?
Yes / No

 

 5. Do you believe that law abiding citizens of Australia should have a Long Arms Registry imposed on them ?     (Which costs the Queensland tax payers millions, employs 155 full time staff, and thousand of police hours in every police stations in Queensland, and costs the shooter $30. every time he changes a firearm and has to wait sometimes 11 months to have the paperwork returned to him, during that time he cannot use the property he owns. We all believe Governments, cannot make it work, it solves no crimes, it does not save a life so it should be scrapped)
Yes / No

 

 6. Over the last twenty year Queensland politicians have followed the ‘Wrong’ principle of collectively punishing the law abiding, property owners, (that property being firearms) by prohibiting or registering that property and ignored the policing and prosecuting of the individual wrong doers. As no serious attempts by police are made to protect the community, crime increases and instead of addressing the real problem parliament again attacks the innocent property owners and prohibits even more property. This principle is immoral and should be reversed not compounded. Will you continue and support these prohibitive Acts of legislation?

Yes / No

 

 We will score the questions at 10 points per question, recommended Candidates will have 60 points

Nov
30

Evan Moorehead MP Waterford

Score ZERO  Two false YES  not not score as he put proviso’s with them and his voting for shooters Human rights is deplorable. ron

—– Original Message —–
From: Waterford Electorate Office
To: Leonce
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 5:41 PM
Subject: RE: Please respond to this email re Gun Rights for Queenslanders

Not happy with Evan Moorhead. Leonce.  Evan Moorhead also includes false information by the use of  the words “passed”  with “support from……..most independents”. Where from Hansard 6 independents voted against the Weapons Bill and the only independent that voted with Labour and the LNP for the Bill was Peter Wellingtion MP, who has disgraced the reputation of independents on many occasions. It seems he is a Labour man who finds it easier to be elected under the name  on Independent. ron

 
 Thanks for the chance to respond. The Weapons legislation passed Parliament last sitting week with support from the LNP and most independents.
 
1. Yes, but that right should not be unlimited.
2. Yes, provided the use of firearms is necessary for self-defence.
3. No.
4. No.
5. Yes. I don’t agree with your description of the weapons registration regime.
6. The premise of the question is not correct. The allegations are not true. I support weapons legislation.
 
Kind regards
 
Evan
 
Evan Moorhead MP
Member for Waterford
Ph: 07 3200 3477
Fax: 07 3200 3499
waterford@parliament.qld.gov.au

Nov
30

Darrin Hunt KAP Cairns

Score 50 out of a possible 60. His proviso’s do not help him get the support that he requires for a full score. ron

It would appear that Darren Hunt does support a Firearms Registration system but not in its present form.  See response to Q5.

From: Zoe Giannopoulos
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 12:26 PM
To: owenguns@spiderweb.com.au

Jim my response to your questions as below-
Q.1 yes
Q.2 Yes
Q.3 Yes
Q.4 Yes
Q.5 I do not support the registry in it’s current format. The permit to acquire system in particular is in urgent need of overhaul. A law abiding, licensed user with that category/class of firearm on their licence should be able to purchase the firearm on presentation of their licence and details recorded/forwarded at point of sale. I believe a register does provide protection to lawful, law abiding users but the current model is flawed.
Q.6 No, as in Q.5 the current system is flawed.
Hope this helps.
Darren Hunt
Candidate for Cairns
P.O Box 614 Bungalow
Mob. 0429897561
E-Mail Cairns@ausparty.org.au
Blog: https://djhunt4cairns.blogspot.com/
twitter: https://twitter.com/djhunt4cairns

Nov
30

Chris Foley MP Member for Maryborough

Chris has a good record of voting against prohibitive Gun Laws, but as yet as not answered a a questionnaire so we cannot give him a score. 

Dear Sir
 
I would just like to congratulate you on you NO vote to the Weapons Act amendments, which were voted on in Qld. Parliament on the 15th of this month.  You showed courage and you showed contempt for the legislation which further restricts our already eroded freedoms.  We can only pray that you retain your seat at the upcoming election and I will be doing my little bit to let people know what your position is.
 
Regards,
 
A. B. Trehearn

 

Dear Allan
 
Thank you for your email of support regarding my vote against the Weapons Amendment Bill. This sort of support is greatly appreciated.
 
Thank you again, have a good afternoon.

Kind Regards
Mr Chris Foley MP
State Member for Maryborough

Nov
30

Dorothy Pratt MLA Member for Nanango

Dorothy has a good record of voting against prohibitive Gun Laws, but as yet as not answered a a questionnaire so we cannot give her a score as yet. 

Dear Madam,
 
I would just like to congratulate you on you NO vote to the Weapons Act amendments, which were voted on in Qld. Parliament on the 15th of this month.  You showed courage and you showed contempt for the legislation which further restricts our already eroded freedoms.  We can only pray that you retain your seat at the upcoming election and I will be doing my little bit to let people know what your position is.
 
Regards,
 
A. B. Trehearn

The following responses were sent to me;

Thank you for your kind comment.

Val Wicks
Electorate Officer
On behalf of Dorothy Pratt MLA
Independent Member for Nanango
Toll Free 1800 816 261 (in electorate only)
Ph 07 41621381
Web: http://pratt-mp.webs.com